How to get tenant to leave

Had recent dealing with RTB, it will take 15 - 20 business days to get a reply from these guys. Followed process but impossible to get anyone on the phone. They also messed up the dates on a acknowledgement letter ( non payment of rent ) Luckily the tenants vacated. My advice, send all correspondence via registered post. Follow the 6 step process on rtb website. Get a solicitor to check all your documentation. Best of luck.

It wouldn't be the tenant that would have to worry about getting paid.

They would send the sheriff who you would have the privilege of paying for also.

How common is this type of behaviour?

I don’t understand that. But then again I look at all the votes that SF get - sense of entitlement to houses.

It's a well known fact that Threshold will advise tenants to overhold in properties and to not pay rent. To push LL to the limit as the system takes so long to evict, it will benefit the tenant financially. RTB are only a Mickey mouse group to prolong the inevitable, supposed to be non bias but clearly sways towards the tenant and has no real legal standing anyway, it serves no real purpose.

Can anyone point me towards these laws the tenants are breaking?

You should be able to point them out on https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/

Thanks

And probably not too many countries support residential property owners, both directly and indirectly, like this one does.

It's unconscionable.

I'd personally love for the government to remove all supports, both direct and indirect and just let the market land where it does. No more rent supplement subsidising landlords or bidding up houses to purchase them for social tenants. That would be even writing off the measures brought in after the last crash to soften the landing of the market as much as they could.

So what is your position? You don't believe that the state injects massive money into the property market? Or is it that you don't believe that injecting that money into the market increases rental levels and property prices, and hence asset values, for property owners?

Which is it? I have to know what I'm working with here. Do you have a logical position on the point or are you just someone sticking their fingers in their ears going "nah nah nah na na na"?

The property market crashed over a decade ago. The State assumed many debts and bad assets from the banks rather than letting them all hit the market at the same time. It also implemented measures to protect property owners? Were you not aware of that??????????? That was a massive subsidy from the state to property owners.

I always have to laugh at the peopel moaning about the tenants not paying and pretending they are "stealing". They're not stealing. If you are a "landlord" then you are running a business and you have to be able to manage risk. Rule 101 of managing risk is not to put all your eggs into one basket.

Hmmm.

So if the government removed all subsidies and exited anything to do with the private market, you think that there would be no impact on prices?

You might want to start reading up some basic economics. I think your definition of "waffle" just means a simple concept that you can't grasp.

The subsidy entirely benefits the property owner. And benefits other property owners indirectly by propping up the market artificially.

So how do you think your own income and property value would be affected if it did happen? You surely have to recognise that if that tap was cut off, there'd be a large chunk of the population who simply wouldn't be able to pay their current levels of rent. And there wouldn't be enough "full paying" people out there waiting in the wings to step in and take over. So those landlords have to come to an arrangement with them based on what they can pay. With rental returns down, you can bet that property prices would soon follow. That would be magnified by removing State buying from the property market.

Now, I'm not proposing that this could, or should, happen tomorrow or anytime soon. I am merely using it to explain to the whingers who moan about the State without recognising that they receive huge benefit, even if it is indirect, from the State. So don't be moaning so much if the same State puts in a few rules that you think are "unfair" to you.

If they did do it tonight, there would still be the same number of properties and the same number of people in the country tomorrow morning.

What would you do if the tenant had a pair too and was up for fist fight with you or his crowd vs your crowd?

That's fine. But if you want a risk free income, you need to be happy with risk free rates of return. So currently about zero percent. i.e. the income from letting out your property should just be enough to maintain it in its current state

Income is income and has to be taxed. If it's not worth it for you, then you can sell the property if you want.

I have no intention of proving you with proof.

I lived through the living nightmare that was a tenant withholding without payment in my property for 12 months. My experience with prtb are legit. My experience with a solicitor and barrister, in a court of law and what exchanges and admissions took place are legit. I have no reason to lie.

The dogs on the street know Threshold give this kind of advice to tenants. And not far behind them is the prtb. And I won't withdraw, or give you proof of such.

Advising them they can overhold would not necessarily mean advising them not to pay you the rent.

Sub let after moving out?

The biggest issue I can see is that the tenant knows if they wait until the sheriff the reward is that they are handed paperwork to present to the council who are obliged to house them.

between 5 and 8 grand for an illegal eviction is still cheaper than legal fees and high court order.

Kind of worrying that it is.

This is not difficult to deal with.

In the UK, 3 months arrears is automatic grounds for eviction - no excuses. The landlord simply goes to the local county court, proves the arrears and gets an eviction order. Then the Landlord gets the bailiffs in to do the eviction based on the County Court Order. There is no time wasted going through pointless hearings and appeals with the RTB, there is no "lets give the tenant a few extra months" in the courts. Quick action, and the Landlord can also effectively and efficiently recoup losses suffered from any assets the tenants own (cars etc.). The tenant once evicted becomes the responsibility of the Local Authority to house (not the landlord).

In Ireland, the Local Authority or central government are happy with the status quo. While someone squats in a private landlords property, the government don't have to provide them with accommodation, and they don't appear in the homeless statistics. Long term thinking is not important to them. The result is a cohort of rogue tenants who know how to play the system who move from one home to another stinging a stream of landlords along the way. There is no consequence to their actions, so it continues.

To fix this:

1) Allow RTB orders to be enforced by the County Sheriff without recourse to the courts, or abolish the requirement to go through the RTB and allow landlords go directly to the courts to obtain an eviction order.

2) Make staying in a property for more than x months without paying rent a criminal offence

3) Allow for the meaningful repayment of debts owed by tenants to Landlords through the seizure of assets.