Landlord doesn't want me to take a lodger...

V

vincentgav

Registered User
Messages
100
hi there,

Basically, we're in a 2 bed house, the rent has been jacked up really high, €500per month extra.

The issue is the landlord: he won't allow us to accept a lodger and rent out the second bedroom. We want to rent out that room, we're a couple in a 2 bed, apparently the landlord isn't keen on it due to wear and tear.

We think it's perfectly reasonable, given the price of rent to let the room out - it's unused otherwise!

What are our rights? If we have a lease in place, I feel it's our property and that the landlord has no right to dictate that.

Can we just let the room out anyway?

Thanks
 
Your lease will I would imagine will not allow you to sub let the property.

It's a bit harsh of the landlord not to allow you share the rent over to a third person.
 
It's not covered in the lease. I just want to do so anyway.

Like those deluded leases saying; no overnight guests allowed. There's no right to tell a tenant if they can or cannot have a guest over.

Maybe we can have a 'guest' over?
 
Unfortunately, a landlord does not have a right to check a lodgers references as he has no contract with the lodger. However, a lodger, after he has been in the property for 6 months, has the right to request the landlord that he become a co-tenant on the lease with yourselves. This the landlord may not want.

Furthermore, if during the first 6 months or while the lodger remains a lodger and the tenant vacates without notice, the landlord cannot look to the lodger for the rent money as the landlord and lodger have no contract. Thus, the landlord is out of pocket and must get rid of the lodger before he can re-let the property.

These are just two of the issues a landlord may have with tenants who have lodgers.
 
But does he have a right to tell me that I cannot let out the room?

We wanna let the room out anyway, regardless of what the landlord wants. We rent the whole house, we feel we should have a right to do so.
 
Be careful, if he finds out you're doing it and against his wishes he could report you to "revenue". Now, that could become a problem for you. Landlords have been given a bad name over the past while and the vast majority do not deserve it. Some tenants think they can do whatever they want, the thing is they can't. Make things awkward for a Landlord and he'll bite back.
 
The rent has been jacked up really high......how high is high? It it the market rate for 2 bed properties in your area?

If it's too high for you, why not move to a one bed property?

A landlord can decide who he lets the property to. I am a landlord of a 2 bed property and I would be quite annoyed if I found there were others in my property without me knowing about it.
 
I would be very annoyed if I found out my tenant had sub let out the second bedroom of my property. I go through a very stringent set of reference checks before I let my property and for me a tenant moving in and bypassing these checks is a recipe for disaster. If the rent review has not been carried out correctly you have reason to complain to the PRTB/threshold, if the market average rent has become too expensive for you, then I suggest you move to a suitably sized property in an area that you can afford.
 
If your lease says nothing about it and your landlord says no that should be the end of it.

When the rent went up you should have decided then if you could have afforded it or not.

If not you should have moved on. Landlord might have regretted letting good tenants go if he had failed to get new tenants.

Don't irk the landlord by renting out a room without his consent. It will turn out to be a recipe for disaster.
 
Might just be me but a rent increase of 500 euro is something else - regardless of what the current rent is, and what the so-called market is up to. This is not a way to treat tenants.
I would have no scruples irking the landlord to be honest.

Another good example why the property / rental market specifically in Dublin needs big time regulation.
 
landlord said:
I would be very annoyed if I found out my tenant had sub let out the second bedroom of my property. I go through a very stringent set of reference checks before I let my property and for me a tenant moving in and bypassing these checks is a recipe for disaster. If the rent review has not been carried out correctly you have reason to complain to the PRTB/threshold, if the market average rent has become too expensive for you, then I suggest you move to a suitably sized property in an area that you can afford.
Click to expand...

Thanks for suggestion! Let's assume I've thought of it all. I know the PRTB and what they do, thanks.

I don't care if the landlord would rather I didn't. We're renting the whole house.

It's not a sublet - a sublet would be if I moved out and let someone else in.

I suggest not wagging fingers and giving 'advice' that isn't being asked for.
 
If you take a lease on a property and then let (a portion of) that property to a third party - that's a sub-let. You don't have to move out of a property to create a sub-lease.

If you do this without the consent of your landlord, you will be in breach of your contract and your "lodger" will be trespassing.

The market dictates what rent a particular property can command and a landlord is perfectly entitled to decide how many tenants s/he is prepared to have in a particular property - a tenant is not entitled to make this decision.
 
newirishman said:
Might just be me but a rent increase of 500 euro is something else - regardless of what the current rent is, and what the so-called market is up to.
Click to expand...
What's fictitious about the rental market? Do you think real rents are lower than reported?
 
Sarenco said:
If you take a lease on a property and then let (a portion of) that property to a third party - that's a sub-let. You don't have to move out of a property to create a sub-lease.

If you do this without the consent of your landlord, you will be in breach of your contract and your "lodger" will be trespassing.

The market dictates what rent a particular property can command and a landlord is perfectly entitled to decide how many tenants s/he is prepared to have in a particular property - a tenant is not entitled to make this decision.
Click to expand...
The creation of a sub-tenancy in respect of part only of the dwelling, the subject of a Part 4 tenancy or a further Part 4 tenancy, is prohibited. Furthermore, you cannot have two tenancies in the same property at the same time as there would be a breach of exclusive use by the two tenants (unless the landlord rents room by room).

If the landlord consents to a sub-letting, then the tenant moves out and becomes a landlord ('head-tenant') to the new sub-tenant occupant.
If the original tenant remains in the property, the new tenant is a licensee/lodger with few rights, however, he may ask the owner if he can become a tenant thus acquiring more rights and protection than remaining a licensee/lodger.
 
Last edited:
vincentgav said:
I don't care if the landlord would rather I didn't. We're renting the whole house.
Click to expand...

Renting a house does not entitle you to do whatever you wish. If you want to make such decisions, you need to own it.

vincentgav said:
It's not a sublet - a sublet would be if I moved out and let someone else in.
Click to expand...

A sub-let is when a tenant leases property to a sub-tenant. You don't have to move out.

vincentgav said:
I suggest not wagging fingers and giving 'advice' that isn't being asked for.
Click to expand...

I suggest you're in the wrong place if you just want people to agree with you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top