Can I be landlord though not owner?

M

Macbeth

Registered User
Messages
33
My son has recently purchased a new house to which he will be moving early in the new year.
We intend to rent his old house and I will be receiving the rental income and declaring it for tax purposes, though he will continue to be the legal owner.
The rental area is all new to us, so I would appreciate any help with these questions.
1. Can I, though not the legal owner, be the "landlord" and receive the rent?
2. Who has to register as a landlord with the PRTB?
3. Does the old house have to be registered the NPPR as a second home and if so by whom?
4. Can I take out insurance on the property - or can only the legal owner do this?
Is there anything else which we haven't thought of?

Many thanks for any comments...
 
A bit odd....

Your son is the owner and obviously the landlord and as such can easily (a couple of minutes on the internet) pay 2013 NPPR fee , register PRTB, pay the property charge after 1 July for both homes, and purchase house insurance. And, importantly, his Revenue self-assessment forms.

There are owner -agency agreement forms that you may need if he does not wish or has difficulty with communicating/interacting with any official body or the tenants. They act as a sort of proxy that means you are entitled to act on his behalf. But with all official bodies he is the owner and must be named as such.

On rental agreements- and this is where I may be wrong - you need not give details of the owner. At least with the management companies I deal with on a couple of proeprties they handle everything with the tenants who do not know who/where I am. The mngt agents also deal with official bodies .But i repeat, NPPR,property charges, etc are dealt with by my the agents but in my name as owner.

Your confessed ignorance on letting is worrying.
It really is beneficial to google the websites of a)Revenue.ie IT 70 which outlines many of the requirements of Revenue regarding letting, the websites of b) PRTB, c)NPPR and perhaps spend some time reviewing the last few dozxen threads on the property investment forum in AAM.

There are thousands of resident parents who act on their overseas childrens behalf. I think that many of them now wish their children had appointed experienced letting agents ! It's not that an easy game. Considering your son is in ireland I wonder if it's one you should get involved in.
 
Last edited:

From a tax point of view this could be a messy situation:

Is your son letting the house to you at a market rent? If not then the difference is actually a gift to you (free use of property http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/cat/guide/free-property-loans.html).

So, on the one hand you could run into a gift tax issue.

And if you aren't paying him any rent then your expenses will be negligible and your taxable rental profit could be substantial.

On the other hand, any rent you are paying him will be income in his hands which he will need to account for on his own tax return.
 

I was tyrping at the same time as you Nick, and it's interesting we've both interpreted the OP's questions completely differently!!
 
Renting out a property is NOT, as many people seem to think, an easy option. It is a business, whether you have just one property or more. The private residential renting business is governed by numerous laws, the two main ones being the Residential Tenancies Act 2004 and the Housing standards for rented Accommodation Act 2008 and 2009. Just read through the posts here and see what problems landlords and tenants have.

There is no problem in your son appointing you as agent in his absence. Your name and details, as agent, must be included in the PRTB registration of the tenancy. You, as agent, can pay the NPPR tax and organise landlord's insurance.

Is there anything else? Go to the PRTB website and you will find a mass of information in downloadable form. Any claims by either landlord or tenant must go through the PRTB and as you are a business, you will be considered as knowing and understanding all the relevant laws. Whereas, the tenant who is not in the business and not familiar with the laws, is regarded by landlords as being favoured by the PRTB.

Just a few thoughts:
Have you considered all the implications?
Have you read and do you know the Residential Tenancies Act 2004?
Do you know all the landlord’s obligations?
Do you know all the Tenant’s rights as well as his obligations?
Do you know what standards you must have the property in as regards Structural Condition, Sanitary Facilities, Heating Facilities, Food Preparation and Storage and Laundry, Ventilation, Lighting, Fire Safety, Refuse Facilities, Electricity and Gas?
Will you be required to register the tenancy with the PRTB and pay the fee?
You will have to pay the NPPR tax.
You will have to have a BER certificate.
You will have to have someone that can be contacted in emergencies
Have you considered your tax obligations?
If you have a mortgage, you should notify your lender (and mortgage changed to a buy to let mortgage with higher interest rates).
If you have a mortgage, your mortgage agreement probably has a clause prohibiting renting out without written permission of the mortgage company.
You will have to have landlord’s insurance.
What type of lease will you use?
What happens if you want to regain your property during the lease period?
What are the implications of a Part 4 Tenancy?
What are the implications of regaining possession if your tenant has a fixed term lease.
And what will you do if your tenant doesn’t pay the rent or is anti-social, or that some appliance in the apartment is not working properly?
You must supply certain white goods.
You are responsible for the maintenance and repair of all items supplied.
Do not expect your property to be kept in the same condition as you keep it.
You can use an agent to look after the property but good agents who thoroughly know the law, are few and far between.
 
I'm pretty sure Oldnick and Facetious have got the wrong end of the stick here. Both good posts and valuable info for LL's and agents generally there, but the OP seems to be talking about a different situation.
 
It seems all three of us were typing at the same time !

You may be right Mandelbrot ....

I took OP's post to mean that he was letting it on behalf of his son, rather than he was renting it from his son. I assumed OP had made the usual error of saying "renting" rather "letting" ,especially when he says he will be receiving the rental income.

Please clarify, Macbeth.
 
Thank you all for the replies - and there is certainly much to think about.
Yes, I did make the mistake of saying "renting" rather than "letting".
I will be letting the house to a tenant and I will be receiving the rent, though my son will technically remain the legal owner of the house.
I suppose that my query really revolves around who needs to take care of the admin. matters (insurance, etc) in connection with the letting.
For example, I rang FBD about insurance and they told me that I could not insure the house as I was not the owner...
While I'm on this subject, may I ask a related question?
The prospective tenant has all her own furniture and requires only a cooker,
which we already have. Are there any specific difficulties with letting a house in these circumstances?
Thanks again.
 
My original post holds true - I understood the OP to be renting out the property on behalf of his son. However, I don't see why his son be the landlord and the OP as the agent. If there is problen with tax implication, surely the OP could be paid a handsome "fee" for his work that would render the son with no income from the rented property - but then, I am not an accountant either!

The Housing Standards for Rented Accommodation 2008 as amended 2009 does not seem to allow for unfurnished accommodation. As I understand the Act, there seems to be no exemption from the standards as set out - i.e. all accommodation must have the minimum standards of white goods etc.

When renting out a property as unfurnished, there appears to be no legal way to avoid the standards required.

The only way that I can think of (and as to its legality, I don't know) would be to have one or more clauses in the lease agreement stating that the property is rented unfurnished and therefore certain parts of the Act do not apply. But any Acts take precedence over any commercial contracts.
 
Macbeth - lucky the landlord who has a tenant that requires unfurnished accommodation !
If an agreement clearly states that all the furniture,including white goods will be provided by her, then that is fine. The relevant Act ,which Facetious rightly points out seems not to deal with unfurnished accommodation ,states that a fridge etc must be provided for . It would be a blatant absurdity to insist that the landlord must provide a fridge etc if the tenant wishes to bring her own.

Anyway, it must be now apparent to you that your son is the landlord and must be named for NPPR, PRTB, property charge ,insurance, revenue purposes and any other law the bureaucrats dredge up.
 

Whats the reason for doing it this was; I presume that your son is a higher rate tax payer and you are exempt and so are saving 50% in tax? I presume he does not have a loan on the property.

As Mandelbrot says, if your son does not charge you any rent then you will be in receipt of an annual gift equivalent to the rent of the property. So after 3 years you will be paying 33% in CAT on the rent.
 
I absolutely agree - but I am unable to find anything that provides an exemption from the Housing Standards regulations for unfurnished property. The stated regulations themselves do not provide this exemption as I understand it. There is no mention of unfurnished property nor that the regulations only apply to furnished property - thus one must conclude that one cannot legally provide unfurnished accommodation!!!

Oh! if someone could correct me on this ----
 
Facetious - it is your solemn duty ,as someone who is au fait with all regulations on property renting, to ensure that the authorities provide clear guidance on this matter.

Seriously though, it seems they haven't thought it through.

However, I am sure that no official or court would insist on the literal interpretation of the Act which seems to suggest that tenants can either (a) not bring their own white furniture into an unfurnished house or,(b) they can but the the LL must also provide the same stuff,resulting in two fridges,microwaves etc !

Mind you, the Act states these articles "must be provided". It doesn't state by the LL.....
 
I have been studying this unfurnished situation for some 6 months and I cannot find anything that permits a landlord to rent unfurnished accommodation though some do.

By reasoning, a landlord should be able to do so but I cannot find any regulations permitting it - that is, exempting the landlord from his obligation to fulfil the requirements of the Housing standards for rented accommodation.

The only possibility is in the "Explanation" of the regulations which state: These Regulations require landlords of rented houses (including flats and maisonettes), with some exceptions, to ensure that such houses meet certain minimum standards.[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]Unfortunately, the regulations do not state or define what these exceptions are - unfurnished accommodation possibly? Another cock-up by the legislators?[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
 
I think you've hit the nail on the head with the "some exceptions" part. Otherwise it would be quite farcical (and possibly illegal under some other law, EU or otherwise) from preventing people from renting unfurnished properties.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register