Court report on getting a PRTB determination implemented

Discussion in 'Property investment and tenants' rights' started by Brendan Burgess, Mar 16, 2017.

  1. Brendan Burgess

    Brendan Burgess Founder

    Posts:
    30,952
    This is a case I watched in the Dublin Circuit Court this morning

    2016/08511 John Scanlon - V - Patrick James Fogarty : Brendan D. O'Connor & Co. Solicitors

    The property was let in 2008.
    Arrears began in 2011, and since then payments have been sporadic.
    6 Oct 2015, an initial date was set for a PRTB hearing, but the tenant said it did not suit him, so a new date was set
    17 October 2015- Tenant did not appear at hearing
    27 October 2015 -PRTB issued its determination
    €20,000 arrears due
    Notice of Termination was valid

    December 2015, the landlord went sale agreed on the premises, but the sale fell through.

    The determination was not appealed.
    In June 2016, the landlord found ads online where the tenant was trying to sublet it.

    A contract for sale closed in June
    The tenant vacated the premises in December I think.
    The tenant appeared in court on 27 February and wanted to oppose the judgement
    The case was adjourned because some 90 day notice period had not expired. The judge had directed the former tenant to file and affidavit of defence.

    The judge made an order today against the tenant for €20,890 with costs.

    The barrister presenting the case was excellent. Very clear. All the paperwork in order. Very systematic.
     
  2. Brendan Burgess

    Brendan Burgess Founder

    Posts:
    30,952
    What is the point in having a RTB if the tenant can simply ignore the determinations and continue living in the property?

    I have no idea what legal fees this landlord has incurred in getting the tenant out and getting a judgement for the arrears.

    And he will probably have great difficulty and expense in enforcing the judgement.

    The system should be changed so that once the RTB determination is issued and not appealed, the landlord can take possession of the premises and put the tenant out on the street.

    The landlord should not have to go to the expense of going to the Circuit Court to get the adjudication enforced.

    Brendan
     
    Dermot and Tebbit like this.
  3. cremeegg

    cremeegg Frequent Poster

    Posts:
    1,428
    It is all very well Brendan saying what should happen, but landlords have to deal with the situation as it actually exists.

    And we will have to continue dealing with the existing situation until such time as it is changed. There is no sign that the situation you have outlined will be changed.

    The simple reality is that there is a small chance of a catastrophic situation developing for any landlord, i.e. that a tenant will stop paying and not leave.

    Many potential landlords simply will not let their properties. Others will resort to extra legal means to gain possession of their property.

    As a practical suggestion, a RAS or HAP tenant is unlikely to do this. That is because they have a right to be housed by the council, which they could forfeit if there was a determination against them. I don't know the legal basis for this, but I had a difficult situation with a tenant on RAS some years ago. Ultimately they behaved because they were very afraid that their place on the council housing list would be lost if they had a PRTB order against them.

    For most landlords, other than get out of the business, the only thing they can do to protect themselves is to be very careful not to take a certain type of tenant.
     
    mtk likes this.
  4. mtk

    mtk Frequent Poster

    Posts:
    317
    many thanks fro taking the time to shine a light on this nonsense
     
  5. Sarenco

    Sarenco Frequent Poster

    Posts:
    3,339
    Hi Brendan

    I have heard on the grapevine that the RTB are now initiating (and funding) an increasing number of Court proceedings to enforce their determinations against over-holding tenants. I suspect that there is a realisation within the RTB that over-holding is becoming an increasing problem and that many tenants are simply "playing the system".

    I'm not sure how I feel about the discretionary nature of the RTB's mandate in this regard but I definitely wouldn't be comfortable would the idea of a landlord evicting a tenant without first obtaining a Court order.
     
  6. Brendan Burgess

    Brendan Burgess Founder

    Posts:
    30,952
    Then scrap the PRTB. It only delays things.

    Set up a landlord and tenant court. Both would take it more seriously.

    Brendan
     
    Annie51 and cremeegg like this.
  7. Sarenco

    Sarenco Frequent Poster

    Posts:
    3,339
    Yes, I think that would be an excellent idea - Housing Courts are not uncommon in the US.