What are you referring to as "an expired lease". After a tenant has been in occupation for 6 months he gains PART 4 rights (unless a valid notice of termination was served during the first six months) and therefore may remain in the property without signing any new lease. Therefore, he is protected by the laws of the RTA 2004.
In order for a landlord to fully comply with the 6 grounds available to him (under Part 4 laws) to evict a tenant, he must actually comply with the ground stated on a permanent basis. He cannot evict a tenant on the grounds that he or a relative will live in the property - he must actually do that. If after a month or two, he then rents out the property he has not complied with the law and a tenant may bring a case of unlawful eviction for which the landlord risks a heavy fine awarded to the tenant.
The expired lease reference is relevant because even where there has been a lease, a landlord can wait it out and then serve a valid termination under Part 4. So really, there's no excuse for a serious issue going on with a tenant for years, even ignoring the fact that anti-social behaviour is grounds for terminating a lease also.
Also, come off it. Landlord wants tenant out, and tenant is part 4. Landlord serves notice:
"I am selling the house."
"I want the house for a relative."
"I am substantially renovating the house."
This is valid. Tenant leaves, presumably finds new accomodation, and doesn't lurk in the bushes outside their ex-home waiting to verify that yes, in fact someone related to the landlord has moved in. If the landlord wants to be cautious, he can put a price tag on the property and stick a sign up. Maybe he could ask for 50% more than the house is worth, just to be safe. He could move back into the house himself, or have a relative do it. Maybe the relative/himself only wants the house a certain number of days.
In what fantasy land does the ex-tenant come back into the picture and presumably reclaim the house, when they have moved on to a new dwelling?
"stated on a permanent basis"... - You mean they have to sell the house, "permanently"? Or that the relative has to move in, forever? How does the tenant verify that the new occupant is a relative of the landlord? Can they take a DNA sample from both?
There are so many holes in these get out clauses you could drive a movers' van through them. Whatever the intention of the legislation it makes it very easy to serve a valid notice of termination, and this is without the tenant doing
any wrong. Where the tenant has done wrong, particularly serious anti-social behaviour as evidenced here, 7 days notice can be served. Most of the landlords posting here are way off topic. This wasn't a thread about how difficult it is to evict tenants. The landlord has seemingly taken no interest in evicting them, and he/his agent disputes that the tenants' behaviour was as bad as made out. If there is any evidence the landlord tried to evict the tenants at any stage over several years can someone highlight it for me?
“The tribunal notes that no written complaint or notice was made to the tenants after any of the communications were received from the neighbouring residents or their representative.
“It is claimed that the tenants were requested to modify their behaviour, but there is no evidence that this was effective, or that the requests were accompanied by any threat of sanction if they failed to do so.”
True, but it does demonstrate that the LL is now making best efforts to address the situation. Doubtless this will form part of his challenge to the RPB's determination.
Does it? Where is the indication that he is selling out of motivation to resolve this issue? And after how many years? And can anyone find these houses on myhome.ie? Because I can't, despite the fact they are apparently on the market. Maybe I am being hindered by the fact I don't know the area, but I've found the estate on the myhome map and these houses are not on it.
This was a case of a landlord letting to anti-social tenants, then washing his hands of them while continuing to collect the rent (presumably paid by the state) for a number of years. The tenants affected the quality of life of a large number of people. I wonder would the landlords sympathising with him on this thread change their tune if such tenants moved in next door to their own homes.