Is this a change to the terms and conditions of his lease agreement?An interesting one I heard of from a friend of mine. Fortunately he is moving soon, but he rents through an agency and the agency have introduced a €50 callout fee for getting the landlord out to fix anything.
Why would the introduction of a new charge have anything at all to do with the likelyhood of issues in getting the deposit back?I also mentioned to him the likely difficulties getting a deposit back from this shower
Haven't heard of it, but doesn't surprise me in the least. Could take this to RTB, but don't know if there is anything specific to callouts in current legislation - I know there have been efforts over the years to try to stop landlords from adding spurious fees and charges to compensate themselves for fixed low rates of rent increases imposed under RPZ rules.Hi all,
An interesting one I heard of from a friend of mine. Fortunately he is moving soon, but he rents through an agency and the agency have introduced a €50 callout fee for getting the landlord out to fix anything.
Sure, it might guard against "change my lightbulb", but I told him this was outrageous. I also mentioned to him the likely difficulties getting a deposit back from this shower and to consider what options he might take to minimise a potential loss here.
Anyone heard of this before?
Honestly, I would suggest the tenant raise this case, there is no cost on his part to do so. Its definitely an abuse of the system given that a) landlord is obliged by law to maintain property and b) landlord is already paying service charges to the agent to represent him/herThat's the sort of thing gives the majority of good landlords a bad name. Totally runs against the residential tenancies act. Landlord has a statutory duty to maintain the dwelling in good condition. Landlord and tenant can't contract out of this duty and the landlord can't charge for fulfilling his obligations. There might just be a case for imposing a charge for frivolous callouts but seriously, would you want the hassle of arguing this in front of RTB? Mad stuff.
Off the top of my head this is a few that we've been called out for:That's the sort of thing gives the majority of good landlords a bad name. Totally runs against the residential tenancies act. Landlord has a statutory duty to maintain the dwelling in good condition. Landlord and tenant can't contract out of this duty and the landlord can't charge for fulfilling his obligations. There might just be a case for imposing a charge for frivolous callouts but seriously, would you want the hassle of arguing this in front of RTB? Mad stuff.
Is that not the point... Charging for frivolous call outs? It's no problem paying for things that reach end of life or need servicing,That's the sort of thing gives the majority of good landlords a bad name. Totally runs against the residential tenancies act. Landlord has a statutory duty to maintain the dwelling in good condition. Landlord and tenant can't contract out of this duty and the landlord can't charge for fulfilling his obligations. There might just be a case for imposing a charge for frivolous callouts but seriously, would you want the hassle of arguing this in front of RTB? Mad stuff.
Seems to me that a lot, if not the vast majority, of people haven't a clue how to do even basic household troubleshooting and maintenance. I don't know how many people I've met who can't wire a plug safely or unblock a toilet. I doubt that this is an issue specific to the tenant/landlord relationship.Off the top of my head this is a few that we've been called out for:
- lightbulb
- midnight tenant locked himself out and couldn't find his keys, on one occasion we told him to break in
- mice
- washing machine broken as tenant had decided washing his work boots in it was a good idea
- clogged up dryer
- toilet problems as they put too much loo roll or sanitary products
But the issue is: Should the landlord be on the hook for the cost of the deficit of knowledge of — or ownership of the problem by — the tenant?Seems to me that a lot of not the vast majority of people haven't a clue how to do even basic household troubleshooting and maintenance. I don't know how many people I've met who can't wire a plug safely or unblock a toilet. I doubt that this is an issue specific to the tenant/landlord relationship.
Seems to me that Irish tenants get away with murder. Because all the onus is on the landlord acting as Mammy.Seems to me that a lot, if not the vast majority, of people haven't a clue how to do even basic household troubleshooting and maintenance. I don't know how many people I've met who can't wire a plug safely or unblock a toilet. I doubt that this is an issue specific to the tenant/landlord relationship.
Couldn't the lease agreement clarify what issues will be attended to or not, when a fee applies to the former etc.? Within the constraints of any regulatory framework of course.Seems to me that Irish tenants get away with murder. Because all the onus is on the landlord acting as Mammy.
And what is it with smoke alarms, my pulled out the batteries all the time.
By now you will know that my leases were not worth the paper they weren't written on. Completely pointless and unenforceable were I to bother having one. Everything is in the legislation and everything is biased towards the tenants. But it's ok I'm in exit strategy.Couldn't the lease agreement clarify what issues will be attended to or not, when a fee applies to the former etc.? Within the constraints of any regulatory framework of course.
Obligations of landlords.
12.—(1) In addition to the obligations arising by or under any other enactment, a landlord of a dwelling shall—
(a) allow the tenant of the dwelling to enjoy peaceful and exclusive occupation of the dwelling,
(b) subject to subsection (2), carry out to—
(i) the structure of the dwelling all such repairs as are, from time to time, necessary and ensure that the structure complies with any standards for houses for the time being prescribed under section 18 of the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1992, and
(ii) the interior of the dwelling all such repairs and replacement of fittings as are, from time to time, necessary so that that interior and those fittings are maintained in, at least, the condition in which they were at the commencement of the tenancy and in compliance with any such standards for the time being prescribed,
Instead it should be the tenant's obligation to maintain the property in the condition they received the property originally. And because it isn't there is no respect from too many, or even good tenants, we accept as good tenants on a very low basis.The RTA states:
There is an obligation on a landlord to make his contact details known to the tenant.
IANAL but I don't think it is reasonable under the RTA for the landlord to charge a tenant for callout to be made aware of issues with the state of the property. It is quite literally the landlord's legal obligation to maintain the property in the condition at the start of the property (see above).
Whether this is fair or reasonable is another matter, but the law is the law.
I try to comply with the law, so yes I do!Coyote do you put in microwaves?
Agree. Keep as you got it.Instead it should be the tenant's obligation to maintain the property in the condition they received the property originally. And because it isn't there is no respect from too many, or even good tenants, we accept as good tenants on a very low basis.
Coyote do you put in microwaves?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?