LL suing for breach of contract: X&Y sublet property to A&B who didnt pay rent.

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Peter54

Registered User
Messages
169
This is long winded so I will keep it as short as possible.

X & Y decided to sublet an already leased (by them) property to a husband and wife, while they went traveling for a year. While they were away they stopped paying their rent and have racked up large arrears.

X & Y did not inform the owner of the property that they were going abroad nor did they tell her that husband and wife were temporarily moving in.

X & Y are now being sued for breach of contract and husband and wife are also being chased for debts racked up by them.

I am appalled by what has gone on here and wonder do other landlords know who their tenants have staying in their premises or have you come across similar.
 
Your first port of call should be Threshold, based in Dublin - Cork - Galway. Give them a call and speak to advice worker. As far as I understand a landlord cannot refuse you to sublet but he or she should have been informed. Good luck
 
Surely if you had an agreement with the Landlord it would have been wise to discuss with the LL that 1. you were leaving & 2. you intended to sub-let. I don't why it is unreasonable for the LL wanting to get paid the rent? If it was your house wouldn't you want to know who was there & get paid?
 
I don't see the issue here at all.

The landlord didn't get his rent, so he sues for it. It's really that simple.

I would imagine that X&Y are in gross breach of contract sub-letting without the landlord's permission, but that is not really that relevant.

Brendan
 
Peter54 said:
X & Y are now being sued for breach of contract
Click to expand...

Is this not breach of ''lease terms'' and ''rent arrears'' and as such should it not be dealt with by the PRTB first.

Dispute Resolution (Part 6)
Disputes arising between landlords and tenants are generally to be referred to the PRTB instead of the courts. Examples of disputes that will be dealt with by the Board include issues relating to; deposit refunds, breaches of tenancy obligations, lease terms, termination of tenancies, market rent, rent arrears, complaints by neighbours regarding tenant behaviour, etc.

A mediated agreement or the decision of an adjudicator or of a Tribunal will result in a determination order of the Board. A Tribunal decision may be appealed to the High Court on a point of law only. The enforcement of determination orders of the Board that are not complied with will be through the Circuit Court.

The Board may award damages of up to 20,000 and arrears of rent of up to 20,000 or twice the annual rent, whichever is greater (but a maximum of 60,000 applies to rent arrears awards). Cases involving amounts greater than these will have to be taken through the courts.

http://www.prtb.ie/DownloadDocs/Residential%20Tenancies%20Act%202004%20-%20A%20Quick%20Guide.doc
 
[broken link removed] PRTB leaflet

 
I don’t think this is relevant in this case as the landlord was not aware his tenants had sub let, and did not give permission for them to do so.

Either way the head tenant remains legally liable for the rent due.
 
The tenant can only create a sub-tenancy with the landlord’s written consent.
Click to expand...
Yes, you are correct ..either way the head tenant remains legally liable for the rent due.
 
I know X and Y and am appalled that they would enter into such a hearsay agreement without the landlords consent. The subtenants are still at the property while X and Y have buried their head in the sand. Landlord is threatening all and sundry but has sill not evicted the husband and wife.

Ajapale, thank you for the link. That pretty much sums it up.
 
From what I can see - regardless of the fact X and Y omitted to obtain permission from the landlord to sublet - X and Y should have continued to pay the rent as their contract is with the landlord. In turn A and B should have been paying rent to X and Y. It is up to X and Y to evict A and B.
 
This is kind of complicated alright. They way i see it is.
X & Y are the landlords to the people they sub-letted to.
Its up to them to evict them, or to give the landlord notice that X&Y are giving up the property. X&Y would then have to instruct their sub-letters to leave, but are liable for rent as long as they keep the property.
I see no incentive for the landlord to evict the sub-letters when they can chase X&Y for any money owed.
 

I dont disagree with you - however, why did it get to this point? When rent is late by a day or two, I am immediately on the case. After a week I will begin the formal process of notifying the tenant of obligations and possible eviction. It should never get to the point of more than a month without ANY rent collected and no action taken.

If the landlord sits back and does nothing just because the original tenant is absent that is pretty irresponsible. Likewise if the subletting tenant ignored any contact from the landlord in the hopes that they were no longer involved, then they have only themselves to blame when the court rules in favor of the landlord.

The lanlord must have deep pockets to be allowing anyone to live rent free in their property. I shudder to think what damage a "squatter" will do to a property where the lanlord(s) appear uninterested.
 
Exactly, the LL allowed the situation get completely out of order. I am fully aware that the main tenants are completely in the wrong but as far as I've been lead to believe the LL never once visited the property to inspect it nor queried why there was no money coming in from the rental

The only reason she got word of the situation was when main tenants advised her that they would be moving abroad for good - she said, that was a worry for her as rental at the moment wasn't brilliant; main tenants told her there would be no problem as they had a couple staying at the property while they were away and the couple were more than happy to take on full rental agreement hence leaving her with no worries finding new tenants.

LL went mad that people had been in the property without her consent and is now threatening to sue all and sundry.

How will this favor in the courts? I also believe main tenants gave a personal guarantee, which I have never heard the likes of before in a residential letting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Menu
Log in
Register