PRTB exemption with a resident child

T

tanny

Registered User
Messages
4
Hi all,

I could be posting this to the wrong section, so please feel free to move if I am.

I have an issue with my landlord retaining my deposit.
I had signed a one-year tenancy agreement in June, and rang the landlord to break the agreement with 30 days notice. I had told her I would find a tenant to sublet in the meantime.

The problem is, I found a great tenant with good references who is in her late 20s and is a student. The landlord won't accept the sub-let because the tenant is a student - but this is unfair as there is already a student living in the house.

She is refusing to return my deposit as a sub-let hasn't been organised to her approval. In addition, she has said she is exempt from PRTB registration as her daughter is resident in the house.

My question is:
1) Are landlords exempt from PRTB registration if they have a spouse/child living in the house but there is a tenancy agreement in place with everyone else?

I'm confused.

Thanks!!
 
tanny said:
. In addition, she has said she is exempt from PRTB registration as her daughter is resident in the house.

I'm confused.
Click to expand...


I cannot answer your question on PRTB but looks like a landlord pulling a fast one. And no doubt claiming rent a room relief instead of declaring rent too to revenue.

As a landlord myself there is no way I'd agree to a student - just to give you that perspective.
 
Thanks Bronte, I appreciate the response.

I understand if she doesn't want to accept the student, but she has references and there is a already a student in the house.

I'll contact threshold to discuss with them.
 
A tenant has exclusive use of some part of a property (usually a bedroom) and shared exclusive use with other tenants (kitchen, living room, family bathroom, garden etc). The landlord has no right to enter the property at will - without the express permission of the tenant.

A licensee or lodger does not have exclusive use of any part of a property, not even the bedroom. The landlord has the right to enter any part of the property at any time, unannounced. It is usual that the landlord or a close family member resides in the property, but does not have to be.

Thus, a landlord/ owner of a property can never have a tenant and a lodger in the same property at the same time. Where a tenant (with exclusive use) rents a room in the property to a lodger, the tenant, in effect, becomes a live-in landlord in respect to the lodger. The owner of the property has no financial relationship with the lodger thus most leases prohibit lodgers in a property rented to tenants.

Just because an agreement says "License Agreement" does not necessarily mean that the agreement is what it says in the title; it depends of the facts (clauses) of the agreement. This is borne out in several PRTB cases where the PRTB had to decide prior to any claim if they had jurisdiction to adjudicate. Whether the reverse is applicable, I am not certain: an agreement headed "Tenancy Agreement" when, in fact it is quite clear that it is "License Agreement" because the owner of a property is also a live-in landlord.

Therefore, to answer the OP's question: if the owner or a close family member resides in the property, then any agreement should be a license agreement as the OP would not have exclusive use which prohibits the landlord from entering the property at will. In this scenario, no registration is required with the PRTB.
 
Thanks Facetious, your reply is really informative.

I have a suspicion that my agreement is a tenancy and not licensee, therefore there is a contradiction in the arrangement and the PRTB registration. I'll look into this.
 
tanny said:
Thanks Facetious, your reply is really informative.

I have a suspicion that my agreement is a tenancy and not licensee, therefore there is a contradiction in the arrangement and the PRTB registration. I'll look into this.
Click to expand...
If you had a tenancy agreement before the landlord's daughter moved in - then you still have a tenancy agreement and the daughter could only live in the property as a tenant - the parents do not have a right to impinge on your peaceful and exclusive enjoyment of the property.

However, if the daughter was already in the property before you moved in then you would only have a license agreement as you would not have exclusive use of any part of the property. The daughter has the this right, being in situ before you arrived - irrespective (I believe, though see my previous post) of what the agreement is titled.
 
As far as I know, unless the owner of the property resides in the property, it's a letting for PRTB purposes. That is why rent a room agreements fall outside the PRTB.

While impossible to tell for sure, what you outlined may indeed be an avoidance scheme -The owner letting rooms under rent a room relief, but not actually resident. They must be resident in the house. The scheme is also not available to lettings to sons/daughters!

It would be interesting to know if the daughter pays? My feeling is no, as that may put income received over the €10,000 limit, thus exposing all the income to tax.

What form of notice did your agreement/licence say? You are also entitled to go to the small claims court re withholding of deposit. See http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/owning_a_home/home_owners/rent_a_room_scheme.html
 
Hi Luternau,

The daughter isn't paying rent so it looks like it is just as you said above.
I have a call with threshold this afternoon, so I just want to confirm with them before I inform my landlord of the dispute.

Thanks for your help
 
Luternau said:
As far as I know, unless the owner of the property resides in the property, it's a letting for PRTB purposes. That is why rent a room agreements fall outside the PRTB. ...........
/QUOTE]
Licensees can be: "persons occupying accommodation in which the owner is not resident under a formal licence arrangement with the owner where the occupants are not entitled to its exclusive use and the owner has continuing access to the accommodation and/or
can move around or change the occupants". Therefore, this would be outside the jurisdiction of the PRTB.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top