Rent Review Served - Tenant not paying increase

R

Regression

Registered User
Messages
2
Hello,

I served a rent review on my tenant in mid August to take effect from 1st December.

The tenant has not increased the rent, nor has he challenged the rent review with the RTB.

I posted a reminder letter to him last week, but no sign of the arrears as yet.

The property was rented from 2019 with no increase during the period, I tried to increase to market rent
some years ago but was shot down by the RTB, now trapped in the RPZ.

I served the rent review on the RTB rent review "version 2 December 2021", I included the RPZ calculation and
the three copies of comparable dwellings. I posted it by Express Post. It was delivered
per An Post tracking. I have scanned copies of the rent review, postage receipt and proof of delivery.

Unfortunately I may have to go the RTB on this. Have I all my i's dotted and t's crossed?

I have gotten some conflicting information on this, the RTB rent review form doesn't say that the notice of rent review
has to be sent to the RTB at all. However, the Threshold website states that it has go to the tenant and the RTB.

In regards to the postage the only error I may have made is not getting a certificate of posting.

Has anyone else had to take a case like this to the RTB?

What legal trickery are they likely to use to invalidate the rent review?

Thank you for your time.
 
1. Go by RTB, not Threshold
2. Send polite reminder text / Whatsapp or phone call now, follow up with formal notice of non payment in 7 days.
3. Follow process for non payment of rent.
4. Keep up your inspection routines.
 
A couple of things:

1. You can only increase the rent as per the RTB calculator (2%pa/inflation). The three comparable properties are irrelevant. I suspect your tenant has taken advice to the effect that your rent increase notice is invalid.

2. If the tenancy is six years old, why not wait until next March and reset to market?

Edit - sorry, scrap that second point. I forgot that the 6-yearly market reset only applies to new tenancies created post-March 2026.
 
Last edited:
Sarenco said:
You can only increase the rent as per the RTB calculator (2%pa/inflation). The three comparable properties are irrelevant. I suspect your tenant has taken advice to the effect that your rent increase notice is invalid.
Click to expand...
Comparable properties are requested in the RTB review form.
Sarenco said:
If the tenancy is six years old, why not wait until next March and reset to market?
Click to expand...
The tenancy is probably now unlimited with no possibility of resetting to market rent.
 
Threshold are right in so much that it does state on the RTB notice of rent review part D
"Landlords must inform RTB of the new rent within one month of the rent being payable".

I think (who can be sure of anything with RTB?) that entering the new rent on your RTB registration suffices. But even if you didnt register the new rent the tenants wouldnt know this, so I can't imagine that he is using non-registration of the new rent is the reason he's not paying.

He can,however, use the strong belief of the RTB, most politicians and a lot of the Irish public that landlords are evil abusers of poor innocent tenants and delay paying the increase - or,indeed, any rent and get away with it for a long,long time.
Good luck.
 
Disrespectful not to enage with you.
I would waken them up with a NoT and get out while you can.
They are not people you want to be dealing with for the rest of your life.
 
Regression
- You state this property was rented since 2019 with no increase.
Depending exactly on the date the rent was last set I assume you raised it ca.12% from this December

This is for less than inflation and quite justifiable after 6 years.
But maybe the guy is having financial or other problems and is avoiding the issue.

Have you tried to speak to him? Indeed, do you two ever talk? How are relations between you?
Before going to war it's best to use diplomacy and ( pretend) to show understanding. Maybe offer a compromise - delay the increase for a month or so. But threats to evict him until you've gone thru the friendly approach PLUS the required steps as per RTB is the last thing you should do.
 
Palatine said:
Have you tried to speak to him? Indeed, do you two ever talk? How are relations between you?
Before going to war it's best to use diplomacy and ( pretend) to show understanding. Maybe offer a compromise - delay the increase for a month or so. But threats to evict him until you've gone thru the friendly approach PLUS the required steps as per RTB is the last thing you should do.
Click to expand...
From this and your other posts can I take it you work for the govt or one of its many agencies ?
 
Palatine said:
But maybe the guy is having financial or other problems and is avoiding the issue.
Click to expand...
This is exactly why we are as landlords are where we are. The public demanded a professional rental sector, the landlord is doing what a professional landlord/business person would.

Can the tenant go into any retail outlet and pay the price they think the item is worth rather than the price of the item?
 
I note the immediate OTT reaction -" evict! evict !"- from a couple of posters-.
Based on OP text ..
We don't know if tenant has been a " bad" tenant in any way until now as regards payments, upkeep of premises etc.

The tenant has paid the usual rent for December, but not the new increased amount. That is, he's 3 weeks late in paying a small percent of his rent. Wow!

We're all frustrated with increasingly difficult and confusing regulations. But we are not dealing with sale of items in a retail outlet ( a comparison in previous post)
A " professional" approach in our business means treading on water when dealing with authorities and tenants, not because a good landlord likes the authorities or the tenants, but because having the immediate" evict them" reaction does not work, costs time money and stress, as I've found out in thirty years renting several properties.

Anyway, maybe OP can give us some facts.
 
Palatine said:
I note the immediate OTT reaction -" evict! evict !"- from a couple of posters-.
Based on OP text ..
We don't know if tenant has been a " bad" tenant in any way until now as regards payments, upkeep of premises etc.
Click to expand...
TBH who needs the hassle, better returns elsewhere...
In the current climate, why do you think the reaction is OTT?

Anybody with any sense will leave the rental market ASAP..
 
Palatine said:
A " professional" approach in our business means treading on water when dealing with authorities and tenants, not because a good landlord likes the authorities or the tenants, but because having the immediate" evict them" reaction does not work, costs time money and stress, as I've found out in thirty years renting several properties.
Click to expand...
Why does evicting them not work? they can evict to sell, this getting rid of the issue?

Otherwise, what you propose is to give the tenant the benefit of the doubt, and be patient. This may or may not work out, if it does not work out he has to go through the nightmare that is the RTB, could take months / years to sort this out. Finally when this is over, the landlord still has to put up with future legislation that is biased towards him, plus other possible tenant issues down the line.. ya cant make this nightmare stuff up...

Can you outline the benefits to the landlord as you see it? Really interested to hear?
 
I see this is the angry landlords website, and I understand the anger, but please calm down and consider..
I think the immediate reaction of "Evict!" is OTT because
1. Issuing an eviction notice based on the fact that tenant is a few weeks behind (on a small part of the rent ) is absolutely against RTB regulations.( It's similar with any debt procedure in any business - no lawyer would tell a client to issue proceedings over a three week debt of a few Euros)
2. Issuing an NOT or taking any legal action to recover debt from a tenant can take ages and in many cases can mean the tenant stays and stays - and then leaves without paying a penny. It's a system that really works against landlords.
3.So, despite angry and sarcastic comments from some posters I'm convinced that at first the personal approach is the best one. No threats of eviction or any legal action.
Phone ( keep records of attempted phone calls), visit the premises in a friendly manner.

And only after a reasonable period- a few weeks maybe- become more formal . And,yes,issue a NOT - maybe,as suggested, because OP wants to sell.

P.S
Collins- yes.fewer benefits of being a LL than before.Ive gone down from nine to five properties over the last six years and may go down further. Basically I'm looking at how much I'd get for a property and see what safe return I'd get with the cash cf to renting.
Presently as a nonrisk taker I prefer the rental returns. And,weirdly, I sort of enjoy letting. Keeps me occupied.
 
Palatine said:
1. Issuing an eviction notice based on the fact that tenant is a few weeks behind (on a small part of the rent ) is absolutely against RTB regulations.( It's similar with any debt procedure in any business - no lawyer would tell a client to issue proceedings over a three week debt of a few Euros)
Click to expand...
Fair enough that a notice of overdue rent should be issued first, allowing 28 days for the tenant to clear all outstanding debts. But they are also clear in that failure of the tenant to clear those debts within 28 days the landlord is entitled to issue a NoT.
 
Palatine said:
I'm convinced that at first the personal approach is the best one.
Click to expand...
He has already sent a reminder. He can't really send a reminder of a reminder. So a formal notice seems now the most appropriate. Financial issues or not, the tenant had a lot of time to communicate: 3 months and 3 weeks. He chose not to.
 
Palatine said:
We're all frustrated with increasingly difficult and confusing regulations. But we are not dealing with sale of items in a retail outlet ( a comparison in previous post)
Click to expand...
The landlord advised the tenant in Aug of the increase so if the tenant was having any financial issues that is when the should have advised the landlord at that point. To be honest this is the tenant putting their head in the sand and hoping it will go away. I had a similar issue with one of my tenants on HAP a tenant I had not increased the rent for 5 yrs and the increase in line with the legislation brought the tenant above the HAP rate they could avail of. The response I received was I had to contact HAP for the increase over the max limit the tenant was entitled to. I advised the tenant I did not and it was their responsibility to pay the rent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top