Rent Review Served - Tenant not paying increase

Palatine said:
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
Click to expand...
So no increase at all in the rent from 2019 and a small increase now and this is the attitude of the tenant?

What will it be like when you the tenant is in for 6 years or permanently - what will the attitude be like then. And don't think you can go to the RTB and get the tenant evicted for non-payment of the increase. They'll do everything to block that and make you look unreasonable based on the tiny amount involved.
Palatine said:
Presently as a nonrisk taker I prefer the rental returns. And,weirdly, I sort of enjoy letting. Keeps me occupied.
Click to expand...
Yes, weirdly I always enjoyed it as well, but I am getting out. As a non-risk taker there are just too many risks now especially when the Head of the Department of Housing said in last week's Housing Committee hearing that the purpose of the new legislation is to force landlords to sell with tenants in situ. No mention of course of how difficult that will be. Who'll buy? I'm sick of being treated like a mug.
 
Palatine said:
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.
Click to expand...
I think your completely missing the point..

The issue the OP is experiencing at the moment is the tip of the iceberg... it is one very small reason, of many many larger ones, why every one is saying evict...

Their is nothing to gain by staying in the rental market - simples...

Despite what I just said, the OP has given plenty of notice, like other posters have said... what more can he do?
 
Colin4444 said:
The issue the OP is experiencing at the moment is the tip of the iceberg...
Click to expand...
Yes, if this was the sole issue - non payment of a small increase and no contact at all from the tenant - any reasonable person would say speak to the tenant first and find out what the story is

But this issue is just the tip of the iceberg. We're increasingly being dragged into a situation where we are forced to provide forever accommodation maintained at all times in top condition at an uneconomic rent which never increases.
 
I think many of the responses here are ridiculous.
first of all, was the tenant meant to reply? He got the notice and prob left it in a drawer and forgot about - didnt adjust the standing order.
If they've been paying rent since 2019 without any issues, why not give them the benefit of the doubt. Two days before Christmas, very Scrooge like to consider eviction.
Maybe ring them to discuss after Christmas and give them a chance to resolve it. I had a property that I rented out years ago - serious difficulties with the tenants. We decided to use the 'kill with kindness' approach and it stood to us in the end.
 
RentingD said:
Two days before Christmas, very Scrooge like to consider eviction.
Click to expand...
The OP has not suggested eviction.
They have also posted a reminder...which has also gone unheeded/unreplied.
To me, their conduct thus far, has been anything but Scrooge like.
 
Luternau - RentingD never mentioned OP. It's the reaction of most other posters that he is commenting on.
I also am surprised by some of the comments. I suppose these posters are really venting their own understandable frustration about the ever worsening anti landlord legislation.
P.S. Perhaps the OP could comment after so many posts.

.
 
I think the key question here is if the rental review/increase notice was valid.

The OP needs to decide if he is 100% sure it was valid.

If the tenant knows (or strongly suspects) it is invalid, then strategically he shouldn't tell the landlord that and not communicate at all.

That is currently what he is doing, but isn't necessarily the reason. (He might just be ignoring the notice and hoping it will all work out).

The advantage of this strategy is that the landlord could go through the whole process.

- immediately, notify of late payment (28 days notice)
- 29 days later, issue NoT for non-payment of rent (28 days notice)
- 29 days later, file dispute with RTB
- months later, a hearing happens
-- tenant says that the original rent review was invalid
-- RTB agrees and says since the rent review was invalid, the tenant actually paid the required rent
-- Therefore, the NoT is invalid, since the rent was paid, as required.

At this point, the landlord has to re-do the whole rent review including notice. Relations with the tenant would be degraded and the rent still wouldn't be increased.

The RTB is likely to have a large number of hearings, in the near future, so the delay could be even longer. The is an argument to issue the NoT sooner rather than later. Certainly an official notice of missing the rent needs to happen as soon as possible. The tenant should get the legal notice periods, but no more.
 
JoeRoberts said:
Nope. If tenant thinks it is not valid they contact the LL and discuss. Otherwise they are not a tenant anyone should do business with.
Click to expand...

Right, that is what they should do in a functional rental legal framework.

Ideally, there would be no nightmare tenants or nightmare landlords and the legal framework would be unbiased.

Under the current Irish system, tenants are often advised how to stall the process for as long as possible.
 
I defiantly think there is an overreaction here. I see a big difference in rent not paid and rent increase not paid.

How likely is it that they got the notice in august and didn't remember to update the So before December, when was there reminder posted? Last week? Could they be away for Christmas?

Would you not have started with a phone call or a text?

Are you 100% sure the increase is correct?
 
I've feel there's something missing from OPs account.
1. The same tenant for six years - does OP know, or has even met the tenant?
No visit, phone call, text from the LL to check if tenant got notification - especially after seeing no increase. Just another letter?

2. Although legally entitled to increase the rent by 10-12% this could mean an unexpected increase of € 100-€150. Notification of this large increase after a long hiatus should really have been preceded by a chat or friendly letter. And, yes, the tenant should have discussed the increase. on receiving the notification - if he got it.

3.When OP says there's been no increase 2019 on the property does he also mean the tenant - or is tenant more recent?

4. Is tenant now dead, in a coma, climbing Mt Everest or has just departed? I wonder how to find out ? Perhaps post something
 
If this was a business to business relationship I think you would just pick up the phone as soon as the old amount was received.

Their would probably have also made some personal contact around the time of the change even if the contract didn’t require.

You can also do the legal approach in parallel.
 
RentingD said:
I think many of the responses here are ridiculous.
first of all, was the tenant meant to reply? He got the notice and prob left it in a drawer and forgot about - didnt adjust the standing order.
If they've been paying rent since 2019 without any issues, why not give them the benefit of the doubt. Two days before Christmas, very Scrooge like to consider eviction.
Maybe ring them to discuss after Christmas and give them a chance to resolve it. I had a property that I rented out years ago - serious difficulties with the tenants. We decided to use the 'kill with kindness' approach and it stood to us in the end.
Click to expand...
Again missing the point, as I stated in post 22... ppl are not saying evict solely because the tenant did not pay the increase rent..

People are reacting to the entire rental market, the advise to most landlords is evict whether they are having an issue with a tenant or not. even if they have the best tenants in the world, who always pay on time, are happy to increase the rent each year, never have any maintenance calls etc, the advise is still to evict...

Primarily it has nothing to do with tenants... its all the convoluted rules in place and coming..
 
If one had perfect tenants and never had any real problems with any aspect of letting one's property, then quitting the business becuase of "the rules in place and coming" seems bonkers to me.

Unless one bought property in the peak-price period ,many landlords have seen their investment double or even triple in value -and they would have been getting a better return on their investment than many "safe" investments.

Yes, there are more and confusing/contradictory rules in letting propery. Just as there are in running most small businesses . Non stop regulations regarding employees, Health and Safety, insurance costs etc etc. plague other businesses far more than smaller lanlords,
The (usually innocent ) breaking of various, often stupid, rules by landlords rarely mean heavy penalties -usually RTB or the council letters warning/advising us to do this or that by a certain date. Rarely an immediate penalty which would only apply in a imited number of egregious breaches

Letting a property is a type of business that, compared to most businesses, involves far less red tape. I should have quit years ago due to my age but I find it a - comparitively- easy way of getting an income, and my heirs should also do so.

The more landlords quit the business the more demand there'll be for the the remaining properties which should make life easier for the " remainers" . So, moaners, quit already!
 
I think the issue is that a problem tenant can now cost a landlord tens of thousands. All well and good if you never have a problem tenant.
Not so well and good if you ever get one and have no way out.
 
Palatine said:
If one had perfect tenants and never had any real problems with any aspect of letting one's property, then quitting the business becuase of "the rules in place and coming" seems bonkers to me.
Click to expand...
I have very good tenants at present and no real problems with any of them, I am still quitting.

Why? A number of reasons:

1. The next tenancies I grant will be permanent ones. My tenants can stay for ever, as can their children if they have them. That is a lovely position to be in with an SF led government or even the current anti-landlord one. I can't get out. I'm under a permanent eviction ban. Who'll buy from me with a tenant in situ in that situation. It's the greater fool in practice, I'd have to find a greater fool.

2. I've no faith that I'll be able to get decent rent increases. Rent control is now among the strictest in the world and permanent. Currently I'm capped at 2%. The change to market value when a tenant leaves or at year 6 won't happen. We're seeing the start of that now, a reference rent system (stacked against the landlord of course) will come in. I'll end up with a liability and not a business on my hands.

3. The RTB is anti-landlord. We've seen that in the way they falsified the tenancy numbers. Criminal liability is coming in for all sorts of misfiling or late filing of forms. They won't go after the big guys. They'll go after the little guys like me if I make a mistake. They'll need to show we've prosecuted X number of landlords for this and X number of landlords for that.

It's not the tenant's attitude to the small rent increase, though that is telling in itself, it all the rules so far and fear of the worse rules which are definitely to come.

Yes, other business have rules and red tape as well. With the PRS what is coming and what is to follow has just made the business way too risky and ultimately not viable.
 
Apologies for my rather hastily written post 37 above. Rather arrogant and know-all.Sorry.
I suppose I've had it relatively easy compared to the horror scenario that Jamie 38 mentions.
And I've usually found dealing - sparring - with officialdom no great problem.
But reading Greenwood's post 39 is causing a slight dent in my optimism.
Damn!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top