Investigations and Sanctions
The RTB has an Investigation and Sanctions unit dedicated to investigating certain potential breaches by a landlord of the RTA 2004. The breaches of the RTA 2004 that the RTB can investigate are referred to as “Improper Conduct”. Improper Conduct includes where a landlord does not comply with the RPZ rent increase restrictions.
Where it is found that Improper Conduct has occurred, the result can be a sanction of a caution, and/or a fine of up to €15,000 and up to €15,000 costs against the landlord. Any monetary sanction imposed is paid to the exchequer.
The Investigations and Sanctions unit can start an investigation either as a result of information received from members of the public or as a result of information gathered from records that the RTB has access to under the RTA 2004, including registration data and RPZ exemption data.
A potential breach of rental law as outlined above can be brought to the attention of the Investigations and Sanctions unit by:
For further information on what can be investigated and how to inform the RTB of potential Improper Conduct please click here.
- calling the dedicated unrecorded phone line on 0818 776297 or 01 6753724;
- emailing the RTB at investigations@rtb.ie; or
- making a formal complaint.
Fair point, but it's fairly hard to prove the presence or explain the absence of something that doesn't exist. I wonder if you literally told them the reason, would that be breaking any laws or rules, I think not. Hence, I don't know why more (new) tenancies don't do it - thus the question hereI don't believe so.
But I wonder would you be stuck trying to explain to Revenue how your lease / RTB registration says 20k pa and you tell them you are only getting (say)15k pa.
I don't know either way, but I'd make sure on that point.
Yes, or using it as an excuse to evict.As a tenant I would never agree to this.
Huge risk of landlord claiming accrued arrears of €500pcm at a future point.
Or threatening to report the landlord to the RTB for attempting to circumvent the RT legislation.Yes, or using it as an excuse to evict.
This is exactly what I do with one of my properties. I have a verbal agreement with the tenant that I will not take any shortfall from their deposit. The tenants were so happy that I didn’t increase the rent they certainly didn’t complain. Coincidentally this was done with the acknowledgment and thumbs up from their local HAP housing officer.Hi All -
What rules are there against inserting an amount into the tenancy contract (EG 2000 pm), but verbally agreeing with the tenant to pay 1500pm, as a way to insulate against the 2% RPZ limit if they ever left? We registered our tenancy with the RTB a year ago at 2k per month and it's time to renew, tenants are staying and we're not upping the rent, but considering just continuing with the same contract, 2k per month, albeit collecting 1500pm.
Any reason why more don't do this? Are there any obligations on the landlord to collect the agreed amount in the contract?
People up and down the country are going out of their way to circumvent RT legislation, 100% legally.Or threatening to report the landlord to the RTB for attempting to circumvent the RT legislation.
How does it circumvent? Legislation says you cannot increase the rent by more than 2% in an RPZ. Assuming you are a new tenancy, or left idle for 2 years, and you set the rent 25% higher than what you actually collect, you're not breaking tax laws so revenue have no case and you're not breaking tenancy laws so RTB have no case.Or threatening to report the landlord to the RTB for attempting to circumvent the RT legislation.
No. Tax is payable on rental income. What's on the contract is neither here nor there. Substance over form.Wouldn’t this approach create a tax issue?
My understanding is that tax is payable on the full contracted rent, less allowable expenses.
Where less than the full contracted rent is received due to a tenant default or where rent is waived to avoid hardship then tax can be refunded but that wouldn’t appear to be the case here.
Are profits not taxable on an “arising” basis and if you can sue for the rent (ie if it’s the contracted rent) then it’s “arising”?No. Tax is payable on rental income. What's on the contract is neither here nor there. Substance over form.
You tell me. This is the first I've heard of this term and I've been doing this since 1988.Are profits not taxable on an “arising” basis and if you can sue for the rent (ie if it’s the contracted rent) then it’s “arising”?
Presumably to stop Revenue raising assessments for waived rents?If that’s not the case, what’s the point of the relief for rent not received provided for in Section 101 TCA?
You make an informal agreement to charge a tenant less than specified on the lease, so making them aware that you may increase the actual rent by more than the limits after they leave. They could choose to report you. The 2% limit applies to the rent being charged, not some notional figure.How does it circumvent? Legislation says you cannot increase the rent by more than 2% in an RPZ.
So what if they report you?You make an informal agreement to charge a tenant less than specified on the lease, so making them aware that you may increase the actual rent by more than the limits after they leave. They could choose to report you. The 2% limit applies to the rent being charged, not some notional figure.
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?