RTB told landlords posting date = service date. The High Court says it doesn't. Accommodation providers set up to fail?

[Greenbook]

This should be a scandal

Of course it should. It is actually a scandal. I'm not a lawyer, but I get the impression that the rules in the Interpretation Act are pretty basic and the RTB should not have made this mess.

If this was Revenue, as in your example, I think they would have more honour, explain what happened and what was going to be done to sort the situation out. Not a hope with the accident prone and anti-landlord RTB.

The IPOA is useless. They should be making a huge song and dance about this. Their members are being caught up in this. Plus the vast majority of NoTs for arrears, sales and family use, are now invalid and illegal. Evicted tenants are possibly entitled to compensation. Perhaps landlords could be prosecuted for evictions which are now illegal. Instead, they are busy admonishing single property landlords for not having written policies and procedures in place for dealing with anti-social tenants.

 

[bipped]

So many different timelines it’s easy to get it wrong. Is it 7 days now to copy the RTB for every type of notice that a landlord can send to a tenant?
Think I read somewhere that the 28 days for a rent arrears notice only starts from the date after the RTB get their copy - is that correct ? So if it’s sent 7 days later, that’s when the 28 day period starts?

 

[bipped]

Re previous query above.

The RTB website has changed. I can’t find the 28 day warning letter for rent arrears or any of the steps / advice that was there a few months ago. The only two templates are for a full waiver of rent arrears or a letter with a payment plan.

So is the 28 days warning letter gone? It’s straight to a payment plan or just write off the arrears?

 

[Greenbook]

So many different timelines it’s easy to get it wrong. Is it 7 days now to copy the RTB for every type of notice that a landlord can send to a tenant?

It's even worse than that. As well as different timelines, some notices can't be sent by email, others can't, for example. It's a quagmire and, at this stage, seems deliberately designed to trap the landlord.

So is the 28 days warning letter gone? It’s straight to a payment plan or just write off the arrears?

That is probably the next Residential Tenancies Bill 2027 - you can't evict for arrears, you must write-off what's owed or agree a payment plan with MABs involvement.

I can't find the 28 day warning letter either. The website has changed quite a bit in the past while, the emphasis being on landlord penalties, crimes and enforcement.

 

[bipped]

the 28 day warning letter

Maybe it was removed in the Sept 14th updates. The consolidated RTA doesn’t have the changes yet and the 2026 Act is not that easy to follow for a lay person, it just lists the amendments and there’s no context without going back and forth to the different sections of RTA.

​

 

[Greenbook]

Maybe it was removed in the Sept 14th updates. The consolidated RTA doesn’t have the changes yet and the 2026 Act is not that easy to follow for a lay person, it just lists the amendments and there’s no context without going back and forth to the different sections of RTA.

Possibly, the poor Law Reform Commission are having trouble putting it together. The Act is now massive and very convoluted even for those with legal training.

 

[Wavelly]

The RTB website has changed. I can’t find the 28 day warning letter for rent arrears or any of the steps / advice that was there a few months ago. The only two templates are for a full waiver of rent arrears or a letter with a payment plan.

So is the 28 days warning letter gone? It’s straight to a payment plan or just write off the arrears?

The 28 day warning template for failure to pay rent is back now, along with new guidelines. So they've obviously been busy updating their website.

https://rtb.ie/resources/category/ending-a-tenancy/

So the warning letter has to be emailed to the RTB, but the subsequent termination letter has to be uploaded to the RTB!

 

[Premos]

Instead, they are busy admonishing single property landlords for not having written policies and procedures in place for dealing with anti-social tenants.

Our referring to the budget and the necessity of tax breaks.

It's even worse than that. As well as different timelines, some notices can't be sent by email, others can't, for example. It's a quagmire and, at this stage, seems deliberately designed to trap the landlord

I don't think it's necessary deliberate. But to me, it seems that each time they see some potential issues they create/update without trying to create some consistency or cohesion within the process.

 

[Greenbook]

Our referring to the budget and the necessity of tax breaks.

They haven't a hope of a tax break. It is a complete waste of time.

It would be political suicide for the government to give landlords tax breaks. The opposition would eat them alive. How the IPOA doesn't see this is beyond me.

 

[polecon]

It would be political suicide for the government to give landlords tax breaks. The opposition would eat them alive. How the IPOA doesn't see this is beyond me.

The dynamics of the yearly request from the IPOA for a tax break is dealt with roughly like this:

a) ignore them - everybody knows the phrase "taxbreaks for landlords" is as popular as "round up pets and feed them to snakes at the zoo"
b) .....or if concerned that landlords going away might become a story in the press, and your polling among 18 - 30 year olds is mysteriously not rewarding you for that (boo! unfair! - look we showed how tough we are on these neoliberal rentier leeches), toss them something that adds up to about €350. But with conditions. And don't forget
c) that means you have to give the tenants something too or they'll be doubly outraged. Actually give them something worth more than that €350 we just threw at the landlords - and if possible use something we take off the landlords and transfer to the tenants.

(a) is just by far the easiest.

IPOA are good at trying to help people navigate through the maze set up by the government and the RTB. But they are no good at lobbying or campaigning. And maybe it's not a realistic expectation - they are a few people, no doubt inundated with individual landlord queries, struggling to try to understand what the rules are supposed to require them to advise landlords to do, don't have any thick-skinned media performers, aren't lawyers or economists etc etc.

And what exactly have 'landlords generally' done to try to engage in the PR war declared against them? 250,000 private tenancies at an average capital value of €300,000 would be capital at risk of €75 billion - most of that is nothing to do with IRES and the like. All that money at stake and what resources applied to defend it? Not much seems to be the answer.

It's a bit baffling because, not only has the resulting situation led to policies which are damaging to landlords in various ways - up to and including transfer of property equity from them to their tenants, but it's produced a public discourse anfd policy landscape objectively detrimental to people who rely on the provision of rental property. That is, the effective silence of landlords - their failure to lobby even slightly effectively - is partially responsible for economic policy which is against the public interest and that of the state.

 

[bipped]

The 28 day warning template for failure to pay rent is back now, along with new guidelines.

I can’t find it. Under Managing a Tenancy there’s two templates, one for a payment plan the other for a full waiver. Maybe it’s moved. The payment plan seems to be a new step before the warning notice.

 

[Greenbook]

Unlike Threshold who are funded by the government to the tune of €2m per year, the IPOA do have a hard enough time of it. They must deal with members' convoluted queries and RTB cases and do policy at the same time.

Threshold on the other hand can afford to pay a plethora of advisors and have separate people to deal solely with policy and PR.

The Fund landlords have their own lobby group now. Obviously, it isn't government funded, but they can afford to put serious money into the policy and PR side. They can afford their own solicitors to deal with disputes.

So, yes, the IPOA is at a serious disadvantage. But I still think they are doing a hopeless job:

1. When the new rules were announced instead of explaining that landlords would be unwilling to rent because a tenancy devalued the property by up to 50% or made it completely unsaleable etc., they concentrated all their fire on pre-63s and Fair Deal. These are minor issues.

2. A recent IPOA Facebook post blamed a landlord with an anti-social tenant for the hot water he landed in. The advice from the IPOA - have written policies and procedures in place. Try showing those to your maniac tenant. They should instead explain how genuinely difficult it is for a landlord to deal with an anti-social tenant and how even the AHBs struggle to cope.

3. They can spend plenty of time coming up with new tax wheeses for landlords every Budget despite the fact that they never get anywhere. Try getting a tenant paying €2k a month in rent to support a tax cut for his landlord. What they don't explain is that the landlord only gets €1k of that €2k and probably loses another €300 per month in annual and long term expenses.

 

[Greenbook]

I can’t find it. Under Managing a Tenancy there’s two templates, one for a payment plan the other for a full waiver. Maybe it’s moved. The payment plan seems to be a new step before the warning notice.

From memory in the lasted Residential Tenancy Act, if the tenant is in arrears, MABs must now get involved and a payment plan must be produced. If the case goes to the Tribunal, it must take into account the payment plan.

I don't know how the 28 day notice fits in with all this.

 

[Greenbook]

So the warning letter has to be emailed to the RTB, but the subsequent termination letter has to be uploaded to the RTB!

Yes, there is quite a lot of that going on.

Some things can be posted or emailed. Others have to be uploaded. Others can be posted and uploaded.

Again, very easy to get caught. Possibly best to post, upload and email everything!

 

[stormy]

So many different timelines it’s easy to get it wrong. Is it 7 days now to copy the RTB for every type of notice that a landlord can send to a tenant?
Think I read somewhere that the 28 days for a rent arrears notice only starts from the date after the RTB get their copy - is that correct ? So if it’s sent 7 days later, that’s when the 28 day period starts?

Three separate clocks, so worth separating them.

The seven days is for the copy of a notice of termination to the RTB — s.62(1A) as amended from Monday. It doesn't apply to warning notices.

The arrears warning notice is s.67(3), and it never had a same-day rule. The tenant and the RTB must both be given the written notification, and the 28 days runs from whichever of them receives it later. The statute expressly contemplates the two copies arriving on different days and simply starts the clock from the later one. Send the RTB copy the day you post, but nothing turns on it. And s.67(3) says "receipt", not service, so Argutinski doesn't touch it.

The templates. A template isn't the law. s.67(3) requires a written notification stating the amount unpaid, given to the tenant and the RTB, and 28 days from the later receipt. Write that yourself and keep proof of sending to both. The payment-plan and waiver letters are the new "reasonable arrangements" paperwork — a different thing, and no substitute.

And now the part that should make everyone angry.

Checking s.67(3) for this reply, I looked at the RTB's own "How a landlord can end a tenancy" page over time.

13 March 2026, the day after Argutinski:
https://web.archive.org/web/20260313023557/https://rtb.ie/renting/how-a-landlord-can-end-a-tenancy/
"Send a copy of the rent arrears warning notice to the RTB on the same day you send it to your tenant."

20 May 2026:
https://web.archive.org/web/20260520154327/https://rtb.ie/renting/how-a-landlord-can-end-a-tenancy/
"Serve a copy of the rent arrears warning notice to the RTB on the same day you serve it to your tenant."

Every "send" on the page became "serve" between March and May. No notice, no date, no explanation. "Send" is posting-date language — what landlords actually did. "Serve" is the post-Argutinski word.

Today, 15 September:
"Send a copy of the rent arrears warning notice to the RTB and to your tenant. The 28-day notice period starts when both the RTB and the tenant receive it."

The same-day rule for warning notices has vanished. What replaced it is s.67(3), which is what the Act always said: both parties get the notice, and the 28 days runs from whichever receives it later. There never was a same-day rule for warning notices. The RTB published one anyway, as a numbered step, for years. Then it removed it, silently, this month.

In between, TR0001481 applied it. The Tribunal held the same-day analysis applied "with equal force" to the warning notice — RTB copy on the 18th, deemed service on the tenant the 19th, defect "not capable of cure by the slip rule". It cites no provision requiring same-day service of a warning notice, because there isn't one. It applied the rule on the RTB's website. The RTB has now deleted that rule from the website. The determination stands.

So: the regulator publishes a requirement the statute doesn't contain. Its Tribunal applies it as law. The High Court shows the RTB's reading of service was wrong; the RTB edits the page. It then discovers the warning-notice rule was never law either; it edits the page again. At no point does it say so. And the landlord who followed the page is told in a published determination that he probably followed the guidance, and loses anyway.

That's not a quagmire. A quagmire is accidental.

 

[bipped]

I can’t find it.

Found the warning letter just now. It has moved to ‘Sample Notice of Termination: Breach of tenant obligations’ here:

Ending a tenancy Archives - Residential Tenancies Board

Get Notice of Termination template letters and a Notice of Termination return form to make sure you end a tenancy correctly.

rtb.ie

 

[bipped]

Three separate clocks, so worth separating them.

Thank you for that information. I don’t believe there’s any other sector that has such convoluted rules.

 

[Greenbook]

That's not a quagmire. A quagmire is accidental.

Exactly, and actions always speak far louder than words. They say they want to retain and encourage small landlords, but what they do points in the other direction entirely.

I think they may have decided to get rid of us entirely and rely solely on the Funds and AHBs. They likely think that rent a room and garden rooms will be sufficient in the small towns and villages where the large landlords won't operate. In the meantime, to prevent thousands of evictions coming on stream at the same time, they will make very difficult for the existing small landlords to leave.

This seems to be all part of a plan. The first 2026 Residential Tenancies Act with the restrictive new rules which only suit Funds and now the second one with the quagmire of service rules, the fines and the criminal offences.

You'd be out of your mind to be getting involved in the PRS.

The IPOA also should be jumping up and down about this. It really is impossible for the small landlord to operate at this point.

 

[Greenbook]

So: the regulator publishes a requirement the statute doesn't contain. Its Tribunal applies it as law. The High Court shows the RTB's reading of service was wrong; the RTB edits the page. It then discovers the warning-notice rule was never law either; it edits the page again. At no point does it say so. And the landlord who followed the page is told in a published determination that he probably followed the guidance, and loses anyway.

That is really worrying. It's 1984. Rules which landlords are told they must follow suddenly disappearing from the website.

Revenue change their guidance as the law changes or a new case happens, but there is always a stamp on the guidance that it was updated on a certain date and you can find the older guidance as well.

 

[stormy]

I think they may have decided to get rid of us entirely and rely solely on the Funds and AHBs

Investors in funds can see what's going on too. IRES stock price is now below where it stood before the new rules were announced in June last year, sits about 40% below its 2020 peak, and trades at a >20% discount to NAV — a discount that has widened since the reforms, because the book value went up and the shares didn't. It is selling units at 25–30% over book. It continues to be worth more broken up than as a going concern, and the market knows it.