RTB told landlords posting date = service date. The High Court says it doesn't. Accommodation providers set up to fail?
- Thread starter stormy
- Start date
Sometimes the only way to win is not to play.
And its even worse with the Irish PRS. The only way to not lose is not to play.
They know this and they are actively making it so that you MUST play, or you lose.
The deck is already being stacked against you and the last step is to prevent you leaving the table while you keep losing.
So the best course of action is to just leave the game now before you cant leave.
And its even worse with the Irish PRS. The only way to not lose is not to play.
They know this and they are actively making it so that you MUST play, or you lose.
The deck is already being stacked against you and the last step is to prevent you leaving the table while you keep losing.
So the best course of action is to just leave the game now before you cant leave.
But you cant leave as no one knows how to issue a NoT correctly... lol
That may well be the government's cunning plan.
Even better you'll have to compensate the tenant for illegally evicting him!
Dont say things like that
I am in the process of an eviction.. their eviction date is fast approaching - 30th May, I know they are going to overhold for a few months as they are planning on buying the house... Hopefully this goes to plan, would be a massive weight of my shoulders once I get rid.. I can finally stop reading all the horror stories on AAM...I really hope that it works out for you.
It just shows though. Tenants know they can overhold for a couple of months or longer and there is really zero the landlord can do except make noices and hope they go.
It's really pretty much optional at this stage for tenants whether they pay the rent or look after the place. They can decide themselves whether and when they'll leave. Soon, because IRES Reit will either lose the case or they'll change the legislation again, tenants will be able to instruct the landlord who he is to rent to.
This is getting way too complicated:
- hand delivery to tenant Tuesday, get tenant to sign it
- email to RTB Tuesday
Millie you'd have too many different dates there. Plus your registered post might arrive to the tenant on Friday and the RTB on Thursday !
Some tenancy agreements (including the RTB template agreement) contain a provision where the tenant specifically consents to accept notices at a particular email address.
That means you can be 100% certain what day you served the notice, assuming the email is sent during normal business hours. Whether or not the tenant actually reads the email is irrelevant.
And you can obviously serve a copy of the notice on the RTB on the same day, by email or by uploading to their portal.
That means you can be 100% certain what day you served the notice, assuming the email is sent during normal business hours. Whether or not the tenant actually reads the email is irrelevant.
And you can obviously serve a copy of the notice on the RTB on the same day, by email or by uploading to their portal.
It is. And these filing requirements are just one aspect of the massive overcomplication.
The RTB need to see the NoT or the rent increase document so they can keep track of what is happening in the PRS. That's fine and is a good idea.
But they don't need these on exactly the same day as the tenant gets them. That rule is there to trap landlords and give tenants grounds to go to the RTB.
A tenant can just delete that account. You're back to posting then or hand delivering.
I don't think sueing them for breach of the lease by deleting the account would take you anywhere.
Mine is a plane ride away ! Make it a day trip.
What we did was get my sibling to hand serve the notices. Prior to this I'd flown to Ireland to get the documents all witnessed by my solicitor etc. But sibling had to go a four hour return journey to one tenant, and an two hour return trip to the others. We thought it was worth it to get this done right and to get the tenants out. We still made mistakes as it was a learning curve !! One tenant pretended he wanted to buy the house, that one got sent a solicitors letter and left pronto after that because I had so much knowledge of his shenanigins in defrauding the system on him.
Make sure you take a case against yourself to the RTB on 'Validity of the Notice' .
I dont think that would matter.
If Ryanair email me a change to my flight and I dont read it or dont have access to the email account its on me, not them and I dont have a leg to stand on. If I change email address after booking its up to me to let them know what it has changed to.
@Greenbook
It doesn’t matter.
If the tenant has specifically consented in the tenancy agreement to receive notices at a particular email address and you send it to that address during normal business hours (which is easy to prove), then the notice has been properly served.
It doesn’t matter whether the email address is active or whether or not the tenant actually reads the email.
As a practical matter, you might want to also forward the hard copy notice to the tenant by post. But legally, it has already been served.
It doesn’t matter.
If the tenant has specifically consented in the tenancy agreement to receive notices at a particular email address and you send it to that address during normal business hours (which is easy to prove), then the notice has been properly served.
It doesn’t matter whether the email address is active or whether or not the tenant actually reads the email.
As a practical matter, you might want to also forward the hard copy notice to the tenant by post. But legally, it has already been served.
I am not sure about that.
Ryanair doesn't have to 'serve' you with official documents.
Here you have to serve the NoT. If that can't be done by email, you'll have to use an alternative method as otherwise it is not 'served'. The tenant never got it because the email address no longer exists.
Honestly, I am not sure about that and wouldn't like to risk an RTB case and possibly a High Court case on that basis.
As I said to @JamieB_ , the NoT has to be served on the tenant. Based on the High Court case that means received by the tenant. That receipt can't happen if the email address no longer exists. Once the email bounces back, you'll know it's not served and you'll have to use an alternative method.
Tenants will get wise to this and give you a temporary email address. They can then argue the toss with you about when the letter was received in the post.
Again, it doesn’t matter.
If the tenant consents contractually to receive notices at a particular email address and you send a notice to that address, you’re golden.
Of course, the tenancy agreement has to actually contain this provision for this to apply.
If the tenant consents contractually to receive notices at a particular email address and you send a notice to that address, you’re golden.
Of course, the tenancy agreement has to actually contain this provision for this to apply.
I think we'll have to agree to disagree. You may well be right, but I don't see it that way. If the email bounces back, it has not been served, I think anyway.
I think only legal advice would answer it.
Again, just goes to show how ridiculously complicated this has become.
Also, a tenant who deleted the account deliberately to cause trouble for their landlord would face no sanction. If you did that on the tenant, you'd likely end up fined and having to pay compensation.
Ambiguity is what the RTB is all about... anything goes.