I suspect it was written with someone moving a partner in.
Tenants in house share want room left empty and impact of taking in new tenant after 1st March behind my back.
- Thread starter Pmc365
- Start date
I suspect it was written with someone moving a partner in.
The most useful advice I think I can give is to suggest you take control of the situation. Whatever their motives, which are certainly suspicious, it's not a good situation if you let the tenants dictate their terms to you - the landlord. What you could do, in the case you don't want to sell:
- insist there have always been 4 people living there, and that is what you want. You "welcome" their offer to make up the full rent from 3 people but that is not your wish. Be firm. Arrange a new tenant yourself, given you have just 2 weeks before 1 March.
- State clearly (write it) that there is a single tenancy dating back to the original tenants who are still there. Tell them that because of the new rules coming in, you have taken advice (imply it is legal advice but you don't have to write that) and it is clear there is a single tenancy which is not affected by replacement of a person within the tenancy so long as one of the original people is still living there. This might "head off at the pass" (sorry for the slang) their ideas that there would be 4 tenancies post-March.
- Make sure your registration with RTB is in order. Check the existing lease agreement and any other paperwork. Get legal advice.
- insist there have always been 4 people living there, and that is what you want. You "welcome" their offer to make up the full rent from 3 people but that is not your wish. Be firm. Arrange a new tenant yourself, given you have just 2 weeks before 1 March.
- State clearly (write it) that there is a single tenancy dating back to the original tenants who are still there. Tell them that because of the new rules coming in, you have taken advice (imply it is legal advice but you don't have to write that) and it is clear there is a single tenancy which is not affected by replacement of a person within the tenancy so long as one of the original people is still living there. This might "head off at the pass" (sorry for the slang) their ideas that there would be 4 tenancies post-March.
- Make sure your registration with RTB is in order. Check the existing lease agreement and any other paperwork. Get legal advice.
Does that depend on whether it’s a single lease agreement or individual contracts? If it’s a single lease, how can the landlord do that if the tenants don’t want it? Is it not their call as long as the full rent is being paid.
Not sure if this helps
Rental Market Reforms in Ireland | Tenant Protections & Housing Legislation Updates
Discover key updates to Ireland's rental market reforms, including changes to rent controls, eviction rules, cost rental housing, and tenant protections under the Residential Tenancies (Amendment) Bill. Learn how new legislation affects landlords, tenants, and student accommodation.
www.gov.ie
If one tenant leaves the property and 2 others remain, is this tenancy under the ‘old’ or ‘new’ rules?
The ‘new’ rules only apply to new tenancies that begin after 1 March 2026. If some tenants change but others remain, this is not a new tenancy, so continues to follow the rules that are in place until 28 February 2026.What that doesn't address is if all your original tenants leave and are replaced after March 1, but I guess that your original tenancy continues because it started under the old rules.
This always puzzles me.
If a replacement tenant is added to the lease, they join in to the T&Cs for rent reviews, notice period etc. but they’re not an original tenant.
IIRC, I read somewhere that the tenancy continues as long as any one the original tenants remain.
Does that mean a replacement tenant is viewed as an original? So each time a replacement happens, and the RTB register is updated, the lease continues and it’s just the named parties have changed?
Does constant assignments of interest keep the original lease active for ever?
LarryScott
Frequent Poster
- Messages
- 561
In a situation where tenants are constantly updating, I suspect the RTB would want the lease to eventually update to the new rules.
They do require a new registration when all original ones leave.
On the other hand, if the original lease ends due to all original tenants leaving, can you evict the remaining tenants, since they have no lease anymore? I don't think they would want that interpretation.
There doesn't seem to be a way to update the the new rules from current leases so who knows.
Do they? I don’t think so. Because as each one leaves, the new tenant becomes part of the original letting agreement is my understanding.
This is not up to what the RTB wants. The RTB must abide by the legislation.
But does the assignment release the original tenant who entered into the agreement with the owner? The assignee gains their own P4 security of tenure after six months occupancy but when a tenant assigns their interest, are they still tied to the contract?
I don’t understand if the original tenants obligation ends or does it still exist unless there is a new lease signed and registered with the rtb.
Last edited:
LarryScott
Frequent Poster
- Messages
- 561
The RTB have on this page
RTB said:
That implies that original tenants are significant somehow. It might just be a registration thing, you need to a new registration once all the original tenants leave.
Alternatively, by "original tenants", they might mean current tenants, i.e. the tenants before the change in registration.
So, if all current tenants leave, then that registration should end.
If at least one of the current tenants remains, then it is a continuation of the current lease.
That would mean that constantly replacing the tenants in a shared tenancy would allow a tenancy continue forever, even if none of the original tenants (the ones who signed the lease) remain.
Tenancy 1 Jan 2020, John, Mary, Mike
John leaves 1Jan 2021 and Jim arrives
Mary leaves 1 Jan 2022 and is replaced by Kate
Mike leaves 1 Jan 2024 and is replaced by Paddy
Are we agreed we are on the same tenancy as 1 Jan 2020 on 1 Jan 2024?
None of the original tenants in the 2020 letting are there, but it’s the same tenancy rules?
So what happens if Jim leaves on 1 March and Luke replaces him?
LarryScott
Frequent Poster
- Messages
- 561
I think it is arguable that the tenancy ends when the last of the "original" tenants leave, so it ends 1 Jan 2024.
Having said that, I am not sure anymore. It could be just bad phrasing by the RTB and "original" tenants just means the tenants before the most recent change to the registration.
So, each time there is a change, the new tenants are all equal in standing. The tenancy continues without caring about the changes. All the tenants are jointly responsible for all the rent.
Note, I think there is a requirement that the landlord is involved in the process of adding new tenants.
If they don't bother to inform the landlord, then I think it operates under the following rules.
Tenancy 1 Jan 2020, John, Mary, Mike
Tenants: John, Mary, Mike
John leaves 1Jan 2021 and Jim arrives
John informs landlord that he is no longer a tenant, so he is removed from the registration.
Jim is the guest of Mary and Mike.
Tenants: Mary, Mike
Licensee: Jim
Mary leaves 1 Jan 2022 and is replaced by Kate
Mary informs the landlord she is no longer a tenant, so is removed from the registration
Kate is the guest of Mike
Tenant: Mike
Licensee: Kate, Jim
Mike leaves 1 Jan 2024 and is replaced by Paddy
Mike informs the landlord that he is no longer a tenant. The lease ends as all the tenants have left.
The licensees (including Paddy) need to leave immediately, as they are not tenants. There is no requirement for even a NoT.
In that case, the RTB could easily end up blaming the landlord for not updating the registration, even though the tenants didn't inform him of any changes.
In theory, after 6 months the licensee should ask the landlord to be upgraded to tenant status.
How so? What are you basing that on?
LarryScott
Frequent Poster
- Messages
- 561
I was basing it on the RTB website making a point that the landlord can keep updating the registration until all the "original" tenants leave.
It appears to distinguish between new tenants and the original tenants. I am now leaning towards it just being bad phrasing. The "original" tenants are just the one before the registration is changed.
In the previous post, I did say that if you are right, the tenancy could go over forever, with ever changing tenants. It looks that way.
The legislation for multiple tenant dwellings has a procedure for licensees upgrading to tenancies after 6 months. It seems to assume that they start as licensees.
I think the new tenant(s) needs to formally upgrade from licensee to tenant, or the whole thing ends when the last actual tenant leaves.
Landlords (and tenants) should be very clear on the exact status of everyone.
I would recommend that landlords in the lease specify what they consider "reasonable" for upgrading licensees. For example, the landlord might say that it requires all the current tenants to agree, or maybe even that they don't allow it (though that might be unreasonable).
An age old question like Trigger’s Broom or the Ship of Theseus.
There is no clear guidance on this in the legislation. I'd expect quite a few challenges to this taken to the RTB, for example, a post March tenant who thinks he has a 6 year tenancy but the landlord thinks he doesn't because of a pre-March or a replacement of a pre-March tenant remaining. Of course, if the landlord is wrong, he'll have to pay compensation, so it is very worthwhile for the tenant to take a challenge. He doesn't have anything to lose.
It is really unfair that they haven't legislated clear rules for this and have let it to landlords to try to figure it out and take the consequences if we get it wrong.
The same problem will arise with entirely new post March tenancies, if you have replacement tenants, how does the six years work. Again, no answer to that in the legislation.
It is really unfair that they haven't legislated clear rules for this and have let it to landlords to try to figure it out and take the consequences if we get it wrong.
The same problem will arise with entirely new post March tenancies, if you have replacement tenants, how does the six years work. Again, no answer to that in the legislation.
Agree.
If an assignee needs 6 months occupancy before gaining their own P4 rights, could a landlord issue an NoT to that individual without affecting the other co-tenants?
If a replacement was a licensee of the remaining tenants for 6 or more months, and are then accepted as a tenant by the landlord, is the P4 rights counted from their first day or does it start when they become a tenant.
Or, maybe this part does not apply to a house-share because it says ‘periodic tenancy of the dwelling’:
Effect of assignment of Part 4 tenancy.
38.—(1) If a Part 4 tenancy is assigned by the tenant with the consent of the landlord then if the assignment is—
(a) to a person, other than a sub-tenant of the dwelling concerned, the assignment shall operate to convert the Part 4 tenancy of the dwelling into a periodic tenancy of the dwelling and the protection provided by section 28 for the assignor shall accordingly cease (but without prejudice to that section's fresh application in relation to the assignee should the circumstances mentioned in that section occur),
Last edited:
But the annual RTB payment system is not a registration of a tenancy. In addition “updating” the tenancy is not a tenancy registration. The former is a money making racket combined with extra work for landlords, the latter is what a landlord has to do when a current tenant is replaced by a new tenant, which crucially does not legally create a new tenancy. Unlike where your tenants leave, and you get new tenants, then you register that new tenancy.