Termination notice query

[clairebear]

We're currently renting in a RPZ at about 70% of the market rate.
It's a great deal but we've been there for 5+ years and always looked after the place.
Landlord tried to increase rent to 90% market rate but we refused based on the new rules.
He's now sent us a notice of termination (including a stat. dec. signed by a solicitor) saying he wants to move in. I spoke to him and he said he plans to live there for 6 months to renovate and then re-let it at the market rate. I am raging. Can he do this? Can we do anything to stop him? It's so unfair. Now we are going to have to find another home and pay through the nose for it. I'm tempted to ignore the termination order and drag it out with the RTB as long as possible. Any advice would be very welcome especially from anyone who has gone through a similar experience.

 

[odyssey06]

Take pictures of the property prior to these 'renovations'.
The landlord I think has to offer you the option of moving back into the property after the renovations - but at the 'market' rate.
If the renovations were a sham, take it to the RTB as justification for continuing to pay 70%.

Also, you have been there for 5 years, the landlord has to give you 20 weeks (140 days) notice.
If the notice is for a date earlier that than, it is invalid.
http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/renting_a_home/if_your_landlord_wants_you_to_leave.html

I'd be very dubious that he will in fact be living in this property for 6 months during which there will be renovation work going on, but not sure how you can establish that... If he has not declared this property as his PPR the Revenue Commissioners on his LPT, then if you suspect he is invalidly declaring this as his PPR report him to the Revenue for fraud.

 

[clairebear]

Thanks for the advice odyssey06. I'll certainly do all that. Do I actually have to move out based on the notice or can I appeal just before my eviction date and remain on in the property while it's being dealt with?

 

[odyssey06]

Thanks for the advice odyssey06. I'll certainly do all that. Do I actually have to move out based on the notice or can I appeal just before my eviction date and remain on in the property while it's being dealt with?

If the notice is invalid you have 28 days to refer to the RTB. If the notice you've received is for less than 20 weeks, possibly by referring it it might make the landlord rethink this strategy if they realise it's 5 months!

Leaving it to the last minute with the appeals process I think you would be in an uncertain situation which could go either way - I don't have experience of that side of the process.

A notice of termination must:

• Be in writing
• Be signed by the landlord (or an authorised agent)
• Specify the date of termination of the tenancy
• State that you have the whole 24 hours of the termination date to vacate the property
• Specify the date of the notice itself
• State the reason for termination, if a tenancy has lasted more than 6 months or is a fixed-term tenancy
• State that any issue as to the validity of the notice or the right of the landlord to serve it must be referred to the RTB within 28 days from the receipt of the notice.

 

[Sarenco]

Hi clairebear

It sounds as though you have a very clever landlord.

Whether or not your landlord intends to substantially refurbish the property is actually a bit of a red herring in this case - at least from your perspective.

The landlord is entitled to terminate the tenancy where he requires the dwelling for his own/a family member's use. He/the family member doesn't have to actually sleep there.

Now your landlord does have to give proper notice of termination and you should definitely double-check that you have been given the appropriate notice period.

As odessey06 has pointed out, you have 28 days to dispute the validity of the notice. However, you will need to have grounds to stand up your complaint to the RTB and there is a €15 fee for an online application for adjudication to consider.

You also have a right of first refusal to re-let the property if it becomes available for letting within 6 months of the expiry of notice of notice of termination or the resolution of any dispute referred to the RTB.

Your landlord will still be subject to the RPZ controls on the rent charged on any subsequent letting of the property (assuming he re-lets the property within 2 years and does not substantially refurbish the property) but that's not of any benefit to you. I suppose you could threaten to notify any subsequent tenants of the rent that you were paying but I suspect your landlord would simply shrug his shoulders and tell you to knock yourself out.

It really is a shame that Minister Coveney's new rent control rules are causing such disputes - these rules really are a complete disaster for all concerned.

 

[LS400]

I will be one of the few here who has sympathy for the LL. You have had 30% rent discount for many years, don't abuse it.

I'm sure had he been only driven by rent return, he would have increased it a long time ago, and would not be in the boat he's in now.

I also recon he has been forced like so many into this situation.

Unless you both come to a reasonable compromise, someone could loose big time here, and it could be you.

 

[clairebear]

Thanks Sarenco. I have checked and the notice is indeed valid. He's actually given me an extra week to vacate but I'll probably have to go before then, depending on when I can find another suitable place. I'm so annoyed at this stage, I want to do everything I can to stop him profiting from our eviction.
If after the 6 month period, he rents it to someone else at market rate can I report him to the RTB for breaching the RPZ rules? Or would that already be flagged by the RTB when he registers the new tenancy? Will they do anything if the new tenant doesn't dispute it (which they probably won't if its market rate)? Can I ask the RTB to check he has in fact renovated to justify the increase? I'll only have 'before' photos and won't know what the 'after' looks like unless they contact him for proof.

 

[Sarenco]

I will be one of the few here who has sympathy for the LL.

Actually I suspect most readers/posters will have sympathy for both parties in this scenario.

I think it's a shame that our Government doesn't appear to think that we can be trusted to make bargains with each other in an adult fashion.

 

[Sarenco]

Will they do anything if the new tenant doesn't dispute it (which they probably won't if its market rate)?

Nope.

The role of the RTB is to resolve disputes between landlords and tenants by mediation or adjudication. They're not the police and after 6 months your right of first refusal falls away.

Besides, how could you know what rent your landlord is charging the new tenants or whether or not he has substantially refurbished the property?

I appreciate that you feel very annoyed but, if I was in your shoes, I would appeal to your landlord's better nature and try to strike a deal.

Bear in mind that your landlord will be giving up six months' rent to pursue this strategy - nobody is an outright winner in this scenario.

 

[clairebear]

Besides, how could you know what rent your landlord is charging the new tenants or whether or not he has substantially refurbished the property?

If he advertises the property on daft (which is how he got us), I could see what rent he is going to charge the new tenants. I could then contact the new tenants to see if the property was refurbished.

Why don't the RTB check new tenancies against old ones to check if the RPZ rules are being adhered to? If not routinely, they should certainly do so if they are alerted to a potential breach.

Is it worth my while seeking paid professional legal advice on this? It seems like the landlord holds all the power in this case.

 

[odyssey06]

When was your last rent review? If you have been on 70 percent of market rate for years, then the RPZ rules could allow for 8 to 10 percent increase. Theres a calculator on the RTB site based on last rent review date.

You could reply to your landlord if he would consider 80 percent of market rate and postpone renovations.

Its a horrible piece of legislation which encourages these shenanigans and at the same time requires no positive policing by the RTB of the new rents or extent of refurbishments.
To get your HRI grant you have to be inspected. But not to establish that your renovations necessitated eviction!

 

[Sarenco]

If he advertises the property on daft (which is how he got us), I could see what rent he is going to charge the new tenants. I could then contact the new tenants to see if the property was refurbished.

You could. But what's in it for you?

Also, bear in mind that there is no law against advertising a property for rent at whatever rate a landlord fancies.

Is it worth my while seeking paid professional legal advice on this?

Well that's obviously your prerogative but from what you've told us I think you would be wasting your time and money.

It seems like the landlord holds all the power in this case.

I think you will find that landlords firmly believe that the opposite is that case.

Again, your landlord is giving up six months' rent here. My advice is to swallow hard and do a deal.

 

[odyssey06]

I will be one of the few here who has sympathy for the LL. You have had 30% rent discount for many years, don't abuse it.

I'm sure had he been only driven by rent return, he would have increased it a long time ago, and would not be in the boat he's in now.

I also recon he has been forced like so many into this situation.

Unless you both come to a reasonable compromise, someone could loose big time here, and it could be you.

Whats the legal basis for compromise?

How will the RTB treat a case where the tenant accepts an increase that breaches RPZ limits... then there is a later dispute about rent?
Is the tenancy still valid???

 

[Sarenco]

How will the RTB treat a case where the tenant accepts an increase that breaches RPZ limits... then there is a later dispute about rent?

In that scenario, the RTB would obviously find for the tenant.

In which case, the landlord would presumably re-activate his current strategy of foregoing six months's rent in order to charge market rates.

Everybody loses.

 

[clairebear]

I still can't see how, after 6 months living there (and maybe renovating but realistically, probably not) he can register a new tenancy on 30% higher rent with the RTB and that doesn't raise an immediate red flag with them.
How can he get away with that? Especially if I alert the RTB to my suspicions.
Is the RTB a joke or what??? The whole thing makes me want to emigrate!

 

[Learner2015]

Clairebear for years you have been getting a great deal and you still can by accepting a new amount that is still lower than the market rate - you should be thanking your landlord for the years of reduced rate living they have provided to you.

It is rental madness out there and your common sense is being blinded but nonsensesical new rules that are ruining the rental market. Apologise, accept the new rental amount or you will find yourself competing with the thousands of other unfortunate people trying to secure overpriced accommodation right now.

 

[Thirsty]

I'm so annoyed at this stage, I want to do everything I can to stop him profiting from our eviction.

and there in a nutshell you have the reason so many landlords are getting out of the business.

My advice would be as Learner2015 - you're on your high horse that you've been badly treated (you haven't).

You need somewhere to live, so either find a new home or do a deal with your Landlord.

 

[odyssey06]

Clairebear for years you have been getting a great deal and you still can by accepting a new amount that is still lower than the market rate - you should be thanking your landlord for the years of reduced rate living they have provided to you.

It is rental madness out there and your common sense is being blinded but nonsensesical new rules that are ruining the rental market. Apologise, accept the new rental amount or you will find yourself competing with the thousands of other unfortunate people trying to secure overpriced accommodation right now.

Compromise is one thing but Apologise? For what... following the law. Should she doff her cap too and ask which way to vote in next election? There are some high horses here alright!

 

[Learner2015]

Odyssey an apology wouldn't be needed if clairbear was reasonable in the first place - maybe it still isn't but if I was their landlord I'd be happy to see the back of them at this stage so I'd suspect they will want one...

Lets be honest just because something is the law it doesn't mean it is reasonable...hopefully their landlord isn't as irrational as the OP and they will sort things out in a way that everyone wins and yes that will probably mean a compromise.

 

[odyssey06]

Odyssey an apology wouldn't be needed if clairbear was reasonable in the first place - maybe it still isn't but if I was their landlord I'd be happy to see the back of them at this stage so I'd suspect they will want one...

I'd be happy to see the back of all landlords who think they deserve an apology for a tenant exercising their statutory rights. That's not the actions of a person attempting to run something on a proper business basis. Conducting a business transaction in a reasonable manner does not require cringing apologies.

I hope if the landlord's renovations weren't genuine and this was all just a sham attempt to get the sitting tenants out you'd be the first to expect them to apologise to the tenant???

If it's an unreasonable law, the person to apologise are the politicians and civil servants who introduced it. Not the citizens living under it.