# new tenants - late rent advice pls



## Midsummer (28 Dec 2007)

Hi - here's a summary of the problem : 

We let a brand new fully furnished apt. 2 months ago.  When the tenants moved in they had brand new furniture, washing machine, fridge installed.  We supplied an inventory of plates, cutlery, toaster, microwave etc. all new.  There was a delay of about 2 weeks for the dishwasher to be installed and they also asked for an array of extra stuff which we supplied e.g. toilet brush (?) and lampshades among other stuff.  We got a bit concerned that there was a list of requests which seemed never ending (through the agency) but we supplied them anyway and they signed each inventory form.

They signed the lease and paid a month in advance and a deposit (equiv. to a month's rent).  The following month the rent was paid approx. 11 days late and after several phonecalls between the agency and the tenants and several false promises that it would be paid but then wasn't.  Not sure what the problem was but it seems that they weren't happy that the place was "ready".  The alarm was also installed a few weeks after they moved in.  

So this was not a good start and this month being the 2nd month I was watching v. closely to see when the rent would be paid.  It's now 3 days late and I rang the tenant myself yesterday to which he replied he thought the banks were closed.  I told him to lodge it this morning. (Incidentally the lease asks for a standing order not a manual lodgement every month).  Rang him again this morning and he started giving me vague reasons for not paying e.g. "not happy with the agency" "he knows his rights" "he demands satisfaction" but would not give me any specifics.  There is absolutely nothing they're being short-changed on (absolutely everything is brand new) so these seem like vague excuses.  He also complained that he "had to clean the place himself" when he moved in - my husband personally had gone up and assembled all furniture, removed all packaging and hoovered etc. so it was not dirty by any stretch - probably just needed a once over as any new place would (with hindsight probably should have got a cleaner in).  

Anyway long story short I'm reluctant to go through this fiasco every month as it seems these people are intent on starting a row over nothing so that they can live rent free for as long as possible.  

What advice would anyone give ?  I'm leaning towards issuing an eviction notice as soon as the rent is paid (late again) this month so that we can nip this in the bud before it drags on and we end up seriously out of pocket.  Needless to say it's all above board and registered etc.  I believe I can give them 28 days notice ?  Or does it depend on the rent not being paid at all ?

Thanks !

M


----------



## Midsummer (28 Dec 2007)

I've just checked the bank again and they've paid it today - 3 days late but I just can't go through this every month when there's nothing wrong with the place !

M


----------



## jhegarty (28 Dec 2007)

What date was the money due ?

I know a standing order scheduled for 22nd of every month only left my account today....


----------



## shesells (28 Dec 2007)

Take the hint and serve them notice to leave asap. Check with the agent as to how long the notice period should be. We had this problem and let it go on for 10 months, seriously messing with our finances. When they eventually left they took half our stuff with them and left so much rubbish we filled an entire skip.

Since then we've had no trouble with any other tenants but the first sign of problems would mean they'd be out. Once bitten twice shy and all that.


----------



## Midsummer (28 Dec 2007)

> What date was the money due ?
> 
> I know a standing order scheduled for 22nd of every month only left my account today....


Hi - it was due on the 25th so under ordinary circumstances I would have understood if it had gone in this morning but there's no standing order set up at all.

shesells - I'm inclined to agree though I feel v. bad about turfing people out - having said that they obviously don't feel bad about messing us around...

I think as well the lease says 25th but they didn't move in until the 29th of the first month and they seem to be in dispute about that.  The apt. was ready by the 25th though so it was their choice.


----------



## mercman (28 Dec 2007)

Midsummer -- First drop the human element - this is a business transaction. They viewed the property and they agreed to rent it on that basis. Unless they are pigs, it would have needed some kind of a clean to be done by them, when they moved in. What do these people want - you to go around every day to wash their dishes. Fact is they have been late paying in rent to your account so they are in breach of the lease. If they don't like your agent -- tough - they are renting an apartment not an agent. Now you mention everything is new so you really don't want the place wrecked. Do you know where these people work - do they hold responsible positions ? The fact that you received rent today is a major plus, because most tenants at this time of year will be asking landlords to wait for rent. Hasten slowly - to preserve your apartment and your sanity. Try having a polite,quite,nice but stern word and then see what happens. By the way what have the agents done about any of this - bet they didn't wait for their fee ??


----------



## mercman (28 Dec 2007)

Midsummer -- First drop the human element - this is a business transaction. They viewed the property and they agreed to rent it on that basis. Unless they are pigs, it would have needed some kind of a clean to be done by them, when they moved in. What do these people want - you to go around every day to wash their dishes. Fact is they have been late paying in rent to your account so they are in breach of the lease. If they don't like your agent -- tough - they are renting an apartment not an agent. Now you mention everything is new so you really don't want the place wrecked. Do you know where these people work - do they hold responsible positions ? The fact that you received rent today is a major plus, because most tenants at this time of year will be asking landlords to wait for rent. Hasten slowly - to preserve your apartment and your sanity. Try having a polite,quite,nice but stern word and then see what happens. By the way what have the agents done about any of this - bet they didn't wait for their fee ??


----------



## REMFAN (28 Dec 2007)

Midsummer said:


> Hi - it was due on the 25th so under ordinary circumstances I would have understood if it had gone in this morning but there's no standing order set up at all.
> 
> shesells - I'm inclined to agree though I feel v. bad about turfing people out - having said that they obviously don't feel bad about messing us around...
> 
> I think as well the lease says 25th but they didn't move in until the 29th of the first month and they seem to be in dispute about that. The apt. was ready by the 25th though so it was their choice.


 
You need to turf them out asap! You won't feel bad when you have to chase them every month for rent! They are hassle and you'll only get grief so in your shoes, I'd serve them notice to leave.


----------



## Armada (28 Dec 2007)

*"they also asked for an array of extra stuff which we supplied e.g. toilet brush (?) and lampshades among other stuff. "*

Just slightly off topic but are the above items not standard in a furnished property. 

I always assumed they were ...am I wrong?


----------



## Midsummer (28 Dec 2007)

mercman - I agree with you and the agent is v. amiable so not sure what their problem is.  I just can't figure out their angle - either they're a bit off the planet or they're working up to a big dispute so that they can justify not paying for a few months etc.  I already had stern but polite words with the tenant yesterday and this morning- one of his complaints was that this was the first time he spoke with me (which is why I have an agent) but didn't seem to explain why this was an issue.  

Again though he wouldn't give me any examples of issues he had (as there are none).  I am torn between thinking that at least late rent is some rent and not wanting them to wreck the place - (it does sound like they have responsible jobs - a nurse & a chef which is why I'm surprised at this behaviour too) or just getting them out and getting some reasonable people in who will just pay the rent on time every month with minimum fuss.

Armada - at the time I couldn't actually find a list of standard items for a furnished apt. (can you suggest one ?) so we put in what seemed to be standard e.g. furniture, kitchen appliances & all utensils, cutlery, mirrors,  etc. forgot about the toilet brush but in my own renting experience I would have possibly splashed out on that myself...  There are some things you might be expected to bring with you from place to place I would reckon.  Anyway we did give them everything on the list when they asked for it (which was after they signed the lease as mercman points out they knew what they were getting).  I was surprised when they didn't ask me for sheets for the beds...

I'm tempted to give them one more month but then they were warned last month too...

shesells - did you have any comeback after they took half your stuff ?


----------



## Midsummer (28 Dec 2007)

Meant to add that the agent is tending to agree with me that they might need to leave as he said he's never come across their behaviour before - nothing seems to please them so we're going to discuss it next week.


----------



## mercman (28 Dec 2007)

Midsummer - did you get references from their work ? If so were these checked out ? I'm a landlord, but have a look at it from a tenants viewpoint. There are some landlords who treat their tenants like dirt, which is the reason that tenants have been given rights in the first instance.  Whenever I get new tenants, I sit down and lay down the rules in a very nice manner from day 1. In the past 12 years, I have had very few complaints or hassle - but just once. Make sure that the ESB has been transferred to the tenants names. This is a simple exercise to check if they are bona fide. Also if they have their own TV, do they intend to buy a license ?


----------



## Midsummer (28 Dec 2007)

Well the agency dealt with references etc. and everything seemed fine as well as that the lease agreement is very comprehensive and fair so I'm sure they are aware of all of their rights etc..  Having been a student tenant myself many moons ago I am only too aware of the necessity of tenant rights which is why I would be adamant about everything being above board and fair.  I suppose that's why I'm surprised when the same respect isn't afforded the other way around !  If there was a major issue there was ample chance for him to tell me today or yesterday but there just isn't anything - just the tenant taking offence at having to pay on time.

I can only think maybe they were put out during the first month when there were people organised to visit and install the alarm/dishwasher etc. but I always made sure the agency cleared the time and date with them first as you would expect.  I don't think any reasonable person would be annoyed by that in a new apartment.


----------



## Midsummer (28 Dec 2007)

Should have added that the agent arranged the transfer of gas/esb no hassle - not sure about a tv license might ask the agent to communicate this in case they don't realise.


----------



## DonKing (28 Dec 2007)

I'd get rid of them ASAP (at least before 6 months of lease). I'd also make sure that the agent will not charge you again for another tenant or at least he should be charging a reduced fee. 

When someone starts saying "they know their rights" and they're only in the apartment a couple of weeks then it's certainly not a very could sign. Evict them ASAP.


----------



## Stifster (28 Dec 2007)

DonKing said:


> I'd get rid of them ASAP (at least before 6 months of lease). I'd also make sure that the agent will not charge you again for another tenant or at least he should be charging a reduced fee.
> 
> When someone starts saying "they know their rights" and they're only in the apartment a couple of weeks then it's certainly not a very could sign. Evict them ASAP.



Tough love but i tend to agree. With the way the law is now you are feckered if they stay for longer than 6 months and start giving you trouble.


----------



## spudcounter (28 Dec 2007)

If you have signed a fixed term lease for greater than 6 months then giving them notice before 6 months is irrelevant.  Most lease agreements give a date rent is due and the manner in which it should be paid.  They also state that if rent is late, termination maybe a possibility.  The 2004 residential tenancies Act states that if rent is late the landlord must request it in writing and give 14 days notice for the tenant to pay.  As far as I have been informed once the tenant complies with this you cannot issue a notice of termination as you cannot contract out of your landlord obligations as stated in the Act, irrespective of your lease.  Also if they are repeat offenders i.e. always late with rent you have to go through this procedure every time. Basically once they have their rent paid up after been written to they are in the clear again.

Also if you are issuing a notice to terminate make sure you comply with its format as stated in the Act.  If they don't leave ie overholding the property then contact the PRTB, do not kick them out yourself as the penalties for so called illegal eviction are high.

As far as I can see the Act totally favours the tenant and if they want to be a nuisance they can be, however frustrating it can be.  

Most of the time you can get them to move on without going down this route but if they are really stubborn or lazy they can be hard to move on.


----------



## spudcounter (28 Dec 2007)

If you have signed a fixed term lease for greater than 6 months then giving them notice before 6 months is irrelevant. Most lease agreements give a date rent is due and the manner in which it should be paid. They also state that if rent is late, termination maybe a possibility. The 2004 residential tenancies Act states that if rent is late the landlord must request it in writing and give 14 days notice for the tenant to pay. As far as I have been informed once the tenant complies with this you cannot issue a notice of termination as you cannot contract out of your landlord obligations as stated in the Act, irrespective of your lease. Also if they are repeat offenders i.e. always late with rent you have to go through this procedure every time. Basically once they have their rent paid up after been written to they are in the clear again.

Also if you are issuing a notice to terminate make sure you comply with its format as stated in the Act. If they don't leave i.e. overholding the property then contact the PRTB, do not kick them out yourself as the penalties for so called illegal eviction are high.

As far as I can see the Act totally favours the tenant and if they want to be a nuisance they can be, however frustrating it can be. 

Most of the time you can get them to move on without going down this route but if they are really stubborn or lazy they can be hard to move on.


----------



## Eanair (29 Dec 2007)

They do sound as if they are looking for excuses not to pay. However, and not wishing to go off topic, I don't think that Mercman's opinion that:



> most tenants at this time of year will be asking landlords to wait for rent.



is a fair reflection on most tenants. Anywhere I've rented, or anyone I've shared with, has had no issue with paying their rent on time. The OP's tenants do sound like they are taking the mick, but I think they're the exception rather than the rule.


----------



## Stifster (29 Dec 2007)

spudcounter said:


> If you have signed a fixed term lease for greater than 6 months then giving them notice before 6 months is irrelevant.  Most lease agreements give a date rent is due and the manner in which it should be paid.  They also state that if rent is late, termination maybe a possibility.  The 2004 residential tenancies Act states that if rent is late the landlord must request it in writing and give 14 days notice for the tenant to pay.  As far as I have been informed once the tenant complies with this you cannot issue a notice of termination as you cannot contract out of your landlord obligations as stated in the Act, irrespective of your lease.  Also if they are repeat offenders i.e. always late with rent you have to go through this procedure every time. Basically once they have their rent paid up after been written to they are in the clear again.
> 
> Also if you are issuing a notice to terminate make sure you comply with its format as stated in the Act.  If they don't leave ie overholding the property then contact the PRTB, do not kick them out yourself as the penalties for so called illegal eviction are high.
> 
> ...



Semi-correct. The landlord needs to give 28 days notice if the tenants are there less than 6 months, the landlord does *not* need to give a 14 day letter seeking the rent if they are there less than 6 months. The lease can be terminated for no reason other than the landlord wishes it so.


----------



## spudcounter (29 Dec 2007)

Not if he has signed a fixed term lease agreement, the agreement stands for the agreed fixed term so neither party can break it before the term is up unless an obligation has been breached (bearing in mind the landlord cannot contract out of his duties as stated in the Act).  I have contacted the PRTB on this and this is what they say.  There are examples of tenants breaking their fixed term early and retention of deposits on the PRTB site.  Sometimes you are better off not signing for a fixed term, then you can give the 28 days notice as you say for no reason in the first 6 months.

Not starting an argument!  I have spoken to the PRTB and a solicitor on this concerning tenants I have not paying rent on time and it started early in the lease too.  

But if I thought I could just give them 28 days notice then I would.


----------



## shesells (29 Dec 2007)

Midsmmer, we did get most of the stuff back and had their deposit as well so they ended up getting very little of it back. Those tenants were company employees and the company was renting the house from us. Their boss was horrified when we showed him the list of the missing stuff.

We ditched that agent at the time too, the company renting the house had several properties off the agent and we felt that they were more interested in keeping the company as a client than looking after us.


----------



## Midsummer (29 Dec 2007)

> When someone starts saying "they know their rights" and they're only in the apartment a couple of weeks then it's certainly not a very could sign. Evict them ASAP.


 
I think this is the main point - they're dodge so in the cold light of day we've decided to try and get rid of them.  They're too unreasonable and it sounds like they're in it to cause trouble.  

*spudcounter & stifster* - taking into account everything you've said I've looked over the lease agreement (which is a fixed year) which has the residential act as an addendum and it is a bit unclear to me on the 28 days notice.

Basically we would want them out for the main reason that they haven't paid on time or set up a standing order and therefore I would presume that they are in breach of the lease in this regard.  Having said that the RT Act states the landlord may give 28 days notice for "non-payment of rent.  A 14 day service of notice will issue...failure to comply will result in a 28 day notice of termination" - so this looks like they would have to get a letter every time they're late and can only be evicted for non-payment.

However there is another point "the landlord my terminate this tenancy...for an un-remedied breach of covenant by the tenant.  The notice period...is 28 days".  So I would again assume that late payment is a breach of the covenant as specified in the lease and I would be within my rights to issue an eviction notice.

Having said all that the addendum is only a summary of the act and I'm not a solicitor so I'm going to take some advice from a friend in that profession before we do anything.

I would also hope that the agency would know exactly what we're within our rights to do as it's their area and are being paid for it !  



> If they don't leave ie overholding the property then contact the PRTB, do not kick them out yourself as the penalties for so called illegal eviction are high.


 
From what I've heard the PRTB are very slow to act so if I did contact them first could I then be at a disadvantaget time-wise if we get to the 6 months ?  I would certainly want to avoid an illegal eviction obviously... 

Hopefully the agency will have some experience of this as the lease agreement was provided by them etc.


----------



## Midsummer (29 Dec 2007)

shesells said:


> Midsmmer, we did get most of the stuff back and had their deposit as well so they ended up getting very little of it back. Those tenants were company employees and the company was renting the house from us. Their boss was horrified when we showed him the list of the missing stuff.
> 
> We ditched that agent at the time too, the company renting the house had several properties off the agent and we felt that they were more interested in keeping the company as a client than looking after us.


 
That's good news - does sound like the company was probably worth more to them than yourselves as a client though not good for their rep. no doubt.


----------



## spudcounter (29 Dec 2007)

Hi Midsummer, if you get definitive advice on how to act could you let us know.  The Act and what you can put in a lease seems to be a grey area i.e. if you have a covenant that states if the rent is late then a notice of termination may be issued, will this override having to give them 14 days written notice to pay rent every time they are late which the Act says you must do? I suppose the question is can you protect yourself with a covenant such as this i.e. will it be enforceable? Anyone I have spoken to on this can't give me a straight answer except the PRTB who say you have to go the 14 days written notice route irrespective of what's in the lease.  If this is the case the it offers little protection to the landlord.  This Act was made in 2004 and it seems it hasn't been tested to any great extent since its enactment. 

Good luck, common sense seems to be lost with the PRTB, and it seems that landlords are inherently bad and tenants need all the protection!


----------



## spudcounter (29 Dec 2007)

Sorry Midsummer, just spotted the 'un-remedied' bit of the statement in your lease agreement.  This could give weight to the arguement that you have to give them written notice and a period of time to remedy their late rent.  Perhaps a way around this is to put a covenant which states that if rent is late more than once then it could result in a notice of termination.  Then the first time they are late with rent give them their 14 days notice but also highlight the covenant about being late again will result in termination.

I need a life.....


----------



## Midsummer (29 Dec 2007)

I will let you know.  I would say that the Act probably supercedes any lease signed by tenants (because I suppose you could put anything in then) but sure will see.  The agency didn't seem to think there was a problem issuing an eviction notice "once they had 2 warning letters" so will see what the background behind that is next week when they're back in the office.

I think the only way to really do it if we can't issue a notice on the basis of constantly late rent & breach of covenant then we'll have to issue a 14 day notice letter on the 26th of every month every time they're late and then have an eviction letter ready to go 14 days later so that it can be actioned if they still haven't paid.

Otherwise it seems that the tenant could just not pay rent until he received a 14 day later every single month and even then pay it as late as possible and never get evicted...


----------



## twofor1 (29 Dec 2007)

The notice periods apply from receipt of the 14 day warning and 28 day notice, if you add in postage and a weekend they have already used up 3 weeks of their deposit when the 28 day termination notice is sent out. The PRTB will then take your case, firstly it goes to mediation between both parties then a full hearing if it cannot be resolved. I believe it can take up to six months to get a date for a hearing. (with no rent). If you followed procedure you would probaly win but there is nothing to stop tenant leaving at any stage up to or even the day of the hearing, realistically it will not be worth your while pursuing them. The landlord is legally obliged to register the tenancy and pay the fee. The PRTB should be obliged to act quicker than this. The act appears to be weighted heavily in favour of the tenant, and the delays in the PRTB would appear to further strenghten the hand of the " Professional " tenant who knows how to work the system to their advantage.


----------



## aircobra19 (29 Dec 2007)

I can only agree with 241


----------



## Midsummer (1 Jan 2008)

Hi - just a quick update.  The tenant rang me today out of the blue - she got my number from the person who installed the alarm (I can't complain about this as I'm sure it's on some form that they have or something).  Anyway I asked her what all the issues were and in between all of her ramblings I managed to get the following info:

1. They signed the lease without seeing the apartment and thought it was exactly the same as another one they had seen which faced into the courtyard and not the road (which isn't a main road but still has a bit more traffic & therefore noise);
2. Very annoyed at having to clean the place because the toilet was dirty from the builders using it (I wasn't aware of that);
3. Small window has a crack which the builders still haven't fixed despite being asked to several times;
4. They didn't get all the cutlery/dishes/etc. etc. until the 29th and therefore want to pay rent from the 29th (in fact this was my suggestion as she was rambling on and on about the place not being ready).

So I've apologised for any of the inconvenience but pointed out if they signed a lease without seeing the apartment it was hardly within my control as they are both adults !  Secondly I said I can't do anything about the traffic (again it's only an estate road not a main road) but that if they wanted to move out they could & I would refund the deposit provided there was no reason not to according to the lease etc.  She said if she finds somewhere quieter she will move I just said fine make sure she gives me notice.  She said she was assured that the apartment was sound proofed and in fact they all are but I suppose the traffic noise will still come in the window !

I've agreed that they can move the rent date to the 29th - should I issue a new lease or send a letter to this effect ?  I'm a bit reluctant to do this as I don't want it to look like the previous lease was void etc. 

I'm not being niave here I'm just trying to be fair - I reckon they started out very disgruntled as they apartment wasn't where they thought it would be and it got worse form there.  I do think they're being somewhat unreasonable but I conceded that if they didn't move in until the 29th (and in fact we didn't have it ready until then as that's the date we were told by the agency) then we can move the rent to that date.

So my bottom line is that they set up a standing order and pay the rent by the 29th every month without fail - if not they'll be getting a letter etc.

I'm a bit worried as she said she "has photos" of the dirt (!!) which was basically builders dust and whatever they left in the loo  but the very fact that photos were taken is a bit worrying.  

I pointed out that they were given everything they wanted when they asked etc. and all good quality stuff (i.e. we weren't fobbing them off with old stuff) but she said it all should have been there when they moved in.  The only things that weren't there on the 29th were a bin, ironing board, toilet brush and that's it - everything else was and they signed the inventory.

Anyway for the sake of fairness I'll move the rent due date but they have one more chance this month - if it's not in on the 29th that's it.

Although I was very polite I would rather avoid an encounter with her as there were a few vague references to where I lived & "maybe we will meet one day" etc.  I didn't want to come straight out and say "well I have an agent so that I don't have to meet you" but this seems to be some sort of issue with them that I haven't met them personally.  They have my address from the lease of course.

If the rent is even one day late this month that's it but in general I'm a very worried now.  I don't think they would have a leg to stand on though saying that they were misled by signing a lease when they didn't see the apartment - they were hardly under duress and it wasn't something I was aware of (I assume if the agent showed them another apartment the general jist was that it was the same size & layout as ours).

Some of her other ramblings included that the agency said no to an alarm (which can't be true as the agent was well aware that the alarm was ordered and pending installation) - and that she had lost her job at some point (?) - alarm bells went off and I said that was none of my business and I changed the subject.  Anyway we'll see if the rent is in by Jan 29th or they'll be getting a letter on Jan 30th.  

Stress...


----------



## mercman (1 Jan 2008)

Midsummer. Your post is noted and after reading it I would say that you are piggy in the middle. Whatever agent you used I would suggest this is where most of the fault lies and tomorrow I, if you, would not be hesitant in telling the agent this. You have paid them a fee by their abuse of bluffing a tenant. They should not of shown another apartment as been the same as yours. The tenants are wrong in picking small things like a bin and bits and pieces as a reason for messing about. After reading yours, I think you might be better ridding yourself of them. Let the agent transfer the tenancy to another apartment, demand their fee back and start again with another credible agent. I am not sure the location of the apartment, (send a Private Message if you require) and somebody should be able to find a decent agent who won't fill perspective tenants with crap simply to generate a fee for themselves. You know stories like this puts others from property investment. As to how you manage to hold your temper together defeats me -- and fair play to you.


----------



## mercman (1 Jan 2008)

By the way, you say you can't complain with the alarm company giving out your number. Are you joking ?? This is an alarm company. Giving out personal information breaches all the rules of the security profession - in this case your address and telephone number. If the tenants had a problem they should have contacted the letting agent. How much worse is this going to get ???


----------



## Midsummer (2 Jan 2008)

I know what you're saying.  As for the alarm company as it's a monitored alarm I would say my number was on a form the tenants signed when it was installed.  Annoying but I had no choice.

It does sound like the agency pulled a fast one and pushed through a sale without all the ends being tied up first.  I will have to complain about it and I think the best solution would be for the agency to try and move them (though would say the agency don't want to deal with them anymore either so I doubt that'll happen).

I was just looking for the easiest solution really - I will have to watch my phone in future and not take lots of calls from her as I can tell she's probably going to try and bypass the agent in future.  

I'll discuss with the agency in the morning.  I kept my temper because I don't want them doing anything rash - I would prefer to have the upper hand in that way.  She just wanted to vent so I let her... just this once !  I think she felt she wasn't really treated with respect by the agent and I suppose she's right - having said that some of her demands are a bit ludicrous i.e.  traffic noise reduction... 

The awful thing is this is exactly why I got an agent in the first place...


----------



## sam h (2 Jan 2008)

Can you confirm that you have basically given them a free week (22nd v's 29th).  If so, I think you have been more than fair considering the few things that were not in place when she moved in.  

I would put your conversation in writing & I would put a time limit on alllowing her to move (say a month).  I would make it clear that this puts a line through all her "complaints" and you won't tolerate late rent in future.  You shouldn't need a new lease once you have this all clearly outlined in your letter. 

I would be having strong words with the agent who don't seem to have really done their job properly.  And (IMO) I would suggest you rent directly next time as you really get a good measure of the tenant when you show them around the property.  I reckon you would have picked up how pernickerty this person is and not bothered to rent to them.  The agent just want to be able to hand over the key & then run for the hills with your money in their pocket!


----------



## MrMan (2 Jan 2008)

Alot of landlords posting here it would seem. I do think that they have a point in that the apartment should have been without doubt cleaned thoroughly before tenancy commenced. Simply stating you should have given it a once over or that you weren't aware that the toilets were dirty isn't good enough when you are operating in todays rental market. A tenant has a right to expect such things as a toilet brush, even if it seems trivial. You feel like the victim here as I'm sure the tenant does aswell. This months rent being somewhat late should have been expected when the due date was the 25th, and if you wanted a standing order it should have been set up through your agent.
I don't think it is entirely necessary for the lease to be terminated, but I feel that it would probably best suit you both at this point. I would advise that you use the experience to deal better with your next tenant and might I suggest next agent. Sit down go through everything that went wrong and compile alist of questions to put to your next agent as to how they operate their services. Nothing should be left to chance and don't presume that tenants will accept little disturbances. You are right in that you should have no contact with the tenant, you are paying for that priviledge after all, so if you receive another call, simply tell them to refer to the agent as it should state in their lease that the agent is the point of contact. If she says that the agency isn't helpful I would suggest a meeting with the agent and tenant at their office to get everything out in to the open, theres no point in dealing with hearsay. 
I don't doubt that you have the best of intentions with regard to the fact that everything is new etc, but that is what is expected now, so tenants won't be greatful for simply having new appliances as they are paying a premium themselves.


----------



## mercman (2 Jan 2008)

Mr.Man you may we well correct in your Post. However, the agency should have pointed these matters out before they even conidered letting the property. It appears that they did not even show the exact property in the first instance. Time to get a refund of agency fee, new letting co and new tenants before matters get out of hand.


----------



## Marie (2 Jan 2008)

To be Devil's Advocate for the tenant for just a moment and see it from their perspective.  I go to an agency and specify a quiet first-time let in pristine condition.  I specify no traffic noise........possibly even the orientation (south-facing) and view.  Agent takes me to my ideal rental.  It is available from 25th.   Payment is presumably by calendar month. I lay down the deposit and arrange with agent to move in on 29th.

I am the tenant from 29th.

However agency then inform me the apartment I am _actually _going to rent is 'not quite the same', faces a road and is noisier than the one I viewed.  In addition when I take up occupancy of this now-less-than-des-res I find a ****ty lavatory and no brush to clean it with, a broken window, no alarm (which had been promised) and also various other normal items of furniture which I had every reason to expect would be present.......and were in fact present in the apartment viewed.

I clean the place up, then am inconvenienced by the installation of items which I had (again!) every reason to understand were already present and functioning.

I am miffed.

If on top of that the owner treats me like a naughty 4-year-old and threatens eviction if I don't shut up or put up I would _most certainly_  activate every mechanism for redress for these (quite serious!) issues.

As a poster noted above - it's a business contract.  If the tenant is not living in the apartment they were shown and accepted there is probably an aspect of the transaction which contravenes the Trades Description Act.

You - the owner - have resolved what you could to the best of your ability.  Nevertheless fundamentally the tenant wants an apartment in a secluded location without noise.  This they don't have.  Whilst you might be entitled legally to despatch the tenant with a 14 day notice it is questionable if _morally  _ such an action would be justified given that the muddle is not of either your, or the tenant's, making.

Just my tuppence worth...........


----------



## MrMan (2 Jan 2008)

> However, the agency should have pointed these matters out before they even conidered letting the property. It appears that they did not even show the exact property in the first instance. Time to get a refund of agency fee, new letting co and new tenants before matters get out of hand.



Agreed


----------



## mercman (2 Jan 2008)

Midsummer -- there you are. All arrows are heading in the direction of the letting agent. Get yourself worked up enough to call them and demand a refund and recourse from them.


----------



## mangos (2 Jan 2008)

You can terminate this tenancy with no explanation before 6 months. If this is causing you such a headache you might be better to look at this option.  As far as I know you have to give 28 days notice.

You need to act quickly otherwise you may find yourself battling with the PRTB and believe me this is the one of the slowest acting gov body you can imagine.

mangos


----------



## Flax (3 Jan 2008)

Get rid of them. I've been sub letting my apartment for years and these people do not improve; they just get worse.

I hate to tell you but most people are total losers when it comes to paying rent. It's quite amazing really.

Give them a months notice and get rid of them.


----------



## MrMan (3 Jan 2008)

There is generally some correlation between the performance of the tenant and the attitude of the landlord. It is necessary to realise that tenants are not simply there to improve the bank balance, a level of service must be afforded to them.


----------



## Marie (3 Jan 2008)

Agreed Mr.Man!  One has to wonder if landlord attitudes of the ferocity expressed here actually help to create tenants who have been mucked around so much they go into the next tenancy bristling with doubts and defensiveness.

For the sake of the tenant I hope sense will prevail.  Freezing dark January is a difficult time to traipse round looking for a roof to put over your head soon after you've lost your job.........


----------



## Midsummer (3 Jan 2008)

> You can terminate this tenancy with no explanation before 6 months.


Mango - are you sure about this ?  Even if the rent is up to date ?  I have yet to take advice on this issue.



> Can you confirm that you have basically given them a free week (22nd v's 29th). If so, I think you have been more than fair considering the few things that were not in place when she moved in.


I've stretched it from the 25th to the 29th.  I'm not 100% sure when they moved in - in fact it could have been after the 29th but I know for a fact most items were there by the 29th.  I definitely think I'm being more than fair - it's a gesture of goodwill as a last attempt for a peaceful relationship.



> If on top of that the owner treats me like a naughty 4-year-old and threatens eviction if I don't shut up or put up I would _most certainly_ activate every mechanism for redress for these (quite serious!) issues.


 Marie - are you my tenant    Interesting points but I don't see how I'm doing any of that - just wanting my rent on time.

I won't go through the other posts but the latest update is that I spoke with the agent and he is adamant that she DID see the apartment before she signed the lease as obviously it would be irresponsible and asking for trouble otherwise.

He said that it was all going fine - he let her in - showed her around - she signed up - got the keys and then followed him down to the carpark to say she wasn't happy.  All that was pending at that stage was the alarm which the agent knew was pending & the small crack in the window which we knew about and were waiting for the builders to fix so it seems she knew about everything (except for the flipping toilet !) when she signed - assuming she looked around properly.

To be honest she's just taking the mick I think and probably caused unending hassle in her last place.  I don't know where in Dublin she will find an apartment that doesn't have "traffic" noise - as it is it's a top floor apartment (facing fields !!) so it probably has the least noise possible in an apartment block.

Problem with the agency though - there was mention that another fee would be charged if they were evicted / left to replace them !!  I obviously have mug written on my forehead somewhere because I signed up for a % if the annual rent which has already been debited from the first rent cheque and the way I see it if I don't get that annual rent a refund will be due to me.  I didn't want to argue about that but the point was made.

Long story short the tenants are getting a letter to say the rent is now due on the 29th and they won't even be getting a text to remind them this time.  The morning of the 30th then action will have to be taken.

To the other posters who are giving me the tenant's point of view thanks and I have some very good stories from when I was a tenant too (some you wouldn't believe !) so I am trying to be as fair as possible.  All I'm asking is that the people who use my property treat me and it with respect and pay the rent on time so that I can in turn pay my mortgage...

With hindsight I shouldn't have been pushed into a sale with the agency, I should have held out until every last item was in there, I should have got a cleaner in.  Next time I think I will just vet the tenants myself (when the year's contract runs out with the agency)... 



> The agent just want to be able to hand over the key & then run for the hills with your money in their pocket!


 so true


----------



## DonKing (3 Jan 2008)

Marie said:


> Agreed Mr.Man!
> 
> For the sake of the tenant I hope sense will prevail.  Freezing dark January is a difficult time to traipse round looking for a roof to put over your head soon after you've lost your job.........




It's a business not a charity. It's not the landlord's responsibility to provide accomodation if the tenant can't pay the rent due to losing his job. Will Tesco's give them free food? We have social services who look after people who come into hard times. 

Unfortuanately there are many tenants out there who are all too well aware of how they can abuse the system, and end up living rent free for months on end and get away with it. Landlords have to protect there livelihoods/interest and act fast when they suspect they have a problem tenant.

I personally wouldn't have given the free weeks accomodation. It's setting a bad precedent. The tenant has to respect the fact the prompt payment of the rent is critical. I wonder how midsummer's bank manager would react if every month she was late with her mortgage repayments.

I agree that it's in the interest of landlords to fulfill there contractual duties and look after there tenants, however the landlord also needs to be firm and business like to ensure that they don't get taken for a ride.


----------



## sam h (3 Jan 2008)

It is interesting that dispite numberous discussions on AAM it is still very unclear about the rights of landlord and tenants. Most of these threads end up being almost "tenant v's landlord". Some of the areas I thought I know before but now I'm not so sure - for example:
- can a landlord evict a tenant without any reason within 6 months?
- after 6 months, is the only way to evict a tenant a very long and protracted trip thru PRTB red tape?
- if there is a one year lease signed & the tenant move out early : does the deposit have to be returned?

The information & support from the PRTB seems to be very limited, they seem to just want to get landlords signed up, take the cash and then just let issues drag out over months, which is unfair to both parties.


----------



## Midsummer (3 Jan 2008)

> is the only way to evict a tenant a very long and protracted trip thru PRTB red tape?


 
sam - I'm wondering if you legally have to contact the PRTB first ?  If everyone did that when they had problem tenants there would be a lot of tenants with free accomodation out there.  I think the only way to do this is to read the RA Act from start to finish which I haven't gotten around to yet   I'm sure the PRTB is there to protect tenants not to act as immediate mediators during disputes - I'd say they represent tenants afterwards.  

I'm just thinking out loud here.



> however the landlord also needs to be firm and business like to ensure that they don't get taken for a ride


 
thanks Donking - I tried to get her to come to a resolution on the phone instead of just getting angry and that's why I offered the extended rent date.  But that's all they're getting !


----------



## sam h (3 Jan 2008)

> he is adamant that she DID see the apartment before she signed the lease as obviously it would be irresponsible and asking for trouble otherwise.


 


> He said that it was all going fine - he let her in - showed her around - she signed up - got the keys and then followed him down to the carpark to say she wasn't happy.


 
And thats why you vet tenants yourself, you probably would have picked up on the fact the weren't happy & discussed it further.  You would have sorted the problems or walked separate directions!  I reckon that unless you have numberous properties, it is best to rent yourself or (as a minimum) have an agreement with the agent that you will have the final say on the tenant.  I do not understand  how people can hand over an asset of such high value to someone they have never met.  If you have a load of properties you have the element of "customer loyalty" and "going elsewhere" with 5+ number of properties....1 or 2 just doesn't do it!!

Midsummer, by the way, was your agreement with the agent to just let the property or to let/manage the property??  Normally with a let ony (usually half a months rent) their responsibily ends once the tenant has the keys & hence the reason they couldn't care less about who is in the property.  Let/manage (not so common in Ireland & normally 1 months rent + all expenses.....and can be very expensive as they aren't likely to shop around).  It means they will take all the tenants calls & arrange workmen, replacements etc, however, they do tend to be more (well a bit)careful about who is in the property as they will have to deal with the calls and issues.  Did you fully understand what you were getting into & the arrangement you had with the agent?


----------



## sam h (3 Jan 2008)

> sam - I'm wondering if you legally have to contact the PRTB first ? If everyone did that when they had problem tenants there would be a lot of tenants with free accomodation out there. I think the only way to do this is to read the RA Act from start to finish which I haven't gotten around to yet  I'm sure the PRTB is there to protect tenants not to act as immediate mediators during disputes - I'd say they represent tenants afterwards.


 
I was also thinking out loud !!  I did manage to get rid a tenant (1 bad apple in a barrel....otherwise very, very lucky!) with 30 day notice ....well dragged to about 50 days but there you go! 
 My point is that if the tenant goes to the PRTB, as they are intitled...from many posts on AAM it would appear that it can sit in limbo for months.  Do you still get rent, can you still access the property with due notice etc.  
My point is that there have been many discussions and dispite the RA & the PRTB there are still alot of grey areas.


----------



## mercman (4 Jan 2008)

Midsummer - if you are saying all the agent did was show them the property, ran down the stairs and they signed - this sounds pathetic. Why didn't he investigate references, both employment and past tenancy. Frankly I have other views on these people and if you wish I will send you a Private Message.  As i first mentioned, I really think that the agency has been very short of what is expected in their business. It could be that you are dealing with a messy tenant and an even worse agent. You haven't mentioned if the agency is registered, but regardless may be easier to press them with a solicitors letter than the PRTB. Anybody in the rentals business knows that you never let people in immediately - a cardinal rule has been broken. Why didn't the agent request your authorisation before handing over keys ?


----------



## labernia (4 Jan 2008)

I have a property  let out and I have rented. While we went to an agency to find a tenant, we actually did all the showing around ourselves. When we found someone to rent our house we went through everything with the to be tenant ourselves down to what we should provide in the kitchen. It may sound like a lot of work but it does provide a lot of goodwill between the two parties. We agreed between ourselves what we wanted and the agency drew up the contract incorporating what we had agreed.  We have had no problems so far because they have nothing to complain about. Everything was agreed in advance. From my personal experience of renting, I have found that, when there is some personal involvement from the landlord things run more smoothly. A friend of mine in England rented her house out. The agency there charges 10% for introduction of tenants, and 15% for introduction and the subsequent management of the property. She choose to pay the 15% as she was moving to another part of the country. She ended up bringing the agency to court because, everytime the tenant rang the agency with a problem , they would ring her and say, for example , you need a plumber here is a list of names. She won her case because she was paying them to find  a plumber .  Why would she pay 5% extra otherwise. That is why we have chosen to manage it ourselves. Hope you get it sorted


----------



## mercman (4 Jan 2008)

labernia - unfortunately we don't have a legal system like that in this country. I don't think the small claims would deal with cases like that cos if they did by heck would it make life easier.


----------



## Afuera (4 Jan 2008)

sam h said:


> Some of the areas I thought I know before but now I'm not so sure - for example:
> - can a landlord evict a tenant without any reason within 6 months?


As far as I know, the answer is yes and no. No, if there is a fixed term lease in place; yes, otherwise (28 days notice would be required).



sam h said:


> - after 6 months, is the only way to evict a tenant a very long and protracted trip thru PRTB red tape?


No. If the landlord wants to sell the property, allow a family member to use it, renovate it... (there are a list of other reasons in the RTA 2004) and the tenant does not have a fixed term lease (or the lease is up), then all the landlord has to do is serve adequate notice which states the reason for terminating the lease. If the tenant does not comply with the obligations of the tenancy (there is some leeway given for late payment of rent) they can also be given notice regardless of whether it is a fixed term tenancy or not. For antisocial behaviour the notice required for eviction is only 7 days. In all cases, the PRTB only need to get involved if the tenant disputes the notice and they will have 28 days to bring it to them after the notice has been served.



sam h said:


> - if there is a one year lease signed & the tenant move out early : does the deposit have to be returned?


This is definately a grey area. I think the tenant could be liable for the remaining rent until their lease is up (but I have not heard of a case where this has actually happened). There is a problem also in that the tenant has the option of requesting the landlord to assign the lease to someone else. If the landlord does not allow them to do this, the tenant is actually allowed to break the lease legally. If the deposit is witheld, the landlord must be able to justify it.


----------



## Midsummer (4 Jan 2008)

Hi folks - thanks again for all your replies.  Just another quick update - the letter has gone to the tenants now stating that as a gesture of goodwill the date will be changed but also pointing out that the rent has been late twice already and the original lease still applies.

As for the agency - it is a full management fee (the agency is registered and it's a well known company) and I knew what I was getting into - I have a list of terms.  Also it was the best option for me at the time as I just didn't have the time/availability to show tenants around myself etc. for various reasons (I was busy having a baby ).  I did find the agency very useful from the point of view of letting people in and organising that sort of thing so it was worth the money as far as I was concerned but I won't be paying a penny more as it wasn't a finders fee it was a management fee and finding a decent tenant should have been part of it.

As it was our first rental we know the drill now so possibly would go it alone in future (after this year).  

I'm just hoping now it goes smoothly - if they don't pay again then we'll deal with it and hopefully I won't have further issues with the agent fee-wise..


----------



## Cityliving (4 Jan 2008)

Afuera:

Are you sure about the fixed term lease over-riding the RTAct. It seems as far as I understand it that fixed term leases are not important any more as even if you give a 1 year fixed term lease the tenant has in fact a 4 year tenancy.

To that end I would have thought that the whole point of the PRTB etc was to use their rules to decide disputes is that not correct?

I am a landlord so I would appreciate clarification on this


----------



## Afuera (4 Jan 2008)

Cityliving said:


> Afuera:
> 
> Are you sure about the fixed term lease over-riding the RTAct. It seems as far as I understand it that fixed term leases are not important any more as even if you give a 1 year fixed term lease the tenant has in fact a 4 year tenancy.


Cityliving, unfortunately it's not as simple as saying the fixed term lease will override the RTA. It depends on which aspects of it you consider. For example, the notice period in the lease can not be made any shorter than that specified in the RTA (so you could say the RTA overrides the lease on that point).

Relating to the OPs query though, unless they explicitly have a clause in the fixed term lease that allows it to be broken by the landlord, then they can't evict the tenants unless the terms of the lease are broken by them. The fixed term lease is legally binding and provides protection above what is given in the RTA 2004, since they could be evicted without any reason during the first six months under that legislation.

You're right in what you say about a tenant signing a years fixed lease getting a 4 year tenancy. However, this only kicks in after they have been there for 6 months. For the first 6 months the lease will give them some sort of protection, and after six months they will be protected by both the lease and the Part IV tenancy rules dictated in the RTA. After 12 months, if they do not sign another fixed term lease, they will still be protected under a Part IV tenancy for another 3 years. Part IV tenancies have many breakout clauses though so do not provide much security for a tenant in reality.

I hope that clarifies it a bit for you!


----------



## WombleWilly (4 Jan 2008)

spudcounter said:


> If you have signed a fixed term lease for greater than 6 months then giving them notice before 6 months is irrelevant. Most lease agreements give a date rent is due and the manner in which it should be paid. They also state that if rent is late, termination maybe a possibility. The 2004 residential tenancies Act states that if rent is late the landlord must request it in writing and give 14 days notice for the tenant to pay. As far as I have been informed once the tenant complies with this you cannot issue a notice of termination as you cannot contract out of your landlord obligations as stated in the Act, irrespective of your lease. Also if they are repeat offenders i.e. always late with rent you have to go through this procedure every time. Basically once they have their rent paid up after been written to they are in the clear again.
> 
> Also if you are issuing a notice to terminate make sure you comply with its format as stated in the Act. If they don't leave ie overholding the property then contact the PRTB, do not kick them out yourself as the penalties for so called illegal eviction are high.
> 
> ...


 
Absolutely agree. And for this reason I would ensure that any late payments of rent are followed up with requests in writing cc'd to your agent. Verbal is not enough.

One other thing - if the person has claimed to have a grievance, then ask them, in writing, to put the grievances on paper. If they don't, that's their problem. If they do, then at least you have a checklist to sort out, and you've covered yourself.

You could be accused of all sorts by a malicious tenant who knows how to play the system.


----------



## Midsummer (4 Jan 2008)

Hi - just a quick update - I was advised by a friend in the legal profession that I would be within my rights to evict based on the breach of the lease (and was advised to do so based on their behaviour).  It would then be up to them to go to the PRTB within the timeframe and complain.  However was also advised to be careful that the tenants could play dirty.  They don't have any grounds and hopefully they're not that type.  I'm willing to stand my ground if it comes to it anyway as I have nothing to hide !  



> if the person has claimed to have a grievance, then ask them, in writing, to put the grievances on paper


Good advice and they haven't done this as yet though they've been asked to by the agency apparently.


----------



## REMFAN (5 Jan 2008)

Flax said:


> Get rid of them. I've been sub letting my apartment for years and these people do not improve; they just get worse.
> 
> I hate to tell you but most people are total losers when it comes to paying rent. It's quite amazing really.
> 
> Give them a months notice and get rid of them.


 
It is amazing how you can make such an ignorant, generalized statement that 'most people are losers when it comes to paying rent'. You come to this conclusion from subletting an apartment?


----------



## mercman (5 Jan 2008)

Good Point by Remfan, Flax Does your landlord know you are subletting as 99.9 % of leases do not allow sub-letting !!


----------



## Trustmeh (5 Jan 2008)

Midsummer - Im fairly impressed with your patience in this situation - and I hope you get sorted. I dont think you are without flaws however. You seem like a first time landlord and are eager to learn how to do things the right way - which is good - but Im not sure its fair to "learn" on a tenant, even a bad one. It would have been nice if you had known all the right ways to handle tenants and got off on the right foot - but you didnt and you are learning as you go now. But that doesnt give you the right to get rid of a tenant so you can move onto the next one and do it right.

It takes 3 days for money to transfer from say boi to aib. So although i keep an eye on my accounts - I dont sweat a day or two. (lets face it, the tenant is never going to pay early!)
If i had to spend as much time thinking about my rental property as you seem to - then i would not be a landlord - its just isnt worth the stress or hassle.

I have never used an agency to rent a property although I have been approached by them every time I place an ad in the paper to rent. I recon it would be crazy to give them the work as they are only contacting me because they know how easy it is to rent out my area.  The fact that your agency did not chase payment the first month (11 days late is a bit much) but I wonder if you had left it would the agency have EVER collected any money. It goes to show what other posters have said - do it yourself correctly from day one - and clearly spell out the rules to your tenant.


If an agency is not on top of your property - and they are the ONLY contact the tenant has with landlord - then it spells disaster for the tenants respect for the rules of the tenancy.


----------



## Afuera (5 Jan 2008)

Midsummer said:


> Hi - just a quick update - I was advised by a friend in the legal profession that I would be within my rights to evict based on the breach of the lease (and was advised to do so based on their behaviour). It would then be up to them to go to the PRTB within the timeframe and complain. However was also advised to be careful that the tenants could play dirty. They don't have any grounds and hopefully they're not that type. I'm willing to stand my ground if it comes to it anyway as I have nothing to hide !


Midsummer, I think you are the one with no grounds here. Are you trying to evict them based on the 3 day delay in paying the rent over the Christmas period? Since this has been resolved, what part of the lease are they currently in breach of?


----------



## shesells (5 Jan 2008)

I don't think it's a case of evicting without grounds, I think it's more a case of nipping a potential problem in the bud. If it can be done within the law then I think it's in midsummer's best interest. This forum is after all called Property Invesment.

As for the agent thing. We initially used a big agency. Big mistake. Since then we've used a single agent who left a big property company to go it alone. I met him through work (during our time with the agency) and he is a star. Charges less than the agency, vetts the tenants and we've never had a problem. He also manages the property and deals with any issues the tenants have, usually within 24 hours. 

Since we employed this agent we have not spoken to or dealt with any tenants directly. We do have final say over who moves in but base our decision on the agent's recommendation. We've had no complaints from the neighbours about any tenant and the property is in better condition now than when we let it!


----------



## Midsummer (7 Jan 2008)

> Midsummer - Im fairly impressed with your patience in this situation


Poster - I'm happy you're impressed.  No I was not using the tenants as a learning experience and from my own profession I knew exactly what I was getting into with the agency.   Yes they did chase on time and it took that long for them to pay.   I would hope you wouldn't think this is acceptable - I don't and therefore would prefer that they paid on time or found somewhere else.  I don't think this is unreasonable.  Yes I know how to handle them "nicely". 

Afuera - it hasn't been resolved - they are in breach of the lease twice and therefore there are grounds - PM me if you want further details but I have this on good authoritry.

Sheshells - thanks for your support.

All posters - thanks for your interest and the various positive posts.  I won't be posting again on the topic but thanks to everyone who had constructive advice to give a fellow landlord.


----------



## Afuera (9 Jan 2008)

Midsummer said:


> Afuera - it hasn't been resolved - they are in breach of the lease twice and therefore there are grounds - PM me if you want further details but I have this on good authoritry.


Midsummer, for your sake I hope the advice you are getting is accurate. Trying to illegally evict the tenants would certainly not help in this situation. Since they do not seem to be altogether happy with the apartment, maybe you could offer them the option of terminating the lease with no penalty and see if that solves the problem for you? I would be interested to hear how you get on with whatever action you decide.


----------



## joanod (9 Jan 2008)

Having had bad landlords and tenants you just live and learn, its not nice dealing with either. After last time a friend had bad tenants 2yrs later bills are still arriving for them! Loan sharks etc only when they left did he realise the neighbours were being terroised nightly. He didnt read the signs. Get out while the damage is minimal. There are lovely tenants and v. nice landlords out there you just have to find them and if you can wait for them for peace of mind it will be worth the wait.

J


----------

