# evicting an unregistered tenant



## galway_blow_in (13 Dec 2019)

i bought a property at auction for cash  in the past week , i got it for half what it sold for in 2007 and circa 35% cheaper than other units which were sold in the same development in the past two  years .

however , there are people ( or persons ) residing in the property and there is no registered tenancy attached to the property , i know this because ive checked with the RTB 

this is obviously a high risk purchase - investment but when i bought i was prepared to spend two years evicting the person - persons who are  living there , its a really good property and in a good area of a large thriving town .

obviously i will need to engage with a solicitor once im fully registered as the owner but i was wondering if there is any obligation here to involve the RTB in the eviction process , squatters rights is not a possibility here , however , you cannot of course simply turn the power off or employ a locksmith to change the locks while removing the dwellers possessions 

my question is whether i can completely bypass the RTB and evict those who are living in this property ?

say i do manage to resolve the issue within two years , if there is no history of a registered tenancy , is the property effectively the same as a brand new build in that i will not be bound by any rent control regulation ?


----------



## Dermot (13 Dec 2019)

For a start you could notify them that you are the new owner as and from the date of acquiring it and inspect the property giving the proper notice. You could issue a valid rent increase notice up to market value.  See what response you get and I would do this before I would contact RTB.  I would at the outset find out who is living there,  how many are living there, how long they are living there and what arrangements they  have for living there. 
As you are a landlord already you have a fair idea of the other relevant questions to ask.
Good luck with the new purchase


----------



## galway_blow_in (13 Dec 2019)

Dermot said:


> For a start you could notify them that you are the new owner as and from the date of acquiring it and inspect the property giving the proper notice. You could issue a valid rent increase notice up to market value.  See what response you get and I would do this before I would contact RTB.  I would at the outset find out who is living there,  how many are living there, how long they are living there and what arrangements they  have for living there.
> As you are a landlord already you have a fair idea of the other relevant questions to ask.
> Good luck with the new purchase



you cannot do a rent review on an unregistered tenancy .

you must register a new tenancy first , you cannot do that if the people living in the property wont open the door or engage

as i said in the opening post , i was just wondering if the RTB need to be involved in the eviction process here ?


----------



## cremeegg (13 Dec 2019)

I am not sure what you mean by



galway_blow_in said:


> i was just wondering if the RTB need to be involved in the eviction process here ?



the RTB aren't involved in any eviction, but you must abide by the rules whether the tenancy was registered or not.

I would go along and introduce myself. You need to establish what the rent is. I am not sure how you would do that, unless the tenant has evidence or the previous owner has evidence. If the tenant does not pay the rent then obviously you can issue notice for non payment.


----------



## galway_blow_in (13 Dec 2019)

cremeegg said:


> I am not sure what you mean by
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I thought the RTB are absolutely involved in the eviction process? , you must get approval from the RTB to evict in order to issue proceedings through the conventional court system? 

As this tenancy is not registered, I don't think the RTB need to be engaged with?


----------



## galway_blow_in (14 Dec 2019)

OK so there has been a positive development, I called to the property around 8pm earlier this evening, arrived with a bottle of wine and handed it to the person who opened the door. 

Two Polish guys living in the apartment since 2013. Terrible English but fine otherwise, they were paying the previous landlord cash in hand and then stopped paying for a year when receiver moved in. 

Got PPS number and name and address, next move is to register a tenancy but I don't know whether I need to back date to 2013? 

Also, rent not changed since 2013 so can I register the tenancy today and also set ball in motion for rent review? 

Don't intend to evict based on tonight's meeting


----------



## cremeegg (14 Dec 2019)

galway_blow_in said:


> I thought the RTB are absolutely involved in the eviction process? , you must get approval from the RTB to evict in order to issue proceedings through the conventional court system?
> 
> As this tenancy is not registered, I don't think the RTB need to be engaged with?


For a court to order an eviction you do of course need an RTB determination. I was thinking about he initial steps of issuing notice.


----------



## luckystar (14 Dec 2019)

all very interesting. Have you found out what the rent was when they were paying? Have you used the RTB calculator to see what the amount would be today?


----------



## cremeegg (14 Dec 2019)

No tenancy was registered with the RTB. The landlord was being paid cash. 

I would look at this as a first rental and register it from the date you bought.

Surely you are not responsible for ensuring it was registered before you bought.


----------



## galway_blow_in (14 Dec 2019)

luckystar said:


> all very interesting. Have you found out what the rent was when they were paying? Have you used the RTB calculator to see what the amount would be today?



Well I can only take the polish gentlemen at face value, he says it was 500 euro but no registered tenancy exists.

Not in a RPZ so I am not limited to a 4% increase, will obviously need to provide three months notice however


----------



## Dermot (14 Dec 2019)

I would do as cremegg suggests and register as new tenancy.  You probably have to pay the late payment penalty with no reward from  the RTB and less explaining and raise the rent to market value maybe allowing for the condition.  Remember if the lefties succeed a rent freeze could be on its way.  I have gotten severvely punished for doing the right thing by a tenant in a RPZ and it seems more punishment on the way by way of rent freeze.


----------



## galway_blow_in (14 Dec 2019)

Dermot said:


> I would do as cremegg suggests and register as new tenancy.  You probably have to pay the late payment penalty with no reward from  the RTB and less explaining and raise the rent to market value maybe allowing for the condition.  Remember if the lefties succeed a rent freeze could be on its way.  I have gotten severvely punished for doing the right thing by a tenant in a RPZ and it seems more punishment on the way by way of rent freeze.



I'm hearing views which suggests I Coul get in trouble down the line if it emerged in an RTB hearing that I didn't start the tenancy in 2013?


----------



## cremeegg (14 Dec 2019)

galway_blow_in said:


> I'm hearing views which suggests I Coul get in trouble down the line if it emerged in an RTB hearing that I didn't start the tenancy in 2013?



Where are you hearing this.

From my understanding YOU did not start the tenancy in 2013. You only purchased the house in 2019. 

While I do not know directly if you now have acquired an obligation to register the tenancy from 2013, that would be surprising to say the least. How are you supposed to know what went on in 2013.

Dont go looking for trouble. Register the tenancy now. Thats my take.


----------



## galway_blow_in (14 Dec 2019)

cremeegg said:


> Where are you hearing this.
> 
> From my understanding YOU did not start the tenancy in 2013. You only purchased the house in 2019.
> 
> ...



I'll ask my solicitor, you ask the RTB the same question three days on the trot and get three completely different answers


----------



## Dermot (14 Dec 2019)

Chances are your solicitor will not know unless they are specialising in this field which is highly unlikely.   Im in complete agreement with cremegg on this.   Let us know what your solicitors view on this and their reasoning for the opinion


----------



## galway_blow_in (14 Dec 2019)

Dermot said:


> Chances are your solicitor will not know unless they are specialising in this field which is highly unlikely.   Im in complete agreement with cremegg on this.   Let us know what your solicitors view on this and their reasoning for the opinion



I suspect they won't know, I really see little downside to commencing the tenancy in 2013


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (15 Dec 2019)

galway_blow_in said:


> I suspect they won't know, I really see little downside to commencing the tenancy in 2013



Legally, how can you register a tenant for a different landlord? I don't see how it is possible.

If you want to keep them then you have to register it in your own name from today. The issue is then that it becomes a new tenancy and you can't raise rents for two years.




> Outside of Rent Pressure Zones landlords can only review the rent 24 months after the tenancy commencement date or 24 months from the date of service of the last valid rent review.




You could have an informal chat with the tenants and try to convince them to sign at a higher rent on the basis that €500 pcm is below market, and then register it.

I think this is the best way forward . You'll never be able to backdate the registration as you weren't the landlord in 2013, and by the sounds of it he/she has gone missing and won't co-operate with you.


----------



## galway_blow_in (15 Dec 2019)

NoRegretsCoyote said:


> Legally, how can you register a tenant for a different landlord? I don't see how it is possible.
> 
> If you want to keep them then you have to register it in your own name from today. The issue is then that it becomes a new tenancy and you can't raise rents for two years.
> 
> ...



It's not a case of registering for another landlord, it's about acknowledging the six year tenancy of the tenants, the tenants have accrued rights regardless of their tenancy having been informal, if I needed to evict them and the case came before the RTB, it would look bad if I ignored the life duration of their stay in the property, the RTB are completely pro tenant.

I've been a landlord before,I don't think you have to get the tenants to sign anything in order to set a new rent?, I don't plan to bother with a lease as the RTB conditions trump them every time , in the case where three months notice must be given, you simply forward the tenant on details of the new rent along with examples of three other properties with the same rent, it's then up to the tenant to write to the RTB and dispute the proposed rent

My priority is getting the rent officially to market level before this new three year freeze is gotten through. Even the sitting tenants go rogue, at least I've achieved that and it will stand to me in the long term


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (15 Dec 2019)

galway_blow_in said:


> It's not a case of registering for another landlord,



Yes it is! Look at the form on the RTB website. You would have to give the landlord's name, address, PPS no, rent charged etc. You have to swear that this is correct to the best of your knowledge, and there is no way you can know this stuff with certainty!



galway_blow_in said:


> it's about acknowledging the six year tenancy of the tenants, the tenants have accrued rights regardless of their tenancy having been informal, if I needed to evict them and the case came before the RTB, it would look bad if I ignored the life duration of their stay in the property, the RTB are completely pro tenant.



I appreciate you want to do right by the tenants. That said, there is very little evidence that they ever had a tenancy. It was never registered and they paid in cash. In very stark terms, you have just bought a house and strangers are living in it with nothing on paper to justify their presence.



galway_blow_in said:


> My priority is getting the rent officially to market level before this new three year freeze is gotten through. Even the sitting tenants go rogue, at least I've achieved that and it will stand to me in the long term



As I've said, the best approach is to try and get them to sign a lease with you at market terms. This would achieve the same ends without any drama over back-dating.


----------



## galway_blow_in (15 Dec 2019)

NoRegretsCoyote said:


> Yes it is! Look at the form on the RTB website. You would have to give the landlord's name, address, PPS no, rent charged etc. You have to swear that this is correct to the best of your knowledge, and there is no way you can know this stuff with certainty!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Say I register a tenancy from the middle of January 2020 or thereabouts, I have the tenants details ( pps etc), can I simply include the new revised higher rent when I am registering the tenancy? 

Like I said earlier, my priority is getting a higher rent made official, do I need agreement in writing from the tenant prior to registering a new - higher rent? 

Do I need proof of receipt of payment in order to register the rent amount?


----------



## Dermot (16 Dec 2019)

You give them the 90 plus days notice in writing and give them 3 examples of rent in writing for similar properties in the area which have been advertised in the month prior to you giving the notice.  The same as you would do in a normal situation where you have a tenant in a property.


----------



## galway_blow_in (16 Dec 2019)

Dermot said:


> You give them the 90 plus days notice in writing and give them 3 examples of rent in writing for similar properties in the area which have been advertised in the month prior to you giving the notice.  The same as you would do in a normal situation where you have a tenant in a property.



Something wrong with that advice, so what rent do i say is in place when I register the tenancy with the RTB?, even outside a RPZ, you can only do a rent review every two years. 

Are you suggesting i collect no rent for three months?, i thought a rent review happens within the context of an existing rent arrangement?


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (16 Dec 2019)

galway_blow_in said:


> Say I register a tenancy from the middle of January 2020 or thereabouts, I have the tenants details ( pps etc), can I simply include the new revised higher rent when I am registering the tenancy?



I presume so.



galway_blow_in said:


> do I need agreement in writing from the tenant prior to registering a new - higher rent?



It's a good idea to have a rental contract, but technically not.



galway_blow_in said:


> Do I need proof of receipt of payment in order to register the rent amount?



No.



galway_blow_in said:


> Are you suggesting i collect no rent for three months?, i thought a rent review happens within the context of an existing rent arrangement?



Assume there is no existing rental arrangement. There is no written record of one ever existing. They have not paid rent for a year according to themselves. Just tell them that you are the new landlord and you would like them to sign a contract on market terms.


----------



## galway_blow_in (16 Dec 2019)

NoRegretsCoyote said:


> I presume so.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



While i can't know for sure until i bring it up, if the tenants are opposed to a market rent, at least if i register the rent at the same time as commencing a tenancy, I've shielded the property from future government meddling, I. E a base has been set. 

One thing that bothers me however, were I to end up with the occupants at a RTB hearing either by way of a tenancy termination or whatever, if the tenants produce utility bills from the past number of years, my commencing the tenancy in January 2020 will potentially make me look like a liar? 

Tenants have less rights in the first six months, part 4 tenancy rights don't kick in until that point


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (16 Dec 2019)

galway_blow_in said:


> One thing that bothers me however, were I to end up with the occupants at a RTB hearing either by way of a tenancy termination or whatever, if the tenants produce utility bills from the past number of years, my commencing the tenancy in January 2020 will potentially make me look like a liar?



The tenants would first have to prove the the RTB that a tenancy existed. You could argue that they were there as guests of the previous owner and it would be their word against yours to prove that an oral agreement which constituted a tenancy even existed. In their favour they would have utility bills but I don't know how the RTB would view it. You can search judgements on the RTB website using keywords to see if there is any similar situation.

Possession is very powerful and if they don't want to engage then you could be stuck for a year or more rent-free with the quality of the house decaying. Try and talk to a solicitor with expertise in the area before you go back to the tenants. My guess is that cash in hand could be quite powerful in getting occupants to act, and in the end cheaper than the legal route. Once they're gone you'll be able to set up a new tenancy at market rate without any problem.

Anyway I think you have to clearly define your objectives before you embark on a course of action. You seem a bit unclear as to whether you want to keep them there, renovate, or get new tenants in.


----------



## galway_blow_in (16 Dec 2019)

NoRegretsCoyote said:


> The tenants would first have to prove the the RTB that a tenancy existed. You could argue that they were there as guests of the previous owner and it would be their word against yours to prove that an oral agreement which constituted a tenancy even existed. In their favour they would have utility bills but I don't know how the RTB would view it. You can search judgements on the RTB website using keywords to see if there is any similar situation.
> 
> Possession is very powerful and if they don't want to engage then you could be stuck for a year or more rent-free with the quality of the house decaying. Try and talk to a solicitor with expertise in the area before you go back to the tenants. My guess is that cash in hand could be quite powerful in getting occupants to act, and in the end cheaper than the legal route. Once they're gone you'll be able to set up a new tenancy at market rate without any problem.
> 
> Anyway I think you have to clearly define your objectives before you embark on a course of action. You seem a bit unclear as to whether you want to keep them there, renovate, or get new tenants in.




According to literature I've read, The tenants rights are in no way diminished by the fact that there was no RTB registration

I'd be reluctant to suggest these people were guests, wouldn't want to stray too close to squatters rights territory 

I will certainly need to engage with a solicitor who specialises in tenancy law, the difference in opinion on this matter is pretty stark


----------



## cremeegg (16 Dec 2019)

galway_blow_in said:


> I will certainly need to engage with a solicitor who specialises in tenancy law, the difference in opinion on this matter is pretty stark



You bought a house with sitting tenants, only for the brave, but potentially lucrative. Now you are behaving like a nervous schoolgirl.

Tell the tenants the new rent, register the tenancy with the RTB, and don't go looking for trouble.

Tell the tenants the new rent. Having done a rental review in line with the RTB rules, and having told the tenants that you will be charging the market rent.


----------



## galway_blow_in (16 Dec 2019)

cremeegg said:


> You bought a house with sitting tenants, only for the brave, but potentially lucrative. Now you are behaving like a nervous schoolgirl.
> 
> Tell the tenants the new rent, register the tenancy with the RTB, and don't go looking for trouble.
> 
> Tell the tenants the new rent. Having done a rental review in line with the RTB rules, and having told the tenants that you will be charging the market rent.



Thanks cremegg, hearing a tonne of conflicting views, hence the degree of uncertainty 

One individual told me that if the occupants had a "no fixed term" lease with the original landlord, i inherit all those conditions and can never increase the rent above where it was 

The guy i dealt with the other night told me he was paying 500 euro per month until the receivers moved in but that the landlord covered the electricity and gas bills, obviously that would be a disaster if such an obligation transferred to me and was set in stone


----------



## Dermot (16 Dec 2019)

If you comply with the RTB rules re notification etc and the rent is in line with the local rates for similar properties the tenants can move on if they do not like your increase and you can move on with your life.  You are not in a RPZ


----------



## galway_blow_in (16 Dec 2019)

Dermot said:


> If you comply with the RTB rules re notification etc and the rent is in line with the local rates for similar properties the tenants can move on if they do not like your increase and you can move on with your life.  You are not in a RPZ



Dermot, all that is clear to me, I've done rent reviews before on property, however I'm referring to a situation where there may exist a "no fixed term" lease


----------



## Dermot (16 Dec 2019)

Sorry I have to plead ignorance as I never heard of a"no fixed term lease".  Could you please explain what it means to me.


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (16 Dec 2019)

galway_blow_in said:


> According to literature I've read, The tenants rights are in no way diminished by the fact that there was no RTB registration



Indeed. But the tenants will struggle to prove that a tenancy ever existed! They would likely need the oral evidence of the former landlord, but this doesn't seem likely to be forthcoming.



galway_blow_in said:


> I'd be reluctant to suggest these people were guests, wouldn't want to stray too close to squatters rights territory




Squatters' rights don't come into play until 12 years, and they are nowhere near that from what you say.


As @cremeegg writes you are engaged in a high-risk, high-reward activity. You may have to contemplate cash up front at some point to get them to move on. But this would wipe the slate totally clean.


----------



## galway_blow_in (16 Dec 2019)

Dermot said:


> Sorry I have to plead ignorance as I never heard of a"no fixed term lease".  Could you please explain what it means to me.




check this out









						Buying A Property With Tenants In Situ / Terminations - Irish Property Owners' Association
					

Landlord Query Of The Week: This Week - Buying A Property With Tennats In Situ, Can I Terminate? ......... Read More For Practical Help For Landlords




					ipoa.ie


----------



## galway_blow_in (16 Dec 2019)

NoRegretsCoyote said:


> Indeed. But the tenants will struggle to prove that a tenancy ever existed! They would likely need the oral evidence of the former landlord, but this doesn't seem likely to be forthcoming.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



coyottee , having to offer cash to them is not something i have any issue with at all but what ive read and been told in the past few hours today shocked me

if the previous landlord ( now bankrupt ) has attempted to poison the well by drawing up a lease which is toxic to any future owner of the property , i would be bound to those conditions infinitely , the tenant told me the other night that he was paying 500 euro per month ( until the original landlord lost the place ) but that the landlord was paying for the electricity and the gas , were i bound to those conditions indefinately  , then this would be an unmitigated disaster

the property was sold as having a tenancy under conditions unknown , it never occurred to me or my solicitor that it could have something like that landmine hidden , now i dont know if this is the case at all but i was told in no uncertain terms by someone today that a " no fixed term agreement " can give extrordinary protections to tenants if drawn up accordingly , that theoretically , i would be bound to any sort of onerous conditions permanently and with no recourse to change them , the tenant would effectively have ownership of the place


----------



## Leo (16 Dec 2019)

NoRegretsCoyote said:


> Squatters' rights don't come into play until 12 years, and they are nowhere near that from what you say.



True, plus they'd also have to prove they were there without the permission of the owner.


----------



## Leo (16 Dec 2019)

galway_blow_in said:


> but i was told in no uncertain terms by someone today that a " no fixed term agreement " can give extrordinary protections to tenants if drawn up accordingly , that theoretically , i would be bound to any sort of onerous conditions permanently and with no recourse to change them , the tenant would effectively have ownership of the place



I think that person got it the wrong way round, it's fixed term leases that can't normally be ended during the duration of the term. In domestic tenancy terms, the vast majority of leases aren't fixed term leases and the RTB guidance on termination applies.


----------



## galway_blow_in (16 Dec 2019)

Leo said:


> I think that person got it the wrong way round, it's fixed term leases that can't normally be ended during the duration of the term. In domestic tenancy terms, the vast majority of leases aren't fixed term leases and the RTB guidance on termination applies.



were i not to elect to terminate the lease , would a " no fixed term " lease arrangement as entered into by the previous landlord , prevent me from doing a rent review if i chose to stick with the current occupants ?

i dont know if the tenant has a lease of any kind in writing but say he does possess a " no fixed term " lease and the previous landlord ( aware he was about to loose his place to the bank ) sought to poison the well for any future investors , could any extremely negative conditions carry over to a new owner and thus tie them indefinately to a bad deal ?

i was told that its conceivable that a bitter landlord faced with repossession , could draw up a toxic lease that to any future owner of their property would be utterly disastrous and impossible to escape from  ?


----------



## Leo (17 Dec 2019)

galway_blow_in said:


> were i not to elect to terminate the lease , would a " no fixed term " lease arrangement as entered into by the previous landlord , prevent me from doing a rent review if i chose to stick with the current occupants ?



No, so long as you follow the guidelines set by the RTB around notice, etc.



galway_blow_in said:


> ...but say he does possess a " no fixed term " lease and the previous landlord ( aware he was about to loose his place to the bank ) sought to poison the well for any future investors , could any extremely negative conditions carry over to a new owner and thus tie them indefinately to a bad deal ?



I think the worst thing a departing landlord could do would be to offer them a very long fixed-term lease at low rent. Even then, it may be possible to challenge that via the RTB/ courts. 

Sitting tenants are entitled to a continuation of the lease terms, but if they are not voluntarily providing you with a copy of those terms now, it'd be difficult for them to later try to enforce those terms. As others have said, a solicitor expert in this area will advise best, but might be good to get the tenants to confirm in writing that no such lease exists.


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (17 Dec 2019)

You're afraid of some hypothetical poisonous lease:



galway_blow_in said:


> i was told that its conceivable that a bitter landlord faced with repossession , could draw up a toxic lease that to any future owner of their property would be utterly disastrous and impossible to escape from  ?



But last week you said you spoke to the tenant and you made no mention of any written lease agreement even existing.



galway_blow_in said:


> Two Polish guys living in the apartment since 2013. Terrible English but fine otherwise, they were paying the previous landlord cash in hand and then stopped paying for a year when receiver moved in.




Is there something you are not telling us? Or are you just being paranoid?


----------



## galway_blow_in (17 Dec 2019)

NoRegretsCoyote said:


> You're afraid of some hypothetical poisonous lease:
> 
> 
> 
> ...







NoRegretsCoyote said:


> You're afraid of some hypothetical poisonous lease:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Speculation is not healthy for the mind, I'll stop doing so until i know more, the tenant didn't say they had a lease at all but the terms ( landlord paying for utilities) they claimed they had with old landlord were unattractive, doesn't prevent a rent review but i might have to cover utilities for the remainder of their tenancy. Would need to raise rent enough to offset

I didn't really think that unfavourable conditions like those would be agreed upon by any landlord but times were bad in 2013 and perhaps the LL needed to do it

I'm not going to post on the subject again for a while as it's taken it's toll on me, i know I'm viewed as eccentric at best round here but I want to wish everyone a happy Christmas, this forum is full of sharp minds.

I really should listen to their philosophies of life and business more

Happy New year


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (17 Dec 2019)

@galway_blow_in Happy Christmas to you too! All advice given in a generous spirit.


----------



## Drakon (18 Dec 2019)

When your solicitor did the conveyancing on the property, was any of this discussed?


----------



## Susie2017 (18 Dec 2019)

I think the suggestion that the tenants utility bills were being paid by the previous landlord is a bit of a fairytale. Perhaps you were a little too friendly in your approach to them. Id be bringing a lease to them straight away and getting an appropriate deposit upfront. Whatever went on before you were the owner is history. If they havent produced a lease then they are chancing their arm. If they dont like the new rules give them their notice and tell them you want the place emptied and keys back on x date.


----------



## galway_blow_in (6 Jan 2020)

Hi again, sale not yet closed due to the Xmas break.

Received a phone call from an anonymous caller today, asking me if I had bought said property, i have no idea how this person got hold of my phone number but they would not identify themselves, they demanded to know who i was from the start, i did not answer those questions as i never identify myself before the person calling does first

They did reveal however that they carried out work on the property in the past and that they would be putting a charge on it, obviously i was taken aback but the conversation confirmed nothing in terms of the identity of the person or my own, i suspect they know mine as they managed to get hold of my phone number.

I phoned my solicitor afterwards and while they thought it very strange intimidating behaviour, they said the individual would find it difficult to get a charge on the property?

Having read a number of articles online, it appears a creditor can get a garnishee order which allows a creditor to seek - collect a debt from a third party who owes money to the debtor.

While on the surface horrifying, how enforceable is such a charge in practice, i know charges have a shelf life so provided an innocent party like myself holds on to the property, can much be done in real terms?

There was no reference to this creditor in the contract for sale so my solicitor did not miss anything, the main lender was the only title charge referred to


----------



## RedOnion (6 Jan 2020)

galway_blow_in said:


> Having read a number of articles online


You know better than to do that! 

They'd need a judgement, and then attach a charge to the property. Ask your solicitor what the current timelines are in your court area for that.

A garnishee only kicks in after a judgement - they could go after his salary from employer.


----------



## Thirsty (6 Jan 2020)

If they were genuine, why bother ringing you? If they were able to put a charge on the property, then just do it.

Sounds to me like they were chancing their arm.


----------



## galway_blow_in (6 Jan 2020)

Thirsty said:


> If they were genuine, why bother ringing you? If they were able to put a charge on the property, then just do it.
> 
> Sounds to me like they were chancing their arm.



i suspect they are trying to spook , perhaps a messenger for the perhaps aggrieved previous owner ?

perhaps an attempted shake down ?

its always my desire however to develop my understanding of the legal system , i had never heard of a garnishee order before within this context . add to that you sometimes wonder if all solicitors are on top of their game , my sister is a solicitor but lives and works in dublin , she doesnt do conveyancy herself but was bothered by  data breach ( GDPR ) when i rang her this evening  ? , how this person ended up with my number , havent a clue myself how they might have got it


----------



## galway_blow_in (6 Jan 2020)

RedOnion said:


> You know better than to do that!
> 
> They'd need a judgement, and then attach a charge to the property. Ask your solicitor what the current timelines are in your court area for that.
> 
> A garnishee only kicks in after a judgement - they could go after his salary from employer.



if they managed to get before a judge and slap a charge on the property .

1. can i attempt to block them getting a garnishee  order ? ( presumably not as i dont own it yet as sale not yet closed )

2. if i cant block  and they succeed in getting it and slap a charge on the property ( surely the pre closing searches my solicitor would undertake would highlight this new charge ? )  , would i still be bound to purchase , would that not be grounds for the sale not going ahead ? ( charge showing up )



i will ask my solicitor tomorrow anyway but curious to hear opinions .


----------



## RedOnion (6 Jan 2020)

@galway_blow_in 

I'm not a legal person, so don't do anything based on what I say!

Re number, They might have dropped into the property and got your number from tenants?

The garnishee order would have nothing to do with you - you don't owe money to the original owner.

Getting a judgement takes time. They must give 10 days notice of claim. Then they go to court. Then debtor has 28 days to respond. Then the real process starts. Assuming it's less than 15k it's district court. Even if they managed to get judgement, it'd rank behind the banks charge. So it's useless to them. If he goes to a solicitor, they'd advise him not to do it.


----------



## galway_blow_in (6 Jan 2020)

RedOnion said:


> @galway_blow_in
> 
> I'm not a legal person, so don't do anything based on what I say!
> 
> ...



This guy who rang me claims to have carried out works on the property and was presumably unpaid.

If he did manage to get a charge on the property prior to the sale being closed

1. Would this make the auction contract signed three weeks ago illegitimate?

2. If not and the sale closes but the charge is on the property, can he follow me for the money ( garnishee order) or is it just a case of ignoring the charge and allowing it to expire after twelve years?

Suppose what I'd like to know is worse case scenario could i have to pay this guy for fitting a kitchen or whatever he's owed for

Why would he contact me unless it's me he plans to follow?


----------



## Paul O Mahoney (7 Jan 2020)

Reading this just reinforces my view that the law isn't working on behalf of landlords. Everything is skewed in favour of the tenants.

Just one point whoever rang threatening placing a charge is trying his/her arm.
You bought the property and you said from a receiver surely any outstanding creditors must contact the receiver regarding this.

Frankly I'd report it to the guards, it smacks of extortion. Once the sale goes through it's your property and anyone who is a creditor can deal with the receiver. (Unless the law has changed)

Doing the right thing isn't always the best strategy,  I speak from experience you bend over backwards to accommodate tenants but they do nothing on their side.


----------



## elcato (7 Jan 2020)

Paul O Mahoney said:


> I speak from experience you bend over backwards to accommodate tenants but they do nothing on their side.


I concur and it would seem to me that they are the ones who divulged your number. Have you considered it may be them who are chancing their arm here by using a local buddy ? Of course, if you didn't give the tenants your number then this is not the source.


----------



## galway_blow_in (7 Jan 2020)

Paul O Mahoney said:


> Reading this just reinforces my view that the law isn't working on behalf of landlords. Everything is skewed in favour of the tenants.
> 
> Just one point whoever rang threatening placing a charge is trying his/her arm.
> You bought the property and you said from a receiver surely any outstanding creditors must contact the receiver regarding this.
> ...



im not a solicitor so learning all the time , one hopes that some auction clause wasnt in there which protects the vendor from any unforeseen circumstance where a creditor crawls out of the woods demanding a slice but its the purchaser who must deal with it ?

solicitor told me before the auction that the title was kosher but strictly for cash buyers. received no warnings other than that , hopefully the solicitor is on top of their game , always a concern for regular folk

was unable to get hold of my solicitor so far today but will ask them to double check everything so as i can head off any potential shenanigans or at least try to do so.

as for reporting to the guards , i dont believe this warrants that kind of action , at least for now , the person made no threats of any kind and i didnt confirm my name or that i had bought the place , if i receive more calls , i will consider that sort of action . it was certainly a brass neck thing to call me up but i imagine not much more than that ? , person who leaked the information was worse .

messy


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (7 Jan 2020)

@galway_blow_in 

As part of the purchase, does your solicitor not do a search at the last minute to ensure that there is no charge on the property?

Am not the expert but if you pay €5 and look at the folio for my house on the Land Registry website you can find that there is a mortgage with BoI on the property. You can do this yourself online for the property you are buying.


----------



## galway_blow_in (7 Jan 2020)

NoRegretsCoyote said:


> @galway_blow_in
> 
> As part of the purchase, does your solicitor not do a search at the last minute to ensure that there is no charge on the property?
> 
> Am not the expert but if you pay €5 and look at the folio for my house on the Land Registry website you can find that there is a mortgage with BoI on the property. You can do this yourself online for the property you are buying.



my sister ( has never deal with property but knows that much ) said a charge would show up in a search but im posing the question if their might be a clause in the contract which protects the vendors from surprise creditors ?

like i said i havent gotten a chance to quiz my solicitor about that , you feel borderline paranoid asking them about every conceivable scenario but it keeps them on their toes you hope .


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (7 Jan 2020)

Don't bother your solicitor, look it up yourself here and download the folio for a €5 fee.


----------



## galway_blow_in (7 Jan 2020)

NoRegretsCoyote said:


> Don't bother your solicitor, look it up yourself here and download the folio for a €5 fee.



guy who rang claims to be planning to stick a charge on it so it would not be on it yet ? , my solicitor only referred to the lenders charge pre auction , im wondering if new creditors crawling out are dealt with in the contract , receivers can be sneaky , just how broad can you go with an auction sale ?


----------



## Paul O Mahoney (7 Jan 2020)

galway_blow_in said:


> guy who rang claims to be planning to stick a charge on it so it would not be on it yet ? , my solicitor only referred to the lenders charge pre auction , im wondering if new creditors crawling out are dealt with in the contract , receivers can be sneaky , just how broad can you go with an auction sale ?


Send an legitimate outstanding debts to the receiver,  it's not your issue once the property is legally yours. 
And if others try it get their phone numbers,  you genuinely seem to a genuine type who wants to do everything by the book, unfortunately not everyone is like that, some will exploit if they think they can bully you. 
Again outstanding debts aren't your issue


----------



## galway_blow_in (7 Jan 2020)

Paul O Mahoney said:


> Send an legitimate outstanding debts to the receiver,  it's not your issue once the property is legally yours.
> And if others try it get their phone numbers,  you genuinely seem to a genuine type who wants to do everything by the book, unfortunately not everyone is like that, some will exploit if they think they can bully you.
> Again outstanding debts aren't your issue



I'm not worried about chancers, it's the legal quirks which concern me, perhaps none exist where a fresh creditor can climb on the new owners property, I'm attempting to try and get clarity on the matter, even he did get a charge on my property, i wouldn't really care if it was only useful in the event of a sale, i wouldn't be planning to resell, in fact I'd probably lease to the local authority down the road for ten years plus, i have that arrangement with Limerick Council on another house and it suits me fine, no dealing with tenants, guaranteed rent 

Guy may indeed be a spoofer or working for the guy who lost his property


----------



## Paul O Mahoney (7 Jan 2020)

galway_blow_in said:


> I'm not worried about chancers, it's the legal quirks which concern me, perhaps none exist where a fresh creditor can climb on the new owners property, I'm attempting to try and get clarity on the matter, even he did get a charge on my property, i wouldn't really care if it was only useful in the event of a sale, i wouldn't be planning to resell, in fact I'd probably lease to the local authority down the road for ten years plus, i have that arrangement with Limerick Council on another house and it suits me fine, no dealing with tenants, guaranteed rent
> 
> Guy may indeed be a spoofer or working for the guy who lost his property


I think you might be right........best of luck hope it works out.


----------



## Leo (7 Jan 2020)

galway_blow_in said:


> perhaps none exist where a fresh creditor can climb on the new owners property,



There is no mechanism by which a creditor could obtain a judgement to register a charge against property formerly owned by a debtor. 

Your solicitor will perform final searches just prior to closing the sale, any charges such as this would crop up then. Your solicitor is best placed to advise on what your auction contract entails in the scenario that a charge is registered after the auction but prior to closing. Generally, any such charges must be paid by the vendor from the proceeds of the sale, they don't pass on to the new owner.


----------



## cremeegg (7 Jan 2020)

Leo said:


> There is no mechanism by which a creditor could obtain a judgement to register a charge against property formerly owned by a debtor.
> 
> Your solicitor will perform final searches just prior to closing the sale, any charges such as this would crop up then. Your solicitor is best placed to advise on what your auction contract entails in the scenario that a charge is registered after the auction but prior to closing. Generally, any such charges must be paid by the vendor from the proceeds of the sale, they don't pass on to the new owner.



This is the situation, all the previous stuff about garnishee orders is nonsense.


----------



## galway_blow_in (15 Jan 2020)

Looks like this sale may not be going ahead. 

Solicitor will be back to me later today


----------



## Thirsty (15 Jan 2020)

How come?  I thought you bought this at auction for cash?  Don't they always warn you that successful auction bid is contractually binding?


----------



## galway_blow_in (15 Jan 2020)

Thirsty said:


> How come?  I thought you bought this at auction for cash?  Don't they always warn you that successful auction bid is contractually binding?



I don't remember saying i was the one in breach of contract?


----------



## Thirsty (15 Jan 2020)

Don't pretend to be an expert, but I thought that was the whole point of buying at auction - that it was a binding contract?


----------



## galway_blow_in (15 Jan 2020)

Thirsty said:


> Don't pretend to be an expert, but I thought that was the whole point of buying at auction - that it was a binding contract?



I don't know the full details yet but if it does fall through, i won't loose my deposit, that i am assured of, solicitor is to get back to me later


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (15 Jan 2020)

Oh please tease us a little more


----------



## galway_blow_in (15 Jan 2020)

NoRegretsCoyote said:


> Oh please tease us a little more



I don't honestly know, thing is at best on ice


----------



## galway_blow_in (15 Jan 2020)

Paul O Mahoney said:


> Reading this just reinforces my view that the law isn't working on behalf of landlords. Everything is skewed in favour of the tenants.
> 
> Just one point whoever rang threatening placing a charge is trying his/her arm.
> You bought the property and you said from a receiver surely any outstanding creditors must contact the receiver regarding this.
> ...



Looks like i may have to consider calling the guards, seems my address details were leaked by someone and it certainly was not the tenants as i did not divulge that information to them.

Guy ( perhaps more than one) drove up to our entrance gates around 6pm this evening, my other half wasn't home from work so i shouted over to him, he knew my name and asked me to come over " for a little chat", i asked who he was and he identified himself, thing is i know the name of the guy who has been calling my number every other day since last week, my solicitor learned it from the vendors solicitor, apparently he has been calling them up too

I was unable to see this persons face, could not go further than the front door as the kids were inside, i shouted that i was calling the guards and he or they drove off, didn't confirm my name, should have got reg plate but two kids under four cannot be left alone

Wasn't the vendors who leaked my name as my solicitor asked them, they immediately told her the name of the guy, I'll talk to my solicitor in the morning but won't rush into contacting the guards, someone brazen enough to come to my home is unlikely to be perturbed by a call from the guards, i wasn't threatened in any way

Altogether bizarre development


----------



## RedOnion (15 Jan 2020)

galway_blow_in said:


> Altogether bizarre development


It's not the first time I've heard of something like this. 

There's 1 particular property that has been 'sold' at least 3 times that I'm aware of at auction, and is still not sold.


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (15 Jan 2020)

That sounds awful, very intimidating and upsetting.

Unfortunately there is nothing illegal about a one-time arrival at your gate.

Keep a record of it in case it becomes a pattern.


----------



## galway_blow_in (15 Jan 2020)

RedOnion said:


> It's not the first time I've heard of something like this.
> 
> There's 1 particular property that has been 'sold' at least 3 times that I'm aware of at auction, and is still not sold.



I don't know if the possible collapse of the sale is down to this, don't want to speculate, it's concerning regardless of the sale details


----------



## galway_blow_in (15 Jan 2020)

NoRegretsCoyote said:


> That sounds awful, very intimidating and upsetting.
> 
> Unfortunately there is nothing illegal about a one-time arrival at your gate.
> 
> Keep a record of it in case it becomes a pattern.



I might have been foolish to say i was calling the guards, sort of confirmed to the guy he had the right place - guy.


----------



## Paul O Mahoney (16 Jan 2020)

galway_blow_in said:


> Looks like i may have to consider calling the guards, seems my address details were leaked by someone and it certainly was not the tenants as i did not divulge that information to them.
> 
> Guy ( perhaps more than one) drove up to our entrance gates around 6pm this evening, my other half wasn't home from work so i shouted over to him, he knew my name and asked me to come over " for a little chat", i asked who he was and he identified himself, thing is i know the name of the guy who has been calling my number every other day since last week, my solicitor learned it from the vendors solicitor, apparently he has been calling them up too
> 
> ...


Really sorry to hear this, personally I'd at least let the guards know what's happening. It might go away and you can get on with your life. Nobody deserves to be intimidated like this.


----------



## galway_blow_in (16 Jan 2020)

Paul O Mahoney said:


> Really sorry to hear this, personally I'd at least let the guards know what's happening. It might go away and you can get on with your life. Nobody deserves to be intimidated like this.





Paul O Mahoney said:


> Really sorry to hear this, personally I'd at least let the guards know what's happening. It might go away and you can get on with your life. Nobody deserves to be intimidated like this.



Will wait to see if anything further happens before going to the guards, guy has done nothing illegal as of yet. 

Dreadful idiot though


----------



## Paul O Mahoney (16 Jan 2020)

galway_blow_in said:


> Will wait to see if anything further happens before going to the guards, guy has done nothing illegal as of yet.
> 
> Dreadful idiot though
> Ok but these types play the idiot as part of the deception


----------



## galway_blow_in (22 Jan 2020)

Sale did not reach completion, i got my deposit back, can't say anymore than that, have not heard from the pest who came to my gate in a week. 

Perhaps the universe is telling me I have enough property already?


----------



## AlbacoreA (22 Jan 2020)

I think if something is too good to be true, especially with property, there usually a good (or bad) reason for it.


----------



## galway_blow_in (22 Jan 2020)

AlbacoreA said:


> I think if something is too good to be true, especially with property, there usually a good (or bad) reason for it.



Might be a lot of truth in that, auction house admitted to having had a lot of correspondence with the pest but denied any suggestion of data leakage, the vendors solicitor was also familiar with the individual, I'd be surprised if this property is back on the market anytime soon but who knows?


----------



## samfarrell (4 Feb 2020)

Slightly off topic, but can someone be physically be removed from a property in Ireland, whether they are tenant, squatter, owner with a court order against them, what ever..... do the bailifs come round and haul them out.... ever ?


----------

