Departing tenant seeking rent refund as last rent review done by text!

Yes, definitely trying to get something before he goes.
Brendan Burgess said:
I would certainly not give in here, no matter what the law says.

The RTB starts with a mediation process and they might see the injustice of it and persuade the tenant to not pursue it.

I very much doubt that when it goes to adjudication that you will get a heavy fine.

I don't think I would pay for legal advice. They will just charge you for telling you what you have already learned here.

Brendan
Click to expand...
Thank Brendan,
I do feel there is a huge injustice here, as the rent was low all throughout. The tenants were advised by Threshold to pursue this course of action - which is to get what you can - I have always been more than fair, and to think they can get away with this is very disheartening. My gut is that the RTB will rule in favour of the tenant, as they seem to be very by the book.
 
elcato said:
I would use this as part of the negotiation. It appears to me that your tenant is leaving anyway and is trying to get something before he goes. There must be some damage you can use as leverage. I'd certainly wait as long as I could before reaching any settlement. They may give up.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure they will give up. On paper, I was wrong, but morally, I was very fair but made a mistake on the delivery of the increase. I think if they had a problem they should have had the 90 days to address it. I am going to get out of the market but if I was to stay, I'd nearly need a solicitor to oversee the paper work - there must be alot more landlords in my situation. My brother was renting and never once got a formal notification of rent increase - does he go back and try and claw money out of the landlord who provided him with a house - no, he does not! He's a decent person.
 
T McGibney said:
There is no need for you to get personal here. I won't be responding in kind.

Your claim that the common law is irrelevant to how laws are applied and legislation is interpreted in this country couldn't be further from the truth.
Click to expand...
I think you are right here. Even if there is no time limit at all in the legislation, I don't think a court would entertain a claim that arose years after the tenancy ended unless there was a very good reason for that delay. It is called the equitable doctrine of laches - you must move with reasonable speed to enforce any right. This would cover statutory rights.

I don't think it would be any help here though.
 
Ailinf said:
The tenants were advised by Threshold to pursue this course of action
Click to expand...
I suspected that might have been the case.

Whatever you might think of Threshold, they know the law backwards and rarely make a mistake in my experience.

I completely understand why you feel sore - I would too - but in the grand scheme of things it’s not a huge sum of money.
 
Brendan Burgess said:
How do you know this?

I wonder if you would send a complaint to Threshold after the RTB case is sorted.

Brendan
Click to expand...
The tenant told me.
Yes, I do feel like complaining Threshold. I don't think they should be encouraging tenants to claim money out of landlords due to a procedural error where the landlord has been more than fair. In fact, this situation is going to put big financial stress on me.
 
Greenbook said:
I don't think a court would entertain a claim that arose years after the tenancy ended unless there was a very good reason for that delay.
Click to expand...
This has nothing to do with any court and equitable doctrines are irrelevant.
 
Sarenco said:
I suspected that might have been the case.

Whatever you might think of Threshold, they know the law backwards and rarely make a mistake in my experience.

I completely understand why you feel sore - I would too - but in the grand scheme of things it’s not a huge sum of money.
Click to expand...
It might be Threshold, and not the tenant so much, that are pushing this.

I always got the impression (perhaps wrongly) that they absolutely hate landlords.
 
Sarenco said:
This has nothing to do with any court and equitable doctrines are irrelevant.
Click to expand...
The landlord has a right to appeal to the High Court on a point of law. Aside from that the RTB is a quasi-judicial tribunal and must take legal principles into account. Laches applies to legislation as well. If I have a right under an Act but I do not pursue that right in a timely manner, I will be estopped from doing so. Keep in mind the example given here was a 50 year delay.

That said, it is no help here.
 
Could anyone confirm when landlords were obliged to register with the rtb? I only registered a few years ago and am wondering will this come against me if I do contest this dispute?
I really appreciate all this wonderful advice. My head is saying don't bother contesting and give the refund, but my heart is saying don't go down without a fight!!!
 
IANAL but by defining certain time limits in the rental legislation it does indicate that a timely manner of objection and request for redress is recognised. Thus in the absence of a time limit for this surely a typical time limit of 2 years would be “typical”. 2 years seems to me to be a typical time limit for all sorts of claims, so why would it not be considered that any claim beyond 2 years is unacceptable delay. It certainly seems a valid argument to me.

It seems very odd that the tenants asked Threshold for advice. The landlord was happy with them as tenants, the rent seemed very reasonable and the landlord was not asking them to leave, so what prompted the threshold engagement?
 
Clamball said:
IANAL but by defining certain time limits in the rental legislation it does indicate that a timely manner of objection and request for redress is recognised. Thus in the absence of a time limit for this surely a typical time limit of 2 years would be “typical”. 2 years seems to me to be a typical time limit for all sorts of claims, so why would it not be considered that any claim beyond 2 years is unacceptable delay. It certainly seems a valid argument to me.

It seems very odd that the tenants asked Threshold for advice. The landlord was happy with them as tenants, the rent seemed very reasonable and the landlord was not asking them to leave, so what prompted the threshold engagement?
Click to expand...
I suggested a rental increase. Hence the going to Threshold.
 
Ailinf said:
I suggested a rental increase. Hence the going
Click to expand...

Clamball said:
IANAL but by defining certain time limits in the rental legislation it does indicate that a timely manner of objection and request for redress is recognised. Thus in the absence of a time limit for this surely a typical time limit of 2 years would be “typical”. 2 years seems to me to be a typical time limit for all sorts of claims, so why would it not be considered that any claim beyond 2 years is unacceptable delay. It certainly seems a valid argument to me.

It seems very odd that the tenants asked Threshold for advice. The landlord was happy with them as tenants, the rent seemed very reasonable and the landlord was not asking them to leave, so what prompted the threshold engagement?
Click to expand...
Thank you for this. I may very well suggest this to the RTB in my argument. Much appreciated.
 
Clamball said:
Thus in the absence of a time limit for this surely a typical time limit of 2 years would be “typical”. 2 years seems to me to be a typical time limit for all sorts of claims, so why would it not be considered that any claim beyond 2 years is unacceptable delay.
Click to expand...
Two years (which seems like a random time frame, plucked from nowhere) from what point exactly?

Bear in mind that the OP has yet to (1) issue a valid notice of a rent review; or (2) lawfully increase the rent.
 
Clamball said:
IANAL but by defining certain time limits in the rental legislation it does indicate that a timely manner of objection and request for redress is recognised. Thus in the absence of a time limit for this surely a typical time limit of 2 years would be “typical”.
Click to expand...
IANAL but would assume the opposite.

The specific absence of a time limit in the presence of others in the legislation implies that the clear legislative intent was for it to be unlimited.
 
Ailinf said:
I suggested a rental increase. Hence the going to Threshold.
Click to expand...
OK. I got the impression from your first post that they were leaving anyway. It seems you may have inflamed the issue by suggesting a rent increase and I presume they're not gong anywhere now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top