Landlord claims that Tenant must pay Household Charge as its a lease condition?
- Thread starter gerprem08
- Start date
- Status
The charge is levied against the owner of the property, and only in certain circumstances.
It could arguably be viewed as oppressive or arbitrary to subject a tenant to a charge over which he has no control. The very least that a landlord would have to do would be to set out in the lease that the property itself is subject to the household charge (rather than a vague catch-all term as given by way of example earlier in the thread), and then include a term that the tentant must indemnify against this specific charge.
In the absence of such clarity, it is unlikely that courts would allow a landlord to enforce the term, or eject a tenant for non-compliance, as the tenant has not specifically agreed to it, and cannot be expected to agree to things outside of his control.
It could arguably be viewed as oppressive or arbitrary to subject a tenant to a charge over which he has no control. The very least that a landlord would have to do would be to set out in the lease that the property itself is subject to the household charge (rather than a vague catch-all term as given by way of example earlier in the thread), and then include a term that the tentant must indemnify against this specific charge.
In the absence of such clarity, it is unlikely that courts would allow a landlord to enforce the term, or eject a tenant for non-compliance, as the tenant has not specifically agreed to it, and cannot be expected to agree to things outside of his control.
In other jurisdictions property taxes are paid by the owners and landlords. This is a tax on landlords. In the future it may become something else such as a water bill, in that circumstance the tenant's would have to pay.
In any case there is no need for landlords to do anything, next time they have a new tenant they add the NPPR, household charge etc into an increased rent (if they could get an increased rent, highly unlikely currently). But any landlord right now saying a tenant has to pay is incorrect, the liability is the landlords as are the penalties.
In this specific case the tenant apparently has a lease that specifically allows the landlord to bill him for the charge. Until the legality of that is tested in court we cannot know whether that clause is valid. No doubt at some stage it will come up with the PRTB which will mean further clarification.
In any case there is no need for landlords to do anything, next time they have a new tenant they add the NPPR, household charge etc into an increased rent (if they could get an increased rent, highly unlikely currently). But any landlord right now saying a tenant has to pay is incorrect, the liability is the landlords as are the penalties.
In this specific case the tenant apparently has a lease that specifically allows the landlord to bill him for the charge. Until the legality of that is tested in court we cannot know whether that clause is valid. No doubt at some stage it will come up with the PRTB which will mean further clarification.
When the 100Euro charge goes up to, let's say 1000, in a few years- will we still be asked to pay this much larger amount too?
Aren't we thinking that it's a tax on property- to prevent other booms- so passing the charge onto the guy renting it misses the target- you want to target the property owner. Not the poor unfortunate renting it.
Aren't we thinking that it's a tax on property- to prevent other booms- so passing the charge onto the guy renting it misses the target- you want to target the property owner. Not the poor unfortunate renting it.
- Status