A small business owner is given notice to quit the yard inside which the business (motor repairs) operates. They thus need to find new premises in the same area as they are presently operating in so as to maintain custom and revenue.
The only available offer is one of an uncovered yard in a laneway behind an existing large business. The cost of roofing that yard is estimated at ~ €15,000 by the yard owner's builder. The yard owner says this cost is not recoverable from rent payable under the terms of the lease offered.
To me this seems totally unfair, since the new roof is a major enhancement to the owner's yard and the leasability of it in the event of the business going elsewhere. Yet the tenant is stuck with the entire cost of this enhancement without any reduction of the rent.
In my own (admittedly limited) experience, for longish leases of new units such things as basic partitioning, provision of toilets/showers/lunch-rooms, etc is normally undertaken by the owner of the unit to be leased. Only more de luxe fittings, e.g. panelling of offices, would be paid in whole by the tenant.
My question is - is there any law upholding a tenant's right to rebate of rent in lieu of substantial fixture enhancements to the premises made by them ?
The only available offer is one of an uncovered yard in a laneway behind an existing large business. The cost of roofing that yard is estimated at ~ €15,000 by the yard owner's builder. The yard owner says this cost is not recoverable from rent payable under the terms of the lease offered.
To me this seems totally unfair, since the new roof is a major enhancement to the owner's yard and the leasability of it in the event of the business going elsewhere. Yet the tenant is stuck with the entire cost of this enhancement without any reduction of the rent.
In my own (admittedly limited) experience, for longish leases of new units such things as basic partitioning, provision of toilets/showers/lunch-rooms, etc is normally undertaken by the owner of the unit to be leased. Only more de luxe fittings, e.g. panelling of offices, would be paid in whole by the tenant.
My question is - is there any law upholding a tenant's right to rebate of rent in lieu of substantial fixture enhancements to the premises made by them ?