Reporting suspected tenancies to the PRTB

I had problems with tenants in a rented property two doors up from me. I rang PTRB to see if there was anything they could do and they advised me that the property was not registered. I advised them that the property was rented and they were going to follow up.

When the landlord arrived to collect his rent a few weeks later, I told him I had been in touch with PTRB and that he needs to contact them to register as I had been looking to contact him through PTRB in respect of his rented property.

I dont know what happened between him and PTRB after that, as its his own business.

If his tenants were not bothering me, I would certainly not have rang PTRB just to report him. However, he is the one doing this as a business venture, therefore he needs to look after his responsibilities. The tenants were far away from him, he could not hear them, think he preferred it that way, but I certainly didnt.
 
Howitzer said:
By not registering their tenancy the landlord is breaking the law. Full Stop.
This is taken from the first page of the PRTB site. My highlight.

I said possibly abusing the tenants rights. If a tenancy is not registered with the PRTB their rights under Residential Tenancies Act 2004 are not protected.

I already stated in the thread that I completely disagreed with what the OP was suggesting.

I believe the last couple of posts aren't ranting and are relevant to the thread as there is a question of legality in terms of having to register with the PRTB which many people aren't aware of. Ensuring people are aware of a law and it's enforcement is not begrudgery.
Click to expand...
i said& still say :

jem said:
I would sugest that the two items are completly different.
You know that the person is robbing the old woman, you have no such definite knowledge with regard to the flat.How do you know the owner is not" taking their social responsibilities seriously" what ever that means- you dont, full stop, likewise how do you know the owner "is abusing their tenants rights"The owner could be the best landlord in teh world for all you know.
I would sugest that you and the op should mind your own business unless you have definit 100% proof that someone is breaking the law.
Click to expand...
you don't know whether the website is up to date or not, the property could be redg, likewise the property may be loaned out to friends and therefore no landlord tennant relationship exists bottom line you don't know and to be honest it doesnt effect you.
Howitzer said:
Ensuring people are aware of a law and it's enforcement is not begrudgery.
Click to expand...
Again this is neither your or the op's problem and I would sugest that you should mind ones own business.
 
Well actually it is the OPs problem. The OP is on the committee of the management company of his apartment block. It is common practice for management companies to send round circulars to all owners reminding them of their responsibilties, such as paying maintenance charges and ensuring noise is kept to a minimum at night. By sending these circulars they aren't insinuating that everyone is having all night raves and that nobody has paid their maintenance charges, they're merely reminding everyone of their social responsibilities.

As MandaC pointed out if a landlord is not registered with the PRTB it is much harder for neighbours to address any issues that may arise and it is perfectly within the rights of a management company to have this issue brought to the attention of it's members. Not to report them, but to remind them. They can if they want make it a rule within the complex, that is up to them as the management company.

As a member of the board of his management company it IS therefore the OPs responsibility to remind all apt owners within the complex of their obligations with regards to the PRTB and not doing so could be negligent on his behalf.
 
To be honest you are changing your tune slightly.
Again I would question what business is it of the op whetehr or not it is redg or not.
Howitzer said:
They can if they want make it a rule within the complex, that is up to them as the management company.
Click to expand...
Who inforces the "rule"?, what is the result of ignoring the rule?
 
jem said:
To be honest you are changing your tune slightly.
Again I would question what business is it of the op whetehr or not it is redg or not.
Click to expand...
Not really. I was originally responding to the post that stated that people should just mind their own business, and that anyone who stuck their nose in was a begrudger. Nonsense. And I then referred back to the OPs original scenario. It was suggested by Auto320 that the OP put it onto the agenda to make it a rule of the management company, the owners could agree or disagree at their discretion. And I agreed with that suggestion.

auto320 said:
If you are on the management company committee, could you not introduce a ruling that all rented apartments should be on the register, and that anyone defaulting on that would then be reported? Many of the defaulters, I would suspect, have simply forgotten to do so or are unaware of their responsibilities, and a simple jog of the memory like this will probably sort out most of the problem.
Click to expand...

jem said:
Who inforces the "rule"?, what is the result of ignoring the rule?
Click to expand...
I dunno. Who enforces the other non-legally binding rules of management companies? At the end of the day no one. You either agree to the rules and abide by them or you become involved in the management company yourself and change them.
 
Howitzer said:
Who enforces the other non-legally binding rules of management companies? At the end of the day no one. You either agree to the rules and abide by them or you become involved in the management company yourself and change them.
Click to expand...
or the third option just ignore the management comm altogether.
 
Howitzer said:
Who enforces the other non-legally binding rules of management companies?
Click to expand...

Management company rules will be outlined in the lease agreement (legally binding) signed by the purchaser of each apartment. Unless this mentions that all apartments that are rented out must be registered with the PRTB, I don't see who this falls within their (directors of the management company) remit.
 
CCOVICH said:
Management company rules will be outlined in the lease agreement (legally binding) signed by the purchaser of each apartment. Unless this mentions that all apartments that are rented out must be registered with the PRTB, I don't see who this falls within their (directors of the management company) remit.
Click to expand...
So you put it in the leasehold.

auto320 said:
If you are on the management company committee, could you not introduce a ruling that all rented apartments should be on the register, and that anyone defaulting on that would then be reported? Many of the defaulters, I would suspect, have simply forgotten to do so or are unaware of their responsibilities, and a simple jog of the memory like this will probably sort out most of the problem.
Click to expand...
This certainly isn't begrudgery. It's social responsibility.
 
But can you change the leasehold after it has been signed? I wouldn't have thought so (at least not unilaterally)-we discussing an existing development.

And I haven't accused anyone of begrudgery-I have asked that sentiments like that be left aside. I don't have any opinion on whether reporting someone is right or wrong-I am just curious as to whether the management company can enforce rules that aren't in existence when the lease agreement is signed.
 
There could be a generic sort of clause in the original covenants in the Lease to obey such rules and regulations as may be prescribed from time to time by the mgt company?
 
ClubMan said:
Registration with the PRTB is not a prerogative/choice - it is a legal obligation for most landlords. I'm not making a value judgement either way on the original issue but just wish to correct this mistaken assertion.
Click to expand...


When I say it is the landlords prerogative I mean that it's his property and if he wishes to make full disclosure that should be up to him, otherwise you are "Big brother" deciding for us. Where do you draw the line on being an informer?
 
goodtiming said:
When I say it is the landlords prerogative I mean that it's his property and if he wishes to make full disclosure that should be up to him, otherwise you are "Big brother" deciding for us. Where do you draw the line on being an informer?
Click to expand...
Well I personally have no problem with the reporting tax evasion where it is known to be happening or where there are good grounds for suspecting that this is the case. I would consider this direct action against one of the real, rather than imagined, rip-offs that is not uncommon in our society. When it comes to some publicans legitimately charging €7 for a pint and some people evading their tax liabilities and thus placing a heavier burden on compliant taxpayers then I know which one I consider the real rip-off.
 
Howitzer said:
I said possibly abusing the tenants rights. If a tenancy is not registered with the PRTB their rights under Residential Tenancies Act 2004 are not protected.
Click to expand...
For information only, this is (happily) not accurate. Tenants' rights are protected under the RTA 2004 irrespective of whether the landlord has properly registered the tenancy, and all tenants may bring disputes to the PRTB whether or not their landlords are registered.

It is, however, a legal obligation on all landlords to register tenancies, and those who do not do so will, in the event of a dispute with their tenants, not only as a minimum be forced to register at the higher "late fee", but if that landlord, after receipt of a notice from the PRTB still does not register then he or she may be guilty of an offence under the Act and may be subject to a fine of up to €3,000, or up to six months' imprisonment, or both. And daily fines of €250 for such period as the offence continues.

I do feel that enforcement should be the responsibility of the proper authorities, namely the PRTB and Revenue. In the case where one is in receipt of information within an official role, I don't think it appropriate to convey that information onward, purely because it is, effectively, privileged information. However, this is - obviously - a subjective opinion only, and I do not condone evasion by landlords of their legal responsibilities.

In the circumstances outlined by the OP, if I were absolutely determined to take on the role of the relevant authorities and ensure that everyone came into compliance, I would recommend the issuing of a notice providing four to six weeks' grace period to enable delinquent landlords to come into compliance prior to onward provision of any information to the PRTB.
 
Would a '2-pronged' approach be useful here? 1 - remind all apt owners of the PTRB & their obligations if they are renting, & 2 - remind all occupiers of the rental reliefts that are available e.g. Rent Relief or TRS etc?
 
Good suggestion. I seem to recall our management company reminding landlord housholders of their responsibilities in relation to PRTB registration and other "house rules" that apply under the estate's management company lease/covenant. I don't know if they also sent anything to tenants about their entitlement to rent relief though.
 
When does an "amatuer landlord" become a "professional landlord? Confused!
 
additional said:
When does an "amatuer landlord" become a "professional landlord? Confused!
Click to expand...
I use the term "amateur landlord" to refer to people like myself who've bought investment properties, particularly in recent years, as a medium to long term investment, probably have not more than one or two properties, who don't rely on the income except to defray costs, and who may rely on some level of capital appreciation to determine their perceptions of asset return.

There are, by contrast, quite a number of professional landlords, who have multiple properties, the profit rent from which they rely on as a major source of income, and many (though by no means all) of whom are fully au fait with their legal obligations and tax liability.

There's also sometimes a certain pejorative quality to referring to someone as an "amateur landlord" (though since I happily refer to myself as one, you may gather I don't necessarily share the prejudice); it comes from the fact that many such recent investors remain (blissfully / wilfully ?) unaware of their legal obligations, don't register with the PRTB, don't declare income, sometimes even resent enormously any necessary maintenance and repair costs, etcetera.

I'm being rather black and white about it, but that, at any rate, is what I tend to mean when making the distinction!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top