Tenant gives notice but after date specified doesn't move out

There's a few landlords in Dublin who would have this person removed by their own security people in doubly quick time if they were left in this situation by a tenant. The tenant could then take a case if they so wished.
 
noproblem, He was mentioning going down that road alright, but hopefully ive convinced him that that is a road to ruin.
He has now decided he is not going to rent it out anymore after he gets this tenant out. Advice I actually gave him and anyone else who would listen over a year ago, but he knew better.
 


I don't see it as a road to ruin but that's just my opinion. The tenant would then have to take the legal route and all the costs involved with no guarantee of success, the so called landlord would have the property back and could do whatever he wanted with it.
 
That would not be a good route to follow. It would be a quick and easy claim to the RTB for the evicted tenant, with a potentially 5 figure payout, along with potential criminal proceedings to follow
 
Hmm, hasn't happened yet and I doubt very much that it will. Respect in this country is too easily given, its got to be earned. Then again, only my opinion.
 
Your "opinion" seems to be that the landlord in this case should take the law into his own hands because the tenant is not showing him enough "respect". Yes?

I really hope that's a minority "opinion".
 
Ireland really is anti-private landlord. The tenants in this instance are scum; they have reneged on their notice (which can happen) but they’re now effectively blackmailing the landlord by looking for the €5,000. The landlord would be foolish to bring in the heavies but personally I’d have no moral objection to him doing so in such circumstances. It is the tenant who has brought the matter into the gutter with his/her vile demand for payment.
 
I don't have any view on the morality of acting as suggested - it's the potential legal liabilities, both civil and criminal, that I would be concerned about.
 
noproblem said:
There's a few landlords in Dublin who would have this person removed by their own security people in doubly quick time if they were left in this situation by a tenant. The tenant could then take a case if they so wished.
Click to expand...

If the security people forced entry and physically removed the tenant and their belongings, then the landlord could well end up in prison.

However the landlord is under no obligation to service a property that is supposed to be vacant. (This may not be the case here, as it seems the tenant may have the right to withdraw their notice).

There is no obligation to provide electricity services, or water to a property where the tenant is overholding. there is no obligation for a landlord to keep beds, cookers, etc in a property where the tenant is over holding.

A landlord would need to be careful here as a forced eviction is illegal, as is forced entry, however removing a cooker per se is not. The law is largely untested, though I am aware of a case where a landlord removed beds and cookers, and the RTB did not rule against him.
 
cremeegg said:
There is no obligation to provide electricity services, or water to a property where the tenant is overholding
Click to expand...
The RTB wouldn't agree -

"An unlawful termination of tenancy, also known as an illegal eviction, may occur where a landlord, through force, intimidation or otherwise (such as cutting off utilities, changing the locks etc) denies a tenant from accessing a rented dwelling or removes the tenant’s belongings from the dwelling."

Also, a landlord has no right to enter a property with a tenant in situ to remove beds, cookers, etc.

Again, the tenant is only overholding if the tenancy has been lawfully terminated by the landlord and there is a very prescriptive process to follow in this regard.
 
There is no issue here, the tenants hoped to move and weren't able to do so. So nothing changes. It's impossible to evict them and landlord would be wasting his time trying. As long as they pay their rent and are not damaging the place than there is nothing the landlord can do. Being late with rent I would doubt is a ground for eviction.

The landlord as regards the potential new tenants has done zero wrong. So he should not be concerned about it.
 
Maybe offer to let them stay on a new lease with a revised rent as they over held
 

No issue here? I'd consider it a pretty major issue when tenants refuse to move out after giving notice, and then demand 5K to move.
 
Unbelievable the mentality of this poster. I still suggest the OP to take matter to RTB and make the tenant suffer as much as legally possible .
 
Bronte said:
As long as they pay their rent..
Click to expand...
You really should have read the full thread Bronte...
Rent arrears is very definitely a ground for terminating a tenancy.
 
Would that be considered blackmail ? If it is, does the landlord need a solicitor to write to the tenant?
What are the consequences if found guilty of blackmail
 
Just to update. This is now dragging through the RTB.
He wa told to expect it to take between 1 and 2 years to get them finally out now as they have dug in for the long haul while not paying rent.
He cant even skip the RTB and go straight to court. And he will never get the rent owed back anyway.

I told him he should tell them that their name will be on record and theyll never get somewhere else again if a potential landlord looks them up at the RTB. And he told me that thats not true. That the tenant can have their name removed from the record so that any landlord in future can never know what they have done before. I cant believe that would be allowed.

And now the latest is that my brothers tenant is moving out and ive told him this story. He definitely doesnt want to get into renting long term again after hearing this and other stories, but doesnt want to sell either as he is still a bit in negative equity.
 
If the demand for money to move out is shown to the RTB does that impact the tenant negatively in any way?
 

In this case wasn't the tenancy was terminated by the tenant? I don't believe the OP said the Notice of Termination was withdrawn at any stage. Does the fact that they don't move out automatically withdraw the Notice?
 
Páid said:
In this case wasn't the tenancy was terminated by the tenant?
Click to expand...
I really don't know.

Perhaps @PaxmanK would be kind enough to let us know whether the landlord in question is seeking to enforce a notice to terminate the tenancy on the grounds of non-payment of rent or whether he is seeking to enforce a notice issued by his tenant. Also, I would be interested to know who has told the landlord to expect this process to take up to two years.

It's all very unclear...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register