Tenants leaving well before 56-day legal notice period. Can I keep their deposit?

Arnie Hammer said:
I want to know if (legally) I can keep their deposit.
Click to expand...
Yes.

You can legally retain monies from the security deposit to cover rent that should have been paid to you up to the end of the notice period that should have been given by your tenants.

Whether or not you should do so is a separate question.

Many landlords would simply return the security deposit in full in these circumstances and would focus their energy on re-letting the property as soon as possible, using a letting agent where appropriate.
 

I know the risks involved and my numbers add up. It's only about what's they're entitled to and what I am.

Sarenco said:
Many landlords would simply return the security deposit in full in these circumstances and would focus their energy on re-letting the property as soon as possible, using a letting agent where appropriate.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I've used an agent or letting in the past and will do again this time.
 
Personally, I would look to get the property re-let as soon as possible. If it ended up not being vacant, I’d let it go. But if the property ended up being vacant during the notice period, I’d enforce by withholding the deposit. The landlord/tenant relationship is already tilted too far in favour of the tenant without landlords lying down like patsies when they’re entitled to claim something.
 
Arnie Hammer said:
Indeed, almost certain that property will be vacant for some of the notice period.
Click to expand...

The relevant protections work both ways. The OP is being left completely in the lurch by the tenants. Landlords aren’t operating charities. Tenants can’t just leg it and give two weeks’ notice. The OP should not feel guilty about enforcing the rules here.
 
Gordon Gekko said:
The relevant protections work both way
Click to expand...

No it doesn't, not in the real world.
Real world experience comes with knowing when to enforce your rights, and when, to pull in your horns. If protection did work both ways, it would be an even playing field for both parties. Its not, and I think you know that.

I've been lucky over here with tenants, and it is down to pure luck. The longer I stay in this game though, the greater the chance, of hooking up with the nightmare tenants. They are out there, and they're not afraid of the Rtb.

This has happened to me before, leaving earlier than the agreed contract after a number of great years with them, Ive wished them well and dropped them up a bottle of wine.
 

I’ve never read anything as naive or patronising in my life.

I’m delighted to hear about your beautiful relationship with your tenants where bottles of wine are routinely exchanged.

I have always had a good relationship with my tenants; a good, friendly relationship, but it is a business, where rules are rules, and they operate each way.

If you read the OP, the tenants have bailed and gone somewhere else giving the OP 15 days’ notice. They are refusing to pay October’s rent and demanding their deposit back. I’m all for being more flexible in marginal cases (e.g. “it’s 56 days but can we leave after 30 days?”). But this is an affront.

I would not suggest having a row with them or turning nasty; I’d simply apply the rules as they apply on the basis that I have been seriously discommoded by the tenants’ behaviour. It’s not a charity, it’s a business.

And the rules DO exist to protect everyone. Otherwise we’re living in a parallel universe where landlords have to give massive notice whereas for tenants it’s a free-for-all.
 
Gordon Gekko said:
Otherwise we’re living in a parallel universe where landlords have to give massive notice whereas for tenants it’s a free-for-all.
Click to expand...


And finally, the penny has dropped. It is exactly how it is. Wake up to reality.
Hence, pick your battles.
 
Gordon Gekko said:
I would not suggest having a row with them or turning nasty; I’d simply apply the rules as they apply on the basis that I have been seriously discommoded by the tenants’ behaviour. It’s not a charity, it’s a business.
Click to expand...

Thanks. Several posters have made it clear that it is my legal right to retain the deposit in lieu of unpaid rent for the remainder of the notice period.

I plan to retain two weeks and if I get the place let sooner I will refund the difference.

I don't see what grounds the tenants would have to go to the RTB.
 

That sounds very reasonable
 
LS400 said:
And finally, the penny has dropped. It is exactly how it is. Wake up to reality.
Hence, pick your battles.
Click to expand...

I have no idea what point you’re making.

A tenant has to give notice. They then give a small fraction of that notice, leaving the landlord high and dry.

And your grand plan is to lie down and just give them their money back, even when the law entitles the landlord to keep it.

Bizarre.
 
Arnie Hammer said:
I don't see what grounds the tenants would have to go to the RTB.
Click to expand...
They may not have good grounds for complaint but that doesn't mean they won't complain to the RTB.

Would you have the time to respond to any such complaint and attend an RTB hearing?

Strictly speaking you can only withhold monies for unpaid rent (including unpaid rent that arose during the notice period your tenants should have given you). As such, you should wait for the relevant time to elapse before notifying your tenants that you are withholding their deposit for unpaid rent.
 
Sarenco said:
Would you have the time to respond to any such complaint and attend an RTB hearing?
Click to expand...

It's a four-figure sum so, yes, probably worth a day of my time if it comes to it.


This is useful advice. Thank you.
 
Flipping this around, why would the tenants waste their time writing to the RTB and attending a hearing for a case they’re destined to lose?

It would seem to me that landlords being loose and naively benign around these issues probably encourages bad tenant behaviour.
 
Gordon Gekko said:
Flipping this around, why would the tenants waste their time writing to the RTB and attending a hearing for a case they’re destined to lose?
Click to expand...
They're only destined to lose if the (busy) OP actually responds to any complaint they may make.

Bear in mind that it's essentially free to make a complaint to the RTB and there's no question of the tenants having to cover the OP's time costs of dealing with the complaint.
 


Agree completely. Hence my previous post. If Landlords continue to roll over we are normalizing this type of tenant behaviour.
 
Sarenco said:
Bear in mind that it's essentially free to make a complaint to the RTB and there's no question of the tenants having to cover the OP's time costs of dealing with the complaint.
Click to expand...

Dealing with the RTB is a hassle for both sides. Who knows what they will do in this case.


It's a bit unclear about the sequence of events you suggest here:
1) They stop paying rent
2) They give me the keys
3) Next day I issue them with a 14-day notice for non-payment of rent
4) After 14 days I tell them I am withholding part of deposit for non-payment of rent


I am just a bit sure about point 3 here. Wouldn't a demand for rent imply that a tenancy is still in place? Once the keys are back I don't want them claiming that they still have any right to access the place. I've looked at RTB.ie and there isn't much guidance here.
 
It's interesting to read what different AAM posters would do in the OP's situation.

What could have been done is that the quid pro quo could have been that the tenants in-situ would cooperate fully with the OP in re-letting the accommodation. The property would be marketed immediately on Sep 15 with viewings to be accommodated flexibly by the current tenants.

The issue here is that the OP is an amateur landlord, does not have an agent, had their hands full with a nipper, and time has been wasted between Sep 14 and now contemplating the situation and the rules. The response on Sep 15 should have been to crack on with marketing and re-letting stat.

One way or the other there was going to be a vacant period and the landlord out-of-pocket. The tenants could have stayed up until Nov 11 (or whenever the statutory date was to be) and enforced their rights to peaceful and exclusive occupation of the dwelling with very minimal allowance of the landlord to set up viewings. Unless the landlord had someone to let the property sight unseen, there was going to be a gap.

The rules weren't necessarily the the first thing to resort to here - getting the property re-let was.
 
This is incorrect. You may hold the deposit for unpaid utilities, damage to the property, missing items, rubbish removal, cleaning, etc.

I posted a link to the RTB website earlier that lists all the allowed deductions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register