Residential Tenancies Board<\/a> (RTB) tribunal that allegations made by Derek Tunney, including that he \u201cdeliberately\u201d caused an ingress of water to the property following the storm, were \u201cludicrous\u201d.<\/p>\nTunney had been renting a flat in the garden of Graham\u2019s family home in Santry, Dublin, from 2018 until he vacated last May after receiving two separate notices of termination.<\/p>\n
The tenant disputed the validity of the notices and claimed Graham had breached his obligations in relation to maintenance issues and peaceful occupation, for which he sought damages.<\/p>\n
Tunney told the tribunal that shortly after Storm \u00c9owyn in January 2025, he heard what sounded like a \u201cbrick being removed\u201d, which he then realised was a slate from the roof.<\/p>\n
He described water subsequently pouring through a hole in the roof for hours and \u201csplashing\u201d on the ground, saying there was little to no rain falling at the time.<\/p>\n
The tenant claimed Graham had \u201cdeliberately caused an ingress of water\u201d and believed it was \u201cessentially being piped in\u201d through a garden hose, according to a tribunal report published this week.<\/p>\n
Describing the allegation as \u201cludicrous\u201d, Graham said: \u201cNo person in their right mind would go and cause damage to their own property.\u201d<\/p>\n
The tribunal heard their relationship had \u201cbroken down\u201d previously, and that Tunney had requested all communication be in writing for \u201clegal reasons\u201d.<\/p>\n
Graham told the tribunal he received a letter from Tunney about a month after Storm \u00c9owyn, informing him of the roof damage. He said he then asked if someone could assess the damage from inside.<\/p>\n
The landlord claimed Tunney asked for a Garda-vetted builder and wanted to see their qualifications. He further claimed Tunney wanted to take videos and photos \u201cwhile they were there\u201d.<\/p>\n
Describing the demands as \u201cridiculous\u201d, Graham said the builder \u201cflatly refused\u201d and repaired the roof \u201cas best he could\u201d from the outside.<\/p>\n
Tunney separately claimed his former landlord interfered with his peaceful occupation of the home, which included \u201calmost daily\u201d bouncing of a ball on the wall and the roof by Graham\u2019s son, which he felt was \u201cintentional\u201d.<\/p>\n
He also described \u201cprolonged use of a lawnmower which went on for hours\u201d, which he believed was done to annoy him.<\/p>\n
This was alongside the landlord\u2019s house and car alarm sometimes going off \u201cwithout explanation\u201d, believing this too was done deliberately to irritate him.<\/p>\n
The tribunal did not uphold Tunney\u2019s claim that Graham breached his obligations as a landlord.<\/p>\n
It did not accept his allegation that Graham deliberately pumped water into the flat and sided with the landlord that it \u201cjust would not make sense\u201d.<\/p>\n
In relation to other maintenance issues raised by the tenant, the tribunal was satisfied Graham made \u201cgenuine efforts\u201d to carry out repairs.<\/p>\n
It said Tunney did not afford the landlord \u201creasonable parameters\u201d to carry out necessary work, noting that on one occasion, he gave him permission to enter to address some issues, though he said he would be \u201crecording\u201d and the landlord was not allowed to bring any mobile devices inside.<\/p>\n
The tribunal said it was not satisfied that issues outlined by Tunney, including those related to the alarms and lawn-mowing, \u201cwere deliberate, persistent or conscious actions\u201d.<\/p>\n
It separately deemed both notices of termination, one for rent arrears and one on the basis that the property was required for Graham\u2019s daughter, valid.<\/p>\n
The tribunal ordered Tunney to pay \u20ac220 in rent arrears, after Graham retained the \u20ac990 deposit to offset the remainder.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"A landlord who claimed his tenant made \u201cridiculous\u201d demands, including that a builder be vetted by the Garda…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":57404,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_share_on_mastodon":"0"},"categories":[73],"tags":[79,18,19,17,41275,960],"class_list":["post-321918","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-business","tag-business","tag-eire","tag-ie","tag-ireland","tag-residential-tenancies-board-prtb","tag-storm-eowyn"],"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@ie\/116018994428937936","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/321918","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=321918"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/321918\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/57404"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=321918"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=321918"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=321918"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}