A Co Kildare landlord must pay \u20ac6,000 in damages over his attempts to terminate a tenancy arising from concerns about his tenant\u2019s partner and alleged antisocial behaviour. <\/p>\n
A Residential Tenancies Board (RTB) tribunal heard evidence of alleged antisocial behaviour at the property in Ticknevin, Carbury, Co Kildare, and an incident giving rise to tenant Charlean Reilly\u2019s partner being arrested at the address. <\/p>\n
However, the tribunal found that landlord Nigel Brennan\u2019s apparent opposition to Reilly\u2019s partner\u2019s presence at the address \u201ccoloured\u201d his view of the tenant. <\/p>\n
The tribunal held that three notices of termination served on Reilly in March, April and May 2025 \u2013 issued on foot of the alleged antisocial behaviour \u2013 were without just cause, and affected her peaceful occupation of the dwelling. The tribunal noted that Reilly was not responsible for the alleged behaviour, and took steps \u2013 including obtaining a court order against her partner \u2013 to prevent antisocial behaviour.<\/p>\n
According to a recently published RTB determination, Reilly alleged Brennan \u201cconstantly\u201d harassed her by issuing unwarranted notices of termination and cutting off the water supply to the property. <\/p>\n
Brennan submitted to the tribunal that he had acted appropriately at all times and in good faith, and that his family was \u201cin fear\u201d of Reilly\u2019s partner following instances of the alleged antisocial behaviour. <\/p>\n
For a period, the landlord said he enjoyed a good relationship with Reilly. <\/p>\n
Brennan inherited the rented dwelling and the surrounding farmlands from an uncle. He told the tribunal he continued to farm the land around the property.<\/p>\n
He said that in early 2024, the tenant\u2019s partner moved in. The landlord said he was concerned about the tenant\u2019s partner. <\/p>\n
The landlord said there were instances of antisocial behaviour at the dwelling, alleging that on one occasion, Reilly\u2019s partner threatened to burn down the dwelling. He claimed the partner broke into the home on an occasion in June, and that \u201cblood and a knife were found inside the dwelling\u201d. <\/p>\n
In her evidence, Reilly said her partner had not lived at the dwelling, but accepted that he was a \u201cfrequent visitor\u201d who stayed at the house once or twice a week. Under cross-examination, she said the partner was subject to bail conditions that prevented him from living full time at the address. <\/p>\n
She said following Easter weekend \u2013 which fell on April 18th to 20th \u2013 water supply to the property was shut off. This followed an alleged threat to switch off the water by Brennan, Reilly claimed.<\/p>\n
The landlord said he became aware of a leak issue on the farmlands and dwelling on receiving a bill from Irish Water for \u20ac5,000. This necessitated repair works, the tribunal heard.<\/p>\n
Reilly said she was forced to go to her relatives\u2019 properties to bathe her children, and that she brought water from their homes to flush the toilets at her address. <\/p>\n
Cross-examined, Reilly agreed she had called garda\u00ed to the property following incidents of alleged antisocial behaviour. When put to her that this alarmed the landlord, Reilly replied that it was not her behaviour that had caused the alarm. <\/p>\n
In its findings, the tribunal preferred Reilly\u2019s evidence that her partner was a visitor to the dwelling, and \u201cdid not enjoy unrestricted access\u201d to the address.<\/p>\n
The tribunal noted that Reilly sought and obtained a court order restraining her partner\u2019s access to the property.<\/p>\n
This showed that she did not agree with or condone the partner\u2019s behaviour, the tribunal noted.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe tribunal notes that the landlord may not have liked or wanted the tenant\u2019s partner to be present at the dwelling; however, the tribunal finds that this approach coloured his view of the tenant,\u201d the determination noted. <\/p>\n
The tribunal accepted Reilly was not responsible for the incidents of antisocial behaviour alleged by Brennan. <\/p>\n
\u201cWhile the landlord may have had concerns, it was for the tenant to decide who could visit her at the dwelling and the landlord\u2019s efforts at discouraging the tenant\u2019s partner\u2019s attendance meant that he had interfered to an unwarranted degree with her exclusive and peaceful occupation of the dwelling,\u201d the tribunal held.<\/p>\n
Reilly eventually voluntarily vacated the property in August. However, the tribunal found her final months at the property were affected by the landlord\u2019s actions, noting the \u201cbelow standard\u201d water supply and the service of numerous notices of termination without any just cause. <\/p>\n
The tribunal ordered Brennan to pay \u20ac6,000 in damages to Reilly for the breach of an obligation to allow the \u201cpeaceful and exclusive occupations\u201d of the dwelling.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"A Co Kildare landlord must pay \u20ac6,000 in damages over his attempts to terminate a tenancy arising from…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":621428,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_share_on_mastodon":"0"},"categories":[73],"tags":[42287,6294,262490,79,2005,22958,262491,18,1729,262492,49754,170483,789,25844,25218,34357,19,2003,17,40228,4164,262493,78430,77947,27136,17475,262494,4984,44951,90694,262495,12443,262496,65639,262497],"class_list":["post-621427","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-business","tag-agreement","tag-apartment","tag-application-form","tag-business","tag-contract","tag-document","tag-domestic-room","tag-eire","tag-finance","tag-for-rent-sign","tag-form","tag-home-ownership","tag-horizontal","tag-house","tag-housing-development","tag-human-hand","tag-ie","tag-investment","tag-ireland","tag-landlord","tag-law","tag-lease-agreement","tag-legal-system","tag-mansion","tag-pen","tag-plan","tag-real-estate-office","tag-rent","tag-rental","tag-residential-building","tag-residential-district","tag-sign","tag-signature","tag-tenancy","tag-tenant"],"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/621427","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=621427"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/621427\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/621428"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=621427"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=621427"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=621427"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}