A “hands-on” Dublin landlord who entered a tenant’s apartment to remove fluff from their dryer and defrost their freezer has been ordered to pay damages for breaching her tenant’s right to peaceful occupation.
Tenant Oisin Tozer told a Residential Tenancies Board tribunal that landlord Rita Kelly would enter the house in Phibsborough, Dublin 7, to carry out jobs including defrosting the freezer and removing fluff from the dryer’s filter while no one was home.
Mr Tozer argued that repeated visits affected his quiet enjoyment of the house, claiming that Ms Kelly once called to defrost the freezer “without any notice whatsoever”.
Ms Kelly claimed all other tenants in the house were “happy” that she defrosted the freezer, but she has since apologised to them, she said.
‘It is so expensive in Dublin we decided to rent’: Swedish embassy returns to capital
Tenants who were ‘full of hatred’ followed and video-recorded neighbours, tribunal hears
‘I was 34 and all my friends were having kids... I was like: what am I waiting for?’
Consumers could face €1,000 increase in bills across energy, broadband and other areas from this week
On the day she removed fluff from the dryer while no one was home, Ms Kelly claimed she knocked on the door before entering to “do the job and then went off home”.
Generally, she claimed, she would send a text, and she would never enter the house without notice or knocking beforehand.
She accepted she did not always wait for a response when she was making visits to the house, though she said she “did her best at all times”, according to a tribunal report published on Wednesday.
Ms Kelly, the owner and manager of the property, told the tribunal she is “very active and always around” when works are required, such as bathroom renovations, which also formed part of the dispute.
Ms Kelly accepted she was “certainly there most evenings” while work was ongoing as she is a “hands-on landlord”.
The tribunal heard the renovations of the bathroom, which Mr Tozer’s bedroom was located closest to, were initially due to last for one week but went on for about six weeks.
It heard that, at one stage, Mr Tozer requested €300 in compensation from Ms Kelly for the interference.
He told Ms Kelly he “may have to go to the RTB” if the compensation was not paid. He claimed she was “nervous” about him raising a dispute.
Days later, Mr Tozer received a notice of termination, which was the last day that his tenancy could be terminated before he would be entitled to the benefit of a long-term tenancy as it was within six months.
Mr Tozer argued he was “victimised” and received the notice of termination for signalling an RTB dispute.
Ms Kelly claimed she was exercising her right to terminate the tenancy within the first six months without any reason, and did not want it to become a long-term tenancy, though she confirmed she did not do this generally with other tenants.
The tribunal heard none of the other tenants received a notice of termination.
Ordering Ms Kelly to pay €450 in damages, the tribunal said Ms Kelly’s entering the house without proper or adequate notice to defrost the freezer or remove fluff, “even with the best of intentions”, is a breach of peaceful and exclusive occupation.
It also said it was “entirely understandable” that Mr Tozer was disturbed by the bathroom renovations.
It further found that Ms Kelly penalised Mr Tozer, saying there was a “clear connection” between the conversation concerning a possible referral of a dispute to the RTB and the service of the notice of termination three days later.
It said the mention of potentially lodging an RTB dispute acted as a “trigger” for the subsequent notice of termination. The tribunal ordered Ms Kelly to pay a further €1,550 in damages.
