RTB finds Carlow tenant overheld at property for almost two years
Stock image
A TENANT who stayed living in a property for almost two years after being served an eviction notice was found to have overheld at a recent Residential Tenancies Boardn (RTB) tribunal hearing.
Joe Hennessy began living at 139 Heather Hill Court, Sleaty Road, Carlow in November 2010 and paid €690 a month in rent.
A notice of termination was served on Mr Hennessy on 10 May 2024 with a termination date of 5 January 2025 on the grounds that the landlord, Tim Ewington, whose assets were being managed by receiver Tom O’Brien, wanted to sell the property.
The tenant argued at the RTB hearing on 13 April 2026 that the notice of termination was invalid because he had received a letter from the letting agent, Keenan Property Management, on 2 April 2026, which indicated so. The letter said Mr O’Brien was going to sell the property by way of auction with the tenant in situ and the agent wanted to gain access to the property to take photographs of it.
Mr Hennessy said he had understood his tenancy agreement with the original landlord to be an “open contract” and that he could stay as long as he wanted. The house had been put on the market four or five years ago and that a sale had been agreed but subsequently fell through. When he received the notice of termination in May 2024, he said he was assured by the letting agent that they “wouldn’t put him out of the house”.
Vikas Kapoor, a representative of Keenan Property Management, gave evidence at the tribunal that the landlord was planning to sell the property as soon as possible. He acknowledged that the letter referred to selling the property with the tenant in situ but said this was not intended to rescind the notice of termination.
Mr Kapoor said the letter was sent primarily to secure the co-operation of tenants in the sale process and any decision on whether to enforce the eviction would be a matter for the purchaser.
The RTB tribunal found that the letter sent in April 2026 did not ‘unequivocally’ rescind the eviction notice and that the original notice was legally sound. It determined that Mr Hennessy should vacate the property within 56 days of the order.
