Ms Caitríona Walsh:

My days in the District Court are very busy and varied. Much general litigation experience is required, in addition to a high level of understanding of legislation and its interpretation. It is a matter of presenting cases to the District Court judges and trying to do the very best for my clients. That is what I have been doing since 2000. I am one of the main people in the District Court because I am there quite a lot, given the nature of the work I do.

Although the Private Residential Tenancies Board might seem like a world apart, it runs in train with the work I do. The board is a statutory body that was set up in 2004 and has a number of functions. It registers tenancies and tries to regulate them between landlords and tenants. It also has a dispute resolution service which is very broadly based on the court system. It provides advice for the Government on questions of policy or questions the Government might have on the private rental sector.

I am chairperson designate and awaiting formal approval. My role in regard to the Private Residential Tenancies Board is to try to gather as much information as possible and examine the challenges it faces. I agree with the Vice Chairman that the challenges are numerous and increasing every day.

Let me outline the key points of importance in regard to the Private Residential Tenancies Board. First, the dispute resolution service is broadly based on the court system. When there is a dispute between a landlord and a tenant, it proceeds to an adjudicator or, I hope, mediation, with which everyone, even those in the court process, agrees. Mediation is the most important process. An adjudicator comes next. The adjudicator makes a decision which is appealable to a tribunal of three who make the ultimate decision. After that, it is a little like an appeal from the District Court to the Circuit Court. One is appealing on a point of law to the High Court.

The dispute resolution service is important. It is important in that it affords time to people. My experience in the District Court is that while people might complain about the decision made, it is important that they are heard and that time is allowed to hear them. They should have the opportunity to say exactly what they want to say to put all their points across. They ought to believe they are being heard and that a decision will ultimately be made. Unfortunately, this means it takes quite a bit of time to get through cases in the dispute resolution service if one is going to try to provide people with that opportunity.

Resources are a particular issue for the Private Residential Tenancies Board, particularly in these challenging times. It has been self-financing for the past year or two. This is to be welcomed, but it obviously brings its own challenges. It is a public body and its staff numbers are decreasing every year. My understanding from reading the literature is that the number of staff dropped from a high of 70, possibly in 2010, to 54. I understand that under the programme for Government and the Croke Park agreement, the staff number will have to be reduced to 33. This is certainly reflected across private industry. I found the Private Residential Tenancies Board's reaction to be positive. It wishes to comply with Government policy and has made a serious investment in information technology in recent years. The tenancy-management registration system went online in the middle of last year. One hopes to see the long-term effects of the information technology being rolled out in the next few years. One hopes serious investment will in some way redress the balance following the loss of administration staff. Nowadays, everyone seems to have an online presence, be it through the purchasing of insurance or otherwise. It is hoped landlords will register online and that the bulk of the dispute resolution service can be offered online. It is hoped this will reduce waiting times.

There have been significant delays associated with the dispute resolution service and there seem to be delays at present. From what I can gather, there are delays in the region of ten or 11 months. In the case of an appeal, one is talking about three months. I understand there is a facility in place to deal with urgent cases much more quickly. However, the information suggests this means a figure of approximately five months, which is reflected across the board. I was in the District Court in February looking for a hearing date for a contested criminal case and given a date in October. All of the sectors that deal with this work are stretched.

I hope there is something I can bring from my experience in the District Court and the way in which I see cases being managed in the District Court system to do something to alleviate this problem or reduce the delays somewhat. It will be a bit of an ask, but it is necessary because, ultimately, the Private Residential Tenancies Board is all about providing a service. The whole point of establishing the board in 2004 was to provide a more speedy, effective and cheap service than was available on the market at the time.

These are the challenges I will be facing. Mine is a very challenging role. As the Vice Chairman said, the subject is very topical. People seem to be renting more and buying less, which puts stress on the service. Another is the Bill going through, the Residential Tenancies (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill 2012, which will bring the bulk of the voluntary housing bodies within the remit of the Private Residential Tenancies Board. However, some of them are excluded.

There is a suggestion in the literature that I have seen that this will mean another 20,000 tenancies coming under the remit of the Private Residential Tenancies Board. That obviously will present challenges. I hope the full roll-out of the information technology that is being introduced will be a short-term expense for a long-term gain. My experience in the District Court in which I have had to deal with all the different things that can be thrown up will, I hope be helpful in my role as chairperson designate of the Private Residential Tenancies Board. Obviously my appointment is subject to formal approval. I think there seems to be a good system and it is a question of trying to get the very best from the existing resources. The management team led by Ms Anne Marie Caulfield seems to be progressive. I look forward to working with them. I am glad to see that problems arising from IT difficulties have been addressed and I hope we will see the benefits of the implementation of the new technology. In the private sector, investment in technology is a means to stretch out staff resources.

I am interested in the challenging role of chairperson of the Private Residential Tenancies Board, subject to formal approval. I hope to bring my skills set to the role.