Mr. Diarmaid O'Sullivan:

Deputy Ó Broin asked about the tenancies at risk. The majority of tenants who come to Threshold whose tenancies are at risk would be in situations where a receiver has been appointed or a lending institution is seeking repossession of their property. There is little if any guidance as to how this process happens. Due to a loophole in the Residential Tenancies Act, they are not considered to be landlords for the purposes of the Act. This means a landlord's statutory obligations do not apply to either a receiver or a lending institution. This needs to be changed.

Threshold is advocating that the definition of “landlord” under the Residential Tenancies Act 2004 be widened to include a receiver or a lending institution. This would provide some greater security to tenants, particularly to those whose properties have gone into receivership. The receiver or a lending institution would then take on the responsibilities of the landlord.

The deletion of section 42 of the 2004 Act, under head 26, is a welcome development. However, it still does not go far enough in providing for indefinite tenancies for tenants in the private rental sector. The continued existence of Part 4 tenancies means that tenancies at the end of a four-year cycle can be brought to an end. We believe this needs to be removed to ensure indefinite tenancies become the norm, as is the case in mainland Europe. This is a measure also supported by the National Economic and Social Council in a 2015 report. There certainly need to be changes in that area.

On those on year-to-year tenancies, the protection of the Residential Tenancies Act and Part 4 tenancies will actually kick in regardless of whether an individual is signing a succession of one-year leases. It will still have the statutory protections. However, as I have said, they do not go far enough and these tenancies can still become at-risk at the end of a Part 4 cycle.

Perhaps we will not focus on Senator Murnane O'Connor's point about landlords refusing HAP, the housing assistance payment. Recently, however, changes to the Equal Status Act mean that refusal by a landlord to accept a HAP or rent supplement tenant is actually in breach of the legislation. In theory, there is protection under the Equal Status Act. Proving that a landlord is refusing is certainly an issue, however.

On notice periods, particularly when a property is being sold, under the Residential Tenancies Act the amount of notice a tenant is entitled to goes from 28 days to 224 days, depending on the length of the tenancy. In a situation where a landlord tells a tenant that she or he is selling the property and needs them out in two months or two weeks, this would not be valid under the Act. It underlines the real need for a strategic approach to housing advice and advocacy services. There is certainly a need for an awareness campaign to ensure tenants are aware of their rights under the law, as well as making public representatives and statutory and voluntary agencies aware they can refer tenants who face these types of problem to a relevant agency such as Threshold to provide them with advice they need to ensure their rights are upheld under the law.