A couple who terminated a tenancy on the basis that a house was no longer suitable for a now-deceased tenant due to perceived “immobility” issues has been ordered to pay damages to his estate for an “appalling” termination.
Shane O’Neill told a Residential Tenancies Board (RTB) tribunal that his late father, Seamus O’Neill, was stressed and “developed delirium” after receiving a notice of termination in January 2024.
His father’s former landlords, Mary and Joe Farrell, had argued that the property was no longer suitable.
In the notice, they said the bed spaces and bathroom, located on the first floor of the house off Grand Canal Street in Dublin 2, were inaccessible to O’Neill due to his “immobility and ongoing health issues”.
READ MORE
Emer Smith, the landlords’ estate agent who appeared on their behalf, said the couple “thought it was best” O’Neill move into alternative accommodation “suitable to his needs”.
She claimed Joe Farrell had noticed O’Neill could “not go upstairs” and that he had a bed and a “commode” in the livingroom, adding he became “concerned for the welfare” of his former tenant and the condition of the property.
O’Neill’s son told the tribunal the reason for terminating the lease could set a “dangerous precedent” as it could allow landlords to make an “unqualified medical decision” to terminate a tenancy.
He provided a 2022 occupational therapist’s report that recommended downstairs living, after which a bed was provided for the ground floor, he said.
O’Neill argued that if the property was unsuitable, the report would have specified this.
He told the tribunal the termination, which gave until August 22nd to vacate the property, was “very stressful” for his late father, as he had lived there since 1992.
His father subsequently became unwell and entered hospital about two months after receiving the notice. He then entered long-term care in August 2024, where he died the following December.
While he was in the process of removing his father’s belongings on August 25th, he discovered the locks of the house had been changed by the landlords. He argued that his late father had been “illegally evicted”.
O’Neill had told the tribunal he believed the tenancy was terminated as his father had complained about his boiler.
The boiler broke in late 2023, he said, claiming Joe Farrell was “reluctant” to pay for a new one in full due to “cash flow problems”.
He claimed Farrell reached an agreement with his late father, in which he would pay €450 as a “short-term contribution” to be repaid.
However, O’Neill said the sum was never returned. He also sought the return of a security deposit amounting to €1,270.
However, the landlords claimed no such deposit was paid.
Deeming the notice of termination invalid, the tribunal said it was not permissible for a landlord to terminate a tenancy based on the “perceived” medical condition of a tenant.
It said the 32-year tenancy of an “elderly and vulnerable tenant was terminated for an ultimately flawed reason”.
Noting the locks had been changed while O’Neill was in the process of removing his late father’s belongings, the tribunal said the tenancy had been “unlawfully terminated” by the Farrells.
It found the nature of the termination of the tenancy to be “appalling” and ordered the couple to pay €500 in damages to the late O’Neill’s estate.
It also ordered them to repay the €450 the late tenant paid towards the new boiler, saying he should not have had to contribute to such costs.
It did not uphold the claim for the return of the security deposit, saying there was insufficient evidence it had been paid.
