Waterford council doesn't have to restore rent payment, court rules

A couple whose rent assistance was stopped because their private landlord failed to carry out important repairs have lost a High Court challenge aimed at restoring the payment.

Natanya Feeny and Kealan Duggan, who have two children and are on disability benefit, sued Waterford City and County Council over its decision to stop making housing assistance payments (HAP) for their rented home at Fenian Place, Dungarvan.

Under HAP, a total of €575 per month was paid to their US-based landlord, with the couple contributing €240 per month to it.

Ms Justice Niamh Hyland ruled the council was entitled to cease its contribution on the basis the landlord had not complied with approved standards for rented accommodation.

She also found the council was not under any duty to issue a notice prohibiting the landlord from re-letting the house until the improvement works were done.

The couple moved into the house in June 2017. A number of problems were identified including a leak from the attic which was coming through a ceiling light, no fire alarms and a bathroom window which needed repairing.

The council gave the landlord until October 12, 2017, to rectify the problems but nothing was done. Ms Feeney complained to the council more than a year later.

By that stage, the condition of the property had "substantially deteriorated", the judge said.

By then, the central heating boiler was broken with only a fireplace with a back boiler to heat the house. Electrics were in a dangerous condition, radiators were leaking and there were issues with the taps.

There was a leak in the bathroom ceiling, all the doors and windows needed some form of replacement and ventilation was required in a number of rooms.

Still nothing was done by the landlord and the council told the couple they were required to move out by the end of January 2019 when the council's HAP for that house would cease.

They did not move and in Spring 2019 they ceased paying the rent directly to the landlord but instead put their share into a bank account until the situation is regularised.

They continued living in the house.

The property remained in the same condition and the couple then brought proceedings against the council which opposed them.

'Indifference of the landlord'

Ms Justice Hyland said a striking feature of the case was the "apparent indifference of the landlord" both to the council remediation requests and to the cessation of rent payments.

The judge found while the council had the power to issue a prohibition notice preventing the re-letting of the property until works are done, it was unlikely in this case that it would have the "desired effect" of forcing work to be done given the landlord’s "history of indifference to the steps the council took".

The judge said the council accepted during the hearing it had no entitlement to require the couple to leave the house.

The council had good reason to stop the HAP because of the condition of the house. If it continued to do so, it might have to bear responsibility should a tenant be injured, she said.

She hoped the couple, who were in a vulnerable position and who need a safe dwelling to raise their young family, will be able to obtain a suitable property for which HAP can be paid.