Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Sinead  Maher

Michael O'Donohoe

Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

Representatives

 In person

 In person

Act

Complaint/Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 21 Equal Status Act, 2000

CA-00059515-001

20/10/2023

The complainant was a tenant. The respondent  is the home owner.

This complaint was received by the Workplace Relations Commission on 20th October 2023.

The following is a personal account of the dealings of the Complainant with the Respondent.

In August 2020, the complainant moved into the rental house in County Wexford. The Complainant was in receipt of HAP.  In February 2021, she received a visit from a man who informed her that the house had been repossessed by the banks, and a property agency would take over the management off the property, until it would be sold.   He had the relevant paperwork to prove this.  From that month onwards the Complainant was left in limbo wondering when and if the house would be sold, if she could stay renting the property etc.  The house went up for sale a few times etc but never sold etc. The Complainant discovered the house had been sold online with tenants in situ in Feb 2023 as she was tracking it online.  The Complainant thought she would hear from the new owner very shortly after the sale date.  However, this did not happen and thus began another waiting game.

At the end of May 2023, the property agency who managed the house emailed the Complainant informing her they were no longer dealing with the property.  Then the HAP department emailed her wanting to know who the landlord was. The Complainant replied stating she had no idea. The Complainant knew nothing until the 8th May when Michael O Donohue the new owner visited her unannounced and told her he was the new owner. The Complainant was very concerned at this stage, but he informed her she could stay in the house, and he would accept HAP also.  The Complainant was so relieved to finally know what was happening after two years. The Complainant knew it was a real possibility that she could have had to move out but it was the uncertainty of it all that caused her son and herself great stress.

After being told this the Complainant could now plan to settle properly in the house knowing she was secure in this accommodation.  However, as time went on she heard no word from the new owner about a contract, payment of rent, acceptance of HAP.  The council also heard nothing and asked the Complainant to contact him on their behalf which she did and he text saying he would.  As time went on the Complainant grew very concerned again.  On the 5th June the owner’s partner Jessica paid a visit telling the Complainant they were moving in shortly and that had been their plan all along as they were building a house close by and wanted to live in the house until it was completed. This came as a shock to the Complainant as she could not understand why the Respondent would lie to her about it. All along she had herself mentally prepared for such a situation but after so much time had passed, she was so happy she had security for herself and her son.

The Respondent’s partner told the complainant that they were moving into the house in September and the Complainant said she needed time to process the situation and look into all options but to stay in contact and we would sort everything out.

The complainant tried to explain her situation and her rights to them, but they would not listen and did not share her concerns.  The complainant then got in contact with Focus Ireland for professional advice and Robert Hayes, a Project Worker, began working with her to help resolve the situation as amicably as possible.

Both the new owner and his partner hand delivered the first notice of termination to the Complainant on July 14th. They made it very clear that they intended to move in during October despite the Complainant telling them she was entitled to six months’ notice.  The Complainant found the conversation very uncomfortable. 

Following phone calls and text messages back and forth the respondent again refused to accept HAP and stated the rent was €946 every month, and that they would not return her deposit.  The Complainant got very worried at this stage as she could not afford that amount on my wage as a single parent and told them this.  Also, if they did not return her deposit, she would have no deposit to rent another house.  The complainant genuinely thought she could end up homeless like so many people are today.

Things took another turn for the worse when the complainant received a letter of arrears in the post. The Complainant had paid her rent continuously in any house she had rented.  The amount they were looking for was incorrect and she had paid her rent up to the beginning of May of that year. The Complainant felt threatened at this stage and bullied into a situation that was not her doing.  They knew she couldn’t afford the rent without the help of HAP.  They refused HAP and then threatened her with a rent arrears letter stating she would be evicted if full payment was not paid within the month.  They followed through with this threat when she received a letter of eviction for non-payment of rent arrears, eviction date the 9th October.

To say the least the complainant was extremely stressed and anxious over the situation.  Her mental health suffered, and she didn’t sleep properly for months which had knock-on effect on her work as she couldn’t give a hundred percent as she was tired stressed and irritable.  The complainant’s manager was very supportive however there was nothing anyone could do about the situation.  She explained that she had no idea when the situation would be sorted and that there was a possibility, she would have to hand in her notice depending on where she would have to move to.  This is not good for her career as an early childcare educator as consistency is key when it comes to the children. She worked a 440-hour week and had to work every hour or else she didn’t get paid.

The complainant’s son was studying for his Leaving Certificate year, and he was struggling with the situation also.   The complainant and her son had discussed what would happen if they  had to move house and where they could get accommodation close to his school so he could complete his leaving cert.  He was very angry about why they were treating us like that and the effect he could see it was having on the complainant.

The complainant received great support from Robert Hayes.  As the respondent and his partner would not listen to her, she asked Robert would he speak to them thinking they would heed his professional advice.  However, despite Roberts best efforts they refused to listen to him and were aggressive in their dealings with him so unfortunately the complainant had no choice but to lodge a complaint with the RTB.  This was all very stressful and time consuming. 

Every week something happened in relation to this situation. The complainant had phone calls from the original property letting agency in Gorey whom she signed the original contract with.  They explained the respondent had been in contact with them saying they had no contact details for me and could they give my contact details and a copy of the original contract to Michael.  The complainant explained that they had all her details and the contracts. She received this call in work and could not believe that they were trying to deceive both herself and the letting agency with their lies.  The following week she received a call, again in work, from her previous landlord explaining he was in the final stages of buying back the house and I could stay in the house indefinitely. The complainant had to tell him the house had sold in February, to which he had no idea. This left the Complainant thinking if the respondent even owned the house.

The complainant’s biggest fear was that on the 9th October, the day they were expecting her out of the house, that the Respondent would arrive to the door demanding her to get out.  In case this did happen the Complainant contacted the Garda in Gorey explaining the situation.  They explained that if she felt threatened or needed their assistance, they would be aware of the situation. Fortunately, this did not happen. 

In December the complainant secured alternative accommodation for herself and her son.  Due to work commitments, Christmas and a family bereavement, she was unable to return the keys until the 9th January.  The complainant emailed the respondent telling him she had vacated the house on this date.  He requested we arrange a suitable time for me to hand the keys back in person which I agreed to do.  As she was still unsure as to whether he legally owned the house she again asked him for proof of ownership and he sent me a document from revenue. The complainant could not understand why he did not present this earlier when asked to do so.  He asked for proof of the deposit I had originally paid and asked me to clarify what rent I had been paying the landlord and what the HAP were contributing.  She sent him a screenshot of the receipt of this deposit and explained that her account with HAP was closed when the property agency she was dealing with contacted the council telling them that they would be no longer dealing with the property, and in order for her to receive HAP again the respondent had to sign the relevant HAP forms to which he had refused.  The complainant explained that how much HAP were paying was no longer relevant and those details were between herself and the council.  A time for the complainant to return the keys personally could not be arranged due to the complainant having Covid, she asked a friend to leave the keys in through the letter box.  The complainant emailed the respondent explaining this and received no reply.

The complainant contends that she is taking this to the WRC as she believes she has been treated very unfairly by the respondent. She found herself in a situation that was not of her doing.  The complainant has always been a good tenant and paid her rent, she cooperated at all times, the respondent refused to do so, he refused to engage with the complainant, Focus Ireland and Carlow County Council (HAP) to resolve the issues. 

The complainant was not afforded her rights as a tenant, and he refused to accept a Housing Assistance Payment/HAP to which I was entitled to.  The Respondent knew she could not pay the full amount of rent without the assistance of HAP, and then he served her with a letter of rent arrears resulting in a letter of eviction three months later.  The complainant has been very fortunate in securing alternative accommodation, but she would not like any other person to experience what she did and believes it is important that if the Respondent is to deal with any other properties in the future that he cannot discriminate against a person by refusing a Housing Assistance Payment.

Timeline of Events.

07/05/2023- The landlord, Mr. Michael O' Donohoe, arrived at the property unannounced. During his visit, he stated that he was the new landlord and was happy to allow Sinead to remain at the property on a long-term basis. Sinead made every attempt going forward to engage with Mr. O' Donohoe regarding payment of rent and HAP. Niamh from the HAP Department could not get in contact with Mr. O' Donohoe either.

26/05/2023- Ms. Maher sent a text message to Mr. O' Donohoe, asking him to contact Niamh in HAP to organise paperwork/process payment etc. Mr. O' Donohoe stated he would. Ms. Maher also asked for a new contract/ lease agreement to be arranged. Ms. Maher heard nothing further from this correspondence.

05/06/2023- Mr. O' Donohoe sent a text message to Ms. Maher asking would it be ok for his partner (Jess) to call up to the property that evening. Ms. Maher obliged. Jess arrived that evening and discussed several issues outlined below.

·        Jess stated they were planning on occupying the property themselves. 

·        Jess stated it would be September when they require the property for their own personal use. 

·        That they would not be signing up for HAP. 

Ms. Maher stated that she will have to go and get some advice as she was completely unprepared for this news as Michael had stated the complete opposite during his unannounced visit.

09/06/2023- Mr. O' Donohoe's partner, Jess, sent a text message to Ms. Maher stating she had contacted HAP and that they are no continuing with HAP. Jess also stated that as they are not continuing HAP, Ms. Maher is responsible for paying the full rent amount herself.

12/06/2023- Jess sent a text message to Ms. Maher requesting a list of contents for the property. Jess also requested E900 rent p/m and sent through Mr. O' Donohoe's bank details. Jess also stated that this rent was to be paid for the 'remaining' 3 months.

13/06/2023- Ms. Maher, with the support of Robert Hayes, sent an email to Mr. O' Donohoe, requesting proof of ownership of the property. Ms. Maher also requested they send, in writing, their decision to not sign up for HAP. Ms. Maher also stated in this email that if they wanted her to vacate the property, they would have to send a valid Notice of Termination with the correct notice period. Ms. Maher received no response.

29/06/2023- Ms. Maher had not received any response from Mr. O' Donohoe so she sent a text message to Jess asking if they had received the email, and if so, what was their response. Jess stated that the requested documents were posted on the 20/06/2023, minus the deeds of the house as they will be emailed to Ms. Maher. Ms. Maher stated that she did not receive anything by post. Jess stated that they will personally deliver the requested information/ documents on the 14th of July.

14/07/2023- Mr. O' Donohoe and Jess arrived. They presented a Notice of Termination but did not provide proof of ownership for the property (Deeds) and did not provide written reasons as to why they are refusing HAP. The notice period on the letter was three months ending on the 14th of October. Ms. Maher explained that as far as she was aware, she was entitled to six months' notice, they said their solicitor advised them it was three months. They also said they were not liable to repay the deposit Ms. Maher paid when moving into the house. However, it is stated on the letter of termination, that after the house is inspected on the date of leaving, they will return the deposit. As regards HAP they said they did not have to sign up for it as they were moving into the premises. Ms. Maher explained that she was not in the position to pay the E900 per month without the support of HAP. Ms. Maher's rent is E1000 per month and with HAP, she pays E666 rent every month. They agreed verbally on E650 but that they had to speak to their accountant first.

18/07/2023- Mr. O' Donohoe phoned Ms. Maher, he explained that they are going to be charging her E936 p/m. Ms. Maher explained that without the support of HAP, she could not afford this. Ms. Maher stated that she will have to get further advice and get back to them. 

19/07/2023- Ms. Maher phoned Niamh in HAP in Carlow County Council. She confirmed, through liaising with Robert, that the Notice of Termination appeared as invalid. Ms. Maher notified Jess by text message. Jess replied saying she will wait for a response from the RTB. Jess further asked about an update on paying the rent as it needed to be sorted as soon as possible for tax purposes.

20/07/2023- Ms. Maher received a text message stating should she have any further queries, to just email Mr. O' Donohoe going forward. Thursday 20th July, Ms. Maher received a message asking to email Michael with any questions or contact moving forward. On the evening of the 20/07/2023, Mr. O'Donohoe emailed Ms. Maher and stated that the original contract had rolled over to him and that there is an outstanding balance of E4,680 - Calculated from 10/03/2023-10/07/2023 at a rate of E936 p/m. Ms. Maher was confused as to the dates as she was still in receipt of HAP and paying the rent to the property management company/agency up until 10/05/2023, and she has paid the rent to both the agency and HAP for the months of March and April. Ms. Maher still has not been provided with proof of ownership by Mr. O' Donohoe.

24/07/2023- Ms. Maher again, attempted to address several issues in an attempt to resolving same. Ms. Maher sent an email to Mr. O' Donohoe outlining the issues that are ongoing with the tenancy, and the steps required to resolve these issues. This list included the importance of serving a valid Notice of Termination, notice periods, HAP, paying of rent, Deed of Assignment/Proof of ownership and the return of the deposit. Furthermore, Ms. Maher stated that if she did not receive a response withing 24/48hrs, that she will have no choice but to take the matter further and lodge a dispute with the RTB.

28/07/2023- Ms. Maher gave permission for Robert Hayes to contact Mr. O' Donohoe on her behalf in an attempt to resolve some of the issues. Robert did not receive any response by email, he had also contacted them on several occasions by phone, to no avail. Robert explained in this email the rights, responsibilities and obligations of both the tenant and the landlord.

02/08/2023- Ms. Maher had still not received a reply so she sent a text message to Jess asking could Mr. O'Donohoe reply to the email from Robert Hayes. Still no proof of ownership/Deeds.

03/08/2023- Ms. Maher sent a text message to Jess stating that as she has not received any response/contact from Mr. O' Donohoe and has not received a new valid Notice of Termination, that she has no choice but to lodge a dispute with the RTB. Jess replied to the text message stating they are receiving legal advice about the situation. Ms. Maher replied by stating that if she does not hear anything back from them by the 09/08/2023, then she will have no other option to lodge a dispute with the RTB. Still no proof of ownership/Deeds.

13/08/2023- Ms. Maher received a Warning Notice for rent arrears. The warning notice stated it was served on 14/08/2023 but it was actually served on the 13/08/2023. The amount owed in rent stated E5,616. The notice was also dated down the bottom the 11/08/2023. Further confusion. Ms. Maher felt severely anxious and concerned with this situation and went on to the RTB website to lodge a dispute. Still no proof of ownership/Deeds.

14/08/2023- Ms. Maher contacted Robert about this letter and explained how stressed and anxious she was over the situation. As per Ms. Maher's request, Robert made several more attempts to contact Mr. O' Donohoe. After many failed attempts of phone calls due to no response, Robert then sent a text message to Mr. O' Donohoe. Robert did not receive any response. Robert then sent a text message to Jess. Jess replied stating they will be in contact at 17:30 that same evening. Robert explained he was not available then. They both came to an agreement to have a phone call the following evening 15/08/2023 at 17:30. They both agreed to this. Still no proof of ownership/Deeds.

15/08/2023- Mr. O' Donohoe and Robert Hayes spoke over the phone and discussed the issues associated with the tenancy. Mr. O' Donohoe eventually agreed to sending the Deeds of the property as proof of ownership, so Ms. Maher could start paying the rent. This was the only positive thing to come from the phone call. Robert asked during the phone call about completing the HAP forms. Mr. O' Donohoe stated that he is not going to fill out the forms because he doesn't have to. Robert asked, "So are you refusing HAP?”, Mr. O' Donohoe replied, "Yes". Robert and Ms. Maher are going through the WRC process to resolve these issues.

30/08/2023- Jess phoned Robert stating they had still not received the Deeds of the property. 

11/09/2023- A Notice of Termination for rent arrears was delivered to Ms. Maher's property. This Notice stated it was served on the 12/09/2023 but it was actually served on the 

11/09/2023. Ms Maher emailed Mr. O' Donohoe stating she had received the Notice and that she will be lodging another dispute with the RTB. Still no proof of ownership/Deeds provided to Ms. Maher.

12/09/2023- Ms. Maher contacted Robert about the Notice of Termination she had received. Robert and Ms. Maher discussed potential options and she requested Robert to lodge a dispute on her behalf as a representative, and also because she was in work all day. Robert obliged and completed the relevant steps. Robert also received a call from Jess stating that they still do not have the Deeds but once they receive them, they will forward to Ms. Maher and Robert right away.

19/09/2023- Ms. Maher received a phone call from a Mr. Matt Breslin. He was the original landlord of the property when Ms. Maher moved in. He then lost this property, and it was repossessed after some time. Mr. Breslin stated that he was near the final stages of purchasing the property back and will let Ms. Maher know as soon as this process is completed. Ms. Maher stated that somebody had arrived unannounced and stated that they were the new owners of the property, and that they bought it in February. Mr. Breslin stated that he will figure out the truth behind whether the house was sold or not and get back to her. Still no proof of ownership/Deeds. 

23/09/2023- Property Partners O/ Brien Swaine - Gorey Letting Agency phoned Ms. Maher. They were the original agents who dealt with Ms. Maher and this tenancy from 2020 onwards. They sated that they had received a call from Mr. O' Donohoe and Jess and they were enquiring if there was a copy of the original lease/ contract and they also stated that they did not have any contact details for Ms. Maher, and they only had her name. Ms. Maher stated that they have both an email address and contact number for her, and that they have been in contact on several occasions. Ms. Maher also stated that they have even met in person also. Ms. Maher gave permission for the agency to forward a copy of the original lease/ contract. Mr. O' Donohoe and Jess had all along claimed that they had a copy of the lease/ contract, so this further confused Ms. Maher, but also confirmed that they are repeatedly lying about the whole situation. Still no proof of ownership/Deeds.

To Whom It May Concern,

This statement is of my true accounts upon my dealings with Miss Sinead Maher and Mr. Robert Hayes. All evidence submitted, is to guideline every detail in this statement.

I purchased the property of 24 Slievebawn

Monaseed Gorey

Co. Wexford Y25X372

Late February of 2023, as is known when purchasing a property, it can take time when

Liaising with solicitors to finalise the deal. As this took several weeks it had only become apparent that the property was sold with a tenant in-situ several weeks after I had initially bought the property.

Upon this we had no way of contacting the said tenant as the copy of the contract we had received was docked up (page 1,2,3,4 and 5 of the evidence) to the point we could not see any names on the contract. After getting in touch with the estate agents on the contract, I was told as my name was not on the contract, they could not give me any details. Thus, leaving me at a loss and forced me to attend the property in person. I had attended the property with my mother.

In my first engagement with Miss Maher on the 7th May I introduced myself as Michael O'Donohoe and explained I was the new owner of the property. In this first introduction with myself and Miss Maher, I had made it known that the property was brought for myself, my partner and two small children to be a family home. To which Miss Maher had responded that it was a lovely place for children to grow up.

On the 5th June 2023 I  had messaged Miss Maher and asked was it okay for my partner to pop over to see the house, to which she agreed (page 6 of evidence). Once my partner had arrived, she explained again that we had bought the property to be a family home and had sympathised with Miss Maher over her having to vacate the property but explained we would be going through the necessary channels to ensure Miss Maher had all she needed to vacate the property. Jessica had also told Miss Maher that in the event of any changes should we move out of the property that she would keep hold of her details and if Miss Maher Liked we would offer the property back to her. Miss Maher had explained to Jessica that she would need relevant paperwork for her to leave the property. Jessica had told Miss Maher she would get everything sorted in due course.

After not understanding what HAP was, still liaising with my solicitor, I questioned this and was told that if I signed up to HAP, I would be signing up for two years to which we did not intend for the dwelling to be a rental property in the first place. I did not want to be tied into a two-year contract. The solicitor also explained that as the contract was docked, we had no way of knowing who the actual tenant was in the house and that we would be in serios trouble for filling false claims.

After this my partner Jessica Mullen took over and engaged with Niamh Lacey in Carlow County Council, she explained to Miss Lacey that we would not be continuing with HAP and why, to which Miss Lacey had not informed Jessica that you cannot accept HAP but rather told Jessica that it was fine and explained that Ms. Maher would be liable for the full amount of rent. This was the only dealings we ever had with Miss Lacey in Carlow County Council.

On 14th July myself and Jessica flew over to Ireland to hand deliver the termination notice to Ms. Maher. As Ms. Maher had explained to us both that sometimes her post does not arrive and is left in the local pub. We had expressed our sincere apologies and took into consideration that this was an upsetting time, Ms. Maher had also stated the dates on the termination was wrong, as this was all new to myself and Jessica we were under the impression that Ms. Maher was entitled to 3 months’ notice but in this case was she was entitled to 6 months which we appreciated Ms. Maher information. Miss Maher had said that she could not afford the rent, and we had said we would speak to an accountant on what would be the best way forward to ensure that Ms. Maher could afford the rent. Ms. Maher also went onto ask the question of the return of the deposit, we had explained to Ms. Maher that we had not received her deposit when the sale of the house was finalised, and we would have to investigate this as Ms. Maher had claimed she had paid €1,000. We had requested Ms. Maher send us a copy of the contract that was not docked up. To which she had said she would. We never received a copy of the contract undocked still to this day.

After leaving the property and with the matter of the rent still needing to be sorted out, we liaised with an accountant and were advised it would not be in our best interest to reduce the rent because of tax purposes. Out of decency I had phoned Ms. Maher and explained that we could not reduce the rent payment to which she had replied that she needed time to think about this.

Miss Maher had then messaged Jessica to say that Focus Ireland had said that the termination was invalid. Jessica then went on to phoning the RTB to which she was told that they could not cancel the termination notice until they deem it invalid when Jessica asked could we send a new termination notice they replied no.

Upon this, Jessica emailed Miss Maher to say that we needed to sort out the rent due to tax purposes.

After this we had no contact with Ms. Maher for a couple of weeks while we tried to find the best way possible to deal with this situation, we then received an email from Miss Maher stating that she was not paying any rent until we sent over the deeds assignment. At that stage we did not have the deeds as they were in with the land registry. However, we had sent on a link to Miss Maher where she could see the deeds. We had no reply to that email.

Following on from this I then received an email late evening on 24th July that was alarming, distressing, demanding and very threatening. This email was a cause of concern as Miss Maher stated she was not paying any rent until she saw the deeds and an explanation as to why we refused HAP and stated we had 24/48 hours to reply to her email.

The following morning Jessica phoned the solicitors and sought advice on this and was told that they would be in touch within the next week, which passed Miss Maher’s deadline to us. This started to take a toll on Jessica’s mental health and to make matters worse on Friday 28th July we received a very similar email from Mr. Hayes again, very distressing, demanding and threatening. This was the first contact from Mr. Hayes. This caused further stress on Jessica, and this started to have an impact not only on her mental health but also on her physical health, she started to suffer from stress related vertigo. In spite of this Jessica continued to try and resolve matters and went back to the solicitor again seeking advice, their best advice was that as Ms. Maher was becoming more unco-operative and refusing to pay any rent to us that the best course of action would be to send Miss Maher the Warning Notice of Rent Arrears any notice sent to Ms. Maher was never a threat and we had followed the RTB guidelines through every process. We received a message from Mr. Hayes who wanted to engage in a phone call with Michael and Jessica. This was the second contact from Mr. Hayes.

Despite being advised by solicitors not to contact Mr. Hayes we agreed to do so and spoke to him on the evening of 15th August. Michael was asked by Mr. Hayes why he had not given a copy of the deeds to Ms. Maher. Michael explained that he had sent an email to Ms. Maher containing a link to the deeds. Mr. Hayes’s response was very rude with him stating that Ms. Maher should not have to pay for the deeds even though she was the one requesting them. Mr. Hayes then asked why we were refusing to accept HAP. Michael told him he was not refusing to accept HAP, and at this Mr. Hayes would not accept any answer.

Again, suffering our loss, and then dealing with all of this on top of everything this was taking its toll, so when asked for what seemed like the hundredth time, was I refusing HAP I responded yes as this seemed to be the only answer Mr. Hayes would accept.

Immediately after that response Jessica intervened and explained everything to Mr. Hayes, this included the termination notice, Mr. Hayes responded with the “RTB will only deem a termination notice invalid if someone files a dispute” Mr. Hayes also agreed that we had been somewhat misled when buying the property. It was also agreed that he had told Ms. Maher certain things that had not been passed accurately back to Michael and Jessica

It was agreed that future communication would be dealt with through Mr. Hayes for the RTB and with Ms. Maher for anything in relation to the upkeep of the house. It was then agreed that Jessica would obtain a copy of the deeds for Ms. Maher. After some time had passed and there was no copy of the deeds the Respondent agreed to give a copy of the house purchase receipt to Mr. Hayes, this happened on 12th September.

After this interaction there was no contact with or from Mr. Hayes until they received the email with the complaints form for the WRC (ES1 FORM). Jessica responded to this form but within the permitted time limits. The Respondent received an email from Mr. Hayes that was very aggressive in tone.

At this point the Respondent decided not to engage further with Mr. Hayes or Ms. Maher directly and leave this to what they considered as the right channels.

While the respondent awaited a date for an adjudication hearing at RTB he received an email for Mr. Hayes dated 7th December 2023. This email stated that Ms. Maher was willing to negotiate a mutual agreement to her vacating the property to avoid her losing any assistance moving forward and in return she would drop all cases against the respondent.

In reply to this email the respondent said he would agree once Ms. Maher had paid all outstanding rent arrears. The respondent did not want to impact on the complainant’s ability to gain help with housing assistance in future.

There was no reply to this email until the respondent made an attempt to contact Mr. Hayes on 8th January when he asked was he to presume that all complaints against the respondent were going forward.

On 9th January the respondent received an email from Ms. Maher informing him that she had vacated the property. This came as a shock to the respondent as he had no way of checking had the property been secured. The respondent asked Ms. Maher if she could meet them to hand over the keys. Ms. Maher was uncooperative and stated in an email that she would not be handing over keys to the property without seeing the deeds to the dwelling.

The Equal Status Act applies to those who:

·        Buy and sell a wide variety of goods.

·        Use or provide a wide range of services.

·        Obtain or dispose of accommodation; and

·        Attend, or manage, educational establishments.

Discrimination is prohibited on ten specific grounds. One of these grounds is Housing Assistance Ground, this can be explained as follows:

Discrimination occurs when a person is treated less favourably, in comparison to another, because one person is in receipt of rent supplement, housing assistance or any other social welfare payment, and the other is not (IHREC ESA Guide, p.11). This ground applies in relation to accommodation only.

Comparators.

Equality law is based on comparison – how one person is treated by comparison to another who does not possess the relevant characteristic. It is therefore necessary to ground a claim of discrimination by pointing to how another person, not having that protected characteristic relied upon, was, is or would be treated in a comparable situation. This is referred to as a comparator. In many cases the comparator will be an actual person. However, if an actual comparator is not available, in some cases a hypothetical comparator can be constructed by asking why the complainant was treated as they were. If the treatment complained of was because of a protected characteristic, a hypothetical comparator is a supposed person who does not have that characteristic but who is otherwise in the same position as the complainant.

In the instant case there has been no mention of any comparator, real or hypothetical.

The Respondent eventually conceded that he was not accepting HAP.

I believe that the solicitor hired by the Respondent should have known that there was a sitting tenant living in the house and should have informed his client (the respondent).

The respondent has now acted in a discriminatory manner towards the complainant in not accepting HAP and I now order the Respondent to pay compensation to the complainant in the sum of €3,000 and this sum should be paid within 42 days from the date of this decision.

The respondent has now acted in a discriminatory manner towards the complainant in not accepting HAP and I now order the Respondent to pay compensation to the complainant in the sum of €3,000 and this sum should be paid within 42 days from the date of this decision.

Equal Status Act 2000; HAP.