Currently, hot news in the property world right now are the proposals to ‘reform’ the Residential Tenancies Act. A number of changes to this Act are under
consideration, and of these changes, the “no cause” clause is likely to be the most problematic for landlords.

The publicity around this proposal is – possibly deliberately – biased. There is actually no such thing as a “no cause” termination. There is always a
cause. No landlord wakes up in the morning and decides to get rid of a tenant just for the fun of it. To do so will disrupt his cash flow of rent from
that property, never a good idea. What they seem to refer to is that there is currently no requirement for the landlord to disclose that reason to
the tenant.

The effect is that a 90-day notice to vacate will only apply where the landlord:

  • Intends to carry out extensive alterations, refurbishment, repairs or redevelopment of the premises and it would not be possible for the tenant
    to continue to live there while the work was being undertaken, or
  • Intends to change the use of the premises, e.g. from residential to commercial, or
  • If a person, such as a mortgagor, becomes entitled to possession and needs the tenant to vacate the premises to meet requirements relating to a
    mortgagee sale process.
Where these situations don’t apply a landlord would need to obtain a Termination Order from the Tenancy Tribunal, which can only be granted in
certain situations that will be specified in the Act.

To give the tenant a reason for the termination is to give grounds for an argument, which is why landlords are generally advised to not state the