Case Number: ADJ-00009960. Workplace Relations Commission.
| Docket Number | ADJ-00009960 |
| Hearing Date | 21 June 2018 |
| Date | 01 January 2019 |
| Year | 2019 |
| Court | Workplace Relations Commission |
In accordance with Section 25 of the Equal Status Act, 2000following the referral of the complaint to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint.
Background:
|
The Tenant rented a property from the Respondent for 1 year from 1st May 2016 to 30th April 2017 at a monthly rent of 1,600 euro. |
|
The Complainant informed the Landlord when entering the lease that she was entitled to rent supplement and the Landlord completed the form SWA RS1. The Complainant had an option to extend the lease for 1 further year. On 13th August 2016 the Complainant received a Notice of Termination of the lease accusing the Complainant and her partner of multiple breaches of the lease, which she denies. On 30th August 2016 the Landlord carried out viewings at the apartment without their consent. The Complainant discovered the property was advertised on Daft for a monthly rent of 1,750 euro by the Landlord. The Respondent called to the apartment, and left a threatening voice-mail saying he has the right to end the tenancy within the first 6 months. The Complainant lodged a complaint with the Residential Tenancies Board in relation to the Notice of Termination. The Notice of Termination was found invalid. The Complainant learnt the Landlord denied signing the SWA RS1 form. The Landlord notified the Department of Social Protection that the tenancy was ending on 16th September 2016. The Complainant received a threatening letter from the Landlord’s solicitor. The Tenant received a further threatening letter from the Landlord saying she would be responsible for losses incurred by new Tenants who were planning to rent the apartment in October 2016, and was extremely distressed. The initial Notice of Termination was withdrawn by the Landlord. The Department of Social Protection sought verification from the Landlord that he signed the SWA RS1 form. On 21st November 2016 the Complainant received another Notice of Termination advising that the lease will terminate on 31 December 2016. The Department of Social Protection advised the Landlord informed them that Rent Supplement would only be accepted until 31 December 2016. The timing of the Notice of Termination so close to Christmas caused further distress for the Complainant. The Tenant lodged a further complaint with the Residential Tenancies Board claiming the second Notice of Termination was invalid. She received further complaints from the Landlord regarding alleged breaches of the lease. On 2nd January 2017 at 4am the Complainant received an email from the Landlord serving a 14 day warning notice of rent arrears. The delay in paying rent on 1st of the month was due to the bank holiday Monday on 2nd January. The Complainant says rent was always paid on time. The Department of Social Protection then informed the Complainant that due to the Landlord denying he signed the SWA RS1, rent supplement cannot be paid. This also resulted in a delay in payment of other benefits. An appeal was lodged with the Department of Social Protection. The Department of Social Protection refused to pay rent supplement for 1st February 2017. The RTB found the second Notice of Termination was invalid, which was appealed. On 15th February 2017 the Complainant received a third Notice of Termination. This was subsequently withdrawn on 8th March 2017. The Complainant advised the Landlord of their intention to remain in the apartment under S195 of the Residential Tenancies Act 2004 in April 2017. This was disputed by the Landlord who submitted a complaint to the RTB of overholding. The Complainant received the signed SWA RS1 form on 16th April 2017 filled out by the Landlord for the following year’s Rent Supplement saying “This SWA RS1 Part B was previously completed in May 2016 and I’m advised by tenants that social welfare services require it to be completed again” . The Complainant received a fourth Notice of Termination on 5th May 2017 that the property is required for the Landlord’s brother and a statutory declaration of the Landlord. The Notices of Termination of 21st November 2016 and 5th May 2017 were found invalid by the RTB. The Complainant denies all allegations of breach of tenancy obligations. She found the actions of the Landlord hugely distressing and distracted from her new start-up business. This put a lot of pressure on her professional and personal life requiring extensive visits to the Dept. of Social Protection, appeals and consequent lack of attention to her business. She suffered from stress related health problems. She has also been defamed by the Respondent to the Dept. of Social Protection. The Complainant issued an ES1 complaint form on 13th March 2017 alleging unlawful discrimination by the Landlord on the grounds of housing assistance and referring to 2 letters she received from Dept of Social Protection dated 28 November 2016 and 20th January 2017. The letters notified the Complainant that the Department were refusing to pay rent supplement to the Complainant after 31 December 2016 as the Landlord was refusing to accept rent supplement after 31 December 2016, refusing to validate his signature on the 2016 SWARS1 form and the termination of the tenancy by the Landlord. The Complainant lodged a complaint of discrimination to the Workplace Relations Commission on 4th August 2017 alleging discrimination on the housing assistance ground, stating the first incident of discrimination took place on 13 August 2016 and most recent act of discrimination was on 5 May 2017. The Respondent replied to the ES1 on 13th April 2017. The Landlord stopped the Complainants rent supplement on 4 occasions by falsely declaring he did not sign the SWA RS1, and refusing to accept rent allowance on a number of occasions. A Preliminary issue was raised by the Respondent in relation to two matters alleging (i) The Complainant’s claim is statute- barred due to delay and (ii) the Complainant’s claim is Res Judicata. (i) The Complainant’s claim is statute-barred due to delay.
The Complainant rejects this assertion and says that the discrimination was continuous from 13th August 2016 to 5 May 2017 and the time-limit for making a discrimination claim runs from the last date of discrimination. The Complainant relies on Clare County Council v The Director of the Equality Tribunal [2011] IEHC 303. ..”The Act sets a time-limit for referral of six months from the most recent act of discrimination, not from the first such act of discrimination. That time limit runs from the end of a period of time where the act constituting discrimination extends over a period”… Without prejudice to the foregoing, the Equal Status Act 2000-2015 allows for an extension of time. The Complainant relies on ADJ-00006866 where it is stated: “In relation to the time-limits the Equal Status Act states: Subject to subsection (7), a claim for redress in respect of prohibited conduct may not be referred under this section after the end of the period of 6 months from the date of the occurrence of the prohibited conduct to which the case relates or, as the case may be, the date of its most recent occurrence. (7) if, on application by the Complainant, the Director is satisfied that exceptional circumstances prevented the Complainant’s case from being referred within the time-limit specified in subsection (6)- (a) the Director may direct that, in relation to that case, subsection (6) shall have effect as if for the reference to a period of 6 months there were substituted a reference to such period not exceeding 12 months as is specified in the direction.” The Complainant submitted her form on 4th August which is within 6 months of the last act of discrimination on 5th May 2017. She applies for an extension of time in relation to submission of her complaint of discrimination up to within 12 months of the last act of discrimination, if required on the exceptional grounds set out below. The form ES1 was served on the Respondent on 13th March 2017. The Respondent replied to the ES1 on 13th April 2017. The ES1 was served within 2 months of the prohibited conduct which was 2 letters received from the Dept of Social Protection of 28 November 2016 and 20 January 2017. The Complainant seeks an extension of time pursuant to S21 (3) of the Equal Status Acts 2000-2015 to extend the time for notification of the ES1 to 4 months or alternatively if required, now applies to dispense with the notification requirement of the ES1 as exceptional circumstances apply as set out below. The first date of discrimination is 13th August 2016, the discrimination was ongoing, and there were... |
To continue reading
Request your trial