Tribunal allows 'bullied' Galway tenant to remain in her home despite named landlord's termination notice
The tenant claimed that she was ‘untruthfully’ summoned to a meeting in October 2025 with the landlord and the landlord’s daughter
A Galway tenant who claimed she was bullied and verbally abused has been allowed to remain in her home after a tribunal found that her landlord’s notice of termination had been “most inadequate”.
A Residential Tenancies Board (RTB) tribunal was told that Joy Cassidy Keeffe had been living at Lydon’s Chalet in Clooniffe, Moycullen since July 2023, paying rent of €1,200 per month to Maureen Lydon.
Ms Cassidy Keeffe claimed that she was “untruthfully” summoned to a meeting in October 2025 with the landlord and the landlord’s daughter. She said the daughter said she was taking over management of the property.
The tenant alleged that she was verbally abused at the meeting and presented with a fixed-term agreement running from August 27, 2025 to December 31, 2025, and asked to sign it on the spot.
Ms Cassidy Keeffe said she felt bullied and took the document away before showing housing charity Threshold, who advised her not to sign it. She was also informed at the meeting that her tenancy would be ended with less than six weeks’ notice.
Two weeks later, a notice of termination dated November 25 was left in her porch, instructing her to vacate the property by December 31. It cited two grounds: the expiry of an August fixed-term agreement, and a requirement to carry out renovations due to storm damage.
Ms Cassidy Keeffe told the tribunal that she faced panic attacks and the threat of homelessness while caring for three dogs, adding that relations had soured after the landlord’s daughter became involved.
She noted that a solicitor’s letter on behalf of the landlord had wrongly claimed she moved in with a man named John McCormack and unlawfully sublet rooms, whereas a female family friend, Joanna McCormack, had stayed with her.
She added that she had received an email from the landlord’s daughter alleging elder abuse and overcharging of other tenants, which she rejected as grossly defamatory.
A solicitor for the landlord told the tribunal that Ms Lydon would not give evidence because she found the process too stressful. In his closing submission, he argued that the tenant had failed to produce evidence disputing the validity of the termination notice.
In its findings, the three-member tribunal dismissed the landlord’s arguments and found the notice wholly defective. It said Ms Cassidy Keeffe enjoyed Part 4 security of tenure under the Residential Tenancies Act 2004, meaning the tenancy could only be ended under the strict grounds outlined in Section 34 of the Act.
The tribunal also rejected the landlord’s reliance on an expiring lease, accepting Ms Cassidy Keeffe’s evidence that she had been presented with an “artificial fixed-term tenancy” in October 2025.
It ruled that the tenancy had been founded on the original 2023 agreement and that the expiration of a fixed term does not override Part 4 statutory protections. The tribunal also noted that the landlord had provided only 36 days of notice, whereas the tenant was legally entitled to 180.