Galway landlord overturns order directing him to pay former resident €4,700
Vitaliya Yaskozhuk told an RTB tribunal that Martin Hogan had served her with an eviction notice following an argument about bins
A Galway landlord has successfully overturned an order directing him to pay €4,700 to a former resident, after a tribunal ruled it had no jurisdiction in the dispute because the property had been occupied under licence under the Rent a Room scheme.
The Residential Tenancies Board (RTB) tribunal determined that landlord Martin Hogan had also resided in the dwelling at Dunsandle, Kiltullagh, Athenry, meaning the arrangement fell outside the scope of the Residential Tenancies Act 2004.
The dispute arose after tenant Vitaliya Yaskozhuk referred a case to the RTB in May 2025, which led to an initial adjudication determination the following September.
In that decision, the adjudicator directed Mr Hogan to pay Ms Yaskozhuk €4,700 – comprising €4,000 in damages for breach of landlord obligations, along with €500 in respect of an unlawfully retained deposit and €200 relating to utility payments.
Mr Hogan subsequently appealed the determination to a Tenancy Tribunal, arguing that the RTB lacked jurisdiction because the resident had taken up accommodation under the Rent a Room scheme and occupied the room under licence.
The hearing was told that Ms Yaskozhuk had taken up occupation of the dwelling on February 20, 2025 at a rent of €120 per week, having paid a €500 security deposit. She left the property around April 30, 2025, leaving no rent arrears, but her deposit was not returned.
The landlord’s solicitor, Ronan Connolly, submitted that the adjudicator had reached the initial decision without hearing evidence from the landlord. He stated that the tenant had signed a document in plain English clearly headed “Rent a Room Agreement”.
He argued that, even if the landlord was not present for every part of the period, the dwelling was his ordinary residence.
To substantiate his residence, Mr Hogan supplied extensive documentation registered to the Athenry address, including a driving licence, motor insurance certificate and renewal notice, and mortgage correspondence.
Mr Hogan testified that the property was his principal private residence, which he had renovated following a fire and decided to let rooms to help finance the construction works.
While he was a full-time farmer and spent three to four nights a week caring for his very ill mother nearby, he retained a locked ground-floor bedroom for his own use, kept personal items and a television there, cooked in the house, and spent an average of three to four nights per week sleeping at the property.
He added that he had decided to terminate the agreement after the tenant became aggressive during an encounter regarding bins.
Ms Yaskozhuk, who was represented by legal executive Hannah Rodriguez, claimed the landlord had assured her the letting would last at least two years and had told her she would only see him on Mondays when collecting rent.
She claimed Mr Hogan did not spend a single night in the dwelling while she lived there, that basic household items and internet were initially missing, and that he entered the house regularly without adequate notice, which she found intimidating.
She alleged that, after she asked for advance notice of visits following an argument over bins, the landlord issued a retaliatory 10-day eviction notice lacking required statutory details, forcing her into alternative accommodation at double the rent.
Her representative argued that the documentation offered merely linked Mr Hogan to the address rather than proving physical day-to-day residence, pointing to the absence of basic amenities upon move-in and text messages implying he lived elsewhere.
In its findings, the tribunal accepted Mr Hogan’s proof of residence, and found his explanation for frequent absences to care for his ill mother to be plausible and unchallenged.
It also noted that no evidence had been produced showing he owned or had another residence available to him, that he retained full access to the house and his own bedroom, and that the agreement signed by Ms Yaskozhuk was explicitly headed as a Rent a Room agreement.
Finding on the balance of probabilities that the landlord resided in the property, the tribunal ruled that the tenant had occupied the dwelling under licence, and that the RTB was required not to deal any further with the dispute.