A landlord who claimed his tenant made “ridiculous” demands, including that a builder be vetted by the Garda before assessing damage caused by Storm Éowyn, has successfully defended a claim that he breached his obligations.
Landlord Gary Graham told a Residential Tenancies Board (RTB) tribunal that allegations made by Derek Tunney, including that he “deliberately” caused an ingress of water to the property following the storm, were “ludicrous”.
Tunney had been renting a flat in the garden of Graham’s family home in Santry, Dublin, from 2018 until he vacated last May after receiving two separate notices of termination.
The tenant disputed the validity of the notices and claimed Graham had breached his obligations in relation to maintenance issues and peaceful occupation, for which he sought damages.
Tunney told the tribunal that shortly after Storm Éowyn in January 2025, he heard what sounded like a “brick being removed”, which he then realised was a slate from the roof.
He described water subsequently pouring through a hole in the roof for hours and “splashing” on the ground, saying there was little to no rain falling at the time.
The tenant claimed Graham had “deliberately caused an ingress of water” and believed it was “essentially being piped in” through a garden hose, according to a tribunal report published this week.
Describing the allegation as “ludicrous”, Graham said: “No person in their right mind would go and cause damage to their own property.”
The tribunal heard their relationship had “broken down” previously, and that Tunney had requested all communication be in writing for “legal reasons”.
Graham told the tribunal he received a letter from Tunney about a month after Storm Éowyn, informing him of the roof damage. He said he then asked if someone could assess the damage from inside.
The landlord claimed Tunney asked for a Garda-vetted builder and wanted to see their qualifications. He further claimed Tunney wanted to take videos and photos “while they were there”.
Describing the demands as “ridiculous”, Graham said the builder “flatly refused” and repaired the roof “as best he could” from the outside.
Tunney separately claimed his former landlord interfered with his peaceful occupation of the home, which included “almost daily” bouncing of a ball on the wall and the roof by Graham’s son, which he felt was “intentional”.
He also described “prolonged use of a lawnmower which went on for hours”, which he believed was done to annoy him.
This was alongside the landlord’s house and car alarm sometimes going off “without explanation”, believing this too was done deliberately to irritate him.
The tribunal did not uphold Tunney’s claim that Graham breached his obligations as a landlord.
It did not accept his allegation that Graham deliberately pumped water into the flat and sided with the landlord that it “just would not make sense”.
In relation to other maintenance issues raised by the tenant, the tribunal was satisfied Graham made “genuine efforts” to carry out repairs.
It said Tunney did not afford the landlord “reasonable parameters” to carry out necessary work, noting that on one occasion, he gave him permission to enter to address some issues, though he said he would be “recording” and the landlord was not allowed to bring any mobile devices inside.
The tribunal said it was not satisfied that issues outlined by Tunney, including those related to the alarms and lawn-mowing, “were deliberate, persistent or conscious actions”.
It separately deemed both notices of termination, one for rent arrears and one on the basis that the property was required for Graham’s daughter, valid.
The tribunal ordered Tunney to pay €220 in rent arrears, after Graham retained the €990 deposit to offset the remainder.