Two tenants whose friendship had broken down after they lived together for several years had installed their own CCTV cameras to watch one another, according to claims made at a Residential Tenancies Board (RTB) tribunal.
The hearing, which took place in July, was told that relations further deteriorated between the former friends after one of them sought to have his parents visit and stay at the property for two weeks during the Christmas period.
Gabriel Lazar, one of the two tenants living at the apartment in Dublin 11, claimed his former flatmate, Marius Cadar, insisted on bringing his parents to stay at the property despite objections from Mr Lazar and landlord LiChang Liu.
[ Who is responsible for leak damage from the apartment above?Opens in new window ]
Mr Lazar told the tribunal a one week stay âmight have been okayâ, but he said the flatmateâs parents were âgoing to be coming and goingâ and he was not happy with the plans. Mr Cadarâs parents proceeded to stay in the property for a week last December and another week in January.
Mr Lazar also claimed that his flatmateâs brother verbally abused, hit and threatened him, further claiming that Mr Cadar began to make a lot of noise by having the TV on at a loud volume.
He submitted photos to the tribunal of a CCTV camera in the living room, which he claimed was installed by Mr Cadar, further claiming that Mr Liu took no action to remedy it. He said he reported the matter to gardaà but was told it was a civil matter.
The tribunal heard that Mr Cadar had moved out of the apartment by the end of February, while Mr Lazar left in June.
Mr Liu told the tribunal the two tenants had been living together for three to four years and were close friends, but for reasons unknown, their friendship broke down.
Following this breakdown, he claimed, the two men began to message him complaining about one another. He said they had both offered to pay him a higher rent if he would ask the other to leave.
He claimed Mr Lazar and Mr Cadar had separately installed CCTV cameras in the apartment âand they were watching each otherâ. He said he had told both men not to do this as it was âillegalâ. Mr Lazar denied ever installing a CCTV camera in the apartment.
Mr Liu said he told Mr Cadar his co-tenant was not happy at the prospect of his parents staying there and that he advised them to discuss the issue. He said Mr Cadar âdid not want to listen to himâ when he raised the matter.
He claimed that on each occasion a complaint was made by Mr Lazar, he told Mr Cadar to âbe nice and keep quietâ.
Mr Liu told the tribunal it was his first time being a landlord and he was trying to do his best, according to the tribunal report published last week. He was found to be in breach of his landlord obligations by the tribunal and ordered to pay Mr Lazar â¬500 in damages.
The report stated that Mr Liu felt the fact his tenants were previously friends meant it was up to them to âsort out their problems themselvesâ.
The tribunal described Mr Liuâs actions to deal with Mr Lazarâs complaints as ânot sufficient,â adding that any complaints were his responsibility and it was incumbent on him to properly deal with the situation.
It said Mr Liu could have issued formal written warnings to Mr Cadar and, if deemed necessary, could have issued a notice of termination on the grounds of antisocial behaviour subsequently.
