Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Rent increase, thoughts

Options
13

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    TheOldHand
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 91 ✭✭TheOldHand


    See those houses that are just as nice advertised for 450+? You could rent one for 400-420. You view a few places and put in your offer, make sure they know you are a nice couple.
    You say the landlord fixed your heating like he was doing you a favour. That's what he is getting paid for. You are being walked over.
    You should have got a discount on your rent not am increase. Rents are in free fall in rural areas without big employers around. Rents are rising in Dublin because so many people have left these rural areas looking for work.


  • Options
    #63
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,237 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    TheOldHand wrote: »
    You say the landlord fixed your heating like he was doing you a favour. That's what he is getting paid for. You are being walked over.

    You are spectacularly missing the point. He wasnt doing him a favour, but have you any idea how many landlords out there do not respond to issues in any kind of timely fashion? Have you any idea how many utter cowboys there are out there playing landlord? The OP has found themselves a good one; they could take the chance of moving to a different property but they risk ending up dealing with a cowboy. Or, as they have done, they have decided that its worth €20 a month to continue dealing with one of the good guys.


  • Options
    #64
    TheOldHand
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 91 ✭✭TheOldHand


    I cannot understand this attitude of accepting bad landlord behaviour as the norm. Btw this landlord is not a good one. They just asked for a 60 quid increase to cover their costs.


  • Options
    #65
    Ritchi
    Registered Users Posts: 319 ✭✭Ritchi


    TheOldHand sounds like someone that would queue up for a few hours to save himself a euro or two.

    Yeah, maybe he could have got it cheaper, and maybe he should have moved, but he reached an agreement that suits both parties, and has reduced the stress, time and effort involved in it.


  • Options
    #66
    D3PO
    Registered Users Posts: 7,879 ✭✭✭D3PO


    TheOldHand wrote: »
    I cannot understand this attitude of accepting bad landlord behaviour as the norm. Btw this landlord is not a good one. They just asked for a 60 quid increase to cover their costs.

    nobody is accepting bad landlord behaviour. You are either spectaularly bad at understanding peoples points or are a massive troll.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,237 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    TheOldHand wrote: »
    I cannot understand this attitude of accepting bad landlord behaviour as the norm. Btw this landlord is not a good one. They just asked for a 60 quid increase to cover their costs.

    Its not about accepting that its the norm; its about accepting that it happens, a lot. Whether you like it or not there are a lot of bad landlords out there, and if you happen to find one that looks after you, that takes care of the property and seems willing to work with you to resolve your issues in a timely fashion then you make an effort to keep the relationship going and to keep it sweet.

    And there is nothing wrong with him looking for a rent increase; legally he is entitled to review the rent once in a 12 month period. I think he was chancing his arm with how much he looked for, but as the OP found out there is nothing to stop them negotiating. The fact that he didnt force the matter and was willing to meet the OP half way was a good sign; there are a lot of landlords out there who would remain stubborn and insist on the €60, even if it meant losing the tenant.


  • Options
    #68
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    TheOldHand wrote: »
    I cannot understand this attitude of accepting bad landlord behaviour as the norm. Btw this landlord is not a good one. They just asked for a 60 quid increase to cover their costs.

    If LL is a bad to raise rent is the tenant a bad one for likewise seeking a reduction???


  • Options
    #69
    TheOldHand
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 91 ✭✭TheOldHand


    BostonB wrote: »
    If LL is a bad to raise rent is the tenant a bad one for likewise seeking a reduction???

    No. A tenant looking to reduce rents in a market with falling rents is a good tenant. A landlord looking to increase rents in a market with falling rents is not to be trusted.


  • Options
    #70
    D3PO
    Registered Users Posts: 7,879 ✭✭✭D3PO


    TheOldHand wrote: »
    No. A tenant looking to reduce rents in a market with falling rents is a good tenant. A landlord looking to increase rents in a market with falling rents is not to be trusted.

    toatal and utter nonsense. Clearly you had a bad rental experience at some stage and have a completely irrational hatred for landlords as a result, but how about posting with rational thoughts going through your head.

    To say the OP's landlord isnt to be trusted further dents the little credibility you have on this forum.


  • Options
    #71
    TheOldHand
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 91 ✭✭TheOldHand


    To say the OP's landlord isnt to be trusted further dents the little credibility you have on this forum.
    Don't speak for the forum. You have little credibility in my eyes. A person that rings up with a poor mouth story and says my costs have gone up I want another 60 a month is a chancer. I would never tell a landlord that I was finding money tight and wanted a reduction. Its all about the market rate. I'd respect a landlord that knew that and wanted an increase if the market had moved on. I know what I'm doing in life. Whilst the majority here haven't a cent to their name I have a fairly massive bank balance and salary.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    From a business POV the idea if being a LL is to make money. Not make less money. What ever the market can sustain. Only if the market can't sustain it should you reduce rent. Unless of course the market drops so far it becomes un-viable. In which case the LL should sell up and get out of it.


  • Options
    #73
    TheOldHand
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 91 ✭✭TheOldHand


    BostonB wrote: »
    From a business POV the idea if being a LL is to make money. Not make less money. What ever the market can sustain. Only if the market can't sustain it should you reduce rent. Unless of course the market drops so far it becomes un-viable. In which case the LL should sell up and get out of it.

    But a huge number cannot sell up. They are stuck with banks refusing sales. These people will take 100 per month whether they like it or not. You really have to realise how little rental value properties have in rural Ireland. They knocked a load of apartments in Longford as there was so little demand in the area.


  • Options
    #74
    D3PO
    Registered Users Posts: 7,879 ✭✭✭D3PO


    TheOldHand wrote: »
    . I would never tell a landlord that I was finding money tight and wanted a reduction. .


    well then your beyond help. This is a perfectly legitimate thing for a tenant to do in the current market to try and get cheaper rent. Just like the landlord it may or may not have the desired impact but its a perfectly legitimate reason to start dialogue over your rental costs.


  • Options
    #75
    TheOldHand
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 91 ✭✭TheOldHand


    D3PO wrote: »
    well then your beyond help. This is a perfectly legitimate thing for a tenant to do in the current market to try and get cheaper rent. Just like the landlord it may or may not have the desired impact but its a perfectly legitimate reason to start dialogue over your rental costs.

    No it's not. Your income should have no bearing on what rent you pay for a particular property. Move out if you don't have the money. The landlord isn't running a charity. Your credibility is in negative numbers now.


  • Options
    #76
    D3PO
    Registered Users Posts: 7,879 ✭✭✭D3PO


    TheOldHand wrote: »
    But a huge number cannot sell up. They are stuck with banks refusing sales. These people will take 100 per month whether they like it or not. You really have to realise how little rental value properties have in rural Ireland. They knocked a load of apartments in Longford as there was so little demand in the area.

    :D This cheered me up. I needed a laugh.

    Again utter nonsense. You have no idea what your talking about. Nobody will rent somewhere for 100 per month regardless of their circumstances, keep up with the ludacris comments though.


  • Options
    #77
    D3PO
    Registered Users Posts: 7,879 ✭✭✭D3PO


    TheOldHand wrote: »
    No it's not. Your income should have no bearing on what rent you pay for a particular property. Move out if you don't have the money. The landlord isn't running a charity. Your credibility is in negative numbers now.


    Tell you what go read some books on negotiation techniques and maybe a few on property investment and then when you have a reasonable grasp of things come back and post here.


  • Options
    #78
    TheOldHand
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 91 ✭✭TheOldHand


    D3PO wrote: »
    :D This cheered me up. I needed a laugh.

    Again utter nonsense. You have no idea what your talking about. Nobody will rent somewhere for 100 per month regardless of their circumstances, keep up with the ludacris comments though.

    You are losing badly here.

    http://www.daft.ie/searchrental.daft?id=1291341


  • Options
    #79
    D3PO
    Registered Users Posts: 7,879 ✭✭✭D3PO


    TheOldHand wrote: »
    You are losing badly here.

    http://www.daft.ie/searchrental.daft?id=1291341

    bless

    1) thats in Northern Ireland not the Republic
    2) its 116 not 100

    but carry on. maybe find somethign in vietnam next


  • Options
    #80
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    TheOldHand wrote: »
    But a huge number cannot sell up. They are stuck with banks refusing sales. These people will take 100 per month whether they like it or not. You really have to realise how little rental value properties have in rural Ireland. They knocked a load of apartments in Longford as there was so little demand in the area.

    You'd lose less money leaving it empty.


  • Options
    #81
    D3PO
    Registered Users Posts: 7,879 ✭✭✭D3PO


    BostonB wrote: »
    You'd loose less money leaving it empty.

    exactly my point.

    PRTB fee, daft advertising costs, possible EA fees, bank charges to recieve DD, maintenance costs, equity loss doe to future CGT charges, possible tax in rental income (although unlikely) etc etc.

    completly and utterly stupid to rent at that rate, so it wouldnt happen.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    TheOldHand
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 91 ✭✭TheOldHand


    BostonB wrote: »
    You'd lose less money leaving it empty.

    You guys are really fighting a losing battle. I knew one would mention the NI aspect. That is showing that houses do not a floor under which rent will never fall. This should be even truer in this country given how many ghost estates we have in remote areas.

    If you left the house empty then you would have a lot more maintenance costs, still have property taxes, insurance issues and security issues. You are getting a house sitter in and covering some of your costs. D3PO is sick from earlier I bet.


  • Options
    #83
    TheOldHand
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 91 ✭✭TheOldHand


    D3PO wrote: »
    exactly my point.

    PRTB fee, daft advertising costs, possible EA fees, bank charges to recieve DD, maintenance costs, equity loss doe to future CGT charges, possible tax in rental income (although unlikely) etc etc.

    completly and utterly stupid to rent at that rate, so it wouldnt happen.
    yet it happens in NI and nearly every other developed country. Why are we special? We are in a worse state than all of them.


  • Options
    #84
    D3PO
    Registered Users Posts: 7,879 ✭✭✭D3PO


    TheOldHand wrote: »
    yet it happens in NI and nearly every other developed country. Why are we special? We are in a worse state than all of them.

    look you are wrong at least be man enough to admit it. You said people woudl be forced to rent at that rate due to their financial difficulties.

    They wont it makes no sense. A default and reposession makes more sense, why would they throw good money after bad. Renting in the REPUBLIC of Ireland for 100 euro will cost you money you would be stupid to do it.

    You cant provide any examples to prove me otherwise but keep on your crusade.


  • Options
    #85
    TheOldHand
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 91 ✭✭TheOldHand


    D3PO wrote: »
    look you are wrong at least be man enough to admit it. You said people woudl be forced to rent at that rate due to their financial difficulties.

    They wont it makes no sense. A default and reposession makes more sense, why would they throw good money after bad. Renting in the REPUBLIC of Ireland for 100 euro will cost you money you would be stupid to do it.

    You cant provide any examples to prove me otherwise but keep on your crusade.

    Ever hear of a ghost estate. I've included some background material for you if you haven't.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_estate

    These are empty properties. The rent being received on them is zero. That is less than the number 100. They are owned by the banks who themselves are completley insolvent and who are playing a game of keeping up appearances. When this plays out properly all of these properties will find there way on the rental and sales market. The banks will realise their losses and will be getting rents that will be as low as €100 in some areas. Better than nothing for the reasons I outlined above. If they rented them a few years ago for that money they wouldn't be destroyed from theft/vandalism and close to worthless.

    So simple...


  • Options
    #86
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    TheOldHand wrote: »
    You guys are really fighting a losing battle. I knew one would mention the NI aspect. That is showing that houses do not a floor under which rent will never fall. This should be even truer in this country given how many ghost estates we have in remote areas.

    If you left the house empty then you would have a lot more maintenance costs, still have property taxes, insurance issues and security issues. You are getting a house sitter in and covering some of your costs. D3PO is sick from earlier I bet.

    It doesn't sound like you ever owned a house or rented one out to someone else. There nothing like the same amount of expense from leaving a place unoccupied as there is in wear and tear when its rented.


  • Options
    #87
    TheOldHand
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 91 ✭✭TheOldHand


    BostonB wrote: »
    It doesn't sound like you ever owned a house or rented one out to someone else. There nothing like the same amount of expense from leaving a place unoccupied as there is in wear and tear when its rented.

    Do you know how much house insurance is for an unoccupied house?


  • Options
    #88
    D3PO
    Registered Users Posts: 7,879 ✭✭✭D3PO


    TheOldHand wrote: »
    Ever hear of a ghost estate. I've included some background material for you if you haven't.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_estate

    These are empty properties. The rent being received on them is zero. That is less than the number 100. They are owned by the banks who themselves are completley insolvent and who are playing a game of keeping up appearances. When this plays out properly all of these properties will find there way on the rental and sales market. The banks will realise their losses and will be getting rents that will be as low as €100 in some areas. Better than nothing for the reasons I outlined above. If they rented them a few years ago for that money they wouldn't be destroyed from theft/vandalism and close to worthless.

    So simple...

    So simple you cant get your head around it. Some of these ghost estates are economically unviable, including the shells in them. They are of no value as they currently stand, and in many cases will end up being demolished and sold as agri land.

    A house in a ghost estate thats finished now that is empty is empty for a reason. It cannot be rented as nobody wants to live there besides which many are already vandalised , stripped of their pipes, smashed windows etc.

    Maybe you should go into the banks as a consultant though im sure they would love this revenue you can get them that they cant get themselves :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #89
    D3PO
    Registered Users Posts: 7,879 ✭✭✭D3PO


    TheOldHand wrote: »
    Do you know how much house insurance is for an unoccupied house?

    Im pretty sure you dont, give you dont even believe in insurance for your own rental :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #90
    D3PO
    Registered Users Posts: 7,879 ✭✭✭D3PO


    BostonB wrote: »
    It doesn't sound like you ever owned a house or rented one out to someone else. There nothing like the same amount of expense from leaving a place unoccupied as there is in wear and tear when its rented.


    Your banging your head into a brick wall Boston.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    TheOldHand
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 91 ✭✭TheOldHand


    D3PO wrote: »
    Im pretty sure you dont, give you dont even believe in insurance for your own rental :rolleyes:

    Ha I have you again. Caught you pretending to know stuff. It is a requirement to have insurance if you have a mortgage.


    http://www.moving.ie/mortgages/insurance.asp
    Please Note: Some insurance and protection policies are optional, while others are required by the mortgage lender before they'll issue your mortgage cheque:

    Insurance your mortgage provider will required you to have (at a minimum):

    Life insurance / mortgage protection insurance
    House insurance (at a minimum, you are required to insure the structure)


Advertisement