Glut of repossessed houses could depress prices ‘by up to 25%’

Mustard1972

Villa05 wrote: »

You may well be a taxpayer, however it will be your children and their children that will be paying for the vast majority of this mess. We, after 5/6 years of austerity are still adding to the bill.

So I ask you, is it fair to pass massive mortgages as well as substantially increased taxes to pay for a mess left by our generation to your children.

Taxes and property prices/rents are less than they were 10 years ago.
You would think that people pay higher taxes than ever now the way people go on. People have short memories. I think I was paying 24 and 46% in 2000 or there about. More than that before and a bit less after.
Its time to get real here.
And no I won't go searching for links to tax rates in 2000. If you need them Google them.

Mustard1972

ezra_pound wrote: »

Face palm moment.

Let me guess. Another person with no experience of renting or buying property going back any more than a few years.

ezra_pound

Mustard1972 wrote: »

Let me guess. Another person with no experience of renting or buying property going back any more than a few years.

Let me qualify my face palm moment. You refer to ten years ago, 2003 as a benchmark for property prices. that very year the economist ran a cover story that Irish property was overvalued by c. 20%. Also I don't think that you are taking inflation into account.


Look I believe that Dublin property is correctly priced but your argument is awfully flawed.


I've bought twice by the way.

ezra_pound

Mustard1972 wrote: »

Let me guess. Another person with no experience of renting or buying property going back any more than a few years.

Let me qualify my face palm moment. You refer to ten years ago, 2003 as a benchmark for property prices. that very year the economist ran a cover story that Irish property was overvalued by c. 20%. Also I don't think that you are taking inflation into account.


Look I believe that Dublin property is correctly priced but your argument is awfully flawed.


I've bought twice by the way.

El_Dangeroso

Mustard1972 wrote: »

Yes they are. And Google is your friend. Knock yourself out. I'm.not going to go looking for links for that say the sky is blue if someone asks me do I have links for it. Put in some effort yourself. Or if you are feeling really lazy just type in daft.ie into a browser and follow the trail.

Let me guess you weren't paying rent in 2003.

I did google it, and I couldn't find a graph that goes back to 2003. Can you?

Calina

Mustard1972 wrote: »

I think you've been asleep for a few years. We don't have high property price anymore. We have property prices and rents that are lower than they were 10 years ago.
People seem to think that everyone has a right to buy a house. There will always be a large proportion if the population that cannot afford to buy a house. Its always been like that. Witness what happened when anyone who wanted could get enough money from the banks to buy a house. Oh, you must have been asleep for that one.

The fact that prices are lower now (in some places) than they were 10 years ago does not make them not high. They were higher 10 years ago than they were 14 years ago and even 14 years ago, frankly, I thought they were insane.

In the intervening time, particularly in the Dublin metropolitan area, a significant number of properties were built but they changed the property mix available quite a bit from mainly houses to a mix of apartments and houses. But the apartments, for the most part, were not built with sustainable living in mind, but with revenue maximisation for investors.

So while property prices have falling a lot since 2006, the simple truth is we still have a messed up market because the supply does not really match the requirements for the market.

for the tl:dr version; properties being lower now than they were 10 years ago does not mean they are now low. They are still high. They still have a way to go in my view.

Villa05

Mustard1972 wrote: »

Taxes and property prices/rents are less than they were 10 years ago.
You would think that people pay higher taxes than ever now the way people go on. People have short memories. I think I was paying 24 and 46% in 2000 or there about. More than that before and a bit less after.
Its time to get real here.
And no I won't go searching for links to tax rates in 2000. If you need them Google them.

10 years ago was the height of the bubble with full employment. Any comparison with today and 10 years ago is lunacy

2000/01 rates were 22/44% It was a time where you got something back from your PRSI, now you get nothing from an increased USC paid on all income. Tax reliefs that were there then are gone now. Stealth taxes are everywhere now, less so in the 2000/01

Tax rates from the mid 80's to mid 90's were there to correct mishandling of the economy in the 80's. These rates are more reflective of future rates over a much longer term as our debt mountain has become unsustainable

Mustard1972

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

I did google it, and I couldn't find a graph that goes back to 2003. Can you?

I was looking at it on Daft only a month ago. Its all there if you are bothered to put in some effort for yourself.

Mustard1972

ezra_pound wrote: »

Let me qualify my face palm moment. You refer to ten years ago, 2003 as a benchmark for property prices. that very year the economist ran a cover story that Irish property was overvalued by c. 20%. Also I don't think that you are taking inflation into account.


Look I believe that Dublin property is correctly priced but your argument is awfully flawed.


I've bought twice by the way.

Many stories are run all the time saying all sorts. People dont seem to be able to form their own opinions anymore from the evidence in front of their eyes.

Nevertheless rents are cheaper than now 10 years ago. Taxes are lower now. Even go back as far as the turn of the century and you'll find the same.
There was a period when anyone who wanted could get a mortgage and that is what ****ed up the property market. People cannot all afford to buy property, yet everyone thinks that they should be able to. Those days are now gone and we are back to a normal market (In Dublin I should say. The countryside is indeed a basket case and it doesnt matter what nama do there they probably cant drive prices any lower there anyway).
See the thread about a conspiracy by estate agents to drive property prices up if you want a laugh.

Go find put for yourself and do your own homework on rents, taxes and inflation and I think you'll find a surprise once you put the work in.

El_Dangeroso

Mustard1972 wrote: »

I was looking at it on Daft only a month ago. Its all there if you are bothered to put in some effort for yourself.

I'm googling and can't find anything, if it's so easy to find then link to it please.

Villa05

Mustard1972 wrote: »

Nevertheless rents are cheaper than now 10 years ago. Taxes are lower now. Even go back as far as the turn of the century and you'll find the same.
There was a period when anyone who wanted could get a mortgage and that is what ****ed up the property market. People cannot all afford to buy property, yet everyone thinks that they should be able to. Those days are now gone and we are back to a normal market (In Dublin I should say. The countryside is indeed a basket case and it doesnt matter what nama do there they probably cant drive prices any lower there anyway).
See the thread about a conspiracy by estate agents to drive property prices up if you want a laugh.

Go find put for yourself and do your own homework on rents, taxes and inflation and I think you'll find a surprise once you put the work in.

Cheaper than 10 years ago= So What, 10 years ago was a bubble
Anyone could get a mortgage. This has not been resolved yet and the implications of correction have yet to feed into property prices
+50% cash sales + those not paying not being dealt with is not a normal market.

gaius c

Mustard1972 wrote: »

As a tax payer I expect NAMA to do as much as they can to make as much money as they can from the property on their books.
Flooding the market and driving down the price of property is not in the best interest of the tax payer. It might be in the best interest of those wishing to buy property, but its not in the best interest of the tax payer in general if they flood the market.

Mustard1972 wrote: »

I was looking at it on Daft only a month ago. Its all there if you are bothered to put in some effort for yourself.

No. You made the point. The onus of proving it is on you.

Mustard1972

gaius c wrote: »

No. You made the point. The onus of proving it is on you.

Why would I waste MY time proving the sky is blue.
I dont really give a **** if someone believes it because I said it or not. A fact is a fact and if they want to convince themselves whether it is fact or fiction then put the work in. I already know its fact, therefore I dont need to bother helping someone else with laziness.
I already told him google or daft and if he cant find it there then God only knows what he is at.
Next he'll be asking me to prove that Co. Dublin is on the east coast of Ireland.

So take my word for it or dont, or go find out yourself for sure, I dont really care tbh.

ezra_pound

Mustard1972 wrote: »

Many stories are run all the time saying all sorts. People dont seem to be able to form their own opinions anymore from the evidence in front of their eyes.

Nevertheless rents are cheaper than now 10 years ago. Taxes are lower now. Even go back as far as the turn of the century and you'll find the same.
There was a period when anyone who wanted could get a mortgage and that is what ****ed up the property market. People cannot all afford to buy property, yet everyone thinks that they should be able to. Those days are now gone and we are back to a normal market (In Dublin I should say. The countryside is indeed a basket case and it doesnt matter what nama do there they probably cant drive prices any lower there anyway).
See the thread about a conspiracy by estate agents to drive property prices up if you want a laugh.

Go find put for yourself and do your own homework on rents, taxes and inflation and I think you'll find a surprise once you put the work in.

I think you completely misunderstood my point. I believe that Dublin prices are now correct.

By the way taxes are not lower now than ten years ago.

I've made the exact same point earlier in this thread about nama and repos not being a major factor in an already basket case rural market.

Are you saying that the economist article was incorrect?

Did i say I wanted an inflation adjusted graph? No. I said that the poster was flawed not taking inflation into account.

ezra_pound

Mustard1972 wrote: »

Many stories are run all the time saying all sorts. People dont seem to be able to form their own opinions anymore from the evidence in front of their eyes.

Nevertheless rents are cheaper than now 10 years ago. Taxes are lower now. Even go back as far as the turn of the century and you'll find the same.
There was a period when anyone who wanted could get a mortgage and that is what ****ed up the property market. People cannot all afford to buy property, yet everyone thinks that they should be able to. Those days are now gone and we are back to a normal market (In Dublin I should say. The countryside is indeed a basket case and it doesnt matter what nama do there they probably cant drive prices any lower there anyway).
See the thread about a conspiracy by estate agents to drive property prices up if you want a laugh.

Go find put for yourself and do your own homework on rents, taxes and inflation and I think you'll find a surprise once you put the work in.

I am doing my own homework by the way.

That's exactly what I did and on the basis of that I bought a 3 bed semi in a decent area of Dublin in mid 2012.

………;)

jay0109

For the record, rents in my area of SCD (D6W) are now higher than they were 10 years ago.
Family homes are more expensive now, but smaller houses and apt's are cheaper

Quango Unchained

ezra_pound wrote: »

I am doing my own homework by the way.

That's exactly what I did and on the basis of that I bought a 3 bed semi in a decent area of Dublin in mid 2012.

………;)

Plenty of people who bought in '06 felt smug a year after buying. Look back at threads from that time to pick up on the mood.

Bob24

jay0109 wrote: »

For the record, rents in my area of SCD (D6W) are now higher than they were 10 years ago.
Family homes are more expensive now, but smaller houses and apt's are cheaper

Yes, at least where I am (Grand Canal Docks / Docklands) and as far as rents are concerned; it is clear they are reaching or have already reached their highest point EVER. If I remember correctly 10 years ago a 2 bed was around 1200 per month (in the older blocks and the newer ones were being completed). In 2006 just before the whole mess it was in the 1500-1800 area depending on whether you were in the "fancy" new ones. Then it dropped fairly quickly and I think at the lowest even the nicest ones could be had for around 1000. If you look at Daft today, the asking prices are between 1650 and 1950 and I would say at best you'll get them to knock off 150 euros from them.

Specific area which is not representative of the whole country; but I think in here the rents are more than done recovering from the crisis (of course different story if you buy, but while it is still half price I wouldn't call them a great deal given the quality of construction and the doubts I have for the future of the area).

handlemaster

The in do this morning is playing it up again.

moxin

Bob24 wrote: »

Yes, at least where I am (Grand Canal Docks / Docklands) and as far as rents are concerned;.

All those transient Googlers and Facebookers need a place to live and its usually near work for them. If Google ever pulled out or moved to another area, the rental market in your area would collapse.

gaius c

Mustard1972 wrote: »

Why would I waste MY time proving the sky is blue.

If it's that easy, you'd be doing a great service to us ordinary mere mortals by sharing your infinite wisdom with us.

I dont really give a **** if someone believes it because I said it or not.

For a guy who doesn't care, you sure are posting a lot here to tell us how little you care.

A fact is a fact and if they want to convince themselves whether it is fact or fiction then put the work in. I already know its fact, therefore I dont need to bother helping someone else with laziness.

*peer review fail*

So take my word for it or dont, or go find out yourself for sure, I dont really care tbh.

So basically, you can't prove anything or add any merit to the discussion and you're getting aggressive in response to polite requests for enlightenment.

Bob24

moxin wrote: »

All those transient Googlers and Facebookers need a place to live and its usually near work for them. If Google ever pulled out or moved to another area, the rental market in your area would collapse.

Yes absolutely we agree it would take a big hit and the area is not representative of the whole country.

Having said that, I would also point out that Google was already there and growing in 2007 while the rents were being massively reduced.

Quango Unchained

'Home repossessions will rise, warns EU ahead of troika visit'

'In its just-published report on its most recent inspection visit, the European Commission warned that a rise in home repossessions is on the way as the banks finally tackle the issue of mortgage arrears.'

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/home-repossessions-will-rise-warns-eu-ahead-of-troika-visit-29706456.html

handlemaster

Repossession should be higher but the banks are backing off from it

Mustard1972

gaius c wrote: »

If it's that easy, you'd be doing a great service to us ordinary mere mortals by sharing your infinite wisdom with us.

For a guy who doesn't care, you sure are posting a lot here to tell us how little you care.

*peer review fail*

So basically, you can't prove anything or add any merit to the discussion and you're getting aggressive in response to polite requests for enlightenment.

Isn't it amazing how little effort people on here can put into finding facts for themselves. Even the mods.
Its almost like when pointed to a website where the info is, that they actually don't want to find quite easy to find info that is on there.

Here's my last effort at helping you help yourselves. The info is in the day rental report. Now please don't ask me to go if you a link to it. i can't be bothered. Too much effort posting from a phone.

And for the mod who thinks I'm trolling. Look at the daft report yourself too.

El_Dangeroso

It's amazing how riled up people get at a polite request for a source! :pac:

jmayo

Mustard1972 wrote: »

I think you've been asleep for a few years. We don't have high property price anymore. We have property prices and rents that are lower than they were 10 years ago.
People seem to think that everyone has a right to buy a house. There will always be a large proportion if the population that cannot afford to buy a house. Its always been like that. Witness what happened when anyone who wanted could get enough money from the banks to buy a house. Oh, you must have been asleep for that one.

Oh ffs stop benchmarking anything to do with property against 2003 or 2002 or any bloody year in this century before the bust for that matter.

You do know that 2003 was in the upward curve of our bubble ???

One could say our bubble had begun back in the mid to late 90s when taxes started decreasing, the real celtic tiger economy was taking off and Ireland had real sustainable growth.

Mustard1972 wrote: »

Let me guess. Another person with no experience of renting or buying property going back any more than a few years.

After your above comparison why does pot and kettle come to mind :rolleyes:

Mustard1972

jmayo wrote: »

Oh ffs stop benchmarking anything to do with property against 2003 or 2002 or any bloody year in this century before the bust for that matter.

You do know that 2003 was in the upward curve of our bubble ???

One could say our bubble had begun back in the mid to late 90s when taxes started decreasing, the real celtic tiger economy was taking off and Ireland had real sustainable growth.




After your above comparison why does pot and kettle come to mind :rolleyes:

sounds like you are suggesting we benchmark rents with rents in the last century. Good one. Its nearly 2014 you know. Back in 2000 if we were to be going back the same amount of time bobby Ewing would be getting out if a shower on TV.

i said that rents are still cheaper now than they were in 2003.
or 2000 for that matter. actually since we joined the euro.

Look at the daft rental reports.

But oh no, instead of going and confirming this for yourselves you try to deflect it. Go and look for yourselves and stop the misdirection.

jmayo

Mustard1972 wrote: »

I think you've been asleep for a few years. We don't have high property price anymore. We have property prices and rents that are lower than they were 10 years ago.
People seem to think that everyone has a right to buy a house. There will always be a large proportion if the population that cannot afford to buy a house. Its always been like that. Witness what happened when anyone who wanted could get enough money from the banks to buy a house. Oh, you must have been asleep for that one.

jmayo wrote: »

Oh ffs stop benchmarking anything to do with property against 2003 or 2002 or any bloody year in this century before the bust for that matter.

You do know that 2003 was in the upward curve of our bubble ???

One could say our bubble had begun back in the mid to late 90s when taxes started decreasing, the real celtic tiger economy was taking off and Ireland had real sustainable growth.

Mustard1972 wrote: »

sounds like you are suggesting we benchmark rents with rents in the last century. Good one. Its nearly 2014 you know. Back in 2000 if we were to be going back the same amount of time bobby Ewing would be getting out if a shower on TV.

i said that rents are still cheaper now than they were in 2003.
or 2000 for that matter. actually since we joined the euro.

Look at the daft rental reports.

But oh no, instead of going and confirming this for yourselves you try to deflect it. Go and look for yourselves and stop the misdirection.

See in your post above the bold part.

My post was in direct reply to your point that property prices are not high and that they are lower than 10 years ago i.e. 2003.

You were the one that mentioned property prices and you now chose to just concentrate on rental prices, since your comparison of property prices today to 2003 prices (bubble prices) is shown to be based on a misleading foundation.

2003 was part of our bubble and comparing those with any price, bar other bubble years, is a ludicrous starting point and is about as much use as comparing deaths in Germany in 1944 with those in 1990.

And even comparing rents has a question mark since the economic environment has changed beyound belief and we now have positive emigration numbers rather than immigration to deal with.

If anyone is deflecting around here then it is you.

Mustard1972

jmayo wrote: »

See in your post above the bold part.

My post was in direct reply to your point that property prices are not high and that they are lower than 10 years ago i.e. 2003.

You were the one that mentioned property prices and you now chose to just concentrate on rental prices, since your comparison of property prices today to 2003 prices (bubble prices) is shown to be based on a misleading foundation.

2003 was part of our bubble and comparing those with any price, bar other bubble years, is a ludicrous starting point and is about as much use as comparing deaths in Germany in 1944 with those in 1990.

And even comparing rents has a question mark since the economic environment has changed beyound belief and we now have positive emigration numbers rather than immigration to deal with.

If anyone is deflecting around here then it is you.

My points still stand.