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

Vulture fund to sell currently tenanted homes in Dublin 15

Options
1235789

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    gaius c
    Registered Users Posts: 3,528 ✭✭✭gaius c


    newacc2015 wrote: »
    We need a system like the US, where if you fail to pay your rent you get a bad credit rating. Landlord check your credit rating before you moved in to check that you havent failed to pay rent/loans in the past. Even power companies in the US can you report you default on your electricity bill. If you have a minor flaw on your credit rating you will find it never impossible to get a mortgage here. You will have difficulty getting a credit card, car loan etc.

    Our entire credit rating system nearly only benefits the consumer and put the lender. I would imagine there would be significantly less tenants doing a runner, if they knew they couldnt rent a house in the future due to having bad credit or they couldnt get a car loan due to not paying their rent previously.

    Provided landlords also have to undergo such credit checks, this would be a very good solution.


  • Options
    #123
    davo10
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,926 ✭✭✭davo10


    gaius c wrote: »
    Provided landlords also have to undergo such credit checks, this would be a very good solution.

    Why would a LL be required to undergo a credit check? They are providing the property, not finance.


  • Options
    #124
    davo10
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,926 ✭✭✭davo10


    beauf wrote: »
    Not sure you could do that anymore it would be seen as discriminate against RA. If tenants volunteer such information. That would be different.

    If the requirement is applied to every applicant irrespective of whether they at RA or not, I don't see how it can be discriminatory. Personally I don't ask to see bank statements, it is over reaching but I do ask for 3 months deposit in advance.


  • Options
    #125
    esforum
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,420 ✭✭✭esforum


    gaius c wrote: »
    Provided landlords also have to undergo such credit checks, this would be a very good solution.

    Why? When you apply for a loan you get checked, not the bank.


  • Options
    #126
    Villa05
    Registered Users Posts: 4,619 ✭✭✭Villa05


    davo10 wrote:
    Why would a LL be required to undergo a credit check? They are providing the property, not finance.


    Are they a secure LL up to date on mortgage repayments, many reports of LL pocketing the rent while not fulfilling their obligations on the mortgages

    Tennant need to be protected from this


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    newacc2015
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,379 ✭✭✭newacc2015


    Arbiter of Good Taste wrote: »
    Australia also has a good system where rogue tenants. Are blacklisted. All a landlord has to do is check the list, and if a tenant has done a runner, they will never rent a property again. I'm not sure, but I think it also works for bad landlords. If that's the cSe, both sides get protected which is the way it should be.

    You can search the PRTB database for dodgy Landlords too. You can search tenants also. But the way the PRTB works, is that they will only take on a case against a tenant if it is a certain amount of money. Meaning you can do a runner as a tenant and the PRTB may not take on the case, as the money isnt at the their threshold for investigation.


  • Options
    #128
    borderlinemeath
    Registered Users Posts: 5,340 ✭✭✭borderlinemeath


    gaius c wrote: »
    Provided landlords also have to undergo such credit checks, this would be a very good solution.

    I'm sure twinlite would pass a credit check:rolleyes:

    A tenant may think that they are far more secure with a company eg Twinlite as a landlord, surely they'll do everything above board and create a secure tenancy. So many times on this forum you hear tenants wanting their landlords to be more "professional" and "act like a business". And twinlite have done just that, so it just shows that the grass isn't greener on the other side.


  • Options
    #129
    davo10
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,926 ✭✭✭davo10


    Villa05 wrote: »
    Are they a secure LL up to date on mortgage repayments, many reports of LL pocketing the rent while not fulfilling their obligations on the mortgages

    Tennant need to be protected from this

    What has that got to do with the tenant? The tenants rights are protected even if the property is repossessed by th bank. If the LL is "pocketing" the rent, that is a matter for Revenue and the bank, not the person renting the property.


  • Options
    #130
    Villa05
    Registered Users Posts: 4,619 ✭✭✭Villa05


    davo10 wrote:
    What has that got to do with the tenant? The tenants rights are protected even if the property is repossessed by th bank. If the LL is "pocketing" the rent, that is a matter for Revenue and the bank, not the person renting the property.


    Rental market has changed drastically. It is now more a longterm option.
    Good tenants want a LL that is committed long term and good LL's would be delighted to have trustworthy longterm tennant

    When proposals to help good LL find good tenants all you hear on these boards is
    Why should I do that?

    If that's the general attitude, maybe ye deserve each other


  • Options
    #131
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    Arbiter of Good Taste wrote: »
    Australia also has a good system where rogue tenants. Are blacklisted. All a landlord has to do is check the list, and if a tenant has done a runner, they will never rent a property again. I'm not sure, but I think it also works for bad landlords. If that's the cSe, both sides get protected which is the way it should be.

    How have moved into bad tenants?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    davo10 wrote: »
    What has that got to do with the tenant? The tenants rights are protected even if the property is repossessed by th bank. If the LL is "pocketing" the rent, that is a matter for Revenue and the bank, not the person renting the property.

    It's a matter for all taxpayers if the banks are state owned. Which most are.


  • Options
    #133
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    borderlinemeath wrote: »
    I'm sure twinlite would pass a credit check:rolleyes:

    A tenant may think that they are far more secure with a company eg Twinlite as a landlord, surely they'll do everything above board and create a secure tenancy. So many times on this forum you hear tenants wanting their landlords to be more "professional" and "act like a business". And twinlite have done just that, so it just shows that the grass isn't greener on the other side.

    It looks like renters need protection. Laws.


  • Options
    #134
    newacc2015
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,379 ✭✭✭newacc2015


    Villa05 wrote: »
    Rental market has changed drastically. It is now more a longterm option.
    Good tenants want a LL that is committed long term and good LL's would be delighted to have trustworthy longterm tennant

    Landlords are business people. All they want to do is maximise their profit and they are fully entitled to do. Every other industry in Ireland does the same and it is accept as the norm. A LL treats his business like a for-profit business by increasing rents or selling their property, yet it is seen as greedy.

    If tenants want long term, should start accepting completely unfurnished properties like Germans. That includes having to install a kitchen themselves. If Irish tenants want the German tenancy laws, then tenants should take on the cost and responsibilities that come with being a German tenant.


  • Options
    #135
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    newacc2015 wrote: »
    Landlords are business people. All they want to do is maximise their profit and they are fully entitled to do. Every other industry in Ireland does the same and it is accept as the norm. A LL treats his business like a for-profit business by increasing rents or selling their property, yet it is seen as greedy.

    You could have made that argument in the 19th C are the landlords dispossessed entire villages.
    If tenants want long term, should start accepting completely unfurnished properties like Germans. That includes having to install a kitchen themselves. If Irish tenants want the German tenancy laws, then tenants should take on the cost and responsibilities that come with being a German tenant.

    What we need is public social housing and more housing in general so the landlord classes are a tiny minority of ownership, necessary only for single people transitioning between their parents ( or abroad) and family.


  • Options
    #136
    davo10
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,926 ✭✭✭davo10


    Eugene Norman wrote: »
    It's a matter for all taxpayers if the banks are state owned. Which most are.

    Yes it may be, but that is between the lendor (bank) and the borrower (LL), the tenant should not be a party to that business relationship.


  • Options
    #137
    davo10
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,926 ✭✭✭davo10


    Eugene Norman wrote: »
    It looks like renters need protection. Laws.

    Renters have protection. Laws.


  • Options
    #138
    davo10
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,926 ✭✭✭davo10


    Eugene Norman wrote: »
    You could have made that argument in the 19th C are the landlords dispossessed entire villages.



    What we need is public social housing and more housing in general so the landlord classes are a tiny minority of ownership, necessary only for single people transitioning between their parents ( or abroad) and family.

    You need to pull out your history books buddy, mind boggling stuff.


  • Options
    #139
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    davo10 wrote: »
    Renters have protection. Laws.

    Bog all compared to most countries.


  • Options
    #140
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    davo10 wrote: »
    You need to pull out your history books buddy, mind boggling stuff.

    I did. That's why I referenced 19C landlords who dispossessed Irish tenants and who were just maximising profits. Not sure what your reference is to though?


  • Options
    #141
    davo10
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,926 ✭✭✭davo10


    Eugene Norman wrote: »
    Bog all compared to most countries.

    You are joking or are you trolling? It's virtually impossible to get an errant tenant out here because of the protection afforded them by those same laws. Have a read through the RTA and PRTB cases.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    April 73
    Registered Users Posts: 846 ✭✭✭April 73


    A properly functioning long-term rental market would benefit both tenants & landlords. It shouldn't be an endless bad landlord v bad tenant argument.

    Imagine being able to let an unfurnished property long-term with reasonable rent increases being allowed & with the back-up that if a tenant stops paying they can be moved out within a max of two-three months.
    Imagine if tenants had security of tenure & a place they could make a home for the long-term with rules in place to deal with rogue landlords.

    Maybe I am imagining a utopia but I see benefits for everyone in long-term leases with protections for both landlord & tenant.


  • Options
    #143
    davo10
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,926 ✭✭✭davo10


    Eugene Norman wrote: »
    I did. That's why I referenced 19C landlords who dispossessed Irish tenants and who were just maximising profits. Not sure what your reference is to though?

    Was the RTA enacted then? Did the tenant have the protection of the courts then? The evictions of the 1800's were by English landlords given lands during the plantation, today's evictions are by people who legally bought/own property and must evict within the laws set down by the Irish people.


  • Options
    #144
    The_Conductor
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 32,285 Mod ✭✭✭✭The_Conductor


    Eugene Norman- kindly familiarise yourself with the forum's charter- and abide by it, if you intend to post in this forum again. Any more trolling in this thread- and I will ban you.


  • Options
    #145
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    davo10 wrote: »
    Was the RTA enacted then? Did the tenant have the protection of the courts then? The evictions of the 1800's were by English landlords given lands during the plantation, today's evictions are by people who legally bought/own property and must evict within the laws set down by the Irish people.

    Don't be a silly boy.

    By protection I mean long term tenancy agreements and protection from dubious evictions. Since I have close relatives who have been evicted from their house (or face extortionate rents) that situation is much more relevant to me and more pressing socially than the few errant non rent payers.

    Furthermore the evictions were legal and regardless of when land was given, they had legal title at the time of the evictions and were maximising profit.

    Last post until I get some response from feedback.


  • Options
    #146
    Bowlardo
    Registered Users Posts: 2,390 ✭✭✭Bowlardo


    Probably stupid question but why were the houses not sold on the open market? Why did mama gi directly to a vulture fund


  • Options
    #147
    Gandalph
    Registered Users Posts: 1,792 ✭✭✭Gandalph


    The media are having a complete orgy with this one, even the SBP today headlines with quote from one of the Larkins; "We are a business, not a charity", and from the sounds of the article they are actually being very charitable in what they are offering the current tenants in compared to the usual conditions of these situations. Their biggest mistake was serving all these notices at once, if they had gone about gradually splitting the eviction notices over a longer time frame then this would not of been a part of this crazy media spotlight.


  • Options
    #148
    HeidiHeidi
    Registered Users Posts: 29,364 ✭✭✭✭HeidiHeidi


    Bowlardo wrote: »
    Probably stupid question but why were the houses not sold on the open market? Why did mama gi directly to a vulture fund

    NAMA (I'm assuming that's what you mean) had/had nothing to do with this situation.


  • Options
    #149
    Tigger
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,705 ✭✭✭✭Tigger


    Is it not liabelous to call the investors a vulture fund
    I don't mean on here I mean the rte news are using the term and it's a slur
    I'm sure they aren't called a vulture fund correctly


  • Options
    #150
    DublinDilbert
    Registered Users Posts: 5,379 ✭✭✭DublinDilbert


    I heard someone on the radio a couple of years back saying many of these funds look for a 30% return over 3 years. So as the loans were purchased in 2012, the timing is about right. Will they be able to clear €220k+30% for the houses?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    Gandalph
    Registered Users Posts: 1,792 ✭✭✭Gandalph


    DublinDilbert wrote: »
    I heard someone on the radio a couple of years back saying many of these funds look for a 30% return over 3 years. So as the loans were purchased in 2012, the timing is about right. Will they be able to clear €220k+30% for the houses?

    They don't buy the loan books at their full value, they might of only paid 70% of its actual worth as Ulster bank just want it off their books. I don't know the specifics of this deal but that's generally how it works.


Advertisement