Does the CB realise how the new mortgage rules have effected people

yqtwqxqm

Peist2007 wrote: »

Fixed term leases give the Landlord security and override Part 4. You're welcome.

Tell me what happens then if I rent an apartment to you and say after month 2 you stop paying the rent and refuse to leave.
What can I do about it?

or

On the other hand, I decide I want you out after 2 months and you decide you like the place so much you would like to stay rent free for another year, so you do.
Who is this relationship stacked against.

You're welcome.

Divelment

Angel2016 wrote: »

I was just wondering does the CB and banks in general realise the negative effect the new rules are having on people trying to buy their first home together, do they realise how many people are going to be stuck in the renting sector for alot longer then they hoped?

Have they actually thought all of these rules through good enough, they said it was to stop the prices of houses rising which it seems to have done but also it has stopped alot of people from being able to buy a house, did they think about where there is a couple and one is a second time buyer and one is a first time buyer?
I'd like to know people's thoughts on this, do you think that Ireland will end up where more people just accept the fact they will stay renting for a good part of their lives and if so do we need clearer and precise rules for tenants and also for landlords.

The whole thing is a wholesale con job OP. If the Central Bank and the government really wanted to fix the property market and the housing crisis in this country, there is a very simple way to do it. Simply stop this outrageous situation where vulture funds and people with huge cash sums are allowed to buy residential property for investment purposes. That is all that needs to be done to restore some equilibrium to the Irish residential property market.

Today we learn that 60% of properties bought in 2014 were bought with cash. These are certainly not first time buyers, these are investors/speculators. These are the same people who drove up asset prices back in the boom when people who wanted to buy to live in a house they were queuing up for (usually off plans), had to stand in a queue with investors standing in front of them and behind them. We have learnt absolutely nothing in this country, as we see the property speculator class again, queuing up to push people who want to buy to live in, out of a market that is not even building houses.

If the government wanted to deal with any of this, it would have done so, however the government is happy to let a property market emerge where investors are treated equally to would be owners and residents of a property, in terms of the right to buy a property.

This is all very fixable but a total change on the political scene is needed to get rid of the failed FF/FG/Labour/SF policies that first of all caused a housing crisis and since then, are determined to sustain a crisis by allowing residential property assets to be used for speculative purposes. We need to go back to a place where (1) It is not unacceptable to want to own your own house for yourself and your family, and (2) That is what houses are for, not for enriching people who are too lazy or stupid to go start up a business if they want to make money by investing their money in their own idea.

fatherted1969

The rules are very unfairly biased towards double income couples with no children. I was refused a topup on my mortgage early this year, was actually approved it last summer then my wife became I'll so I shelved it till she became better then tried to restart it in new year. She had used up all her sick leave at this point. Bank informed us that original application had expired so I had to apply bases on my single income which was knocked back straight away. They were only too happy to offer me a home loan at 9.9% as opposed to 3.25% mortgage.

The real sickener is we only owe 10k on my mortgage and was only looking for 15k topup. No car loans and 1k in credit card debt so total debt of 26k if approved. Both full time pensionable positions. Felt under pressure for home loan so took it but fully intend to reapply when my wife returns to work later this year to wipe out the home loan to avail of the lesser interest rate.

Absolutely no common sense in AIB, had a mortgage of 80k in 08 and had worked my ass off to have it down to 10k in 7 years only to be treated like that

Idbatterim

his is all very fixable but a total change on the political scene is needed to get rid of the failed FF/FG/Labour/SF policies that first of all caused a housing crisis and since then, are determined to sustain a crisis by allowing residential property assets to be used for speculative purposes. We need to go back to a place where (1) It is not unacceptable to want to own your own house for yourself and your family, and (2) That is what houses are for, not for enriching people who are too lazy or stupid to go start up a business if they want to make money by investing their money in their own idea.

I totally agree with this, we hear this is the latest issue they will deal with, after the sham that is our infrastructure, HSE etc, we simply go around in circles! good luck waiting for these clowns to do anything...

Senecio

Yes, they know exactly how the rules have impacted people and they should be applauded for having the courage to have done it.

Divelment

andekwarhola wrote: »

If two people without kids don't have the joint income to pay rent (as in rent somewhere you can afford rather than love to live) and squirrel away a deposit on the side over a couple of years, then maybe they shouldn't risk buying a house.

Problem with a lot of Irish people is they refuse to accept that they can't afford to rent or buy where they want (usually because everybody else wants to live there) so complain about a 'functioning market' instead of downgrading exceptions.

40 years ago, my parents, who were in their early-mid 30's at the time, on one full-time middle class income/salary, could afford to buy a spacious 3 bed semi detached house in the suburbs of Dublin with a generously spaced front and back garden.

Fast forward 40 years and a similar couple with 2 incomes, with double the spending power, would struggle to be able to afford to buy a two bed shoebox apartment in the same area.

There is something seriously wrong with what has happened in the last 40 years in this country, where we have allowed ourselves to be steamrolled into a place, very slowly, where it is now the norm that two incomes are needed to support a family, where a couple with two incomes can't afford to buy a house, there are now expected to raise kids in an apartment now, and they are expected to rent from a landlord who is always going to take advantage of a constraint in the property market to extract every cent in rent that might be possible to obtain from a tenant by way of a rent increase.

Added to that problem, we have an open door policy to immigration in this country now where people who are not even from an EU country, appear to have an automatic right to settle here, and we are not allowed to even discuss this?!?

Idbatterim

thats the thing, by not simply going ok we will throw more money at the problem, they have forced the government to start looking into the cost of land / building. Instead of simply going the easy route for government, I.e. let us hang ourselves with more debt...

Graham

Divelment wrote: »

Added to that problem, we have an open door policy to immigration in this country now where people who are not even from an EU country, appear to have an automatic right to settle here, and we are not allowed to even discuss this?!?

Because it makes bugger all difference in the grand scheme of things.

Divelment

Idbatterim wrote: »

I totally agree with this, we hear this is the latest issue they will deal with, after the sham that is our infrastructure, HSE etc, we simply go around in circles! good luck waiting for these clowns to do anything...

Everywhere you look in this country in terms of public policy now, you see total chaos. The HSE as you mentioned, housing, education, justice, all close to or beyond collapse.

My view is that we need a new right wing political party in this country, where we stand up and say that property is for living in, so the day is over where you can own several residential properties, tax these people out of the market.

Crime, if you are a repeat offender, then you'll be electronically tagged, end of story. Health, if you can't manage a health department or team of people, then you'll be fired and replaced by someone who can, end of story. We have become the worst country on earth in my opinion for fannying around with politically correct type policies and committees and expert groups and steering committees that OBVIOUSLY, cannot provide simple solutions to simple problems. It's hard to think of a national problem that we have in this country that isn't caused by vested interests and idiots pricking around at the edges of an issue without just calling out the solution loud and clear and then tackling it.

Michael D Not Higgins

Mod: this line of discussion is well outside of the topic of not just the thread but the entire forum. Divelment, don't post again before reading the charter and abiding by it.

Idbatterim

but how can you have a discussion on it without getting political. The ridiculous height restrictions in Dublin, awful infrastructure and building regulations, all government decisions and people can decide for themselves on the repercussions!

yqtwqxqm

Idbatterim wrote: »

I totally agree with this, we hear this is the latest issue they will deal with, after the sham that is our infrastructure, HSE etc, we simply go around in circles! good luck waiting for these clowns to do anything...

They have dealt with it.
Banned bedsits. Driving private investors out of the market with taxes and rules that dilute the control the investor has in their own investment.
Make it so that it was illegal to refuse tenants on certain grounds.
And numerous other attempts to fix the property market. All of which made things worse and not one that made it better for anyone.

Idbatterim

while we are at it, why stop at bedsits! sure why not ban apartments too, arent they only for short term living or "poor people"! Dublin can simply take over all of Wicklow, call it New South Dublin and we can all live in 4/5 bed detached houses :rolleyes:

Divelment

yqtwqxqm wrote: »

They have dealt with it.
Banned bedsits. Driving private investors out of the market with taxes and rules that dilute the control the investor has in their own investment.
Make it so that it was illegal to refuse tenants on certain grounds.
And numerous other attempts to fix the property market. All of which made things worse and not one that made it better for anyone.

Residential property is for living in, not for investing in. When we start getting our heads around that very simple fact and start pursuing policies that respect that simple basic fact, then we will be able to sort out our housing and homelessness crisis, and until we do, we are stuck with this crisis.

MarkAnthony

Divelment wrote: »

Residential property is for living in, not for investing in. When we start getting our heads around that very simple fact and start pursuing policies that respect that simple basic fact, then we will be able to sort out our housing and homelessness crisis, and until we do, we are stuck with this crisis.

So it's actually some left wing policies we need then?

Where do the tens of thousands of people who want to live in Dublin short term, or indeed want to rent live?

noodler

Rules completely necessary.

A measure of affordability.

They do nothing to.affect supply.

We badly need our CB Governor to hold firm on this in a way his predecessors never did to the country's detriment.

MarkAnthony

Sorry I've actually just realised this isn't a different thread - it's about CB rules. Thankfully the CB does not dictate social policy in Ireland. They've done what is financially prudent. The rest is up to the government. Stop electing the same muppets to the dail.

_Kaiser_

Idbatterim wrote: »

but how can you have a discussion on it without getting political. The ridiculous height restrictions in Dublin, awful infrastructure and building regulations, all government decisions and people can decide for themselves on the repercussions!

100% agree.

Housing IS political in this country... We based (and crashed) an entire economy on buying and selling overpriced housing to each other FFS!

Everything property-related... from the formerly ridiculously lax regulation and encouragement to "get on the property ladder" no matter what, to the dragging of heels on real reform of the rental sector and addressing the current shortage (not least because a sizable portion of TD's are landlords themselves) is impacted by political interference to some degree.

This is why the current situation exists... as I said in another thread, if there was real political will to address the supply shortage (and in turn all these other effects we'e seeing) then you'd be knocking out 450 houses every 2/3 months, not 5/6 years from now.

RandomAccess

I was speaking to two non eu national couples who have decided to buy as soon as they get Stamp 4 (I don't really know what that is or how long it takes but they seem to be taking about next year) citing rent prices as the reason.

One of those certainly intends to return home within a few years, whether they can keep the property to rent or will sell I do not know.

I would have thought that mortgage interest would make such short term purchases poor value? I've never run the numbers on such a plan.

I don't think these are what the central bank had in mind as regards definition of first time buyers. It's more like an investment purchase. There used to be some government incentives for purchasers which had clawback clauses for those who flipped property. Not sure the name of the scheme. Simon Coveney may need a similar clawback.

Anyway, thought it was worth adding as it shows an alarmed (or considered) rush from rental.

Long term residents should perhaps be prioritised but of course that is my bias.

Graham

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

We based (and crashed) an entire economy on buying and selling overpriced housing to each other FFS!

We crashed an entire economy based on imprudent lending/borrowing, the property crash was a symptom of this.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

to the dragging of heels on real reform of the rental sector and addressing the current shortage (not least because a sizable portion of TD's are landlords themselves)

I call bunkum on this. Ireland has one of the most landlord-unfriendly environments I know of. Any landlord TD's operate in that same unfriendly environment.

_Kaiser_

EDIT: You changed your whole post before I hit submit, but here it is anyway...

Graham wrote: »

Fairly impressive how a small nation like Ireland was responsible for the entire global financial crisis. :rolleyes:

*sigh* .. it's long been established that an over-reliance on the property sector was a key cause of the collapse in this country and why that global financial crisis impacted as hard as it did.

Are you trying to suggest that is why Ireland is such a landlord friendly environment or something else???

The current scenario of low/restricted supply of both housing and mortgage credit means that (as the OP points out) more people have been forced to delay plans to buy and instead must rent for longer.

These factors have helped pushed rents in particularly Dublin back to Celtic Tiger days, and forced others back into the surrounding counties (like I've said before, it's like 2006 all over again in that regard) and given that many TDs are also renting out properties (Alan Shatter for example has/had something like 15 as I recall), there's a clear conflict of interest there when it comes to taking decisive measures to address the crisis and stabilise (reduce) prices.

I'm not interested in the usual argument of how hard done by landlords are through taxes and regulation. While I fully recognise that there are certainly problem tenants that need to be (able to be) dealt with quickly and effectively, we need to move away from the "accidental"/reluctant landlord model to a more professional setup that benefits both renter and owner properly... in reality as it currently stands a landlord can ultimately just exit the market (or rent it to AirBnB etc).. a tenant on the losing end of the deal stands to lose the roof over their head at best, out on the streets at worst.

Graham

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

*sigh* .. it's long been established that an over-reliance on the property sector was a key cause of the collapse in this country and why that global financial crisis impacted as hard as it did.

and over-reliance on property only became possible because of imprudent borrowing/lending.

athtrasna

Idbatterim wrote: »

but how can you have a discussion on it without getting political. The ridiculous height restrictions in Dublin, awful infrastructure and building regulations, all government decisions and people can decide for themselves on the repercussions!

There's a difference between mentioning politics and going on a political rant. Once politics appears on this forum, so, magically, do the ranters. The thread is about CB rules which are independent of the government so no need to go near politics?

_Kaiser_

Graham wrote: »

and over-reliance on property only became possible because of imprudent borrowing/lending.

.. which was because of the view being pushed (and still the case) that renting is "dead money" and a temporary stop-gap on the road to ownership, or something for those with no better option.

We're obsessed with property ownership in this country.

Graham

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

I'm not interested in the usual argument of how hard done by landlords are through taxes and regulation

It matters not whether you're interested, it remains hugely significant in explaining why landlords are leaving the market in droves.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

in reality as it currently stands a landlord can ultimately just exit the market (or rent it to AirBnB etc).. a tenant on the losing end of the deal stands to lose the roof over their head

Agreed, but that's not going to change without addressing the taxes/regulation side of things.

athtrasna

Graham wrote: »

It matters not whether you're interested, it remains hugely significant in explaining why landlords are leaving the market in droves.



Agreed, but that's not going to change without addressing the taxes/regulation side of things.

Which has what to do with central bank lending rules?

_Kaiser_

athtrasna wrote: »

There's a difference between mentioning politics and going on a political rant. Once politics appears on this forum, so, magically, do the ranters. The thread is about CB rules which are independent of the government so no need to go near politics?

Not sure if that "ranters" part is directed at me, but on the latter point there's significant pressure on the CB to relax the rules especially as the economy has improved. Independent or not, I think ultimately concessions will be made as the politicians will want to be re-elected, and will lobby their EU counterparts for changes.

Graham

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

.. which was because of the view being pushed (and still the case) that renting is "dead money" and a temporary stop-gap on the road to ownership, or something for those with no better option.

We're obsessed with property ownership in this country.

You're confusing symptom and cause again, imprudent lending allowed people to succumb to the obsession you refer to.

Without the imprudent lending, the violent swings in property prices/values/returns wouldn't have been anything like so dramatic.

I do agree there needs to be a significant effort put into increasing the supply of long-term, secure (tenure) rental property.

athtrasna

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Not sure if that "ranters" part is directed at me, but on the latter point there's significant pressure on the CB to relax the rules especially as the economy has improved. Independent or not, I think ultimately concessions will be made as the politicians will want to be re-elected, and will lobby their EU counterparts for changes.

Not aimed at any one poster, just reminiscent of frequenting this forum for the best part of a decade

Tigger

Angel2016 wrote: »

A tenant and she was paying a very low rent for the area which just covered my costs so I wasn't making anything, all taxes are paid on it NPPR, LPT, management fees etc and income tax was not liable as I paid out just slightly more then I was taking in I had that worked out for me.

thats not how it works