Homelessness on the rise

LirW

Just right now on RTE someone's whinging about the bad landlords that they get tax relief to buy buy-to-let and this is so unfair and how it's just fair enough basically make it unable to evict a family.
The thickness of some people...

The_Conductor

naughtb4 wrote: »

Agree with this, reading FF suggestion of closing loopholes to stop Landlords moving in family or selling up. Why in the world would anyone want to become a landlord?

There is little incentive for the average single property landlord

The only reason anyone would want to become a landlord- is a dearth of other investment opportunities. As QE winds down (the ECB halved it yesterday)- and increases in interest rates feature on the horizon- the main reasons to hold residential property- will become lesser and lesser.

Government policy appears to be to discourage people from viewing residential property as an investment- at all costs (with the exception of the REITs- who are given remarkable tax treatment). Until government policy evolves- this isn't going to change.

The_Conductor

LirW wrote: »

Just right now on RTE someone's whinging about the bad landlords that they get tax relief to buy buy-to-let and this is so unfair and how it's just fair enough basically make it unable to evict a family.
The thickness of some people...

Sigh- if they gave a lower HTB rate for secondhand property- which essentially would bring FTBs into the secondhand market- and opened the doors to landlords to sell- it is precisely what would happen.

Some of these people really should do a little bit of reasonable investigation on the consequences of their proposed actions- before going in all guns blazing.

Why would anyone want to be a landlord in Ireland?

LirW

I'm just asking myself what will happen to the people that will rely on the rental market for their entire life? There are other countries already that will have lost generations that won't ever be able to buy their own home and rely on the rental market, therefore have to fight over every single shoebox that's available out there.

The situation is such a mess, I don't envy Murphy for the job he's doing because no matter what he will decide, it's going to be career suicide.
As far as I'm aware it's the homelessness associations that want these legislations brought in, not the government (yet).

Browney7

The_Conductor wrote: »

The only reason anyone would want to become a landlord- is a dearth of other investment opportunities. As QE winds down (the ECB halved it yesterday)- and increases in interest rates feature on the horizon- the main reasons to hold residential property- will become lesser and lesser.

Government policy appears to be to discourage people from viewing residential property as an investment- at all costs (with the exception of the REITs- who are given remarkable tax treatment). Until government policy evolves- this isn't going to change.

The REIT structure has favourable tax status but if the underlying shareholder isn't tax exempt they pay tax on the dividends and realised capital gains like anyone else.

Devil's advocate here but surely a government disincentivising/saving people from taking out second and third mortgages to have an "investment" property (which makes it a highly leveraged investment!) when they don't have their own house paid for it is a prudent course of action?

Would these same people borrow 200 grand and buy shares in IRES REIT? (you wouldn't get tax relief on the interest either).

BillyBobBS

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Sadly I can't ever see this issue being solved, prepare for 10,000 homeless soon

I'm afraid i'd agree with that unfortunately. FG seem to be the party of the landlord and to hell with the poor and homeless. Depressing really.

The_Conductor

BillyBobBS wrote: »

I'm afraid i'd agree with that unfortunately. FG seem to be the party of the landlord and to hell with the poor and homeless. Depressing really.

I'm not entirely sure how you make this out- the issue with government policy is that it has not addressed the abject supply side issues. Simultaneous to a lack of any credible course of action to tackle shortages (overall)- they are hammering landlords from both a legislative and tax perspective- and not putting reasonable mechanisms in place to allow RAS/HAP/LA tenants compete with the private sector for housing (mind you- given the lack of supply- its moot anyway).

The key to unlocking the entire mess- is to increase supply. This is what *has* to happen.

Browney7

The_Conductor wrote: »

I'm not entirely sure how you make this out- the issue with government policy is that it has not addressed the abject supply side issues. Simultaneous to a lack of any credible course of action to tackle shortages (overall)- they are hammering landlords from both a legislative and tax perspective- and not putting reasonable mechanisms in place to allow RAS/HAP/LA tenants compete with the private sector for housing (mind you- given the lack of supply- its moot anyway).

The key to unlocking the entire mess- is to increase supply. This is what *has* to happen.

But why would a government who has large holdings in numerous domestic banks want an increase in supply that stems house price increases and corresponding rent increases? These same banks have billions of loss making trackers which need to be subsidised by new mortgages with high capital amounts and comparatively high interest rates?

Nothing is going to change whilst we own or are in thrall to the banks...

LirW

The thing is the crisis is a national emergency by now. This is a huge black cloud that's hanging over the current government and with the next election this is going to be an essential topic. Homeless children make better press than small landlords that are getting completely swamped.
Said government would effectively lose out on votes if they leave this entire topic as is. And with the current trend to the right it just takes a political newcomer from the right with big promises.

Of course the government has their own interest but it's literally everyone who's shouldering the cost and by now every Tom, Dick and Harry realized that.

BorneTobyWilde

I've never seen homeless people on streets in Kilkenny before, but now they are EVERY where. What the hell is going on.

Browney7

LirW wrote: »

The thing is the crisis is a national emergency by now. This is a huge black cloud that's hanging over the current government and with the next election this is going to be an essential topic. Homeless children make better press than small landlords that are getting completely swamped.
Said government would effectively lose out on votes if they leave this entire topic as is. And with the current trend to the right it just takes a political newcomer from the right with big promises.

Of course the government has their own interest but it's literally everyone who's shouldering the cost and by now every Tom, Dick and Harry realized that.

What cost is your typical voter really shouldering? Their house value has grown markedly in the past three years whilst the crisis has ballooned? The 'accidental' landlord is closer to exit and closing their negative position.

SF will try make political capital but your average voter gets bombarded with "you can't vote for the Ra, investors will depart in droves, they'll drive the economy off a cliff etc etc" ( and maybe they would). I'd bet a lot of money the majority of people who are most at risk wouldn't vote for FG anyways. People only care about themselves at the end of the day. They'll shrug their shoulders and say "tis terrible" but people wont effect change.

fg1406

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

I've never seen homeless people on streets in Kilkenny before, but now they are EVERY where. What the hell is going on.

Is that the Roma group that are in town? A few were arrested last week. They arrived into the town to beg.

antoinolachtnai

Browney7 wrote: »

But why would a government who has large holdings in numerous domestic banks want an increase in supply that stems house price increases and corresponding rent increases? These same banks have billions of loss making trackers which need to be subsidised by new mortgages with high capital amounts and comparatively high interest rates?

Nothing is going to change whilst we own or are in thrall to the banks...

Building requires bank borrowing and is good for banks. But it does require the government to give some certainty.

LirW

Fact is, Ireland doesn't have a healthy rental market. There always will be people in society that will depend on the rental market life-long. The more rents shoot up and house prices continue to grow, the harder it is for young people to have an independent life.
House value is from little interest for people that will rent forever.
The problem is though that small landlords need to have some way to protect their property from damage and financial loss, when there's a mortgage involved. Why should it be impossible to evict people out of rental accommodation? It might make the number look better regarding homelessness but small landlords will have no chance whatsoever to move on, to move someone of their family in or to adjust to a change in their living situation. For example a landlord falls ill and needs money for medical treatment, yet can't sell on their rental property because there's a family living in there. An interference like this on property is simply unacceptable.

Also rural Ireland needs small landlords since the interest from the big players is close to zero. If you make legislations with city landlords in mind it will affect rural Ireland too.

What the market really needs is all sort of rental stock and plenty of it. A healthy rental market has short term and long term options for different people, in Dublin mainly professionals and families, both groups have different needs. It's certainly not the landlords fault that the situation is that bad for everyone, it's the government to blame.
The government can't expect professionals they want to attract to live in apartment shares, for people in high demand, they'll just go somewhere else.

Tony EH

EPAndlee wrote: »

Maybe I'm being stupid here but if you see yourself having financial trouble and struggling to keep a roof over your head would you not think to move away from Dublin. I know your extended family might be there but putting a roof over your childs head is far more important

The problem is there's little work to be had outside of Dublin. Half the country is up here for that reason.

One could move further afield, but you'd still be in financial trouble, coupled with no family support and not knowing anyone or the area.

In many ways, you'd just be compounding the problem.

The Student

LirW wrote: »

I have to say though that the idea that some organisation came up with of a legislation change that you can't evict families from buy-to-let properties is beyond ridiculous. That is a plain recipe for disaster.

The legislation is there if landlords are abusing the legislation then go after them. I have two properties both of which will be needed for family members. if the govt try to introduce legislation where I can't use my own asset as I see fit then I will just transfer the asset to my family members.

MayoSalmon

Tony EH wrote: »

The problem is there's little work to be had outside of Dublin. Half the country is up here for that reason.

One could move further afield, but you'd still be in financial trouble, coupled with no family support and not knowing anyone or the area.

In many ways, you'd just be compounding the problem.

But I would imagine you wouldn't be living in a hotel etc that you see so many people in due to the lack of social housing no?

the_syco

EPAndlee wrote: »

Maybe I'm being stupid here but if you see yourself having financial trouble and struggling to keep a roof over your head would you not think to move away from Dublin. I know your extended family might be there but putting a roof over your childs head is far more important

The cost of moving can put people off. Also, if working in Dublin, cost of transport may negate the saving of moving away from Dublin.
Also, as you're away from your family, you'd have to pay childcare. In a lot of cases, it's cheaper for one person not to work, than to pay childcare costs.
Thus moving away from Dublin may not be an ideal situation if you're working.

Browney7

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Building requires bank borrowing and is good for banks. But it does require the government to give some certainty.

True, but banks seem to have very limited appetite to fund developments. Deloitte have a report stating that appetite is limited to 70% of the loan to cost ratio. There could numerous reasons why they are choosing to deploy capital this way. I suspect, their bottom line will improve quicker by changing the profile of their balance sheets rather than expanding them. No one knows for certain though. I might be giving them too much credit that they are capable of such conspiracies....

All I see at the moment is problems everywhere but no solutions

Browney7

MayoSalmon wrote: »

But I would imagine you wouldn't be living in a hotel etc that you see so many people in due to the lack of social housing no?

So if a guy is working in Dublin and trying to support a family (wife minding children instead of paying for childcare) but his current landlord is selling up and can't find a LL to rent to them he should move to Leitrim then?

Tony EH

MayoSalmon wrote: »

But I would imagine you wouldn't be living in a hotel etc that you see so many people in due to the lack of social housing no?

By the time the hotel thing becomes a necessity, it's already too late. You're pretty much caught between a rock and a hard place. Nobody wants or expects to be in a situation where they have to stay in hotel rooms and B+B's.

The underlying problem here is one of realism. Letting house prices/rents skyrocket beyond belief is why we are where we are and there doesn't seem to be any real political will to do anything about it.

It's simply folly to believe that house can just go up and up and not have this kind of affect on people.

One would have thought that we (and by "we" I mean government) would have learned a few lessons from the crash in 2008. But, nothing has been learned or, more than likely, the lessons were learned and ignored...because those that make the decisions are insulated from the fallout of those decisions.

Again, we have a growing property bubble, that WILL burst...and, again, people are being forced to pay well over the odds on ridiculously over priced crap and are forming a new generation of people who'll be living in hotels in 10 or 15 years. Into the bargain, the banks are being let run riot as well.

We, as a state, managed to house our citizens for decades. What went wrong? Why can't we do it now? Why is the political will to house the citizens of the nation absent nowadays?

BorneTobyWilde

fg1406 wrote: »

Is that the Roma group that are in town? A few were arrested last week. They arrived into the town to beg.

No idea. So you think it's all a show ?

BorneTobyWilde

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

No idea. So you think it's all a show ?

The homeless people in the media are usually those living in the new hubs, hotels and B & Bs as opposed to those sleeping rough.

A lot of those who beg on the streets are professional beggars and are usually part of a large group that go from town to town.

um7y1h83ge06nx

LirW wrote: »

I have to say though that the idea that some organisation came up with of a legislation change that you can't evict families from buy-to-let properties is beyond ridiculous. That is a plain recipe for disaster.

I think organisations like this either under-estimate the ability of humans to adjust to changing situations and make logical decisions and/or they are naive and believe everyone is moral.

Of course we all know what will happen in reality:

Some family tenants - Make a good impression, move into a house and immediately stop paying the rent. Free house for life.

Landlords - Do not under any circumstances rent to families. This would result in families that want to rent either purchasing a house or moving into public social housing.

NIMAN

Seems to have gone out of the news recently?

zetalambda

The_Conductor wrote: »

There isn't a short answer to this- other than a reflection that those in short term accommodation (hotel accomodation, B&Bs etc) are included among the figures- and while I wouldn't wish short term accommodation on my worse enemy- it does mean the people are not on the street, and they are enumerated as homeless.

As to whether if there were more houses- would those in emergency accommodation be in a position to buy- no, of course they wouldn't. Many of them were in all probability previous owners- many were not. Thats irrelevant however. Providing someone with accommodation- and asking whether they are in a position to own a dwelling- are two entirely different things- and its not really fair trying to entangle the two of them. First and foremost- those in emergency accommodation need to be offered viable long term accommodation. Someone needs to sit down and assess what precisely this means (I'm keeping in mind the poor woman in the Springfield Hotel in Leixlip barely 7-8 weeks ago, who commited suicide when offered a house in Adamstown/Clonburris- psychologically- she felt she couldn't bring children up in the area- yet many thousands of people are doing just that).

Looking after the homeless- is not as simple- as finding an empty property and dumping them in it- neat, job done, next in the queue. Homeless people have very complex needs- which have to be properly assessed and addressed. What may be logical to you, or I- may be a complete disaster to someone else- you simply don't know.

Homelessness is not about owning a property- it is about having a long term housing need satisfied. I would argue that local authority units- which are maintained by local authorities and in state ownership in perpetuity- is the way to go- not the current housing association with a plethora of red tape scattered like fairy dust around the country (also keep in mind- over 85% of all homeless are in the Dublin local authority areas- to the extent there are more Cork homeless or Galway homeless- in Dublin- than in their respective cities (for whatever reason- people tend to gravitate to Dublin).

Its a very complex issue- which patently is not being addressed- however, the biggest element of the issue- is a lack of appropriate accommodation, alongside appropriate amenities and facilities- particularly in the Dublin local authority areas.

Yeah, like flies on shit. Can you back up your assumption that more Cork people are homeless in Dublin than Cork. That statement made me smile. The last place in the world a Cork homeless would go is Dublin. I bet you've never even been there and wouldn't know the difference between a Cork accent and a Galway one!

zetalambda

I haven't been following this thread from the start but just to respond to the thread title, Homelessness is not a big problem here in Ireland. What do you think when you hear the word homeless? I've always associated it with people that sleep on the street as i'm sure most other people do. In Ireland, there are approx. 170 rough sleepers split between Cork and Dublin. The outraged snowflake brigade would have us all think that there are tens of thousands of homeless people in Dublin alone. That include everyone and their dog that live in emergency or temporary accommodation in their figures. People without a permanent roof over their heads are not homeless. If you're going to say people in temporary accommodation are homeless then you need to include everyone renting or those who don't own their own house which amounts to about 3 million of us! This crap being peddled around about our imaginary massive homeless problem in Dublin in particular is part of the reason Frankfurt, Paris and other European cities were chosen over Dublin as a new location post Brexit. It was also a factor in Ireland's failed bid to host the rugby world cup.

Browney7

zetalambda wrote: »

I haven't been following this thread from the start but just to respond to the thread title, Homelessness is not a big problem here in Ireland. What do you think when you hear the word homeless? I've always associated it with people that sleep on the street as i'm sure most other people do. In Ireland, there are approx. 170 rough sleepers split between Cork and Dublin. The outraged snowflake brigade would have us all think that there are tens of thousands of homeless people in Dublin alone. That include everyone and their dog that live in emergency or temporary accommodation in their figures. People without a permanent roof over their heads are not homeless. If you're going to say people in temporary accommodation are homeless then you need to include everyone renting or those who don't own their own house which amounts to about 3 million of us! This crap being peddled around about our imaginary massive homeless problem in Dublin in particular is part of the reason Frankfurt, Paris and other European cities were chosen over Dublin as a new location post Brexit. It was also a factor in Ireland's failed bid to host the rugby world cup.

Ah yes, our infrastructural deficits - only two world class stadiums with less than 20% of capacity from terracing and decent public transport- had nothing to do with the failures.

Facts are, people are dependent on emergency accommodation(over 3000 children) and situations like what prime time investigates showed (40/50 foreign language students packed into a house) are occurring due to a lack of any significant residential construction activity. Simple demographics mean the situation is going to get worse, not better.

But yeah, discussing any short comings of the government is causing business to not come here in droves. Nothing to see here people. The response so far is Like pointing at the Fire brigade putting out a bonfire whilst the whole mountain is on fire behind you.

The_Conductor

zetalambda wrote: »

Yeah, like flies on shit. Can you back up your assumption that more Cork people are homeless in Dublin than Cork. That statement made me smile. The last place in the world a Cork homeless would go is Dublin. I bet you've never even been there and wouldn't know the difference between a Cork accent and a Galway one!

Its the Peter McVerry Trust who assert there are more Cork or Galway homeless in Dublin- than in their respective home cities (its in one of the submissions they made to the Minister- I'll see if I can find it online for you). As for my never having been in Cork- born in St. Finbarrs (a long long time ago) and work in Cork a few days every month (I've the misfortune to work in Dublin a few days most months too- which I dread- but mostly I'm Kildare based- with a few roadtrips to other locations- however, thats another story).

zetalambda

The_Conductor wrote: »

Its the Peter McVerry Trust who assert there are more Cork or Galway homeless in Dublin- than in their respective home cities (its in one of the submissions they made to the Minister- I'll see if I can find it online for you). As for my never having been in Cork- born in St. Finbarrs (a long long time ago) and work in Cork a few days every month (I've the misfortune to work in Dublin a few days most months too- which I dread- but mostly I'm Kildare based- with a few roadtrips to other locations- however, thats another story).

Actually come to think of it, I recently heard a lot of the homeless in Cork are non Irish and when you think about it, many bums would probably leave their home town due to the shame and embarrassment of being recognized on the street by someone you went to school with or grew up near but even then i still think it's a pretty small number of homeless from Cork in Dublin. I mean it's bad enough being homeless but then having to be homeless in Dublin on top of that is just adding insult to injury.