Selling apartment in RPZ when rent 'cheap'

LMFM

Hi
Hoping someone can offer some advice.
I currently rent a large 2 bed apartment in the Dublin 15 area - an area that is within the Rent Pressure Zone.
I have been renting the apartment for the last 8 years or so - and have always been a fair and decent landlord - as a result, currently renting the apartment out at almost 200e - 250e less than the market could demand in this area. The current tenants are there circa 1 year.

Circumstances have changed for me now - and I am considering emigrating - so am wondering if, and how, the rent I am currently charging could impact on the price of my property should I sell? Hearing it could, potentially - but need to understand how...

Any advice appreciated - in a quandry re what would be the best thing to do.
Thanks
LM

athtrasna

It depends on who wants to buy it, shouldn't make a difference to an owner occupier but may be a factor for someone looking for an investment.

Samuel T. Cogley

LMFM wrote: »

Hearing it could, potentially - but need to understand how...

The new rent is subject to the old rent. If I'm looking at two identical apartments as an investment then the one renting at €1000 a month is not as attractive as the one renting at €1400 per month as the yield is lower. You don't need to over think this - it's that simple.

Realistically though €200 on a two bed is not that low, I'm €400 off on a one bed I let out. If you're concerned increase the rent with the required notice etc.

Graham

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

If you're concerned increase the rent with the required notice etc.

RPZ restricts the ability to do that. I'd expect a similar property at market-rent to be worth 30k - 50k more to an investor.

Samuel T. Cogley

Graham wrote: »

RPZ restricts the ability to do that. I'd expect a similar property at market-rent to be worth 30k - 50k more to an investor.

It's €200 under in maybe a €1800 area. It's not a million miles off. The OP clearly has scope within the RPZ and notice requirements to make an adjustment which I'd advise him to do before selling.

2 bed apartment in D15 €180K - €250K, how do you know a Castleknock property owner... that's right they'll tell you so I'm assuming it's not. Not a chance it's losing more than about 10% of it's value if that, and there would be plenty of owner occupiers looking which would negate this issue entirely.

Graham

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Not meaning to be rude but that was a figure pulled from a behind if ever there was one! :pac:

My behind tells me 3k rent at 7% target yield is worth about 43k in investment terms. YBMV

OP, I wouldn't worry too much. As athtransa mentioned, your property is likely to be of more interest to an owner occupier so I wouldn't expect a low-rent to make any difference to the price you actually achieve.

Samuel T. Cogley

Graham wrote: »

My behind tells me 3k rent at 7% target yield is worth about 43k in investment terms. YBMV

OP, I wouldn't worry too much. As athtransa mentioned, your property is likely to be of more interest to an owner occupier so I wouldn't expect a low-rent to make any difference to the price you actually achieve.

Apologies, you got in before the edit.

It's €2400 a year, based on legislation that's time limited and where rents can be increased during its effect. Your behind might be the more prudent buyer, but it's going to get out bid by Paddy property investor repeating the mantra "property is a great investment".

LMFM

OP here....Thanks for the replies....not castleknock....good observation:-)
In Royal Canal Park....plenty up and coming for the area, just in a total quandary of whether to try and sell now or hold off and live off the rental income. Small enough mortgage left on it now....

The_Conductor

Zero interest to first time buyer- its not a new property.
Limited interest to an investor- its rent controlled at an artificially low level
Possible interest to an owner occupier- however, they need vacant possession in order to draw down a mortgage to purchase it.

Vis-a-vis holding onto it- if you're not tax resident here (which you can clarify for yourself)- you are not entitled to be treated in the same manner in which you are as an Irish tax resident- and the tenants are legally obliged to deduct witholding tax (@ 20 percent) and forward same to Revenue. You, in turn, are supposed to appoint a managing agent (who typically will charge 10% of the gross rental income).

You have a decision to make- however, if you don't intend to use the property for your own use in future- I'd question whether holding onto it- particularly in the current regulatory regime, is a good idea- however, thats a decision you'll have to make.

LMFM

Thanks again!
One other option I am toying with...could I move back in myself and then sell after x number of months? If I do head away...realistically it won't be until later in the year....do I have to be using the apartment " for my own use" for a certain period of time ? Does that readjust the rental income for any potential investor should I then sell?

athtrasna

LMFM wrote: »

Thanks again!
One other option I am toying with...could I move back in myself and then sell after x number of months? If I do head away...realistically it won't be until later in the year....do I have to be using the apartment " for my own use" for a certain period of time ? Does that readjust the rental income for any potential investor should I then sell?

It needs to be out of the rental market for two years

PhoenixParker

If you're selling the apartment unfurnished (which would be the normal course of things), then surely it's relatively trivial for a new owner to prove the apartment has undergone a major upgrade and thus the rental limits don't apply?

Brand new furniture is a pretty major (and expensive) upgrade to any apartment, one that should be reflected in the rental value. Couple that with repainting and some new flooring and an exemption should be readily achievable.

As for whether to sell or not, I'd wait until this time next year. Building works on the new houses around the site will be largely complete by then, the Luas will have opened and quite possibly a new supermarket within walking distance.

Fol20

Graham wrote: »

RPZ restricts the ability to do that. I'd expect a similar property at market-rent to be worth 30k - 50k more to an investor.

Worth less yes, 30k less. No. As long as property can be sold vacant. There are ways and means of bringing up to market rate

athtrasna

PhoenixParker wrote: »

If you're selling the apartment unfurnished (which would be the normal course of things), then surely it's relatively trivial for a new owner to prove the apartment has undergone a major upgrade and thus the rental limits don't apply?

Brand new furniture is a pretty major (and expensive) upgrade to any apartment, one that should be reflected in the rental value. Couple that with repainting and some new flooring and an exemption should be readily achievable.

As for whether to sell or not, I'd wait until this time next year. Building works on the new houses around the site will be largely complete by then, the Luas will have opened and quite possibly a new supermarket within walking distance.

None of that qualifies as major renovations that will permit a rent increase above the 4% etc

Graham

Fol20 wrote: »

Worth less yes, 30k less. No. As long as property can be sold vacant. There are ways and means of bringing up to market rate

The value is likely to be reduced to an investor. Given the current demand from owner-occupiers, I doubt it will have much (if any) effect on a sale price.

The_Conductor

Graham wrote: »

The value is likely to be reduced to an investor. Given the current demand from owner-occupiers, I doubt it will have much (if any) effect on a sale price.

>70% of prospective owner occupiers are first time buyers- who are now, because of the assistance scheme for first-time-buyers, only interested in 'new' properties.

The rent controlled aspect of the property- most certainly does affect its sale value- however, even for owner-occupiers, there was only a small cohort to whom its of interest in the first place- i.e. those who are not first-time-buyers.

This is masked to a large extent by the lack of supply- however, if supply gets ramped up a bit (doesn't have to rise that much)- you'll very rapidly find buyers will become more choosy about what they're willing to buy- and anything with strictures on it- such as rent-control- will very rapidly have to distinguish itself by markedly further reducing its asking price in comparison to similar property in the locality.........

Marcusm

Graham wrote: »

My behind tells me 3k rent at 7% target yield is worth about 43k in investment terms. YBMV

OP, I wouldn't worry too much. As athtransa mentioned, your property is likely to be of more interest to an owner occupier so I wouldn't expect a low-rent to make any difference to the price you actually achieve.

That would only be appropriate if the rent was never capable of being increased and there was not an expectation of a future rebalancing. A substantial refurbishment might not cost as much as 43k for example.

Graham

Marcusm wrote: »

That would only be appropriate if the rent was never capable of being increased and there was not an expectation of a future rebalancing. A substantial refurbishment might not cost as much as 43k for example.

The necessity for a substantial refurbishment and the uncertainty about 'future rebalancing' would almost certainly make an equivalent property without such considerations worth more.

I'd also be doubtful as to what (if anything) would qualify as substantial refurbishment in what I assume is a relatively modern apartment.

LMFM

Thanks All - OP here again - really appreciate the constructive feedback.

The apartment is about 13 years old - well maintained common areas to be fair, and its a 'good' sized apartment. 2 double bedrooms and 2 bathrooms. Being honest - its due a lick of paint - but current tenants are content enough, and in spite of offering to repaint - were ok to move in as is...

All talk is that it is an 'up and coming' area - Luas will be on the doorstep soon, and it is well served by the bus and trainline as well. Not a million miles away either from the new DIT campus.

Unsure now as to what to do. Obviously, I would like to make as much of a return on my investment as possible - but not sure I have screwed myself by being a 'fair' landlord ( always felt it was good to get decent people to mind your place - works both ways when you respect each other!) - These new regulations have caught up on me.

What would any one of you do? Wait a year? Sell this year? Or hold on for LT investment...?

Samuel T. Cogley

I'd be holding on if I could. But you can read tea leaves as well as I can.

I think the market has some way to go yet and 1 beds and areas like D15 haven't seen the madness yet IMHO. As a further apology to a comment I made to Graham I will admit where that has been pulled from.

Graham

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

I'd be holding on if I could. But you can read tea leaves as well as I can.

+1

I'd hold in anticipation that capital appreciation offsets the reduced rent. In the mean time I'd be adjusting rents in line with maximum allowances at every opportunity.

Fol20

LMFM wrote: »

Thanks again!
One other option I am toying with...could I move back in myself and then sell after x number of months? If I do head away...realistically it won't be until later in the year....do I have to be using the apartment " for my own use" for a certain period of time ? Does that readjust the rental income for any potential investor should I then sell?

You need to live there for 2 years to do this.

whatnext

LMFM wrote: »

Hi
Hoping someone can offer some advice.
I currently rent a large 2 bed apartment in the Dublin 15 area - an area that is within the Rent Pressure Zone.
I have been renting the apartment for the last 8 years or so - and have always been a fair and decent landlord - as a result, currently renting the apartment out at almost 200e - 250e less than the market could demand in this area. The current tenants are there circa 1 year.

Circumstances have changed for me now - and I am considering emigrating - so am wondering if, and how, the rent I am currently charging could impact on the price of my property should I sell? Hearing it could, potentially - but need to understand how...

Any advice appreciated - in a quandry re what would be the best thing to do.
Thanks
LM

Posted this in another thread:
Well due to rent pressure zone legislation I will be air BnB Ing my old apartment. Tenants handed in notice last week, had an estate agent around and he said as I was so far below market rent the flat is worth 50k less than others in the block. It's an investor location and apparently not one that attracts first time buyers anymore. I thought I was going to be rid of it after 5 years subsidising it, but no, I have to keep it out of the rental market for 2 years before I can get shot of it debt free. NB not break even, just cover the outstanding mortgage.

The_Conductor

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

I'd be holding on if I could. But you can read tea leaves as well as I can.

I'd be inclined to agree- however, cognisant of the fact that the OP is proposing to emigrate- I'd appoint a formal agent to manage the tenancy, take the 10% (or whatever they charge) and instruct them to get the best possible tenants at the best possible price at every opportunity- and to increase rent to the max- at every possible opportunity.

re: works of sufficient significance to trigger a regrading- its been stated that a new kitchen or bathroom are not sufficient (by the RTB themselves). An internal reorganisation- that involved changing rooms around, possibly moving a stairs etc- might not be too expensive, but would certainly in my opinion come under the umbrella. There is a burgeoning trade in new stairs being retrofitted in 1990s townhouses- and shopfitters are doing a very popular sideline in gutting and redoing apartments. Its not structural in nature- and can free up a significant amount of space for prospective tenants- so it tends to be a win-win. Check it out.

Ps- refits do not qualify for tax relief- other than replacing of fixtures or fittings on a like-for-like basis (Revenue are very good at spotting people trying to bend the rules- just don't go there). You'd be looking at upgrading the apartment/townhouse into a different property class than its currently in- which would mean it would be worth more to prospective tenants- but also more valuable if/when you go to sell it down the road.

Of importance to the OP- is getting a good agent- if they're abroad- the propensity for a tenancy to go tits-up, increases exponentially........

76544567

OP Something that might fit in this thread.
I have a similar issue to yourself and assumed the the rental cap keeping my rent so far below market rate would effect sale price.
But this happened to me lately and I find very curious.
I think there is something happening at the moment in the Dublin property market.
Maybe you want to keep your property for a few years and see how it pans out, maybe you want to cash in. Only you can decide for yourself, but this has happened to me in the last while.

I put a one bed apartment in north county Dublin on the market recently (over a month ago) and had just started airbnbing it.
The rent was locked in by the new rules at approx 50% below market value so I figured it had to be taken out of the rental market or I would just get stuck with an asset that is value effected when it comes to selling.

I actually didnt expect it to sell anywhere near my asking price which I put at 20% above the last one in the same place that I found on the property price register (From late last year). I was just chancing my arm. I was really ready for the long haul of leaving it for two years for sale and airbnbing it for that time and then maybe achieving market prices after the rental lock was gone.

But last Thursday I got not one, but 3 offers in the same day on it (There were viewings on Tuesday and Wednesday) , two substantially above the asking price even.

I was actually tucked in for the long haul for the sale, but thats very sudden and now I have to rethink my strategy. I am inclined to cancel all the airbnb bookings and just let it go now. Or ask does any buyer want to just take over the bookings. I did that with a property i recently bought in Spain, but I dont think it would be a runner here, unless the potential buyers wanted to stay out of the rental market til the lock is gone. Or maybe they want to live in it.

I'll put some figures on it, not exact so I cant be stalked, but rough.

Last sale price of apartment in the same block was €120,000 late last year. (I was actually going to buy another one at that price, but things changed with rental rules and I pulled out). The one I was going to buy was sold afterwards, but not on the register yet.
I put mine on the market for €145,000 not too long ago.
Got offers of €140,000, €149,000 and €155,000 this week.

I have only spoken to the EA briefly, but said they told the second and third bidders the previous bids, so there may be more bids to come. They also were asked by all three about the current rent and what its locked at. I didnt have time to ask all the questions i wanted to. Will do next week.

But this is a huge jump and not what I was expecting at all for a 2nd hand 1 bed in North Dublin effected by the rental rules so badly.

I think if that highest bid works out im just going to let it go now and not bother waiting out the two years.
Imagine what they would be like without the rent being locked, but it might be risky to wait it out.

I have also noticed that there are less and less apartments for sale recently. But what happened with me I can actually see. I have to guess about the other ones.

Pity the property price register is so slow. Might give a better read of the market, though there havent really been too many on sale lately.

I think there is something happening again in the market suddenly. I think its another big jump. I thought it was slowing down in the second hand market, but now not so sure.

Another thing might be that apartments were stalled big time since the crash. Are people now deciding that they are the only thing they can afford so going back into the market for them?

Is my experience an outlier or a fluke? I'll keep you posted on how it goes.

Anyone had a similar experience with property for sale recently? A big bump in interest / bids the last few weeks?
I have a friend who is selling a 1 bed apartment in the same area, I think supposed to go on the market in June when his tenants move out. I'll monitor his progress too, though by then maybe some data will be out to cover this time period and a picture will emerge. I could be wring but I think the market is stirring.

wordofwarning

I honestly think people are overstating the first time buyers grant on the market for second hand properties. Yes it is €10k towards a home, but there is no point buying €30/40k more than a second hand property to get €10k back. Some people are thick and will not see that, but most will.

OP you could move into it to remove the rent cap. But you will need to live there for 2 years. You could do short term lets ie leases less than 6 months, but you can't claim mortgage interest relief and you can't evict your existing tenants to do it.

IMO a good landlord is so much more than charging below market rent.

The_Conductor

76544567 wrote: »

Is my experience an outlier or a fluke? I'll keep you posted on how it goes.

Spoke to a few local estate agents in Dublin West last week- they'd agree with your experience- however, rather than a large bump happening- its more a complete and utter lack of availability that is continuing to drive the market.

There was a period where there was a surplus of apartments (compared to other residential property types) available on the market- however, by and large this relative supply of property, hasn't been incremented as it changed hands.

Location is key to any sale- and by definition the RPZ located properties- *are* in the high demand areas.

The one point you didn't touch on in your post- that I'd be asking- is who are these people who are bidding against one another for your property?

I.e. are they owner occupiers, new retired couples downsizing, pre-existing property owners seeking to move, prospective landlords who intend to try and get around the rent control etc etc. If you knew just who your prospective customers are- you'd be in a better position to target your apartment even better towards them (if you want to go to the trouble that is).

Well done on having what is very obviously a desireable property- I hope you get a good price and are pleased with the sale process.

Perhaps update the thread with your further experiences down the road?

Marcusm

This is what the RTB states about "substantial change".

A ‘substantial change’ must be a significant change to the dwelling resulting in increased market value of the tenancy. This would involve significant alterations or improvements which add to the letting value of the property.

Recently I have seen a lot of statements, info from mods, stating that new kitchens/bathrooms etc do not count based on RTB published guidance. Can anyone back this up with citations? If "add to the letting value" is the test, I do not see any white line test precluding particular types if refurbs - such as a new kitchen or bathroom in a (say) 15 year old unit. These would certainly add to the letting value.

The_Conductor

Marcusm- most people are getting their information directly from the horse's mouths- that is the RTB (with some commentary for landlords from the Irish Landlord's Association).

The intent is to remove the ability of a landlord to conduct spurious upgrades of their property as a pretext for ending a tenancy.

What is allowable or not allowable- is *not* defined in the Act- deliberately.

What really is needed is a few cases to test the Act and see exactly where the RTB determines its boundaries to be- the problem is a lack of guinea pigs willing to put their hands up to sacrifice themselves to the process (particularly after the Irish Landlord's Association have been accused of 'cartel like activities which must be stamped out of the market' (this was from Leo Varadker rather than Simon Coveney- but you get the picture- its convenient to continue scapegoating landlords as the big bad ogres who are to blame for everything).

Its not defined, its not tested- the information, such as there is information- is verbal information supplied by the RTB (predominantly) to anyone who cares to ask for it.

Arguably- its unconstitutional- however, good luck testing that one too.

The current legislation has a defined lifespan- of 2 years- which got it over the line because it was wildly popular with tenants and left wing politicians- and the government wasn't presumed to survive the duration- so it would be someone else's problem 2 years hence when the decision has to be made whether to extend it (which presumably is what will happen) or not.

Its a sticking plaster- ill'ly defined- because it suits to not tie the RTB or any other agency to a defined list of actions- they can make up the rules as they go along- however, to do so- they need a few guinea pigs- and there has been a reticence on the part of landlords to line up and challenge the Act.

Fian

whatnext wrote: »

Posted this in another thread:
Well due to rent pressure zone legislation I will be air BnB Ing my old apartment. Tenants handed in notice last week, had an estate agent around and he said as I was so far below market rent the flat is worth 50k less than others in the block. It's an investor location and apparently not one that attracts first time buyers anymore. I thought I was going to be rid of it after 5 years subsidising it, but no, I have to keep it out of the rental market for 2 years before I can get shot of it debt free. NB not break even, just cover the outstanding mortgage.

I am sorry to be the bearer of bad news. There is a misunderstanding about the "2 years out of the rental market" issue. If an apartment is taken off the rental market for 2 years it remains subject to rent control based off the last rent. How this could possibly be enforced or policed is another issue entirely of course.

The misunderstanding comes from the new section 19(5):

(5) Subsection (4) does not apply:

(a) where a dwelling has not at any time been the subject of a tenancy during the period of 2 years prior to the date the area is prescribed under section 24A as a rent pressure zone or deemed to be so prescribed;

(b) if, in the period since the rent was last set under a tenancy for the dwelling

(i) a substantial change in the nature of the accommodation provided under the tenancy occurs, and

(ii) the rent under the tenancy, were it to be set immediately after that change, would, by virtue of that change, be different to what was the market rent for the tenancy at the time the rent was last set under a tenancy for the dwelling.

So if the appartment had not been rented in the two years prior to the RPZ being set (ie in the years 2015 and 2016) the RPZ legislation would not apply. Interestingly it would not apply even after the first year's rent - you could increase rent up to market rent. Presumably that was not intended, but maybe it was a deliberate choice to encourage new appartments onto the market.

So taking something off the market now for 2 years has no impact on whether the RPZ limits apply. If it was not rented in the 2 years of 2015 or 2016 then the RPZ limits will not apply to it even after the first rental. It is the two years before the area became an RPZ that are crucial, not the two years before the next tenancy.

Marcusm

The_Conductor wrote: »

Marcusm- most people are getting their information directly from the horse's mouths- that is the RTB (with some commentary for landlords from the Irish Landlord's Association).

The intent is to remove the ability of a landlord to conduct spurious upgrades of their property as a pretext for ending a tenancy.

What is allowable or not allowable- is *not* defined in the Act- deliberately.

What really is needed is a few cases to test the Act and see exactly where the RTB determines its boundaries to be- the problem is a lack of guinea pigs willing to put their hands up to sacrifice themselves to the process (particularly after the Irish Landlord's Association have been accused of 'cartel like activities which must be stamped out of the market' (this was from Leo Varadker rather than Simon Coveney- but you get the picture- its convenient to continue scapegoating landlords as the big bad ogres who are to blame for everything).

Its not defined, its not tested- the information, such as there is information- is verbal information supplied by the RTB (predominantly) to anyone who cares to ask for it.

Arguably- its unconstitutional- however, good luck testing that one too.

The current legislation has a defined lifespan- of 2 years- which got it over the line because it was wildly popular with tenants and left wing politicians- and the government wasn't presumed to survive the duration- so it would be someone else's problem 2 years hence when the decision has to be made whether to extend it (which presumably is what will happen) or not.

Its a sticking plaster- ill'ly defined- because it suits to not tie the RTB or any other agency to a defined list of actions- they can make up the rules as they go along- however, to do so- they need a few guinea pigs- and there has been a reticence on the part of landlords to line up and challenge the Act.

You are conflating two separate points; what constitutes a "refurbishment" to permit a termination of a part 4 and what constitutes a "substantial change" such that the 4% cap does not apply.

I am concerned that this muddled thinking is being presented as fact.