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

Irish times blames landlords for protecting their investment

Options
135

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    TheChizler
    Registered Users Posts: 9,455 ✭✭✭TheChizler


    Graham wrote: »
    If you think 2 months deposit is unreasonable, can you imagine entrusting something worth 100 - 200 times that amount to a relatively unknown tenant.

    That's a choice a landlord makes. If they don't want to make that risk they don't have to rent it out. They also have an opportunity to talk to previous references etc. The way the market is going the tenant has no choice in the matter and they can't exactly go asking landlords for references (they could and used to years ago but who would entertain it now?).


  • Options
    #63
    jamesthepeach
    Registered Users Posts: 992 ✭✭✭jamesthepeach


    I see a few posts about garaunteurs. I believe this is going to happen soon enough. The problem being that the owner has zero leverage over the person who is renting the property to encourage them to pay back for damages or unpaid rent even if found guilty.

    Also you might get to a stage where you are being asked for rent 6 months in advance at a time. That's happening already. All that will be left for the normal renter are the shhit holes.
    All.of the good properties will be taken by those who can distinguish themselves from the crowd, and usually this is done with money on the table and irrefutable refs.
    Also another thing we might see is companies renting out apartments and then subletting them.


  • Options
    #64
    Bob24
    Registered Users Posts: 10,905 ✭✭✭✭Bob24


    TheChizler wrote: »
    That's a choice a landlord makes. If they don't want to make that risk they don't have to rent it out.

    That's a fairly poor argument to be frank. You can also reverse it and say "that's a choice tenants make, if they don't want to pay 2 months deposit they don't have to rent that property".

    But in both cases you are not really making any point - it's just a very generic sentance which can apply to anything.


  • Options
    #65
    Bob24
    Registered Users Posts: 10,905 ✭✭✭✭Bob24


    jamesthepeach wrote: »
    I see a few posts about garaunteurs. I believe this is going to happen soon enough. The problem being that the owner has zero leverage over the person who is renting the property to encourage them to pay back for damages or unpaid rent even if found guilty.

    Also you might get to a stage where you are being asked for rent 6 months in advance at a time. That's happening already. All that will be left for the normal renter are the shhit holes.
    All.of the good properties will be taken by those who can distinguish themselves from the crowd, and usually this is done with money on the table and irrefutable refs.
    Also another thing we might see is companies renting out apartments and then subletting them.

    Yes - as I said before the only policy which will help tenants in the current market is one which significantly increases supply.

    Anything else is just going to make things more complicated for everyone (landlords and tenants alike).

    Having rented in Paris before I have a fair idea of where we are heading trying to over-regulate an already constrained market: it will come to a point where landlords are so picky that many properties are only available to locals who have a good job, a few years "experience" in renting, and 2 civil servant parents with garanteed jobs who are ready to sing a legally binding form saying they will act as a guarantor in case the tenant doesn't pay the rent. Someone moving from abroad will struggle not only because of scarcity of accommodation but also because all the requested paperwork is unmanageable for an individual who hasn't spent the previous few years in Ireland.


  • Options
    #66
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    I'm glad to see we have a new weekly topic and that people are so willing to listen to each other and reform their opinions based on the new information from both sides.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    jamesthepeach
    Registered Users Posts: 992 ✭✭✭jamesthepeach


    You mess with the market. The market will adapt around you whether you like it or not.
    It still amazed me that the government have learned nothing. Never in history has interfering in the property market produced the desired effect. Plenty of unintended effects though.
    And yet they continue to fcuk with it.


  • Options
    #68
    TheChizler
    Registered Users Posts: 9,455 ✭✭✭TheChizler


    Bob24 wrote: »
    That's a fairly poor argument to be frank. You can also reverse it and say "that's a choice tenants make, if they don't want to pay 2 months deposit they don't have to rent that property".

    But in both cases you are not really making any point - it's just a very generic sentance which can apply to anything.

    I'm saying the way the market is going, and the trend that this thread is about, which looks like 2 months rent as deposit will be standard, means that if you're renting there will be no choice. For many people they don't even have a choice to not rent as buying is out of their means. They also have little means of getting reassurances of which landlords are decent or not, they are essentially walking into the tenancy blind. Whereas landlords have the ability to demand more reassurances of potential tenants.


  • Options
    #69
    4ensic15
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,691 ✭✭✭4ensic15


    Tenants have only themselves to blame. A few years ago they were crowing about how much they had forced their landlords to drop the rent. The landlords' problems were not theirs and the landlord took the gamble of going on the market and now had to live with the downside. Now the shoe is on the other foot, the usual suspects are howling.


  • Options
    #70
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    4ensic15 wrote: »
    Tenants have only themselves to blame.

    Tenants are no more to blame for the current state of the property market than landlords are.


  • Options
    #71
    Bob24
    Registered Users Posts: 10,905 ✭✭✭✭Bob24


    TheChizler wrote: »
    I'm saying the way the market is going, and the trend that this thread is about, which looks like 2 months rent as deposit will be standard, means that if you're renting there will be no choice. For many people they don't even have a choice to not rent as buying is out of their means. They also have little means of getting reassurances of which landlords are decent or not, they are essentially walking into the tenancy blind. Whereas landlords have the ability to demand more reassurances of potential tenants.

    The choice / no-choice thing is a bit weak. Accidental landlord who's can't sell because of negative equity and has to rent to cover mortgage repayments. They have no choice either. Shall they be exempt from your reasoning and be alloyed to ask for too months deposit?

    Also even ignoring that: let's assume we legislate and limit deposits to one month rent. The market will still be as constrained and landlord will still be worried that the deposits won't cover potential damage. So what's next? They'll ask for more paperwork or for a guarantor. Then you'll have similar concerns as with the 2 months deposit, which is these new requirements will cut some people off the rental market because they can't fullfill them. You might want to legislate to ban these new practises. But landlords will still have concerns and leverage so they'll find something else to protect themselves ... it's endless.

    At the end of the day the issue is not that landlords want more protection (we all would do the same), it is that the market is too constrained.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    Arcade_Tryer
    Registered Users Posts: 2,021 ✭✭✭Arcade_Tryer


    Bob24 wrote: »
    The choice / no-choice thing is a bit weak. Accidental landlord who's can't sell because of negative equity and has to rent to cover mortgage repayments. They have no choice either. Shall they be exempt from your reasoning and be alloyed to ask for too months deposit?
    There is always a choice. They can sell, and suffer the loss.


  • Options
    #73
    Bob24
    Registered Users Posts: 10,905 ✭✭✭✭Bob24


    Arcade_Tryer wrote: »
    There is always a choice. They can sell, and suffer the loss.

    You could probably say the same for many prospective tenants in Dublin. They have a choice to rent for cheap in the middle of nowhere where demand is low and landlords will be happy with one month deposit ... and then to spend 2 hours on poor public transport each morning and another 2 each evening to commute to work.

    A choice most posters who happily recommend it on boards would never make for themselves ... but a choice.

    And are you sure the bank will let you sell the place if it's in negative equity? And if you could would you yourself choose to walk away with let's say 100k euros in debt and no house if you were in that situation with no stable income?

    That's why the choice / no choice argument makes no sense. As you say there is always another choice (being for landlords who are in the situation I described or tenants being asked for 2 months deposit). People just turn the choice thing around to fit the side of the fence they are sitting on but it makes no valid point.


  • Options
    #74
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 24,714 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Arcade_Tryer wrote: »
    There is always a choice. They can sell, and suffer the loss.

    The tenant can rent elsewhere or buy their own place if they aren't happy. The Ll should be able to ask whatever rent and deposit he/she likes and if someone will pay that then so be it and if no one will the LL has to reduce rent or deposit to a point where someone will. That's how the private rental market should operate.

    Some people here want tenants to have every right under the sun but absolutely no responsibility or financial risk.


  • Options
    #75
    Arcade_Tryer
    Registered Users Posts: 2,021 ✭✭✭Arcade_Tryer


    Bob24 wrote: »
    You could probably say the same for many prospective tenants in Dublin.
    You could.
    Marco Obedient Springboard wrote: »
    The tenant can rent elsewhere or buy their own place if they aren't happy. The Ll should be able to ask whatever rent and deposit he/she likes and if someone will pay that then so be it and if no one will the LL has to reduce rent or deposit to a point where someone will. That's how the private rental market should operate.
    Agreed. At the same time, that is probably not an optimal market for society. Nor sustainable long term. Hence the urgent need for supply.

    Post below says it best
    Graham wrote: »
    Tenants are no more to blame for the current state of the property market than landlords are.


  • Options
    #76
    jimmycrackcorm
    Registered Users Posts: 14,339 ✭✭✭✭jimmycrackcorm


    Bob24 wrote:
    Also even ignoring that: let's assume we legislate and limit deposits to one month rent.

    I suspect that would be open to challenge though without any corresponding protection for landlords losing out on unpaid rent.
    Arcade_Tryer wrote:
    There is always a choice. They can sell, and suffer the loss.

    Just as there is s choice for tenants to pay two months deposit or not. They can suffer the unavailability of their deposit.


  • Options
    #77
    4ensic15
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,691 ✭✭✭4ensic15


    Graham wrote: »
    Tenants are no more to blame for the current state of the property market than landlords are.

    The problem is under supply. landlords are supplying accommodation so are therefore easing the situation. Tenants are taking up accommodation thereby making the situation worse. tenants quite happily drove landlords out of the market a few years ago thereby worsening the situation.


  • Options
    #78
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    4ensic15 wrote: »
    The problem is under supply. landlords are supplying accommodation so are therefore easing the situation. Tenants are taking up accommodation thereby making the situation worse. tenants quite happily drove landlords out of the market a few years ago thereby worsening the situation.

    I don't think it's the case that tenants drove landlords out of the market.

    Market rates drove landlords out of the market, something that's quite beyond a tenants influence even if they may have benefitted from it at the time.

    Markets have now swung the other way, which benefits some landlords.

    A sensible goal would be to bring some sort of stability to the rental market. Violent swings in both directions ultimately benefit neither landlords or tenants.


  • Options
    #79
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,280 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    Arcade_Tryer wrote: »
    There is always a choice. They can sell, and suffer the loss.

    +1 , so many people holding on to properties in NE just because theyre waiting for them to get to magic 2007 boom prices again . Its a uniquely irish idea that an investment can't lose money.

    The supply problem in house sales is being caused by these people.


  • Options
    #80
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    +1 , so many people holding on to properties in NE just because theyre waiting for them to get to magic 2007 boom prices again . Its a uniquely irish idea that an investment can't lose money.

    The supply problem in house sales is being caused by these people.

    When an asset devalues and is likely to recover some/all of that value, it's hardly a uniquely Irish idea to wait until that happens before disposing of the asset.


  • Options
    #81
    Carlos Orange
    Registered Users Posts: 2,499 ✭✭✭Carlos Orange


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    The supply problem in house sales is being caused by these people.

    That or the way I gather almost no houses have been built in the last 5 years.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    Lux23
    Registered Users Posts: 7,134 ✭✭✭Lux23


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    +1 , so many people holding on to properties in NE just because theyre waiting for them to get to magic 2007 boom prices again . Its a uniquely irish idea that an investment can't lose money.

    The supply problem in house sales is being caused by these people.

    And that it's everyone else's fault but their own.


  • Options
    #83
    the_syco
    Registered Users Posts: 37,301 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    TheChizler wrote: »
    That's a choice a landlord makes
    Renting is a choice the tenant makes.


  • Options
    #84
    grogi
    Registered Users Posts: 8,615 ✭✭✭grogi


    the_syco wrote: »
    Renting is a choice the tenant makes.

    Sometimes that choice is made for the tenant though.


  • Options
    #85
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    And where are people supposed to get 2 months rent and a despot upfront?

    Jesus Christ o moved into my place I had to starve myself to save 1800 euro


  • Options
    #86
    TheChizler
    Registered Users Posts: 9,455 ✭✭✭TheChizler


    the_syco wrote: »
    Renting is a choice the tenant makes.
    Is homelessness a real choice? In the case of someone who's over the threshold for state assistance but can't afford to buy and doesn't have the option to move in with family, what do they do?


  • Options
    #87
    Bob24
    Registered Users Posts: 10,905 ✭✭✭✭Bob24


    TheChizler wrote: »
    Is homelessness a real choice? In the case of someone who's over the threshold for state assistance but can't afford to buy and doesn't have the option to move in with family, what do they do?

    If you face homelessness with no alternative it is likely you will quality for public assistance. You can choose that. And in most people's cases homelessness is not on the table and there is a choice to move to a much further location and/or lower-end property/location.

    Not a great prospect mind you and it would be stupid to say this is what should happen to many people, but the suggestion before that an accidental landlord has a choice to sell the property was equally moot. Walking away with for exemple 100k in debt and no steady income it not what you and i would do if we had another option.

    The "choice" rhetoric which has been going on on the thread makes no sense either way. It's just sugar coating from people who have decide to split the situation in good and bad sides and are justifying their side being the good one and they don't want to know what issues other side might have because it is those people's "choice".


  • Options
    #88
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 24,714 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    +1 , so many people holding on to properties in NE just because theyre waiting for them to get to magic 2007 boom prices again . Its a uniquely irish idea that an investment can't lose money.

    The supply problem in house sales is being caused by these people.

    In fairness with any investment a financial advisor will tell you up front that if things drop in value the last thing you should do is panic sell when there is a good chance that riding it out will see you recoup some or all of the looses in the long run. I think anyone in any country with an investment that has fallen and has the potential to increase again will stick it out if they are in a position to do so.
    Deleted User wrote: »
    And where are people supposed to get 2 months rent and a despot upfront?

    Jesus Christ o moved into my place I had to starve myself to save 1800 euro

    Plenty of people could easily pay 2 months deposit from their savings.

    Those that struggle to get it together may also struggle to pay the rent if some other expense comes up or if their salary drop/they are sick or lose a job.


  • Options
    #89
    crossmolinalad
    Registered Users Posts: 837 ✭✭✭crossmolinalad


    Patww79 wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    Is one of the reasons I never pay the last(two)months (s) rent when I plan moving on


  • Options
    #90
    crossmolinalad
    Registered Users Posts: 837 ✭✭✭crossmolinalad


    dudara wrote: »
    It's a big change in mentality for Irish renters, hence why it's causing upset. Also, given that monthly rents are now much higher, a two month deposit can be around the €4K mark, which is a lot of money. You can see why tenants are emotional about it.

    Give it time and it will become the new norm, especially given the increased professionalism of landlords since the REITs arrived. Most tenants are reacting based on their experience of the stereotypical "dodgy" small scale landlord.

    And it will be much more if you moving 4 k by landlord one and have to pay 4k to landlord 2 before getting a key
    That's for a tenant 8k deposits Stupid rules should be forbidden
    Most of the tenants wouldn't have the money in the pocket for this


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    crossmolinalad wrote: »
    Is one of the reasons I never pay the last(two)months (s) rent when I plan moving on

    And you will no doubt be shocked and upset if deposits increase to take this into account.


Advertisement