Threshold Comments today

davindub

There was an interview or press release today from Threshold - Aideen Hayden.

Would anyone have a link to the full recording or transcript?

I heard 2 completely different versions on the radio and one better version on the Irish Times. I had planned to contact Threshold after hearing the 1st version described below, it was completely incorrect. But I am beginning to think the radio station used cuttings to sensationalise the story.

1. Describing how there is a loophole in the legislation allowing for substantial renovations to increase the cap

2. Another describing substantial change in nature is the standard to avoid the rent cap not renovations an example given of a 2 bed moving to a 3 bed (i.e. no loophole, policing is the issue)

3. https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/threshold-says-landlords-doing-minimal-maintenance-to-raise-rents-1.3197406

Askthe EA

It's Threshold......

Askthe EA

davindub wrote: »

There was an interview or press release today from Threshold - Aideen Hayden.

Would anyone have a link to the full recording or transcript?

I heard 2 completely different versions on the radio and one better version on the Irish Times. I had planned to contact Threshold after hearing the 1st version described below, it was completely incorrect. But I am beginning to think the radio station used cuttings to sensationalise the story.

1. Describing how there is a loophole in the legislation allowing for substantial renovations to increase the cap

2. Another describing substantial change in nature is the standard to avoid the rent cap not renovations an example given of a 2 bed moving to a 3 bed (i.e. no loophole, policing is the issue)

3. https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/threshold-says-landlords-doing-minimal-maintenance-to-raise-rents-1.3197406

"Substantial renovations have usually been interpreted to mean renovation where you’re required to have planning permission"

By whom?

subrosa

I was at the launch. The point being made was badly reported in some places. Their point was that some landlords are conflating 'substantial refurbishment' and 'substantially changing the nature of the property.' They suggest that the refurbishment standard - while permissible for eviction - is lower than the change of nature standard.

Basically landlords refurbishing properties and then claiming to be exempt from the RPZ legislation. The mention of planning permission was used as an example of what might constitute a 'change of nature.'

To be fair is an important, but fairly complex, point. The media is not great at those.

davindub

Askthe EA wrote: »

"Substantial renovations have usually been interpreted to mean renovation where you’re required to have planning permission"

By whom?

I'd say the common meaning of the words and there is usually quite a bit of discussion between all parties involved, including ministers. I wouldn't take it as literal without seeing a proper transcript. But i'd say they are giving examples in contrast to painting a room, or retiling a bathroom.

davindub

subrosa wrote: »

I was at the launch. The point being made was badly reported in some places. Their point was that some landlords are conflating 'substantial refurbishment' and 'substantially changing the nature of the property.' They suggest that the refurbishment standard - while permissible for eviction - is lower than the change of nature standard.

Basically landlords refurbishing properties and then claiming to be exempt from the RPZ legislation. The mention of planning permission was used as an example of what might constitute a 'change of nature.'

To be fair is an important, but fairly complex, point. The media is not great at those.

Thanks, I was flabbergasted when I heard the first report, a loophole no less!

Topgear on Dave

Yes I heard it on the RTE drivetime.

Its up on the web alright.
http://www.rte.ie/radio/utils/radioplayer/rteradioweb.html#!rii=b9%5F21224065%5F83%5F24%2D08%2D2017%5F

I dont think she likes landlords.

Theyre looking for a deposit protection scheme, I can see an ENORMOUS bureaucracy developing here.
5K to run a tribunal for the RTB :pac:

Does she ask herself why the landlords are looking for large deposits? :rolleyes:

Eradicating this wont prevent homelessness. Getting more gaffs available will prevent homelessness.

sk8board

Threshold just need to see the drop on Daft from 23k properties in 2012, to 3k today.
homelessness is simply a Supply issue in the social housing market. Threshold forget that it's not the private landlords role to provide social housing in Ireland.

They can continue to regulate the market until they're blue in the face, they'll just end up with feather landlords, and even fewer properties available for rent (just like is currenty happening).


Calculated my 2016 rental tax returns yesterday - my margin across 3 houses was 41%, i.e. 59% was income tax, USC, prsi, LPT, the 20% nondeducable mortgage interest, maintenance/repairs, capital allowances etc etc.

Seems to me that the main person coining it from this rental market is the government.

subrosa

sk8board wrote: »

Threshold forget that it's not the private landlords role to provide social housing in Ireland.

The problem is that according to the government the private rental sector is the solution to the lack of social housing via the HAP scheme. Once a person has signed up to the HAP scheme (and found a property) their social housing need has been met. The already creaking rental sector was meant to absorb all (or most) of the social housing waiting list. If we had a properly functioning market with good supply this would still be a bad idea, but might work as a short term measure. As it is there is little or no capacity at the lower end of the market and HAP limits are set below market rate anyway.

Almost no-one thinks this is a good idea (including threshold or other charities) but HAP is going nowhere and it doesn't look like a boom is social housing construction is going to happen, so it's just a matter of trying to tinker with the details of HAP.

The Student

sk8board wrote: »

Threshold just need to see the drop on Daft from 23k properties in 2012, to 3k today.
homelessness is simply a Supply issue in the social housing market. Threshold forget that it's not the private landlords role to provide social housing in Ireland.

They can continue to regulate the market until they're blue in the face, they'll just end up with feather landlords, and even fewer properties available for rent (just like is currenty happening).


Calculated my 2016 rental tax returns yesterday - my margin across 3 houses was 41%, i.e. 59% was income tax, USC, prsi, LPT, the 20% nondeducable mortgage interest, maintenance/repairs, capital allowances etc etc.

Seems to me that the main person coining it from this rental market is the government.

Completely agree with this.

if the rent a room scheme was extended to landlords (allow for a 4% increase each year) it would put a cap on rent increases while at the same time allowing tenants save for a deposit.

When and if supply comes on stream tenants will have had an opportunity to save for a deposit for home ownership.

Askthe EA

subrosa wrote: »

sk8board wrote: »

Threshold forget that it's not the private landlords role to provide social housing in Ireland.

The problem is that according to the government the private rental sector is the solution to the lack of social housing via the HAP scheme. Once a person has signed up to the HAP scheme (and found a property) their social housing need has been met. The already creaking rental sector was meant to absorb all (or most) of the social housing waiting list. If we had a properly functioning market with good supply this would still be a bad idea, but might work as a short term measure. As it is there is little or no capacity at the lower end of the market and HAP limits are set below market rate anyway.

Almost no-one thinks this is a good idea (including threshold or other charities) but HAP is going nowhere and it doesn't look like a boom is social housing construction is going to happen, so it's just a matter of trying to tinker with the details of HAP.

HAP would work if the LL rented to the council directly at slightly below market rent. At start of agreement, council agree the property is up to a certain standard. It is their responsibility then to maintain it to said level. This would remove the risk and most LLs would choose a lower return for a risk free arrangement. The council want all the benefits with none of the risk.