Securing rental accommodation through a private landlord

LaughAlot2

Hap issues are arising due to prices being put over the amounts available to tenants in receipt of Hap by landlords. Loads of accommodation available, prices purposely being upped to deter potential Hap or supplemented tenants.

What are the rents like around the Westmeath Midlands area currently for a single occupancy or sharing??

Best wishes.

dennyk

Landlords aren't going to price themselves out of the market just to avoid renting to HAP tenants. The prices are what they are because that's the rent they can get; they aren't going to charge less unless they have to. Can't blame 'em for that, really; it sounds like your local authority's HAP isn't keeping up with the reality of the marketplace.

rossmores

Private landlords are not responsible for social housing and had no input to hap which presents many other risks that make it unattractive.
I dont agree there is loads of accommodation available as supply is at a historical low and will get worse before it gets better.
Applicants should lobby local politicians and councils to address this

theballz

dennyk wrote: »

Landlords aren't going to price themselves out of the market just to avoid renting to HAP tenants. The prices are what they are because that's the rent they can get; they aren't going to charge less unless they have to. Can't blame 'em for that, really; it sounds like your local authority's HAP isn't keeping up with the reality of the marketplace.

In my recent experience I find this to be completely untrue.

Over the last month I have been viewing apartments across Dublin as my lease was up. On a few occasions landlords had pulled me aside to tell me that the advertised price per month was actually a lot lower.

I don’t have the pleasure of HAP however I definitely feel like I was in a better position then some of my peer applicants as landlords did not favour it.

RunRoryRun

theballz wrote:

Over the last month I have been viewing apartments across Dublin as my lease was up. On a few occasions landlords had pulled me aside to tell me that the advertised price per month was actually a lot lower.

I don't follow exactly. So the landlord posted a price (for example €2k) then when you arrived knowing this price, undercut themselves and said the high price was deter applicants with HAP (for example reducing the price to €1.7k)? Am I understanding that correctly?

Del2005

RunRoryRun wrote: »

I don't follow exactly. So the landlord posted a price (for example €2k) then when you arrived knowing this price, undercut themselves and said the high price was deter applicants with HAP (for example reducing the price to €1.7k)? Am I understanding that correctly?

It's illegal to discriminate against HAP recipients so it's easier to price above their limit and if you find a suitable candidate offer to reduce the rent.

RunRoryRun

Del2005 wrote:

It's illegal to discriminate against HAP recipients so it's easier to price above their limit and if you find a suitable candidate offer to reduce the rent.

Is it illegal? Is discrimination not based on one of the 7 protected groups (of which HAP candidate isn't one). A landlord has the right to choose their preferred candidate. Two identical candidates in every respect - one on HAP, the other not. Landlord can choose the one not on HAP - doesn't constitute discrimination.

I still don't understand why a commercialy motivated landlord would drop the price in this market if people are viewing the property knowing the high price. Makes no sense to me.

davo10

theballz wrote: »

In my recent experience I find this to be completely untrue.

Over the last month I have been viewing apartments across Dublin as my lease was up. On a few occasions landlords had pulled me aside to tell me that the advertised price per month was actually a lot lower.

I don’t have the pleasure of HAP however I definitely feel like I was in a better position then some of my peer applicants as landlords did not favour it.

So the price is advertised, people turn up knowing the advertised price, then the LL tells them the price is actually lower? Sorry, this just doesn't make sense, I find it very hard to believe that properties rent for lower than advertised even though LLs can get the ad price.

Nomis21

I used to be a landlord a long time ago but if a candidate turned up to view with very good references or offering a bigger deposit I may have reduced the rent. Although I am a tenant now and on Disability I accepted many tenants on welfare at the time and am sorry to say it was a disaster every time...

davo10

RunRoryRun wrote: »

Is it illegal? Is discrimination not based on one of the 7 protected groups (of which HAP candidate isn't one). A landlord has the right to choose their preferred candidate. Two identical candidates in every respect - one on HAP, the other not. Landlord can choose the one not on HAP - doesn't constitute discrimination.
.

Unfortunately it does if your decision is based on whether the tenant is in receipt of HAP or not.

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/landlord-ordered-to-pay-more-than-42-000-to-three-tenants-1.3192606%3fmode=amp

Graces7

Del2005 wrote: »

It's illegal to discriminate against HAP recipients so it's easier to price above their limit and if you find a suitable candidate offer to reduce the rent.

Yep. Last year I was many months seeking a new rental as my ll needed to sell, and i mean needed. One house was grand, and ll great. When I mentioned rent allowance, he face hit the floor . I got an email saying, "rent allowance does not suit my husband and I " followed by aggressive emails.

It can be done very subtly too

Graces7

Nomis21 wrote: »

I used to be a landlord a long time ago but if a candidate turned up to view with very good references or offering a bigger deposit I may have reduced the rent. Although I am a tenant now and on Disability I accepted many tenants on welfare at the time and am sorry to say it was a disaster every time...

Sorry about that. I rented many times on RA and was a great tenant. As I am now

Graces7

RunRoryRun wrote: »

Is it illegal? Is discrimination not based on one of the 7 protected groups (of which HAP candidate isn't one). A landlord has the right to choose their preferred candidate. Two identical candidates in every respect - one on HAP, the other not. Landlord can choose the one not on HAP - doesn't constitute discrimination.

I still don't understand why a commercialy motivated landlord would drop the price in this market if people are viewing the property knowing the high price. Makes no sense to me.

It is devious.You advertise above HAP limits. so no social welfare folk come looking . Then you tell preferred tenants the real price to entice them in.

Graces7

RunRoryRun wrote: »

Is it illegal? Is discrimination not based on one of the 7 protected groups (of which HAP candidate isn't one). A landlord has the right to choose their preferred candidate. Two identical candidates in every respect - one on HAP, the other not. Landlord can choose the one not on HAP - doesn't constitute discrimination.

I still don't understand why a commercialy motivated landlord would drop the price in this market if people are viewing the property knowing the high price. Makes no sense to me.

See

https://www.threshold.ie/advice/seeking-private-rented-accommodation/can-a-landlord-refuse-to-rent-to-me/

It is illegal and rightly so

hawkelady

This forum is full of stories that have negative stories of RA tenants. The majority of them are horror stories ! So the landlords rightly try and steer away from them. I put it down to most of them have never really owned anything before especially a property so they just treat everything like crap ! It'll never change , some on RA are fine and look after things but the majority just don't give a crap ! The councils that put them there are as bad as the worst of tenants !

Graces7

hawkelady wrote: »

This forum is full of stories that have negative stories of RA tenants. The majority of them are horror stories ! So the landlords rightly try and steer away from them. I put it down to most of them have never really owned anything before especially a property so they just treat everything like crap ! It'll never change , some on RA are fine and look after things but the majority just don't give a crap ! The councils that put them there are as bad as the worst of tenants !

Wish people would not make statements like this ad lib with no proof. This is what does such harm to decent tenants who form the silent majority

There are ways; eg references, to check on tenants .

And other reasons why lls refuse them. In the case I mentioned it was that if they accepted RA they would have to declare income and be taxed

Raging_Ninja

Graces7 wrote: »

Wish people would not make statements like this ad lib with no proof. This is what does such harm to decent tenants who form the silent majority

Usually there is little to no documentary evidence as usually taking somebody on social welfare to court for damages is a waste of time, money and energy for obvious reasons.

So all you have to go on is people's experiences and at some point you're going to have to trust that what they are posting here is what they have actually experienced.

Be honest with yourself - would most people genuinely respect and treat well something they have received for free where there are no real consequences if it is damaged?

And I think you meant "ad hominem", not "ad lib".

hawkelady

There has to be something to the countless tales of RA trashing places etc. I've witnessed it myself... Not all landlords who won't accept RA are doing it for tax evasion you know

Graces7

Raging_Ninja wrote: »

Usually there is little to no documentary evidence as usually taking somebody on social welfare to court for damages is a waste of time, money and energy for obvious reasons.

So all you have to go on is people's experiences and at some point you're going to have to trust that what they are posting here is what they have actually experienced.

Be honest with yourself - would most people genuinely respect and treat well something they have received for free where there are no real consequences if it is damaged?

And I think you meant "ad hominem", not "ad lib".

Not "for free" ; we pay rent. Certainly not free..And being honest I have never met anyone who treated rentals else than as their own. I usually leave a rental in far better shape than when I moved in .

So cynical.\

And I meant ad lib.

Del2005

Graces7 wrote: »

Wish people would not make statements like this ad lib with no proof. This is what does such harm to decent tenants who form the silent majority

There are ways; eg references, to check on tenants .

And other reasons why lls refuse them. In the case I mentioned it was that if they accepted RA they would have to declare income and be taxed

Plenty of evidence of landlords giving trouble tenants glowing references and money to leave their property.

Loads of tax compliant LLs refuse to accept RA or HAP tenants, not helped by the councils insisting that rentals built decades ago confirm with current building regulations instead of the regulations of the time for no reason.

Del2005

Graces7 wrote: »

Not "for free" ; we pay rent. Certainly not free..And being honest I have never met anyone who treated rentals else than as their own. I usually leave a rental in far better shape than when I moved in .

So cynical.\

And I meant ad lib.

15% of income, usually from the government, is "free" considering that most people are spending 40%+ for their private rent/mortgage

Unfortunately for you the amount of trouble tenants on RA or HAP and the councils refusal to deal with them is why all RA/HAP tenants are avoided. The good don't be the ones moving.

10pennymixup

Del2005 wrote: »

15% of income, usually from the government, is "free" considering that most people are spending 40%+ for their private rent/mortgage

Unfortunately for you the amount of trouble tenants on RA or HAP and the councils refusal to deal with them is why all RA/HAP tenants are avoided. The good don't be the ones moving.

Agree. When that 15% is derived from some other social welfare payment, it's easy to consider it in some cases as "free".

the_syco

Graces7 wrote: »

See

https://www.threshold.ie/advice/seeking-private-rented-accommodation/can-a-landlord-refuse-to-rent-to-me/

It is illegal and rightly so

Making refusal of HAP illegal just wastes the LL's and tenants time, as the LL can't say HAP is not allowed, so they'll get lots of HAP people looking at the house when there's no hope of them actually getting said house!

Graces7 wrote: »

There are ways; eg references, to check on tenants

The worst tenants will get the best references, so the LL gets rid of them.

Graces7 wrote: »

Wish people would not make statements like this ad lib with no proof. This is what does such harm to decent tenants who form the silent majority

What? Like your statement below? I love this. In the same post as saying that you shouldn't say X about the tenants, you calling LL's who don't accept RA/HAP as tax dodgers!

Graces7 wrote: »

In the case I mentioned it was that if they accepted RA they would have to declare income and be taxed

=-=

If the money stops, the LL won't know if it's because the system has not paid anyone (this happens), or if the tenant didn't pay the CC, and the CC is now not paying the LL.

Oh, and RA/HAP pays in arrears, but those who pay cash from their own pocket pay in advance. A lot of landlords don't like this.

Is RA/HAP paid from the moment they move in, or after a few months? Because if it's the latter, that's another reason not to rent to HAP; private tenants pay from day one.

Very few tenants on Welfare can afford a few months rent until the system starts paying.

Graces7

The cynicism here !

Graces7

the_syco wrote: »

Making refusal of HAP illegal just wastes the LL's and tenants time, as the LL can't say HAP is not allowed, so they'll get lots of HAP people looking at the house when there's no hope of them actually getting said house!


Oh, and RA/HAP pays in arrears, but those who pay cash from their own pocket pay in advance. A lot of landlords don't like this.

Is RA/HAP paid from the moment they move in, or after a few months? Because if it's the latter, that's another reason not to rent to HAP; private tenants pay from day one.


Usually very prompt.And it is possible to get help with the deposit also. he authorities are not stupid.

Sheep Shagger

hawkelady wrote: »

This forum is full of stories that have negative stories of RA tenants. The majority of them are horror stories ! So the landlords rightly try and steer away from them. I put it down to most of them have never really owned anything before especially a property so they just treat everything like crap ! It'll never change , some on RA are fine and look after things but the majority just don't give a crap ! The councils that put them there are as bad as the worst of tenants !

As an ex landlord (sold property last year as the tax bill despite making a profit and grief just wasn’t worth it), I stopped renting out to RA tenants as got burnt one with someone trashing the place and withholding rent (the department of social protection let the tenant change the bank account details from mine to hers with no notice).

It might be tarring everyone with the same brush but just couldn’t afford to get stung again (and the experience left a very sour taste in my mouth and probably expedited the selling of the property).

There’s ZERO support for one property landlords in this country, don’t even get me started on the waste of space that is the PRTB.

Still have a determination order saying a tenant owes me €3k - not worth the paper it’s written on plus the PRTB said ‘if the person can’t afford to pay it there’s not a lot we can do!’

10pennymixup

Graces7 wrote: »

Usually very prompt.And it is possible to get help with the deposit also. he authorities are not stupid.

Usually very prompt in paying the rent in arrears (definition: late) is not a very attractive statement for a LL to hear.

The tenant not having to come up with the deposit is even less attractive. After all why should they care if they lose the deposit?

I do agree that the authorities are not stupid. They know what the game is, they just don't care

rossmores

Insurance cover I use has an additional premium on RA, fact.
not been able to advertise selection does waste both parties time.
5 years ago I had an RA tenant he made life hell for the other tenants even after warnings i caught him red handed one day and it was last never will consider an RA tenant again.

gar32

As both a LL and a tenant I know the 2 sides of the story here .

If someone goes for a job the person most suitable get the job. As a tenant a LL want someone who pays on time and looks after the place well. If someone has a good ref from past LL doesn't mean they will not break the contact by late payment or damaging the place.

You have to go with who you feel will be a good tenant and if your viewing a place and you want it you have to project that you are one.

S&%T happens but less often is better. Respect from all involved is needed but with little information (Ref, short meeting and little other contact) it's hard to guess who will be a good tenant.

the_syco

Sheep Shagger wrote: »

Still have a determination order saying a tenant owes me €3k - not worth the paper it’s written on plus the PRTB said ‘if the person can’t afford to pay it there’s not a lot we can do!’

And as RA/HAP never does, the LL loses out, and the tenant doesn't get punished.