Long term tenant worries

superd1978

Thanks for all the feedback here folks, some very interesting points... much appreciated!!

I would like to highlight i have been an incredible landlord to this guy and his family, i have gone above and beyond, and will be as fair as i can when i do decide to sell, while doing everything in line with regulations also.

A previous poster mentioned the abolishing of the 7 year CBT rule, which i wasnt aware of.

I purchased this property back in December 2013, just over 4 years ago. Does this mean, should i wish, i am in a position to sell the property this year or next, without paying any CBT?

Currently digesting this:
https://www.grantthornton.ie/insights/factsheets/budget-2018--7-year-relief-capital-gains-tax/

Thanks again.

Cash_Q

Well they will advise you on the correct notice period and the wording required on a statutory declaration. They did this over the phone to me when I was neither landlord nor tenant, but buying a house when a tenant who had challenged their notice.

Eric Cartman

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

And 6 kids going into the workforce paying for that other group of lay abouts - pensioners.

If you think that 6 out of 6 kids growing up on benefits will all end up as productive members of society then I suggest you go outdoors more to see the reality. If we came back in 15 years time to find even 2 of them not on HAP, in a council house or in maximum security government 'housing ' it would be a good outcome unfortunately.

Arcade_Tryer

amcalester wrote: »

Yes, just because it’s a legitimate welfare payment doesn’t mean it’s not a handout.

It does mean it's not a handout. It's a welfare payment as part of what others have already mentioned is the welfare state that we as a society choose to live in. Unless you mean any and all type of state aid is a "handout"? One might argue that the many inheritances of property that occur in this country everyday, at minimal rates of tax, constitutes a hand-out, given that they've never worked for it, and it's someone else's money etc. But that's just another perspective. Neither is necessarily right or wrong. But one is perhaps less poisonous.

Bob24 wrote: »

Interesting (and a bit depressing) to see what has became of a thread whereby someone was simply asking for advice on how to properly terminate a tenancy.

People find it incredibly difficult to conceal their disdain for welfare recipients. Throw in a few kids to add fuel to the fire. It would be hilarious if it weren't such a frightening world view.

Eric Cartman

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

People find it incredibly difficult to conceal their disdain for welfare recipients. Throw in a few kids to add fuel to the fire. It would be hilarious if it weren't such a frightening world view.

sadly , when half your money is being stolen by the government every month to fund people who should never have had children living in a hotel because they declined to take a free house in a bad area of Dublin in order to hold out for a free house in a good area in Dublin, meanwhile you commute for an hour and can barely make rent 25km outside Dublin , it will make you suuuuuper pissed off at those people.

The_Conductor

martinr5232 wrote: »

Maybe if taxation on rental income wasnt so high rents would be lower.

The only thing that is going to bring rent levels down- is a significant increase in supply. Taxation policy is only one part of the equation which is running counter to an increase in supply- the rest of the regulatory regime- is far worse a factor than taxation policy- in discouraging new landlords from the sector- and driving pre-existing landlords out.

One way or the other- if supply increased markedly- rent levels would fall to a new equilibrium- and doubtless, despite some tenant's expectations- it is the sort of scenario that would better suit both tenants and landlords.

Eric Cartman

The_Conductor wrote: »

The only thing that is going to bring rent levels down- is a significant increase in supply. Taxation policy is only one part of the equation which is running counter to an increase in supply- the rest of the regulatory regime- is far worse a factor than taxation policy- in discouraging new landlords from the sector- and driving pre-existing landlords out.

One way or the other- if supply increased markedly- rent levels would fall to a new equilibrium- and doubtless, despite some tenant's expectations- it is the sort of scenario that would better suit both tenants and landlords.

Most non reit/trust/big landlords are going to airbnb because of tax policy and the shocking lenth evictions take in Ireland, reforms to decrease taxation and have a 60 day from first arrears eviction procedure would increase supply a lot

The_Conductor

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Most non reit/trust/big landlords are going to airbnb because of tax policy and the shocking lenth evictions take in Ireland, reforms to decrease taxation and have a 60 day from first arrears eviction procedure would increase supply a lot

I'm not convinced.
We hear a lot about Airbnb and how its sucking properties out of the rental sector. However- airbnb share details of *all* rentals of Irish property with the Revenue Commissioners- and the volume of figures that a lot of organisations are bandying around as being representative of the numbers of properties taken out of general rental stock- don't stack up.

The inability to evict a tenant- after the lawful end of a tenancy (for whatever reason)- is a far bigger concern for most landlords- than is the prospect of trying to earn extra from running an Airbnb unit (which is actually a significant amount of work- something that many people do not appreciate- and a landlord cannot charge for any work he/she does themselves).

The rental sector in Ireland- swings from one extreme to the other- on a periodic basis. Once upon a time the perception was that being a landlord was a surefire way to untold wealth and fortunes. Now- for an increasing number of landlords- its actually a roadmap to becoming homeless themselves- despite their owning appropriate property of their own. (Another 2 families in Galway in this boat in the last 10 days- no idea about elsewhere).

There are good and bad landlords and tenants. The bad ones- and their antics- tar the reputations of all the fair and reasonable people out there- yet, there is no mechanism- such as a fair and transparent rating system for both landlords and tenants- that can be leveraged by the person to their advantage. And- where a tenant and a landlord have a good relationship with one another- there is no manner for a tenant to bring the benefit of this relationship to another tenancy- meanwhile the goodwill towards the first tenant- can be leveraged by a subsequent tenant who has done nothing to earn that goodwill. If tenant 1- could have their relationship with their current landlord enumerated- and available as a rating (like your credit score)- for a subsequent landlord- they would presumably get a larger discount than someone without a score. However- with GDPR etc- I guess that boat has sailed..........

Arcade_Tryer

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

It does mean it's not a handout. It's a welfare payment as part of what others have already mentioned is the welfare state that we as a society choose to live in. Unless you mean any and all type of state aid is a "handout"? One might argue that the many inheritances of property that occur in this country everyday, at minimal rates of tax, constitutes a hand-out, given that they've never worked for it, and it's someone else's money etc. But that's just another perspective. Neither is necessarily right or wrong. But one is perhaps less poisonous.

The fact you are even trying to compare an inheritance to a dole handout clearly demonstrates a severe bias. They are incomparable in every single way. An inheritance is given by a person who has bought the asset or earned the money and paid large amounts of tax on it to a family member who is fully deserving of receiving it who is also a person paying large amounts of tax you can be sure.

The only problem is that there is any tax at all on it, inheritances and gifts within the family should be 100% tax free regardless of amount. Inheritance tax is no better than a criminal skimming your card, absolute theft!

amcalester

It amazes me that people are trying to claim that welfare is not a handout.

It’s the very definition of a handout.

To claim otherwise demonstrates a clear bias/agenda.

Interested Observer

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

It does mean it's not a handout. It's a welfare payment as part of what others have already mentioned is the welfare state that we as a society choose to live in. Unless you mean any and all type of state aid is a "handout"? One might argue that the many inheritances of property that occur in this country everyday, at minimal rates of tax, constitutes a hand-out, given that they've never worked for it, and it's someone else's money etc. But that's just another perspective. Neither is necessarily right or wrong. But one is perhaps less poisonous.

You're categorically stating welfare isn't a handout but are suggesting inheritance is.

Would you please consider how absurd that is?

Bob24

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

People find it incredibly difficult to conceal their disdain for welfare recipients. Throw in a few kids to add fuel to the fire. It would be hilarious if it weren't such a frightening world view.

Many post complaining about landlords or the rental situation as well (including the first off-topic post in the thread). Both equally off-topic and sometimes exagerated.

Electric Sheep

Jace Savory Door wrote: »

The fact you are even trying to compare an inheritance to a dole handout clearly demonstrates a severe bias. They are incomparable in every single way. An inheritance is given by a person who has bought the asset or earned the money and paid large amounts of tax on it to a family member who is fully deserving of receiving it who is also a person paying large amounts of tax you can be sure.

The only problem is that there is any tax at all on it, inheritances and gifts within the family should be 100% tax free regardless of amount. Inheritance tax is no better than a criminal skimming your card, absolute theft!

I very much doubt that all inheritances go to people who are working and paying large amounts of tax.

Fol20

Eric Cartman wrote: »

the required notice period for a tenant there that long is 16 weeks (112 days) , OP id give 180 days notice and engage a solicitor to make sure that it is all done above board and in writing (there are so many agencies determined to find flaws to allow tenants to remain in a landlords property against their will)

TBH id give them a year notice. What type of ll would want 6 kids in a house? The amount of wear and tear would be unreal. That coupled with HAP and if its in dublin will make it very difficult for them to find anything at all. On top of that living there for so long may guarantee you having a fight on your hands to evict. Just for peace of mine, i think i would prefer to have the house vacant for 6 months know i can sell rather than the headache you might have.

Graces7

amcalester wrote: »

It amazes me that people are trying to claim that welfare is not a handout.

It’s the very definition of a handout.

To claim otherwise demonstrates a clear bias/agenda.

Getting paid for working is per se also a hand out.. Money given for good reason

Graces7

amcalester wrote: »

It amazes me that people are trying to claim that welfare is not a handout.

It’s the very definition of a handout.

To claim otherwise demonstrates a clear bias/agenda.

In the sense that you mean it is without justification? Without moral justification and social responsibility?

What you call "welfare" is a human and social right in Ireland. To scorn folk who are simply being given what is rightfully theirs is morally more than dubious

DubJJ

Graces7 wrote: »

Getting paid for working is per se also a hand out.. Money given for good reason

What a ridiculous statement, you're really scraping the barrel now to try and justify somebody being on benefits for 13 years and having 6 kids.
What you're really saying then is being on welfare should be seen as a career choice?

Bubbaclaus

Graces7 wrote: »

Getting paid for working is per se also a hand out.. Money given for good reason

What kind of rubbish statement is this? Workers generate revenue and they receive a portion of that revenue back in return for their provision of services.

Electric Sheep

Electric Sheep wrote: »

I very much doubt that all inheritances go to people who are working and paying large amounts of tax.

Based on what?

Aside from the odd high profile "celebrity" you see inheriting a fortune and living the life the vast vast majority are just normal people passing on their money or assets to improve the lives of the next generation of their family. People who have inheritances to give work for them and earn them and this sort of work ethic runs in families so you can be damn sure that the generation receiving the inheritance was encouraged to get a good education, work hard and get a good job for themselves too.

Graces7 wrote: »

Getting paid for working is per se also a hand out.. Money given for good reason

Except a large amount of social welfare is not given for a good reason and should be cut off from the many scrongers.

amcalester

Graces7 wrote: »

Getting paid for working is per se also a hand out.. Money given for good reason

This is an absolutely ridiculous statement, and if you actually cannot see the difference between wages and a handout (or welfare if you prefer) then there's not much point in actually engaging with you.

Graces7 wrote: »

In the sense that you mean it is without justification? Without moral justification and social responsibility?

What you call "welfare" is a human and social right in Ireland. To scorn folk who are simply being given what is rightfully theirs is morally more than dubious

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here, or what is has to do with me thinking that someone reliant on handouts should, perhaps, cut their cloth accordingly.

TheBoyConor

Yakuza wrote: »

Can the place not be sold with a sitting tenant, in the same way was bought by the OP? Whatever rental arrangements the new owner wants to put in place won't be the OP's concern.

It can for sure. But the problem with that is that a sitting tenant will knock the value of the house by some amount. This is because a) it makes the house less attractive to home buyers and b) the new owner is taking on the risk associated with a tenant - especially so when it's a HAP tenant.

What you call "welfare" is a human and social right in Ireland. To scorn folk who are simply being given what is rightfully theirs is morally more than dubious

The issue people have with welfare is not that it's a right - the issue is that unlike ordinary employees and self employed who earn their money through honest hard work and in return give back to society by means of services and products, those on welfare do not earn their keep and instead it is a handout given for nothing in return and in a lot of welfare recipients abuse this system and try to trick their way in to receiving things they would not get if they were fully honest about their situation. I know of social housing tenants who don't live in their social house but are living with parents and renting out the rooms in the social house. Discgraceful carry on. That pisses off the people who have to go out and earn their keep because it is they who pay for all this.

I exclude old age pensioners from this comment - they, having worked and busting their arse all their life, are entitled to some support in their old age. And Grace I include you in that.

Grace - you're living in cloud cuckoo land you know, completely detached from reality as usual! Would you ever come off the stage!
The owner has every right to terminate the tenancy and sell the asset. But he has to do so in accordance with the law.
If the HAP tenant wanted absolute control of their home they would have made the effort to go out and earn and buy a house and not have 6 children all paid for by everyone else.

Seth Brundle

Graces7 wrote: »

What you call "welfare" is a human and social right in Ireland. To scorn folk who are simply being given what is rightfully theirs is morally more than dubious

It is an assistance provided to help those least well off. It has never been defined as a human right except by those who assume entitlement to it and fear it's withdrawl. Anyone who assumes it is a human right completely misunderstands human rights!
It is not a social right because people are not automatically entitled to it. They must meet certain criteria to become eligible for social welfare assistance, as should be the case.
Anyhow, I believe we've strayed waaaaay off topic.

endacl

Graces7 wrote: »

What you call "welfare" is a human and social right in Ireland. To scorn folk who are simply being given what is rightfully theirs is morally more than dubious

It's not really. Those rights apply to all. If I went down to apply for assistance, I'd be laughed out of the office. And rightly so. But I wouldn't have been denied any right to which I am entitled - the right to apply. Which is an administrative right. The only payment I'll be entitled to is the state pension, which will be means tested down to zero. Am I being denied a right there too?

Creol1

endacl wrote: »

It's not really. Those rights apply to all. If I went down to apply for assistance, I'd be laughed out of the office. And rightly so. But I wouldn't have been denied any right to which I am entitled - the right to apply. Which is an administrative right. The only payment I'll be entitled to is the state pension, which will be means tested down to zero. Am I being denied a right there too?

The contributory state pension isn't means-tested.

Ginger83

amcalester wrote: »

It amazes me that people are trying to claim that welfare is not a handout.

It’s the very definition of a handout.

To claim otherwise demonstrates a clear bias/agenda.

I'm 35 and in receipt of a payment called Invalidity Pension. Would you consider me on a handout?

OP fair play for providing housing for many years, communication and as much notice as possible given todays issues is the best way forward.

Mrs OBumble

Creol1 wrote: »

The contributory state pension isn't means-tested.

Yet.

It will be.

The clock is ticking.

amcalester

Ginger83 wrote: »

I'm 35 and in receipt of a payment called Invalidity Pension. Would you consider me on a handout?

OP fair play for providing housing for many years, communication and as much notice as possible given todays issues is the best way forward.

Honestly, yes I would.

That’s not to say I don’t think it’s good that welfare exists, it is good, particularly for those that would struggle to make ends meet without it. Nor would I begrudge you your pension but it is still a handout.

It’s having 6 kids AND being reliant on handouts that sticks in the craw.

Mrs OBumble

4ensic15 wrote: »

It is not just the tenant putting up a fight. As a HAP tenant he won't be rehoused until he has actually been evicted. the council will tell him to stay put until the sherrif comes.

OP, this is the nub of your problem.

Unless the tenant can find another place themself which will accept HAP, then the simply are not going to have anywhere to go - no matter how much they want to leave - because the council's hands are tied, they just don't have spare houses lying around in case someone needs one.

Not every tenant is so attached to a house as some posters would have you believe. Some of us really do just see it as a pile of bricks and mortar which we have use of for a time. I'd suggest not making assumptions about the tenants motivations or behaviour, or setting up to have a bad relationship with them. Let them know your reasoning, and that you'll do what you need to do - and that you know they'll be doing the same.

Even better, help them find another place which will accept HAP. It won't be easy - but maybe you have some contacts they don't have ...

sunnysoutheast

OP - is it an option to sell to the council?

Given the circumstances you've outlined and the current regime I'd say it is likely to be several costly years before you can get vacant possession in order to sell.

I'd also echo the advice about getting a solicitor to do this right first time.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Jace Savory Door wrote: »

The fact you are even trying to compare an inheritance to a dole handout clearly demonstrates a severe bias. They are incomparable in every single way. An inheritance is given by a person who has bought the asset or earned the money and paid large amounts of tax on it to a family member who is fully deserving of receiving it who is also a person paying large amounts of tax you can be sure.

The only problem is that there is any tax at all on it, inheritances and gifts within the family should be 100% tax free regardless of amount. Inheritance tax is no better than a criminal skimming your card, absolute theft!

Inheritance tax should be 100% above say 300k.

Too many idlers.