Dublin City Council rent arrears

noodler

Need to start charging based on ability to pay.

L1011

The Student wrote: »

I have amended my original post as you suggested.

Thanks

For the record, I would agree with automatic attachment from DSP payments as its state money coming in and going back - it would reduce overheads and complexity; and with wage attachment orders for those with incomes that aren't paying

noodler wrote: »

Need to start charging based on ability to pay.

That is what the rent structure actually is; it just caps out at a quite low amount. More money coming in to the household, be it DSP or income and the rent goes up but only to a point.

I believe that this should be revised with the max cap being market rate. I suspect some very high earners would chose to quit to either buy or rent in a nicer location in that case; but there aren't that many very high earners in social housing anyway

Idbatterim

noodler wrote: »

Need to start charging based on ability to pay.

right, this is ireland though! ability to pay, means you need to be a worker, even a very poor one, no amount is too much. If you are unemployed, free pass! Limited means, give it to them for nothing!

The Student

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

By the left do you mean FG/Independents which make up the present government? Who is in a position to tackle this.

Actually it is the politicians who stop what should be happening. The council should be allowed deal with these defaulters.

Remember our property tax is going towards this. We have plenty of people on the housing list who would be only to glad of a property and would not go into rent arrears.

point 14 is statement of fact.
point 13 is also correct. Politicians of every hue will shy away from this topic for fear of alienating their grassroots, be they scrounger or anti-scrounger, and any soundbites they make will be used by their adversaries to undermine them.
This really is a case of the Housing Departments' dereliction of duty leaving those who secure funding for social housing feeling unwilling to provide further funding due to waste and abuse of social housing schemes.

Plumbthedepths

The Student wrote: »

Actually it is the politicians who stop what should be happening. The council should be allowed deal with these defaulters.

Remember our property tax is going towards this. We have plenty of people on the housing list who would be only to glad of a property and would not go into rent arrears.

Well then you should be lobbying which ever government TD is relevant to you to address the issue.

noodler

noodler wrote: »

Need to start charging based on ability to pay.

Er, that’s what already happens. Trouble is that such a huge number are UNWILLING to pay.

The Student

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Well then you should be lobbying which ever government TD is relevant to you to address the issue.

I will be trust me on that.

X111111111111

Idbatterim wrote: »

nail on the head! We could build a lot more social housing, if those in it, actually paid a REASONABLE rent, not the pittance that they do and secondly, deduct any arrears at source, plus interest!

These social housing tenants pay no LPT, nothing!

They pay a reasonable amount of their earnings already. It's the ones who don't work and refuse to that are taking the piss.

The Student

I re-read the article and seen 7 tenants were in arrears of over €27k and the last tenant evicted was in 2014.

No tenant should still be housed by DCC owing this type of money. How many years did it take to accumulate €27k of arrears. That is ridiculous.

L1011

The Student wrote: »

I re-read the article and seen 7 tenants were in arrears of over €27k and the last tenant evicted was in 2014.

No tenant should still be housed by DCC owing this type of money. How many years did it take to accumulate €27k of arrears. That is ridiculous.

4, if assessed at the max rate and paying 0.

Klonker

L1011 wrote: »

4, if assessed at the max rate and paying 0.

7.4 years if taking average rent, probably a fairer assumption.

Gatling

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

60% of tenants are in arrears. That is madness.

Yeah when this was raised with local councillor's the usual oh were looking at this on a case by case basis was replaced with were taking this estate by estate basis ,
Seems a lot of council estates are on rent strike at the moment,

Mass evictions should be enforced and move families capable and willing to pay rents

The Student

L1011 wrote: »

4, if assessed at the max rate and paying 0.

But that's more than renting a three bed semi in Dublin for a whole year. Surely the max rate for council tenants is well below market rate.

This would suggest that these tenants have paid no rent at all for at least one year or have never paid their full rent for more than a year.

Either way no tenant should be allowed have this level of arrears. The article also states the council have employed 19 people to deal specifically with all the areas yet more costs to the tax payer.

X111111111111

Target the low amount of tenents not paying anything and move on.

Klonker

Over 55% of households 'principle earners' are receiving social welfare. That's a crazy statistic.

This country is such a welfare state that its actually unbelievable. The system really has to be looked at where a lot of people on the dole are better off financially than people working low to middle paying jobs. Nobody on the dole should be financially than anyone working, no matter how low paid the job.

If a political party targeted something like this and make it a part of their mandate to make the system fairer I really think they'd do very well as there is a lot of anger about this out there among the workers of the country. Its just strange that nobody seems to have the will to do it. Had a little hope with Leo's 'for the people who get up for work in the morning' but alas, it was just a soundbite.

L1011

The Student wrote: »

But that's more than renting a three bed semi in Dublin for a whole year. Surely the max rate for council tenants is well below market rate.

This would suggest that these tenants have paid no rent at all for at least one year or have never paid their full rent for more than a year.

Either way no tenant should be allowed have this level of arrears. The article also states the council have employed 19 people to deal specifically with all the areas yet more costs to the tax payer.

I had an old figure, or possibly the Kildare figure in my head when I calculated 4 years - that was on a 130/week max I'd got from somewhere

The max DCC charge anyone is 265/week, so 12k/year but I suspect that could be as little as one specific tenancy on that much - the average is far less and comes to the 7 and a half years as stated upthread.

But the article states that all people on the huge debts are on higher incomes ("The 25 tenants who have allowed their debts to exceed €27,000 were in this higher-earning bracket, she said."), so its probably somewhere in between, or as a total stab in the dark is that people are paying partial amounts and disputing the increase for higher income / extra earners in the house. No actual evidence for that.

Mad_maxx

Idbatterim wrote: »

also, you would now be a lunatic to be a young woman of a certain background, and not pop out a kid or two and there is a million euro plus windfall! except you have zero debt, total security! no need to save for a deposit, pay LPT!

This is the system those morons in power have created, hard working people cannot afford to live in areas they want or have to make massive sacrifices to do so or just emigrate!

Given this reality, I think its safe to say the current situation is obscene. DLRCC have rented an entire apartment block from a cuckoo fund for 25 years at obscene cost. The market rent for some of them, could be nearly 3k for a 3 bed!

Meanwhile the taxpayer fools in blocks within spitting distance, can you imagine what they would need to earn BEFORE tax to pay for the same apartment!

Varadkar, you are some FCUKING fraud! Looking forward to all of the political parasites to come knocking on my door!

but but but but but but

varadkar is a thatcherite - right winger - horrible conservative

Mad_maxx

Klonker wrote: »

Over 55% of households 'principle earners' are receiving social welfare. That's a crazy statistic.

This country is such a welfare state that its actually unbelievable. The system really has to be looked at where a lot of people on the dole are better off financially than people working low to middle paying jobs. Nobody on the dole should be financially than anyone working, no matter how low paid the job.

If a political party targeted something like this and make it a part of their mandate to make the system fairer I really think they'd do very well as there is a lot of anger about this out there among the workers of the country. Its just strange that nobody seems to have the will to do it. Had a little hope with Leo's 'for the people who get up for work in the morning' but alas, it was just a soundbite.

nothing will change anytime soon , FF under michael martin are as left wing as labour or the greens when it comes to appeasing freeloaders

add to that the media will crucify any politician or party who puts the tax payer first .

L1011

Politics forum is here for the non-housing related stuff.

The Student

X111111111111 wrote: »

Target the low amount of tenents not paying anything and move on.

Hold on 60% are in arrears so you suggest we tackle a token number of those with the highest arrears. We can we tackle all of them. Agree reasonable repayment schedule not years and years. If the tenant does not adhere to the agreement then move them out of Dublin. Tough if they work in Dublin, if they don't adhere to the repayment schedule then all bets are off.

Qrt

Idbatterim wrote: »

These social housing tenants pay no LPT, nothing!

Maybe because they down own the property? I don’t own a car so I don’t pay motor tax ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Idbatterim

Idbatterim wrote: »

is it though, what about when there is no consequence?!

<SNIP>

With no consequences, its an easy decision.

The Student

Qrt wrote: »

Maybe because they down own the property? I don’t own a car so I don’t pay motor tax ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

LPT is supposed to fund the local amenities. Everybody ues local amenities eg parks, street lights etc.

Ha Long Bay

Qrt wrote: »

Maybe because they down own the property? I don’t own a car so I don’t pay motor tax ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I dont have any children but some of my tax contributions go towards towards schools and free GP healthcare for under 6's which I have no issue with.

LPT is suppose to be for "Local Property Tax allocations paid from the Local Government Fund help fund essential local services such as, public parks; libraries; open spaces and leisure amenities; planning and development; fire and emergency services; maintenance and cleaning of streets and street lighting – all benefitting citizens directly."

Do council tenants not avail of these things?

mgn

We now know why the got rid of the RAS scheme, and replaced with HAP,

If i dont pay my property tax, there is a charge against my property with interest, and these <snip> cant even pay the rent out of the money that the are giving in the first place.

So much for the people that get up early in the morning.

Idbatterim

<SNIP>

Seth Brundle

Gatling wrote: »

Mass evictions should be enforced and move families capable and willing to pay rents

Aah, I can't keep up.
One minute people are moaning about homelessness. The next minute, people are shouting for mass evictions.

Qrt

The Student wrote: »

LPT is supposed to fund the local amenities. Everybody ues local amenities eg parks, street lights etc.

I know. But it’s a property tax. A tax on property owned by a property owner. Giving out about people who don’t own property not paying a property tax is a bit...idiotic.

Graham

Mod Note

ok folks, the standard of several recent posts is way below what's acceptable here in A & P.

If your post has been snipped or deleted, please take it as a subtle hint.