Got a rent reduction

circular flexing

Duke of Url wrote: »

You say it’s a new law. How old is this new law?

RPZs have been around since December 2016.

circular flexing

Fox Elegant Leper wrote: »

Why should they have to sell because of an almost certainly unconstitutional law interfering in private business. This is the LLs business which they are trying to maxamise their income from. It’s insane they can’t charge what the market will pay like anyone in any other business can.

They didn't have to sell, they chose not to.They should have taken into account the regulations when deciding whether to continue with the business or not.


What makes you so certain it is an unconstitutional law?

Dav010

Mr.S wrote: »

Comical reply. I know this forum is full of LL's but even so, it's a pretty odd comment to side with the LL in this case, having broken rental regulation and upped rent by 50% to try and gauge as much money from someone as possible.

:rolleyes:

Assuming the LL put the ops rent up to market rate by illegally increasing it by 50%, it does illustrate how important it is for LLs to increase rent at every opportunity, by the maximum amount allowable. If the previous tenants rent was that low compared to similar local properties, the LL had not been increasing the rent. In effect, the decision to not raise rent, or reward a good tenant by keeping rent static, means the landlord gets punished later, financially and by the Regulators.

If the market rate is X, putting the rent up to X is not gouging, but unfortunately it may not be legal either. I’d agree with others though, I would find a relative who needs a place to live and put him/her in there.

handlemaster

Bigmac1euro wrote: »

Why is it that a lot of people feel it is ok for the landlord to charge what he wants?

Rents are way above a normal level and it’s down to greed of landlords and many many other factors.

While the RTB favoring tenants and the non payment issue is a joke, I agree. Tax is high on rental income yes.

On boards it seems to have become the cool thing to support landlords now because of the horror stories we see of tenants not paying.

But it’s not ****ing acceptable to shoot the price of your property up for the next tenant because you feel like it.
Why didn’t they do this back in 2007 or 2006 ?

Rents have never been so high and landlords are now profiting off the housing shortage and young people are left shafted because of lack of regulation to begin with.


In 2007 my apartment was renting for 900 euro
It’s now going for 1450 which I’m not paying and nowhere near thank god. I’m paying 1150 which is below the 14000 threshold so the landlord is dodging tax and I’m happy because below market rates.10 more weeks left here. Great landlord, great experience.
Anyway.

How about this one?

Imagine in 2007 I had an apartment and I put it on the market for 1450 euro but every other one in the area is advertised at 9-950.

Would I look like a greedy ****?
Absolutely...
Now what has changed in that time?
Oh yeah a housing crisis.

So what has changed since then?

Why where Landlords able to survive with 950 rent in 2007 but now deserve 1450 a month in 2020.
I felt sorry for landlords for the last year or 2 reading countless posts on here and high taxes and the whole lot but I’m back to what I originally thought.
**** them. It’s their own fault. They wanted to be a landlord and now they rip people off expecting over 50% of their salary a month for a **** hole.

Sell up and let the big boys move in and quite your moaning.
Well done to the OP
Following the rules and getting the LL to reduce his illegal increase the cheeky ****.

If anyone can honestly answer this because I know there’ll be loads of smart arse replies.

Why could so many landlords afford 900 per month but now poor me cannot manage getting 1450 ??
What has changed since then?


Also why should rent cover the full cost of the mortgage?
How is that ok? Why should the LL get a free property?

There is to much assumptions in this to be taken seriously.a**hole , 50% of salary , what has changed ??

Well alot actually.

Old diesel

Fox Elegant Leper wrote: »

It’s a disgrace that LLs are forced to subsidise tenants by not being able to maxamise the rent. The previous tenants were obviously paying disgracefully low rent and the LL did his best to try improve the income to his very costly and over regulated (in favour of tenants) business.

It’s the LL I feel sorry for and the op on gloating will kick a karma kick at some stage I’m sure. If I were the LL I would be making a move to evict the op immediately.

Let's define subsidy......

Landlord costs including tax 1900.

Rent 1600....

That might be deemed a subsidy to the tenant of 300 quid a month.

However if the costs remain 1900* but rent is 2,200 then arguably the tenant is subsidising the landlords pension.

*They won't as the tax will increase as now based on 2,200 instead of 1600.

circular flexing

Old diesel wrote: »

Let's define subsidy......

Landlord costs including tax 1900.

Don't forget they can offset costs such as mortgage interest and insurance against tax.

Caranica

Bigmac1euro wrote: »

In 2007 my apartment was renting for 900 euro
It’s now going for 1450 which I’m not paying and nowhere near thank god. I’m paying 1150 which is below the 14000 threshold so the landlord is dodging tax and I’m happy because below market rates.10 more weeks left here. Great landlord, great experience.
Anyway.

Totally incorrect. The 14k threshold applies to rent a room, not to renting entire units.

handlemaster

circular flexing wrote: »

Don't forget they can offset costs such as mortgage interest and insurance against tax.

And the risks ?

This is why people are rushing to sell up.

Dav010

Caranica wrote: »

Totally incorrect. The 14k threshold applies to rent a room, not to renting entire units.

And even if the poster was renting a room, it wouldn’t be a tax “dodge” if the owner was availing of a legal entitlement. Just a big silly post.

bridest

Fol20 wrote: »

Or more reinforcement not to keep rent below market rate for a good tenant and instead increase the rent as much as possible every year to avoid a situation like this.

What is market rate? Such an arbitrary term.

Bigmac1euro

handlemaster wrote: »

There is to much assumptions in this to be taken seriously.a**hole , 50% of salary , what has changed ??

Well alot actually.

Anyone who is an accidental landlord I feel sorry for, maybe I touched a nerve and if I did I apologize for absolutely nothing, I’m getting fed up of people sticking up for the LL’s on boards after making an illegal rent increase. What is wrong with people? And how is it ok?
Unfortunately for the LL the business they are in is now heavily regulated and rightly so and if they don’t like it, leave it.
I am totally against non paying tenants too, I do believe there is a special place in hell for those too.

Bigmac1euro

Caranica wrote: »

Totally incorrect. The 14k threshold applies to rent a room, not to renting entire units.

Yeah he’s claiming I’m renting a room in his apartment.
Try again

iCareNotOneJot

Needs to be more general enforcement of these rules. Too many low life landlords chancing their arms that most people arent aware of the rules

Dav010

bridest wrote: »

What is market rate? Such an arbitrary term.

The meaning of market rate is the maximum rate the market will bare for goods or services at a particular moment in time.

In non-RPZ areas, you have to show examples of similar properties renting for the same amount as you want to charge.

Good for you, OP. A good news rental story.

Unfortunately there are many others in the same situation but are none the wiser.

bridest

Fol20 wrote: »

You were happy to pay the original rent when you first moved in.
Yea the ll did break the new law by doing this.

If you honestly think the ll will just sit idling by, then you really don’t know human nature. I had one dispute with one of my tenants many years ago where he was abusing the system and put me into a bind. (Not related to rpz). Let’s just say that the moment his contract end, he was handed a termination notice. I refused to give a reference and I was delighted to hear that he had broken up with his partner and was house sharing after he moved out.

Wishing ill will on other people, a very mature person you must be

handlemaster

Bigmac1euro wrote: »

Anyone who is an accidental landlord I feel sorry for, maybe I touched a nerve and if I did I apologize for absolutely nothing, I’m getting fed up of people sticking up for the LL’s on boards after making an illegal rent increase. What is wrong with people? And how is it ok?
Unfortunately for the LL the business they are in is now heavily regulated and rightly so and if they don’t like it, leave it.
I am totally against non paying tenants too, I do believe there is a special place in hell for those too.

People ar saying it's not correct what the ll did but there is the other side in case where tenants are in the wrong and nothing is done for the landlord. Nothing at all. Some LL have had complete horror stories.

Dav010

Bigmac1euro wrote: »

Yeah he’s claiming I’m renting a room in his apartment.

If he lives there, then you are not a tenant and therefore not covered by the RTA, you are a licensee. And as I posted earlier, he is not dodging tax by not paying it on rent below €14k, that is perfectly legal.

Bigmac1euro

Bigmac1euro wrote: »

Why is it that a lot of people feel it is ok for the landlord to charge what he wants??

So much wrong in this post it would take a long time to address it all but let’s start here. Why shouldn’t he be able to change what he wants like any other business can?

Also you are on about the cost of an apartment in 2007, what about when tenants went looking for reduced prices in the recession? The free market was alright then when it suited but not that prices are increased (everything costs more now than 2007, many things significantly more) it’s not ok?

Old diesel wrote: »

Let's define subsidy......

Landlord costs including tax 1900.

Rent 1600....

That might be deemed a subsidy to the tenant of 300 quid a month.

However if the costs remain 1900* but rent is 2,200 then arguably the tenant is subsidising the landlords pension.

*They won't as the tax will increase as now based on 2,200 instead of 1600.

You can’t be serious with that rubbish? Can you?

The tenant is paying for a service, the price of that service needs to be profitable in order for the business to function.

circular flexing

handlemaster wrote: »

And the risks ?

This is why people are rushing to sell up.

Any business comes with an element of risk.

Dav010

circular flexing wrote: »

Any business comes with an element of risk.

Very true, but this isn’t any business.

Bigmac1euro

handlemaster wrote: »

People ar saying it's not correct what the ll did but there is the other side in case where tenants are in the wrong and nothing is done for the landlord. Nothing at all. Some LL have had complete horror stories.

I feel for these people and I totally agree it’s unfair LL need more rights. But not the right to charge what they want.

Bigmac1euro

Dav010 wrote: »

If he lives there, then you are not a tenant and therefore not covered by the RTA, you are a licensee. And as I posted earlier, he is not dodging tax by not paying it on rent below €14k, that is perfectly legal.

He doesn’t live here.

Dav010

Bigmac1euro wrote: »

He doesn’t live here.

Do you live alone in the apartment and have exclusive use of all of it?

UpTheSlashers

Vada Melted Smallpox wrote: »

Why anyone would want to be a landlord in this country is beyond me.

Greed.

Dav010

UpTheSlashers wrote: »

Greed.

Greed for profit? Like all investors/business people then. Without profit, why would anyone invest in rental accommodation? To make a loss?

Bigmac1euro

Fox Elegant Leper wrote: »

So much wrong in this post it would take a long time to address it all but let’s start here. Why shouldn’t he be able to change what he wants like any other business can?

Also you are on about the cost of an apartment in 2007, what about when tenants went looking for reduced prices in the recession? The free market was alright then when it suited but not that prices are increased (everything costs more now than 2007, many things significantly more) it’s not ok?

I specifically said 2007 because this was the peak before the last crash.

The only thing that’s more expensive now is rent. And maybe Bus fare by 3%

Why is it ok to charge what you want in Ireland for a property? But not ok in Germany?

You need regulations to house people end of story. You’re messing with a large portion of the populations lives. We now have a crisis.

JeffKenna

Old diesel wrote: »

Let's define subsidy......

Landlord costs including tax 1900.

Rent 1600....

That might be deemed a subsidy to the tenant of 300 quid a month.

However if the costs remain 1900* but rent is 2,200 then arguably the tenant is subsidising the landlords pension.

*They won't as the tax will increase as now based on 2,200 instead of 1600.

I'm totally lost by this point. A subsidy is something that distorts the free market. Neither of your points mention that. A more accurate description would be:

Landlord rents an apartment with a market value of €1,600 a month. The rent he receives for that is €1,600. No subsidy involved, the market is acting freely.

Landlord rents the same apartment for €1,300 due to government regulation. The landlord is subsidising the tenants rent by €300 a month.

Due to government regulation forcing tenants to pay 20% rent above market value the tenants pay the landlord €1,920 rent a month. Now the tenant is subsidising the landlord €320 a month.

UpTheSlashers

UpTheSlashers wrote: »

Greed.

I assume you work for under the minimum wage? As surely it’s greed to expect to be paid a decent salary for your work?

Bigmac1euro

Dav010 wrote: »

Do you live alone in the apartment and have exclusive use of all of it?

Myself and another person. I haven’t seen the LL in 3 years.