2021 Irish Property Market chat - *mod warnings post 1*

hometruths

PropQueries wrote: »

I don't think many people who could afford to pay their mortgage on their home refused to pay if they could afford it.

Receiving letters and calls every second week would drive any person crazy and the end game is that you're more than likely to lose your house anyway.

So, I don't think the percentage of these "strategic defaulters" is as large as some make out.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that point. You only have to read some of the posts on this thread to see how we have normalised the idea that "Your home is at risk if you do not keep up repayments" is an empty threat.

Like so many things about our housing market we are an outlier in this area, and people are unable to accept the obvious answer:



Welcome to Ireland, Where Mortgage Payments Are Optional

PropQueries wrote: »

I think it's just a way for the funds to get the public onside regarding repossessions and extract the maximum value from the mortgages they bought for a pittance over the past several years.

I think you've got that back to front. The funds were the solution to the public and political opposition to repossession not the cause.

The funds have the advantage over the banks, that they can play the long game.

They're buying problem loans at a huge discount precisely because enforcement is difficult. If the wind changes any successful repossessions or repayments are simply a bonus.

Longer term, ultimately they will get possession, people have to sell and move out at some stage due to their own circumstances - death, divorce etc. The capital appreciation in the meantime is vast.

decreds

schmittel wrote: »

This right here is everything that is f*cked up about our property market.

4,000 loans with an average balance of 300,000 means total loan book is valued at 1.2bn outstanding.

Mars Capital have bought this for a third of its value, meaning AIB and the taxpayer have booked a 66% or 800m loss and Mars will make a fortune.

There is nowhere in the country that a 300k property bought even at the height of the boom is worth only 100k. So even if every single mortgage was a 100% bought at top of market, AIB and the taxpayer would have got a better deal by repoing and selling the asset.

To add insult to injury they feel the need to bury the bad news not because they're making a poor decision, but because they're worried about vulture fund criticism.

The average time of default is 10 years. 90% of the portfolio entered default over 7 years ago.

The raft of unintended consequences as a result of our naive no repossessions policy is the single biggest factor causing the current housing problems.

This would not happen in any other country, whereas we happily support it. It is mind blowing.

No wonder the vulture funds think we're the gift that keeps on giving.

It's sheer lunacy why there hasn't been people in the streets over VFs.


I honestly don't know how the term "Fighting Irish " was coined as we are perhaps one of the most spineless nations in the world.



While some generations no doubt had more luck than others when it comes to the property game, there should be no divide and easy scapegoats made i.e targeting the small time landlords etc. Make no mistake our country has and is actively being sold to VCs.


It's my kids generation i fear for most, due to the fact that they are the most docile and will bend over and take this with lube and that home ownership by Irish people will be a minority by then, most likely.

decreds

cnocbui wrote: »

I just want to get on a plane and get a long way away from this madhouse - permanently.

Plenty of high value people will leave this country in droves once the lockdown ends and SF come to power.


Huge brain drain on the way.

PropQueries

schmittel wrote: »

We'll have to agree to disagree on that point. You only have to read some of the posts on this thread to see how we have normalised the idea that "Your home is at risk if you do not keep up repayments" is an empty threat.

Like so many things about our housing market we are an outlier in this area, and people are unable to accept the obvious answer:



Welcome to Ireland, Where Mortgage Payments Are Optional



I think you've got that back to front. The funds were the solution to the public and political opposition to repossession not the cause.

The funds have the advantage over the banks, that they can play the long game.

They're buying problem loans at a huge discount precisely because enforcement is difficult. If the wind changes any successful repossessions or repayments are simply a bonus.

Longer term, ultimately they will get possession, people have to sell and move out at some stage due to their own circumstances - death, divorce etc. The capital appreciation in the meantime is vast.

Don't get me wrong. I think repossessions are a good thing for a properly functioning housing market. And if both the lender and the borrower understand at the outset the implications of default I think many people would agree.

But given that all the groups involved in forcing those mortgage holders into unsustainable mortgage debt in the first place have got bailed out i.e. bankers, civil servants and public sector employees, there would be a very real possibility of very real civil unrest if the repossession rules were changed at this time IMO

I still don't believe many of these strategic defaulters really exist though. It's a propaganda piece thrown out for whatever reason by whatever group IMO

If you work in a multinational or are a civil servant and your pay hasn't been really impacted over the past ten years, what would be the point in strategically defaulting on your home loan? Absolutely none IMO

However, at this stage, over 10 years later, I think the only real beneficiaries will be the funds as the banks have offloaded much of their problem loans to them at this stage.

hometruths

PropQueries wrote: »

Don't get me wrong. I think repossessions are a good thing for a properly functioning housing market. And if both the lender and the borrower understand at the outset the implications of default I think many people would agree.

But given that all the groups involved in forcing those mortgage holders into unsustainable mortgage debt in the first place have got bailed out i.e. bankers, civil servants and public sector employees, there would be a very real possibility of very real civil unrest if the repossession rules were changed at this time IMO

I still don't believe many of these strategic defaulters really exist though. It's a propaganda piece thrown out for whatever reason by whatever group IMO

If you work in a multinational or are a civil servant and your pay hasn't been really impacted over the past ten years, what would be the point in strategically defaulting on your home loan? Absolutely none IMO

However, at this stage, over 10 years later, I think the only real beneficiaries will be the funds as the banks have offloaded much of their problem loans to them at this stage.

The idea that the banks got bailed out is another populist myth that doesn’t really stand up to scrutiny.

Yes, billions were pumped into them to keep them afloat because the public need banks, but not before the owners of the banks - the shareholders - lost everything.

So those who you would expect to pay for the poor commercial decisions taken by the banks did so.

And it’s easy to think so what, the shareholders were mostly faceless institutional investors. But those investors held the shares for people’s pensions. Bank shares were seen as conservative investments for widows and orphans, and they lost the lot.

Re strategic defaulters, impossible to say how many but the sheer weight of numbers confirms some of them are. Ireland’s stats are a textbook case of strategic default. In 2013 nearly 70% of mortgage holders in arrears had not lost their job, and had lower mortgage payments because of falling interest rates.

Have a read of this: Can’t pay, won’t pay: where does the truth lie in the mortgage arrears crisis crisis?

Villa05

PropQueries wrote:

If/when they decide to leave, they purchased them so cheaply that they can most likely sell many of the underlying assets at c. 25% of today's prices and still walk away with double their initial investment IMO

Villa05 wrote:

We have essentially sold them a goldmine with the state doing the mining for them and the profits can leave without paying any tax

Serious question
Why would they want to leave? Are they going to find anywhere in the world more corrupt/gullible with taxpayers money?

PropQueries

schmittel wrote: »

The idea that the banks got bailed out is another populist myth that doesn’t really stand up to scrutiny.

Yes, billions were pumped into them to keep them afloat because the public need banks, but not before the owners of the banks - the shareholders - lost everything.

So those who you would expect to pay for the poor commercial decisions taken by the banks did so.

And it’s easy to think so what, the shareholders were mostly faceless institutional investors. But those investors held the shares for people’s pensions. Bank shares were seen as conservative investments for widows and orphans, and they lost the lot.

Re strategic defaulters, impossible to say how many but the sheer weight of numbers confirms some of them are. Ireland’s stats are a textbook case of strategic default. In 2013 nearly 70% of mortgage holders in arrears had not lost their job, and had lower mortgage payments because of falling interest rates.

Have a read of this: Can’t pay, won’t pay: where does the truth lie in the mortgage arrears crisis crisis?

The bankers did get bailed out. They kept their pay and more importantly their pensions in most cases. Companies don't make decisions, employees do (the CEO is an employee in my eyes). So, the employees should have suffered before the shareholders IMO (Not a popular opinion I know )

I still don't buy the number of strategic defaulters on home loans if they didn't suffer a big income drop though. Despite the lax repossession rules, the end game is still you could lose your home and you can't get another mortgage. Where's the strategic benefit if you can afford to meet repayments?

A strategic default on a BTL makes perfect sense (that's an investment and if the bank takes that you're not homeless), but not on a persons home loan if they can afford it.

Just from a purely selfish point of view, it makes absolutely no sense. Where's the strategy in "strategic default" in that case. At the end you have a strong possibility of losing your home and not being able to get another mortgage to buy a new one. That's not a strategy, that's some other word I don't know of IMO

PropQueries

Villa05 wrote: »

Serious question
Why would they want to leave? Are they going to find anywhere in the world more corrupt/gullible with taxpayers money?

The funds take in money from investors and their investors are going to want it back some day. They can now leave and book their ridiculously large profit.

Why would they take the risk in staying another 5 years and the economy potentially collapses completely or another party comes to power and does something that impacts their ability to sell or make their current return?

They should now take their profits and run IMO

Yurt2

decreds wrote: »

Plenty of high value people will leave this country in droves once the lockdown ends and SF come to power.


Huge brain drain on the way.

Ireland has been in a permanent state of brain drain since the foundation of the country. Some of the best and most capable Irish I've met are abroad hustling, doing very well and would laugh at the prospect of returning to Ireland.

Please don't try to scare us with the prospect of rentiers and property sector spivs upping sticks and leaving Ireland. A lot of people would throw a party

hometruths

PropQueries wrote: »

The bankers did get bailed out. They kept their pay and more importantly their pensions in most cases. Companies don't make decisions, employees do. So, the employees should have suffered before the shareholders IMO (Not a popular opinion I know )

I still don't buy the number of strategic defaulters on home loans if they didn't suffer a big income drop though. Despite the lax repossession rules, the end game is still you could lose your home and you can't get another mortgage. Where's the strategic benefit if you can afford to meet repayments?

A strategic default on a BTL makes perfect sense (that's an investment and if the bank takes that you're not homeless), but not on a persons home loan if they can afford it.

Just from a purely selfish point of view, it makes absolutely no sense. Where's the strategy in "strategic default" in that case. At the end you have a strong possibility of losing your home and not being able to get another mortgage to buy a new one. That's not a strategy, that's some other word I don't know of IMO

There was talk of banks dong deals, write offs, wide scale debt forgiveness etc. the strategy was to reduce your cost of housing.

I know a person who did it on a huge 100% mortgage, and he was quite candid about it. He explained that the first payment he skipped was the hardest. After that, with every letter he ignored, the next letter became easier to ignore.

He’s had a few battles with the bank in the last 10 years but they’ve all been about his investment properties, and he’s still lording it up in his PPR apparently carefree.

He lives in one of the nicest houses in the country and has done so at zero cost, for 10 years. He’s actually being paid to live there as he rents out an adjoining lodge house.

His strategy has unquestionably paid off so far. Presumably they’ll haul him out eventually but that might not be for another 5 years, by which stage all his kids will be grown up and he’d probably be ready to downsize anyway.

No idea what his plan is then, but if he’d been putting even half his mortgage payment into stock market every month since 2010 he’ll have no trouble buying a house outright.

PropQueries

schmittel wrote: »

There was talk of banks dong deals, write offs, wide scale debt forgiveness etc. the strategy was to reduce your cost of housing.

I know a person who did it on a huge 100% mortgage, and he was quite candid about it. He explained that the first payment he skipped was the hardest. After that, with every letter he ignored, the next letter became easier to ignore.

He’s had a few battles with the bank in the last 10 years but they’ve all been about his investment properties, and he’s still lording it up in his PPR apparently carefree.

He lives in one of the nicest houses in the country and has done so at zero cost, for 10 years. He’s actually being paid to live there as he rents out an adjoining lodge house.

His strategy has unquestionably paid off so far. Presumably they’ll haul him out eventually but that might not be for another 5 years, by which stage all his kids will be grown up and he’d probably be ready to downsize anyway.

No idea what his plan is then, but if he’d been putting even half his mortgage payment into stock market every month since 2010 he’ll have no trouble buying a house outright.

His case as a strategic defaulter makes perfect sense. His home is probably cross secured against his investment properties so he's right to strategically default until the end. Once he caves in, there's a good chance he loses his home even if he keeps up the home loan repayments but can't keep up the investment property loan repayments.

But a worker who didn't lose his job or didn't suffer a significant income drop isn't very likely to strategically default IMO

It's a completely other matter if that worker got an interest only mortgage and was hoping his income would rise in the following years before it reverted to principal and interest and their income didn't rise for obvious reasons. But that's not a strategic default, that's inability to repay.

Plus if your mortgage if e.g. €1,000 a month and you can only afford to pay €500, you might as well pay nothing as your home is at risk either way. Still not a strategic default IMO

hometruths

PropQueries wrote: »

His case as a strategic defaulter makes perfect sense. His home is probably cross secured against his investment properties so he's right to strategically default until the end. Once he caves in, there's a good chance he loses his home even if he keeps up the home loan repayments but can't keep up the investment property loan repayments.

But a worker who didn't lose his job or didn't suffer a significant income drop isn't very likely to strategically default IMO

It's a completely other matter if that worker got an interest only mortgage and was hoping his income would rise in the following years before it reverted to principal and interest and their income didn't rise for obvious reasons. But that's not a strategic default, that's inability to repay.

Plus if your mortgage if e.g. €1,000 a month and you can only afford to pay €500, you might as well pay nothing as your home is at risk either way. Still not a strategic default IMO

I'm not saying every arrears case is a strategic defaulter - just that the volume is far greater than most people realise.

Cast your mind back. People thought property prices would never recover, everybody hated the banks, politicians were calling on them to take pain, lots of talk about banks doing deals on mortgages - but they weren't doing deals with the poor saps who were paying on time every time.

The biggest cause of your standard mortgage defaults is rising unemployment.

The biggest cause of strategic mortgage defaults is negative equity, irrespective of ability to pay.

Our arrears started off in 08 just like every other country in the GFC. Rising unemployment saw rising arrears. Why did Ireland's arrears start to rocket when unemployment started to fall?

The article I linked earlier offers an answer:

In fact, Moody's analysts note that the number of Irish delinquent on their mortgages shot higher in 2012, just as political discussions centered on the possibility of a large-scale debt forgiveness plan. (It never materialized.) Moody's suggested that the increase was driven--at least in part--by some who are gaming the system. "The current dearth of repossessions and the recently proposed personal insolvency legislation is starting to result in higher defaults due to moral hazard," the analysts wrote.

That's financial-speak for "people think they can get away without paying their mortgage because they know they're not going to lose their house." Gregory Connor, a professor of finance at the National University of Ireland in Maynooth, estimates that about 35% of those who have fallen into arrears on their mortgages have done so "strategically." That is, they can afford to pay, but just aren't.

There are any number of explanations for the dearth of Irish foreclosure. For one thing, Irish courts ruled in July 2011 that Ireland's recently revamped foreclosure law contains a massive loophole. Long story short, the judge found that the law allows lenders to foreclose only on mortgage loans made after Dec. 1, 2009, when the new law went into effect. After the judgement, arrears shot higher.

It's like the vacancies, or the obsolescence figures. What we're told may suggest it is implausible, but the numbers don't lie.

jill_valentine

PropQueries wrote: »

Plus if your mortgage if e.g. €1,000 a month and you can only afford to pay €500, you might as well pay nothing as your home is at risk either way. Still not a strategic default IMO

Whoa nelly. Making even a token payment brings you under the protections of the CCMA, which can make a very big difference when the pushing comes to shoving.

Paying nothing at all means you become a non-cooperating borrower, and even strategic defaulters would want to avoid that.

PropQueries

schmittel wrote: »

I'm not saying every arrears case is a strategic defaulter - just that the volume is far greater than most people realise.

Cast your mind back. People thought property prices would never recover, everybody hated the banks, politicians were calling on them to take pain, lots of talk about banks doing deals on mortgages - but they weren't doing deals with the poor saps who were paying on time every time.

The biggest cause of your standard mortgage defaults is rising unemployment.

The biggest cause of strategic mortgage defaults is negative equity, irrespective of ability to pay.

Our arrears started off in 08 just like every other country in the GFC. Rising unemployment saw rising arrears. Why did Ireland's arrears start to rocket when unemployment started to fall?

The article I linked earlier offers an answer:



It's like the vacancies, or the obsolescence figures. What we're told may suggest it is implausible, but the numbers don't lie.

Could it be due to the large number of regular people who borrowed money during the boom years to invest in another BTL property?

In that case, the primary home is also on the line even if they can meet their home loan but can't meet their BTL repayments? It also makes them gamblers i.e. "savvy investors".

That then doesn't make them strategic defaulters as in the same meaning as a regular working man choosing not to pay his mortgage on his one and only property i.e. his home?

I just wouldn't want regular working people with just one mortgage on one home getting caught up in the same net as people who gambled/invested during the boom years.

PropQueries

jill_valentine wrote: »

Whoa nelly. Making even a token payment brings you under the protections of the CCMA, which can make a very big difference when the pushing comes to shoving.

Paying nothing at all means you become a non-cooperating borrower, and even strategic defaulters would want to avoid that.

Good point. Very good point. They should definitely pay about a €5 a month. But definitely not anything near €500 even if they could afford it IMO

MacronvFrugals

PropQueries wrote: »

Could it be due to the large number of regular people who borrowed money during the boom years to invest in another BTL property?

.

I love the absurdity of this stat, in 2007 Bank Of Ireland gave more BTLs than FTB mortgages

hometruths

PropQueries wrote: »

Could it be due to the large number of regular people who borrowed money during the boom years to invest in another BTL property?

In that case, the primary home is also on the line even if they can meet their home loan but can't meet their BTL repayments? It also makes them gamblers i.e. "savvy investors".

That then doesn't make them strategic defaulters as in the same meaning as a regular working man choosing not to pay his mortgage on his one and only property i.e. his home?

I just wouldn't want regular working people with just one mortgage on one home getting caught up in the same net as people who gambled/invested during the boom years.

That's why the problem is so bad here. We've have created a grey area because we focus too much on the individual circumstances.

Other countries don't have a grey area. Its very simple:

You don't pay your mortgage, you don't keep your house.

Everybody knows where they stand, and they don't dick around when it comes to mortgage payments.

PropQueries

schmittel wrote: »

That's why the problem is so bad here. We've have created a grey area because we focus too much on the individual circumstances.

Other countries don't have a grey area. Its very simple:

You don't pay your mortgage, you don't keep your house.

Everybody knows where they stand, and they don't dick around when it comes to mortgage payments.

That's the thing. There shouldn't be a grey area. If you have a home and you cross-secured it to invest in a BTL in the boom years, your a professional investor in my eyes and should be treated accordingly e.g. easier repossessions.

But if you're a working man who bought a home during the boom years to house your family, you should receive a lot more support and options IMO.

It's incredibly easy to separate out the two and could be done in about half an hour by the central bank on an excel spreadsheet IMO

Just print out the two spreadsheets and say the ones on this sheet deserve some support and options. The ones on the other, take their property and turf them out. They're professional investors who would have most likely done the same to their tenants who couldn't pay the rent so a much harsher system applies.

hometruths

PropQueries wrote: »

That's the thing. There shouldn't be a grey area. If you have a home and you cross-secured it to invest in a BTL in the boom years, your a professional investor in my eyes and should be treated accordingly e.g. easier repossessions.

But if you're a working man who bought a home during the boom years to house your family, you should receive a lot more support and options IMO.

It's incredibly easy to separate out the two and could be done in about half an hour by the central bank on an excel spreadsheet IMO

The Central bank do separate the two and publish figures separately.

In Ireland there is no shortage of support and options (social housing, HAP etc) to people who cannot afford to house their family, and rightly so.

But allowing a build up of 10 years worth of mortgage arrears should not be one of them.

It should be simple. If you do not keep up your repayments the house will be repossessed.

Anything else leads to the plainly ludicrous idea that if you think you will lose your job, you should hurry up and buy a house at any price while you can still get a mortgage. These boards have shown us that this is what is considered a rational school of thought.

PropQueries

schmittel wrote: »

The Central bank do separate the two and publish figures separately.

In Ireland there is no shortage of support and options (social housing, HAP etc) to people who cannot afford to house their family, and rightly so.

But allowing a build up of 10 years worth of mortgage arrears should not be one of them.

It should be simple. If you do not keep up your repayments the house will be repossessed.

Anything else leads to the plainly ludicrous idea that if you think you will lose your job, you should hurry up and buy a house at any price while you can still get a mortgage. These boards have shown us that this is what is considered a rational school of thought.

Sort of agree If we lived in an economy with a properly functioning property market. It's not like in the states or the UK where you can probably walk down the street and rent another property tomorrow once your home has been repossessed.

But, yes, if you're a homeowner with a BTL who hasn't made repayments, you're out in three months. But if you're a regular person with one property (family home), a lot more options and leeway IMO.

And you must remember. Most of these supports the government goes on about didn't exist when we originally got into this problem so I can understand the skepticism of some of the more legitimate borrowers who defaulted in the first 5 years.

Hubertj

schmittel wrote: »

That's why the problem is so bad here. We've have created a grey area because we focus too much on the individual circumstances.

Other countries don't have a grey area. Its very simple:

You don't pay your mortgage, you don't keep your house.

Everybody knows where they stand, and they don't dick around when it comes to mortgage payments.

Populism in this country stoops to a particularly low level. How bad can it be for this country when the largest opposition party is who they are and people are gullible enough / desperate enough / fed up enough to be willing to vote for them.

hometruths

Hubertj wrote: »

Populism in this country stoops to a particularly low level. How bad can it be for this country when the largest opposition party is who they are and people are gullible enough / desperate enough / fed up enough to be willing to vote for them.

I've posted before that if the left were smart they could make a big dent in the problem and go down well with their base.

Say we're are starting repos tomorrow. We are starting at the back i.e over ten years with highest outstanding balances, and working through the list.

This will catch all the jumbo zombie mortgages on trophy homes, and make everybody else on the list who can, sort out their affairs pretty smartly.

The people who cannot pay off arrears and move up the list will be the ones in most need and can be dealt with sympathetically.

i..e if your turn comes around and you're a couple in a 5 bed in Killiney, you're out on your ear. If your family of four, squashed into into a two bed and would otherwise require social housing, well, we can come to an arrangement.

PropQueries

schmittel wrote: »

I've posted before that if the left were smart they could make a big dent in the problem and go down well with their base.

Say we're are starting repos tomorrow. We are starting at the back i.e over ten years with highest outstanding balances, and working through the list.

This will catch all the jumbo zombie mortgages on trophy homes, and make everybody else on the list who can, sort out their affairs pretty smartly.

The people who cannot pay off arrears and move up the list will be the ones in most need and can be dealt with sympathetically.

i..e if your turn comes around and you're a couple in a 5 bed in Killiney, you're out on your ear. If your family of four, squashed into into a two bed and would otherwise require social housing, well, we can come to an arrangement.

Ok, that’s an idea I can get behind

Villa05

decreds wrote:

Plenty of high value people will leave this country in droves once the lockdown ends and SF come to power.

I'm not sure why people are identifying a party never in power as the ruination of a nation, while the 2 parties in power have been doing it for a century

PropQueries wrote:

I still don't believe many of these strategic defaulters really exist though. It's a propaganda piece thrown out for whatever reason by whatever group IMO

While strategic default exists its much reduced from the heights of the last recession. The average mortgage in the portfolio sold was 300k. That did not get you much in the noughties
Stategic default is an act of selfishness. The selfish thing to do right now is to get you mortgage back on track to avoid the rental market. Most in that portfolio will end up in social housing

PropQueries wrote:

Why would they take the risk in staying another 5 years and the economy potentially collapses completely or another party comes to power and does something that impacts their ability to sell or make their current return?

Good answer, never thought of it that way. Would make sense to profit take and reduce exposure when the state that's feeding you is bankrupting itself in the very action of driving up your profits

The level of incompetence/gullibility/corruption is off the charts

Hubertj

Villa05 wrote: »

I'm not sure why people are identifying a party never in power as the ruination of a nation, while the 2 parties in power have been doing it for a century




While strategic default exists its much reduced from the heights of the last recession. The average mortgage in the portfolio sold was 300k. That did not get you much in the noughties
Stategic default is an act of selfishness. The selfish thing to do right now is to get you mortgage back on track to avoid the rental market. Most in that portfolio will end up in social housing



Good answer, never thought of it that way. Would make sense to profit take and reduce exposure when the state that's feeding you is bankrupting itself in the very action of driving up your profits

The level of incompetence/gullibility/corruption is off the charts

I’d take incompetency and corruption over bombing and terrorism any day. Sad day for society when that sort of behaviour is deemed acceptable. The impact on society of that sort of people governing a country has more far reaching impacts than just property. People in this country laughed and criticised that idiot in the US for 4 years. A party that justifies and defends terrorism is far worse. How will that impact the property market, economy and society? Careful what you wish for. To think they’d do any better...

cnocbui

Hubertj wrote: »

Populism in this country stoops to a particularly low level. How bad can it be for this country when the largest opposition party is who they are and people are gullible enough / desperate enough / fed up enough to be willing to vote for them.

I'd happily vote Sin Fein. In what way could they be worse than the other sh​it heads?

The last time we had the Greens in a coalition, they insisted on demonising and taxing petrol to the hilt and schilling diesel; and look where that got the country.

Now that they know to the very bottom of their souls how wrong that was, they are still demonising petrol and punishing anyone who drives a petrol powered car, even though they are doing the right thing.

Who forgave the Catholic church all their sins and prevented the rightfully aggrieved victims from suing the frocks off them, as they should have been allowed to do? Now they are trying to seal records of more wrongdoings until everyone involved is dust.

Who decided foreign REITs should pay no tax on their profits and no CGT, while the populace gets fleeced 33% on CGT and VRT and Dirt and VAT and Excise and...and...and...

I'm pretty sure it wasn't Sin Fein. At the last election, they were the only party that even mentioned the prospect of a tax cut on property, of all things.

Are Sin Fein responsible for handing over the reins of power to a bunch of overpaid HSE apparatchiks who are so terrified of their own shadows they insist on cancelling all signs of life until the next Ice Age has set in? Want to escape this insanity - there's a €2,000 fine if you make the attempt.

They may well be absolutely appalling in government, but that's just maintaining the status quo and keeping with tradition, as far as I can see. A massive shake up would probably be a good thing in the long term.

Smouse156

House gone up near me recently, stupidly overpriced IMO. Sold for 485k in 2018 (possibly late 2017 given appeared on price register Feb2018) with HTB so really 465k. Second hand houses have risen 7% since (CSO) then Q42017 to Q42020 so I’d value it around the 520k mark. Given the supply shortage maybe 540k although that would be pushing it. Price seems to be based on a larger unit/larger site plot selling for 620k (around the same time but the last sale on that row) on the same row. Typical lazy Sherry Fitzgerald, looking for 2.5% to do nothing bar open the door.

640k seems delusional and really hoping to find the “big fool”:

https://www.daft.ie/for-sale/detached-house-106-millers-court-old-quarter-ballincollig-co-cork/2919114

Anyone in Cork with thoughts?

cnocbui

Thanks. Think I'll chuck another €150,000 on my shack if I can get to where I can list it. Obviously my idea on pricing was way too conservative.

Hubertj

Smouse156 wrote: »

House gone up near me recently, stupidly overpriced IMO. Sold for 485k in 2018 (possibly late 2017 given appeared on price register Feb2018) with HTB so really 465k. Second hand houses have risen 7% since (CSO) then Q42017 to Q42020 so I’d value it around the 520k mark. Given the supply shortage maybe 540k although that would be pushing it. Price seems to be based on a larger unit/larger site plot selling for 620k (around the same time but the last sale on that row) on the same row. Typical lazy Sherry Fitzgerald, looking for 2.5% to do nothing bar open the door.

640k seems delusional and really hoping to find the “big fool”:

https://www.daft.ie/for-sale/detached-house-106-millers-court-old-quarter-ballincollig-co-cork/2919114

Anyone in Cork with thoughts?

Wow. It does look very nice but I would have thought €640k would get a lot more house in cork. I’m gone from cork since 2012 but is supply that bad now?

decreds

Smouse156 wrote: »

House gone up near me recently, stupidly overpriced IMO. Sold for 485k in 2018 (possibly late 2017 given appeared on price register Feb2018) with HTB so really 465k. Second hand houses have risen 7% since (CSO) then Q42017 to Q42020 so I’d value it around the 520k mark. Given the supply shortage maybe 540k although that would be pushing it. Price seems to be based on a larger unit/larger site plot selling for 620k (around the same time but the last sale on that row) on the same row. Typical lazy Sherry Fitzgerald, looking for 2.5% to do nothing bar open the door.

640k seems delusional and really hoping to find the “big fool”:

https://www.daft.ie/for-sale/detached-house-106-millers-court-old-quarter-ballincollig-co-cork/2919114

Anyone in Cork with thoughts?

There's still plenty of fools out there with more credit than brains at the moment.



I get the feeling that we will all look back on this lockdown period and compare purchases executed during this period as up there with those who purchased in 2007 right before the financial crisis.



Anyone who is highly leveraged and/or purchasing investment property right now needs to reconsider, imo.

schmittel

schmittel wrote: »

Zenify is spot on, there is a snob thing going on that Bray is full of scumbags, but I think that is less true now than it used to be, but as you say it persists.

Greystones boomed because that snob value was alive and well 20 years ago. Once the dart extended, those who fancied southside coastal living but priced out of Dalkey etc flocked to Greystones and skipped Bray.

However I think over the next 20 years Bray will be playing catch up. It has everything going for it.

Better transport links than Greystones.

Better amenity/infrastructure potential. The main street and side streets are a bit dreary now, with things like vaping and fix your mobile phone shops, but it would not take much to transform it. Greystones is just one main st full of coffee shops.

The seafront is far nicer and more functional than Greystones - it is a feature in Bray whereas Greystones feels like it has its back to the sea.

The area around that Ellerslie villas house is really nice, leafy and mature, short walk to the seafront, bars, restaurants and the dart.

Sure there are some less attractive parts with some dodgier people but they are no closer than the same issue in the premium southside locations - eg Killiney/Ballybrack.

It would not take many well heeled Dubliners to move in, bringing more disposable income that will see the vaping shops etc give way to something more upmarket, and transform Bray into something really quite special.

If you look at the development of south Dublin/North Wicklow over the past 50 years the glaring anomaly is Bray. I cannot see it lasting too much longer!

Totally agree. We moved from South Dublin to Bray a number of years ago, I honestly feel like it was a stroke of genius. I never knew much about Bray but once you come out here, you realise that it's one of the few places with so much on it's doorstep; Dart so you never lose that connection to Dublin which was important for us, sea, mountains, the new Stella cinema, so many great food and brunch spots and fantastic pubs, one of the best golf clubs in the country (Powerscourt).. literally on your doorstep... Compare that to your average housing estate in Cabinteely or Leopardstown (both great spots, I used to live there but you know what I mean).

Bray has a few council estates just like that Killiney/Ballybrack example you mentioned earlier but who's going down there anyway? You don't go to Charlesland or Kindlestown in Greystones and then tell everyone that Greystones is a kip. Likewise you don't go to Castlebyrne in Blackrock and tell everyone that Blackrock is an unsavoury place.

Coming from South Dublin, the one thing that say a Cabinteely has that Bray doesn't have is much better schools on it's doorstep but if you're sending your kids to private, that doesn't really matter anyway.

Smouse156

Hubertj wrote: »

Wow. It does look very nice but I would have thought €640k would get a lot more house in cork. I’m gone from cork since 2012 but is supply that bad now?

Supply is bad but houses haven’t appreciated 35% in two years. They’re just delusional. Won’t get near the asking unless they find a “big fool”. Seems unlikely with the PPR these days

southofthelee

Smouse156 wrote: »

House gone up near me recently, stupidly overpriced IMO. Sold for 485k in 2018 (possibly late 2017 given appeared on price register Feb2018) with HTB so really 465k. Second hand houses have risen 7% since (CSO) then Q42017 to Q42020 so I’d value it around the 520k mark. Given the supply shortage maybe 540k although that would be pushing it. Price seems to be based on a larger unit/larger site plot selling for 620k (around the same time but the last sale on that row) on the same row. Typical lazy Sherry Fitzgerald, looking for 2.5% to do nothing bar open the door.

640k seems delusional and really hoping to find the “big fool”:

Anyone in Cork with thoughts?

Tricky. From a location perspective Ballincollig is Ballincollig not Cork City - regardless of boundary changes.

On the other hand - it is a 5-bed - which if in a more desirable suburb would be at least +10% (look in Daft for 5 beds in Blackrock, Douglas etc.).

Additionally - there are plenty of folk with employment in the proximity of Ballincollig in solid employment (EMC etc), who could easily access credit for this property (think trader-uppers).

It will probably get this price

Smouse156

southofthelee wrote: »

Tricky. From a location perspective Ballincollig is Ballincollig not Cork City - regardless of boundary changes.

On the other hand - it is a 5-bed - which if in a more desirable suburb would be at least +10% (look in Daft for 5 beds in Blackrock, Douglas etc.).

Additionally - there are plenty of folk with employment in the proximity of Ballincollig in solid employment (EMC etc), who could easily access credit for this property (think trader-uppers).

It will probably get this price

Not a hope! It’s Ballincollig, not Blackrock! If it was on the Model Farm Road then yeah it would get it but not in Ballincollig. I live in Ballincollig and I like it but it’s not the Blackrock Road...you’re not comparing like for like. It’s the Cork equivalent of Lucan. Anyone paying 640k is immediately 100k in negative equity.

donnaille

Bruno Millions Geisha wrote: »

saw this earlier and couldnt believe the asking! I was certain there was a similar one on the market last year around 500k. live near there too, very quiet area but that asking is utterly delusional. You'd buy new off plans in Heathfield up the road cheaper.

Similar, saw this and the price looks about 20% higher than I’d have expected!

Sweet.Science

Deleted User wrote: »

Totally agree. We moved from South Dublin to Bray a number of years ago, I honestly feel like it was a stroke of genius. I never knew much about Bray but once you come out here, you realise that it's one of the few places with so much on it's doorstep; Dart so you never lose that connection to Dublin which was important for us, sea, mountains, the new Stella cinema, so many great food and brunch spots and fantastic pubs, one of the best golf clubs in the country (Powerscourt).. literally on your doorstep... Compare that to your average housing estate in Cabinteely or Leopardstown (both great spots, I used to live there but you know what I mean).

Bray has a few council estates just like that Killiney/Ballybrack example you mentioned earlier but who's going down there anyway? You don't go to Charlesland or Kindlestown in Greystones and then tell everyone that Greystones is a kip. Likewise you don't go to Castlebyrne in Blackrock and tell everyone that Blackrock is an unsavoury place.

Coming from South Dublin, the one thing that say a Cabinteely has that Bray doesn't have is much better schools on it's doorstep but if you're sending your kids to private, that doesn't really matter anyway.

Wow what a yuppie post . Almost satirical. Partridge - esque

southofthelee

Smouse156 wrote: »

Not a hope! It’s Ballincollig, not Blackrock! If it was on the Model Farm Road then yeah it would get it but not in Ballincollig. I live in Ballincollig and I like it but it’s not the Blackrock Road...you’re not comparing like for like. It’s the Cork equivalent of Lucan. Anyone paying 640k is immediately 100k in negative equity.

Ya - as per my post Blackrock would be +10% for a five bed. I don't believe the property is worth it - but with the current levels of dry powder I would wager it will attain this price.

Also worth noting it's SherryFitz - who at least in the areas I follow - will price above market average - and if the seller is not in a rush - will hold out for this price.

Smouse156

southofthelee wrote: »

Ya - as per my post Blackrock would be +10% for a five bed. I don't believe the property is worth it - but with the current levels of dry powder I would wager it will attain this price.

Also worth noting it's SherryFitz - who at least in the areas I follow - will price above market average - and if the seller is not in a rush - will hold out for this price.

Well let’s see. I pity the poor fool that gets screwed if it does sell for it’s asking

southofthelee

Ya absolutely. Challenge with 5 beds in Cork is rarity.

In the core desirable suburbs you are realistically looking at buying a 3/4 bed estate sale for let's say €400k (think single glazed windows and boiler for the 50s) and getting in builders to do a major job / planning etc.

Smiley11

Smouse156 wrote: »

House gone up near me recently, stupidly overpriced IMO. Sold for 485k in 2018 (possibly late 2017 given appeared on price register Feb2018) with HTB so really 465k. Second hand houses have risen 7% since (CSO) then Q42017 to Q42020 so I’d value it around the 520k mark. Given the supply shortage maybe 540k although that would be pushing it. Price seems to be based on a larger unit/larger site plot selling for 620k (around the same time but the last sale on that row) on the same row. Typical lazy Sherry Fitzgerald, looking for 2.5% to do nothing bar open the door.

640k seems delusional and really hoping to find the “big fool”:

https://www.daft.ie/for-sale/detached-house-106-millers-court-old-quarter-ballincollig-co-cork/2919114

Anyone in Cork with thoughts?

Nice house but...the asking price seems very high given its not of the stand alone larger detached, larger site type homes in Ballincollig. I wouldn't pay it but somebody will because thats this market. Saw another one in Douglas go up yesterday for nearly 600k. Well extended but dated IMO & a quick check on the PPR shows its closest price contender being 470k a couple of years ago, highest price ever paid in that estate in the history of the PPR. All these ludicrous asking prices are telling me to back the feck off until things ease up & let our competitors burn off some steam All I can do is roll my eyes & shrug to myself.

Villa05

Hubertj wrote:

I’d take incompetency and corruption over bombing and terrorism any day. Sad day for society when that sort of behaviour is deemed acceptable. The impact on society of that sort of people governing a country has more far reaching impacts than just property. People in this country laughed and criticised that idiot in the US for 4 years. A party that justifies and defends terrorism is far worse. How will that impact the property market, economy and society? Careful what you wish for. To think they’d do any better...

Do you not understand that incompetency and corruption leads to the rise in popularity of alternate parties. In your acceptance of it you are contributing to the popularity of SF

Hubertj

Villa05 wrote: »

Do you not understand that incompetency and corruption leads to the rise in popularity of alternate parties. In your acceptance of it you are contributing to the popularity of SF

I don’t accept either.

PropQueries

Villa05 wrote: »

Do you not understand that incompetency and corruption leads to the rise in popularity of alternate parties. In your acceptance of it you are contributing to the popularity of SF

I think you have a good point and my generation have a very short memory. My generations assets will get transferred to the section of the population with few or no assets at some stage and hopefully it will be through taxation.

Not in favour of this method but the alternative methods of transferring wealth are much worse and very possible IMO

We don’t have to delve too far back into the history books to see what methods can (will be?) used.

Trump, Brexit etc. should have been a warning signal but it doesn’t appear our political class (here or abroad) have taken it too seriously IMO

Smouse156

Smiley11 wrote: »

Nice house but...the asking price seems very high given its not of the stand alone larger detached, larger site type homes in Ballincollig. I wouldn't pay it but somebody will because thats this market. Saw another one in Douglas go up yesterday for nearly 600k. Well extended but dated IMO & a quick check on the PPR shows its closest price contender being 470k a couple of years ago, highest price ever paid in that estate in the history of the PPR. All these ludicrous asking prices are telling me to back the feck off until things ease up & let our competitors burn off some steam All I can do is roll my eyes & shrug to myself.

As soon as we get an uptick in supply those houses lose 20% if anyone actually pays those prices. Still though, a home is the most expensive purchase of most people’s lives and even if they personally haven’t a clue about property you’d think they’d ask someone that does before signing contracts. For the Ballincollig house better to rent and spend 20k for a year than lose 100k on it.

PropQueries

Smouse156 wrote: »

As soon as we get an uptick in supply those houses lose 20% if anyone actually pays those prices. Still though, a home is the most expensive purchase of most people’s lives and even if they personally haven’t a clue about property you’d think they’d ask someone that does before signing contracts. For the Ballincollig house better to rent and spend 20k for a year than lose 100k on it.

What’s the story with the cork housing market? There’s nothing but land around cork city.

I know Dublin has plenty of land but cork is basically one big field. That’s not being said in jest. There’s nothing but empty land around cork city, so no possible reason at all for any housing supply issues.

Hubertj

Smouse156 wrote: »

As soon as we get an uptick in supply those houses lose 20% if anyone actually pays those prices. Still though, a home is the most expensive purchase of most people’s lives and even if they personally haven’t a clue about property you’d think they’d ask someone that does before signing contracts. For the Ballincollig house better to rent and spend 20k for a year than lose 100k on it.

Is there much on the way in terms of new builds in blackrock etc? Or just what planned along the river?

Smiley11

It really shows up these bank valuations as a tick the box exercise. I've never heard of a valuer opposing the agreed price & thats another glaring problem.

We're technically desperate for a house but you have to maintain rationality above all else when it comes to the biggest purchase of your life. I couldn't pay those prices in Cork for a pretty average house. Many will though & therein lies the problem!

My gut is telling me to stop checking the property sites every couple of hours, every day & focus on anything else in the hope calm is restored to some degree. I've accepted that we won't be getting a bargain but I do expect some semblance of value.

The house discussed in Artane previously just beggars belief...495k to 650k without ever setting foot inside the door? And a valuer will sign off on it? Its yet another means of highlighting what is seriously wrong with the market & with its stakeholders.

Smiley11

PropQueries wrote: »

What’s the story with the cork housing market? There’s nothing but land around cork city.

I know Dublin has plenty of land but cork is basically one big field. That’s not being said in jest. There’s nothing but empty land around cork city, so no possible reason at all for any housing supply issues.

Hubertj wrote: »

Is there much on the way in terms of new builds in blackrock etc? Or just what planned along the river?

To be honest, we're not in the new build market but, in my limited knowledge, there seem to be quite a few new developments going on outside of restrictions. Thats just my impression though & somebody in that market may have a far better insight into it. What I do see regularly though is houses going sale agreed far surpassing their asking orice. This isn't in every area obviously but you need a pretty flexible budget in the "hot" areas. There aren't many 1m+ houses on the market generally but, in those I've checked, they seem to be going for asking & slightly under. Not our price range unfortunately but the 1m + houses here tend to be food quality.

PropQueries

Smiley11 wrote: »

To be honest, we're not in the new build market but, in my limited knowledge, there seem to be quite a few new developments going on outside of restrictions. Thats just my impression though & somebody in that market may have a far better insight into it. What I do see regularly though is houses going sale agreed far surpassing their asking orice. This isn't in every area obviously but you need a pretty flexible budget in the "hot" areas. There aren't many 1m+ houses on the market generally but, in those I've checked, they seem to be going for asking & slightly under. Not our price range unfortunately but the 1m + houses here tend to be food quality.

But that house mentioned for €640k. How much could that possibly cost to build? I’ll be very very very generous and say €300k.

So, that’s at least €340k for a tiny site in an estate that far from cork city. Just looked at it on google earth and there really isn’t anything but empty fields all around the area. Sounds insane IMO

Smouse156

Hubertj wrote: »

Is there much on the way in terms of new builds in blackrock etc? Or just what planned along the river?

There are a good few estates being built in the suburbs and what people said isn’t far off the mark. There is lots of land available. Just not enough construction workers & Govt lockdown of construction will drive more and more Sinn Fein votes in the near future