The eviction ban

redlough

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120444760#Comment_120444760

The biggest issue with daft is the abuse you get from potential tenants. You have to get a false number if you advertise because as soon as the property is let you will still get calls and if you haven't let it to them expect to be called every name under the sun.

As you said you get bombarded with rubbish as well to start with.

Plus in the middle of it all, like I posted earlier in thread, you have gobshites on twitter who might decide today is the day to make a show of your ad, then once they do that you will get bombard with hate mails and phone calls from idiots online.

Then people ask why some LL don't use daft?

HeidiHeidi

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120444772#Comment_120444772

In fairness, I never had to deal with any of that except for the sheer overwhelming volume of replies.

But yes, times have changed and the sharing and abuse of ads on various social media has become a thing (I participate in it myself on here on the "would you live in a place like this", but try to be kind!) must be awful if you're on the wrong end of it.

redlough

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120444785#Comment_120444785

I got out of it, too much hassle. Don't blame any LL for getting out of it. Especially when you see TD's and political parties trying to vilify them.

Emblematic

I think there needs to be deeper understanding of the immediate issue.

The problem is not that having huge numbers of small landlords is desirable, and therefore a reduction as is happening is a bad thing. Arguably, too many small landlords is what has led to the current situation.

The problem, rather, is that when they leave, they potentially make a family or individual homeless. They have a stranglehold on the situation that is disproportionate to whatever value they add by staying in the market.

Solutions therefore have such that small landlords are able to exit without causing undue disruption. This might mean increasing tenant-in-situ schemes whereby tenants remain in their homes but ownership is transferred to the LA or another landlord.

Another possible solution might be tax incentives to sell to another landlord with the tenant in place. This might be in the form of a capital gains tax reduction. This could be paid for by increased capital gains tax if the tenant is evicted.

HeidiHeidi

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120444903#Comment_120444903

With respect, the immediate issue is that there simply aren't enough properties to house all that need to be housed. Whether to buy or to rent. Full stop.

Landlords have always been able to come and go from the market without sending the whole thing into a tailspin.

A combination of Covid, the massive net influx of people into the country in recent years, and probably a whole lot of other factors that I haven't even thought of, means there are less housing units than there are parties that need housing.

The current panic with landlords is just a symptom of that.

alias no.9

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120444760#Comment_120444760

This, many times over

Floppybits

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120444785#Comment_120444785

I just got a letting agent to do all the legwork and deal with all the advertising and the applications. I didn't have time nor did I want to be dealing with that.

Emblematic

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120444944#Comment_120444944

There is a shortage of supply but this, I would argue, is a symptom of large numbers of small landlord for whom their investment property is their pension. Consequently, governments have been unwilling to make the sorts of decisions that might resolve the supply problem since doing so would undermine the "pensions" of small landlords. Instead they just let the situation slide to the extent that rent controls needed to be imposed to stop spiraling rents. But there has never been any examination of the root causes, one of which is the over-reliance on small landlords. Even small landlords have acknowledged this on this thread.

There are other causes. As you correctly point out, the increase in population, Covid etc. I would also add the financial crisis. But problems existed before all those things. We've never had a situation where landlords could enter and exit the market without causing disruption to tenants.

SwimClub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120444302#Comment_120444302

The reason for a lack of rental supply is the large number of small landlords?

I'm dumbfounded here, are you for real?

How did 'too many small landlords' lead to a lack of supply in the rental market?

Small landlords don't stop REITs or anyone else building as many build to rents or buying as many properties as they like.

Emblematic

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120445027#Comment_120445027

It is true that they don't stop REITs or others directly from building. But they will have an overall effect on policy making. The effect will not so much be specific actions against developments but rather a lack of proactive decisions and then panic reactions when things get out of hand due to this inactivity.

It does sound contradictory that too many small landlords cause lack of supply but, like I have said, that is because their exiting the market causes evictions even when the buyer is another landlord. It is a strangelhold that is out of proportion to whatever value they supply.

In other countries, for example, Germany, a large landlord leaving the market would not cause any disruption to tenants. Ownership would simply pass to another landlord and rents would be paid to this new landlord.

In Ireland, by contrast, with its huge number of small landlords, the threat is that someone will be evicted by their exiting. This can be used to extract tax concessions etc.

SwimClub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120445118#Comment_120445118

I'd read all of that but I stopped taking you seriously after the last couple.

redlough

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120445118#Comment_120445118

The problem in Ireland is the new LL doesn't want the tenant in case they are terrible and they are just been passed a huge problem

So a way around that is to have a tenant DB that can provide assurance that the tenant is good and the LL will have no problem moving forward. If they are buying as a rental property why would they want to move out a good paying tenant. At the moment is just a huge unknown and the safer option, or so LL think, is to rent out he property themselves

HeidiHeidi

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120445147#Comment_120445147

I would have said that the biggest problem is that banks won't lend without vacant possession.

So you'd be depending on cash buyers, and how many of them are there?

The RPZ rules feed into this - if you sell with tenant in situ, your rent restriction limits the value of the property. At least with vacant possession you can go for owner-occupiers.

SwimClub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120445187#Comment_120445187

That's the main issue, if inflation runs at 10% for a few years and rent increases are capped at 2% you've a 24% drop in rental income in real terms over a few years and if you have to sell with a tenant in situe the value of the asset also drops 24% relative to a new to market rental. That's ignoring the limited demand through forced selling to cash buyers which would further discount the price.

If you have a large portfolio of properties you can manage that through keeping them off the market for a couple of years when tenants move out, probably being selective of tenants to maximize the probability of that, young highly paid professionals that will buy their own place in a few years and move out. These are our saviour institutional investors that will keep rents at nose bleedingly high levels and will move those levels across the whole market as small landlords that are stuck in RPZs get out.

I don't want to be disparaging but it really is turkeys voting for Christmas.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120444903#Comment_120444903

Ah here, how can you describe small landlords having a strangehold on any situation!!! Somebody with one or two properties to let isn't in any way responsible for whatever way you describe the current situation.

As for the tenant-in-situ scheme, what a way to scare off both corporate and small landlords. It could only work if tenant-in-situ situations were paying market rent. Otherwise you are interfering with an individual's property rights for another individual. You can only interfere in property rights for the social good. That is why you have the 20% social housing provision, that is why you have CPOs which have to go through the courts. Applying tenant-in-situ schemes without market rents is likely to be unconstitutional.

Juran

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120444176#Comment_120444176

Same with us. We have the oppurtunity to transfer to Asia with work for 2 years, which we plan to do in 2025. We have our mortgage paid off early by 10 years. We will no way rent our house, and its in a highly deserible suburb of a major Irish city, plus we renovated each room over the years, extended it and put a lot of love, sweat, tears and effort into the house and garden. We'll continue to pay heating and electricity while we are away. Yes, people might think we are mad, or loaded, but we're not. We're comfortable enough not to need the hassle for an extra few quid, after taxes are paid.

Thoughts ... will people view us as shelfish for not offerring a house to potential tenants ?

SwimClub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120445337#Comment_120445337

"will people view us as shelfish for not offerring a house to potential tenants ?"

Not at all, the world is your oyster!😂

Seriously though you'd be mad to rent it out.

redlough

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120445337#Comment_120445337

Nah why wreck your house.

Vestiapx

Some landlords used to use employer references to help select suitable tenants but apparently that's discrimination!?

How is employment status not a deciding factor in these things ? Go to court and you will be described in the papers as (name) a (current_job) from (location_of_residence).

I guarantee that that the idea of renter history is just as discriminatory as employment status and won't be allowed.

crusd

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120444450#Comment_120444450

I understand that, however reits invest for the interests of their investors so have motivations that sometimes are in conflict with the interests of society. Using a state backed fund that took the strategic needs into account would produce better results.

crusd

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120445239#Comment_120445239

If rental incomes had tracked inflation for the last 10 years they would be a hell of a lot lower now than they are

bluedex

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120445337#Comment_120445337

No way, you'd be mad to rent it in the current climate.

SwimClub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120445928#Comment_120445928

That's not the point. You're missing the point on the difference between the price of a rent controlled property versus a non-rent controlled property and why it's rational to sell before that becomes large. Rent controlled property then is sold and removed from the rental market and is replaced by a new build unit at peak market rent.

RPZ means people selling up, owners in RPZs getting out means less rental units and higher rent prices.

Newly advertised rents went up 14% last year. More than inflation and in spite of RPZ controls, where existing rentals could only raise rent 2%.

If you want to know why just follow the logic above, rent controls don't work they just make things worse as evidenced by 14% rent increases.

Bass Reeves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120445928#Comment_120445928

They were artificially low ten years ago after the crash. The problem in any market is when you have seriously less supply than demand. When that happens and you decide to try to regulate your way out of the situation it can make it worse.

For the last 50 years left wing parties have vilified LL. They had this idea that getting more tax off them and regulating them would not increase prices.

Pre the '90's the LA build houses collected the rents ( well what they could of them) but maintenance of the housing stock was costing more than the rent collected. People who crib about LA selling there housing stock forget about this.

It seemed like a good idea however it was the tenant who looked after there place that bought them out. The were left with a large section of the great unwashed. Since then they have found it cheaper for to hand those people who rent houses over to the small LL through HAP and rent allowance I think off the top of my head costs the state about 750 million a year. There is also emergency rent allowance but that is more or jess for domestic violence and emergency rental situations ( a worker renting who gets seriously sick).

It's the greatest bargain the government ever got. These tenants are farmed out and if the refuse to pay there 30-40/ week to the LA they stop paying the LL. The LL then goes through a two years process to get rid of a non paying tenant and the LA have no cost.

On REIT/ institutional LL they generally only take HAP tenants through long-term LA contracts the LA take the house for 15years ( no 20% rent reduction like for small LL for a long-term contract) and will get the house back completely refurbished. As well these Institutional LL ( the early ones anyway got five year rent reviews).

REITS as well will not be dropping prices. There is already a problem developing in the Continent where larger corporate LL are taking back cheaper unit's refurbishing them and then trebling or quadrupling the rent. There was an article about this with regard to units in East Germany that were sold of in the 00's to corporate LL. It's happening in Spain as well.

This is going to get much worse before it gets better.

By the way Peter McVerry was a disgrace with his remarks. He had a chance to retract them yesterday evening. Just think about it on a radio program yesterday he as good as called the Toiseach a liar. It was one of the most disrespectful things I have seen in a while. He has got significant radio and TV time for the last two weeks to spout his views.

The left wing parties, media and him have helped to create this mess by there constant pushing of hard /tough cases.

The truth is hard cases make bad law and this is what we have had with the rental situations for the last nearly ten years now. The left wing parties have there corporate and Institutional LL and do not like the look of them either.

Traditionally I always held the view that LA buying for developers was the best option from a social and economic long term plan. It would have prevented gettoisation of communities. However house building is so expensive and the speed at which we need houses, it probably not sustainable to continue as is. We probably need to look at fabricated housing for social housing. However it will create terrible gettos.

For those who think apartment blocks are the answer costs are horrendous when you go over 20 metres (5-6 floors) even at 5-6 floors area's lost to lift shafts, stairwells, sanitary, telecoms and electricity make it prohibitive enough before you ever consider the finding issues.

Probably the best solution is a couple hundred trailer parks like in the states

redlough

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120445832#Comment_120445832

yes that’s discrimination. That’s how fucked up it is

As a LL you are supposed to let your property to whoever even if they work/don’t work. Just let a massive investment out to any Joe soap. That’s what tenants wanted and they got

Now they complain about the problems they created

yes creating a database of tenants with current regulation would be discriminatory but you can change regulations and the good tenants should be demanding this so more properties become available and rents reduce.

Will they bring it in? No chnace

Think this is US version

Grayson

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120444443#Comment_120444443

I wasn't having a go at you. It's genuinely a horrible situation where you could have the option of making yourself homeless or making someone else homeless.

And likewise if you were the family renting from you, you could be faced with the same decision.

That's just how messed up this housing crises is.

Grayson

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120444428#Comment_120444428

Because something bad is happening to someone else? because of empathy? Yes it's legal but it's still not a nice thing to have to do. And I'd understand that if they were moving back they'd need somewhere to live or be homeless. It's something they have to do. Just because you have to do something, and it is legal, doesn't mean it's a nice thing to do. I recognise that his hands would be tied. It's do this or else....

redlough

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120446479#Comment_120446479

If you are renting on short term then you are renting on short term. That’s teh same in every market

You are trying to say every person evicted is homeless and I’m not sure really what the point is apart from having a go at a poster who suggested they might rent out while on travels.

To me the whole discussion makes very little sense except you do give an excellent example of why people don’t want to get in been a LL anymore

redlough

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120446482#Comment_120446482

Sorry makes zero sense

A lot of people rent because it gives them the freedom to move around etc

you want to bundle everyone into a category that if they rent they want to make a home and stay for life and any eviction means they are now homeless.

Grayson

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120444903#Comment_120444903

As someone else mentioned, there's loads of other factors. land hording, covid, planning backlog etc.

But there is one key point you mention and it's about trading the house with the tenant in situ.

If I owned commercial property I can sell it as a going concern. It's sold with the tenants. It's arguably more valuable sometimes. Because it's guaranteed income. Residential property should be treated the same. There will still be small time investors. Because it's something guaranteed a return over time. It's actually a great investment for retirement. We'd need to look at capital gains tax to make sure that people are incentivised to keep it for longer. We can adjust rental income tax so longer leases pay less tax. And it would remove a lot of volatility from the market. If property spikes in price over a 5 year period less people wouldn't suddenly exit the market.

At the moment investing in property is like investing in tech shares. people expect returns over a shorter period of time. But i t should literally be like a pension plan. Something that matures slowly and with more stability.

(and before anyone says we need stronger protections for landlords, yes we do. And for tenants too)