Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Housing Madness

  • 14-02-2022 10:06pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 170 ✭✭Shuffl_in


    Mortgages. A lot of borrowers in my home town can only afford houses in the oldest estate now. It was built 60 or 70 years ago. G rated, 2 or 3 bed semi-detached homes with tiny, cold rooms. They have skinny little gardens but the houses are very poor by today's standards. They probably weren't great even when they were built. A lot of welfare and working families grew up there. A nice little community back in the day, but poor houses.

    Most of the welfare kids who grew up there got housed in a new estate across town. Brand new, roomier A rated homes. Fair play to them.

    The parents are passing away now and the old houses are coming up for sale. The council don't want them because they don't deem them fit to house people and upgrading them would be too expensive. With the housing market gone the way it is it's all a lot of mortgage holders can afford. And they're buying them!

    These weren't mortgage houses when they were new 60 years ago. These are cheaply built council houses. If you had a mortgage 60 years ago you had no interest in them, you were buying or building a bigger home on a private site.

    But now you have the welfare families in new, roomy A rated homes on one side of the town and the working, mortgage committing borrowers buying the tiny old council houses on the other. And not cheaply.

    Have we all gone f*#king mad? Surely everyone should be entitled to a decent home, especially if you've saved for a few years and are happy to commit to 20 or 30 years of a mortgage/work. Some young mortgage holders can't even afford those old council houses. And I'm told the new retrofitting scheme will increase the price of these houses even further, ruling more people out.

    How bad can it get?



«13456714

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,809 ✭✭✭Sunny Disposition


    Just took a look at rental prices in Dublin and it’s not good. If it’s going to cost more than €18k to rent a one bedroom property for a year it’s not a realistic option for almost anyone to move to Dublin.

    €350 each week on rent, that equates to about €600 of gross pay.


    I reckon a single person on €55k will still be under financial pressure with rent so high, you’d probably struggle to have a big weekly night out.

    There’s going to be a huge political backlash. And it is required, the prices are a terrible indictment.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,289 ✭✭✭Deeec


    You are correct. Where the council's went wrong years ago was selling off their council house stock. These houses should always be available for social houses. If they hadn't sold them the social housing tenents would now be living in the old houses and the new houses would be available to those who can buy

    The notion of a council house for life has to change too - tenents should be encouraged or incentivised to work and better themselves to buy their own private home. Less likely to run out of social housing if people moved up the ladder.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 691 ✭✭✭jmlad2020


    Sure when supply begins to be in surplus the welfare class will be in drafty old 40year old houses. Suckers



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,841 ✭✭✭buried


    Pointless talking about situations 60 years ago. We no longer live in anything that resembles that timeframe. We are existing in a Corporatocracy. In a corporatocracy, you, the citizen, as a basic member of society are entitled to nothing, just the bare minimum to meek out an existence. Even if you try to move up the ladder, the steps continuously snap and collapse underneath your own feet.

    How bad can it get? We are about to find out real soon.

    "You have disgraced yourselves again" - W. B. Yeats



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,045 ✭✭✭silver2020


    There needs to be a change in the central bank limits, especially if someone fixes for minimum term of 10 years.

    €350,000 on a 10 year fixed rate is €1,364 a month.

    That's eminently affordable for a huge number of people.

    It equates to a €390,000 home.

    The help to buy relief should be allowed as part of the deposit.


    Up to 5 times salary should be allowed but with certain limitations including a maximum loan amount of 400/450k and subject to a minimum 10 years fixed rate.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,260 ✭✭✭Ubbquittious


    1364*120 = 163,680

    Not even half of 350k. where does the rest come from?



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,787 ✭✭✭I see sheep


    Have you got a Supermac's?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,045 ✭✭✭silver2020


    Do you understand mortgages?

    Most are 30 year terms.

    You can fix the first 10 years for 2.4%

    This takes the pressure off a homebuyer.

    After 10 years about 26% of the mortgage is paid off.

    You can also fix for 15 and 20 years



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,184 ✭✭✭riclad


    It,ll get worse ,rents are going up, inflation is rising, items that cost 60 cent are now 80 or 90 cent.building materials cost 25 to 35 per cent more.The problem is we need 25 k units built per year to keep up with demand.theres no sign of this happening.Workers demand higher wages because of inflation in food, high energy costs .we have a supply side crisis.People will buy old houses if thats all they can afford.its not housing madness ,its demand versus supply ,economics 101.A change in the bank lending limits increases prices .if anyone can borrow 300k guess what effect that has on property prices.Also if the council builds a house now it cost 300k, even thought the council owns the land.the opposite happened tenants were encouraged to stay and buy the house from the council.this is happening in america, house prices are going up.

    young people will stop having children since they cannot afford to buy a house.The only solution i see is if young people put more pressure on fine gael, fianna fail to tackle the housing crisis



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,839 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    Might be that the price of property and housing has to be regulated. I think regulatory measures are the only way to deter individuals and stop them from gouging the citizens.

    Maybe the scope of AHBRA (Approved Housing Bodies Regulatory Authority) could be expanded…to include this functionality.

    prices of taxis… regulated… independent contractors and companies in that industry cannot charge what they like…

    apply the same principles to builders, property developers…..

    have a builders / developers license whereby if there are issues with pricing or quality of work, their license suspended.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 170 ✭✭Shuffl_in


    I really don't know how it ends. People and families are getting poorer. Inflation is making things progressively worse. Young workers are simply not able to buy or rent homes.

    A rent strike? Plenty of these through history and they usually work. In this day and age one would almost certainly work. If thousands of renters stopped paying rent until (let's say) a 25% decrease was agreed what can investors do? We don't kick people out, certainly not thousands at one time. Rent strikes almost always see demands met. It would inevitably lead to investors leaving the market meaning more houses available to purchase.

    Obviously it wouldn't be pretty and we'd still need new houses built.

    All spiel but as it is things are only getting worse. Even if things level off are young families really going to stay poor at the cost of high rents and mortgages to ever increasing foreign investors?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,839 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    The RTB regulate the rental market, could their scope of responsibility be extended / augmented to include the private sale of houses ? The private market ?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,716 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Well, the RTB don't regulate the rental market to the extent of keeping rents low, because rents are in fact astronomically high. So I wouldn't see that they are well-positioned to regulate the housing sale market so as to keep house prices low.

    Plus, I don't see that this will do much to solve the problem. If all you do is control prices, you'll have the same or, more probably, fewer houses for sale, and the same or, more probably, more people looking to buy. If price doesn't function as the mechanism that identifies the successful bidder, then some other mechanism will - most likely a combination of connections, networking, good luck and a favouring of buyers with ready cash over buyers relying on mortgage finance. But you'll have the same or a greater number of disappointed people looking to buy a house but unsuccessful in their attempt.

    The solution seems to be more public and/or co-operative housing, with public policy directing resources to such projects. But that's a very hard policy for a right-of-centre government to adopt.

    And there's a complication. Any policy which results in bringing down the price of houses, in real terms, will impact very badly on people who have bought houses in recent years. There'll be a lot of people paying over the odds for houses that are in negative equity; they won't be happy (and their houses won't come on the market, which is a problem if you are trying to make it easier to buy). So any policy needs to include some mechanism for addressing their situation.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,839 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    Problem is going to continue to be supply vs demand.

    until there is a way to cap demand or regulate the price of property we are screwed, there isn’t so we are…

    no political party will toy with loosing votes by admonishing or curtailing the property developers who let’s face it, many are linked to politicians and political dynasties, parties and circles… so,its as you were, are, will be until somebody in the Dail has the bollôcks to act for the citizens of this country.

    again though we need to look at the main driver of our rapid population growth.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,716 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    The main driver of our rapid population growth is prosperity. Obviously we can adopt measures to limit prosperity, but that will affect more than the housing market.

    I don't think we can fix this problem by trying to suppress demand for housing; we need to increase supply.



  • Registered Users Posts: 244 ✭✭bytheglass


    Some good ideas in this thread, let’s collate and send them to Sinn Fein and then they have a chance at implementation



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,604 ✭✭✭Amadan Dubh


    Hopefully the hyper growth of large MNCs stalls post-covid as the economy stalls a bit when State supports unwind, which then results in less new jobs created in Ireland and therefore less new demand for rentals. At least for a few years to have this restricted demand in order to let supply catch up for those already in the country working and trying to survive.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,716 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    If you are concerned about "those already in the country working and trying to survive", it doesn't realy make sense to hope that "the economy stalls a bit". A stalled economy is not a favourable one in which to be working.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,132 ✭✭✭malinheader


    The more you cry poor mouth in this country the better you are looked after. The working poor are the ones suffering most in this country hoping some government will one day make it possible for a low or middle income family to support and provide a home for their family while still having a good life.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 891 ✭✭✭moycullen14


    This, 1000 times this. One of the more insidious effects of inflation is that it is virtually impossible to unravel. Any measure the improves the housing/rented situation must affect - decrease - current house prices. Increase supply or decrease demand, doesn't matter. If things are to improve for renters/young people, then prices MUST come down - and that means the value of existing property MUST be reduced. The baby-boomers ain't going to stand for that! Relaxing mortgage criteria will only drive up prices.

    Whether you own your house for 6 months or 60 years, you will feel this effect. It's electoral suicide for any party to introduce policies that decrease people's equity. Sad, but true.

    It would be nice for any party to actually admit this, rather than mouthing cliches.

    You're also seeing the same effect with grade inflation in the leaving cert. Once points go up, it's very hard for them to go down again.

    A whole generation of economists are about to learn all about inflation - the hard way.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,427 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    I can't remember any organised rent strikes like this.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,453 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    Literally impossible. Lots of laws and things like the constitution are in the way. As it is the rent controls in place look like they are going to be challenged and may cost the state a lot of money.

    What people seem to miss is the quality of living standards is much better. The expectation of living standards is also much higher. Something people aren't considering is what is coming over the next 10 years. Dublin is surrounded by hosuing built in the 60s-early 80s and those original owners are dying and will die soon. There will be a ton of these houses on the market relatively shortly. They currently have a very low occupancy rate as it is 1-2 people in these houses that used to have 5 people in them. Tehy are going to come onto the market.

    It might mean cheaper housing as stock comes onto the market. Some of these houses will end up being split into more than one household. The limits people think are there about housing prices aren't really there as proven in all expanding cities. Places can become smaller rather than cheaper.

    Housing is way more complex than people think and spans life times. The idea of devaluing houses and/or forcing sales is not a new idea. The thing is somebody is paying for that and just because it isn't the buyer doesn't make it right. Good luck trying to get investment in property after that is tried.

    It is good that you see that construction costs are a factor here. No way you will cap their rates during high demand



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,909 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    oh it ll get worse before it gets better, we havent accepted that financialising the whole process has completely failed, it has caused a severe shortage in supply, and prices to skyrocketed, which only truly benefits current owners and the ultimately the fire sectors. we have to wait for more and more to realise and accept these failures, and to also accept the only way out of this is further state interventions.....



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 170 ✭✭Shuffl_in


    We had rent strikes in the 1970s.

    And I'm sure you've heard of the Land League and Charles Stewart Parnell? High rents (to foreign owners!) led to poverty. Landowners withheld rent en masse. They demanded fair rents and a chance to own their own properties. It worked.

    Seen as radical when it was proposed but now we learn about it proudly in history classes in school, for various reasons.

    You can go abroad for plenty of examples of other (maybe more relevant) rent strikes. They all meet resistance by government but the power really is with the people and they inevitably work.

    (I didn't intend to sound like I'm promoting rent strikes and I'm not. But in an ever worsening situation it's certainly one possibility of how it all ends).



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,453 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    You forget that the right to own was a big issue and non interference by the state on ownership. People here are suggesting taking those rights away but only for landlords. To compare inward investment to Ireland with the occupation of Ireland is nonsense. I know people love to talk about fighting the system like we did in the past but it is our system not some foreign power.



  • Posts: 13,688 ✭✭✭✭ Zechariah Mealy Chipmunk


    The trends are positive. Sinn Féin were the most popular party among all age groups up to 65+ in the last election. They made solid inroads from the 2016 election.

    Even the 35-64 voters, that would have voted Fianna Fáil/Fine Gael in the past, realise what a predicament their children/grandchildren are in/will soon be in.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 170 ✭✭Shuffl_in


    I'm not comparing anything to the occupation of Ireland. A member couldn't remember rent strikes in Ireland so I pointed out a couple. Including our most famous. You did read that I mentioned you'd find more relevant examples abroad but that didn't suit the narrative you spotted.

    Regardless of who owns the system if you push working class people to poverty through soaring rents and an inability to own their own homes the system will crack at some stage.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,427 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,427 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    The 1970's rent strikes were by Local Authority social housing tenants. I did not see much sympathy for that group in your OP.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 10,443 Mod ✭✭✭✭Jim2007



    When you start out with the idea that a housing policy based on people taking on huge amounts of debt or relying on social services to put a roof over peoples heads, it should be no surprise that it goes pear shape. It is not as if we haven’t been here before. I recall the 60s when we were housing people in abandoned army barracks, the unoccupied married quarters in other barracks etc.

    The EU charter on citizens rights gives you a right to a roof over your head not ownership of a house and with good reason - most other member states know and accept that everyone can’t own a house. Every state has a housing problem, but most who accept this are closer to solving it than we are.

    Sadly for the individual I don’t see much of chance of things improving without a paradigm shift in people’s expectations. So long as voters continue to vote for this approach, the politicians will try to continue to deliver it. A well structured landlord/tenant legal framework is possible, a better commuter transport system, a dramatic increase in rental accommodation is possible…. but the voters are only interested in the dream of home ownership and no politician wants to be the one to deliver the bad news.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 170 ✭✭Shuffl_in


    But what is your point? My OP wasn't about social housing tenants. My OP clearly stated that everyone should be entitled to decent housing. I have no idea what you're trying to say. I don't know if you do either.



  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 10,443 Mod ✭✭✭✭Jim2007


    Well if the rent strikes worked we would not be here once again would we? Repeating the same headless chicken dance is not going to solve the problem this time either.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,427 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    You want everyone to have the same standard as the welfare tenants. Fair enough, but that won't be achieved by the private tenants copying the social housing tenants and going on a rent strike. Or the mortgage holders reneging on their repayments.

    "But now you have the welfare families in new, roomy A rated homes on one side of the town and the working, mortgage committing borrowers buying the tiny old council houses on the other. And not cheaply."



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,495 ✭✭✭XsApollo


    It’s not just housing where the middle class, or is it lower middle to middle class are screwed.

    a lot of social housing gone up near me , top of the range is what I would describe the houses as.

    when the new owners moved in, the cars in the front gardens would suggest they ain’t broke.

    work vans , mercs , audis, BMW’s some with 2 cars, the people carrier and runabout.

    madness and sickening at the same time.

    middle class get screwed, the welfare state and public services cost can’t just keep increasing when will it end?

    so much inefficiency at the expense of the people paying for it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 170 ✭✭Shuffl_in


    I don't know how to respond to that, sorry Jim. But I'd say it's the first time the land leaguers have been referred to as headless chicken dancers.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,193 ✭✭✭Eircom_Sucks


    stop giving houses to single parents who can't afford a house , simple

    spreading the legs and getting more money , while the working joe soap pays for it and gets fook all in return

    system is all wrong



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 170 ✭✭Shuffl_in


    What I said was I think everyone should be entitled to decent housing. My lack of sympathy for social welfare recipients or this same standard deal are things you made up yourself. This discussion is not about what you want it to be about.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,261 ✭✭✭Gant21


    Plenty new SUV’s in council estates sorry social housing.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,427 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    I didn't make up this part of what you posted.

    But now you have the welfare families in new, roomy A rated homes on one side of the town and the working, mortgage committing borrowers buying the tiny old council houses on the other. And not cheaply.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,453 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    You directly compared it by mentioning foreign investment. One of the strikes you mentioned was over 100 years ago and was very different. The next you mention was to one particular landlord not all rents. What happens in another country about rent isn't relevant here because different causes and different laws apply.

    Irish people love to fight the system as a post colonial chip on our shoulder. It does matter it is our system and not a system that didn't allow representation. You can hope for some revolution from the working class but it isn't going to happen. People have been saying the same stuff all my life and it hasn't happened. Ireland had the highest home ownership in the world that was going to change always but people seem surprised. I don't even know how much of the population are renting do you? Do you think they all have the same background and agree politically? Do they only know people in their own situation?

    You are looking for united group to campaign out of a very scattered group. They won't be able to manage it as it would involve too many extremists. Look at the occupation of the office block and how it all fell apart. Dream about revolution all you like but it isn't going to happen.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,630 ✭✭✭✭mariaalice


    well done op on thinking up a new angle on welfare bashing them.

    It's not the 1980s any more those in social housing will be working, kids going to university or doing apprenticeships getting on with thing,s there are more people with disabilities or with long term illnesses in social housing because its all the accommodation they can get.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,484 ✭✭✭✭Supercell


    For those of us that were "lucky" enough to have bought an 80's house with a BER of E2 (when we bought it - single glazing, single leaf cavity block, feck all insulation in the attic etc) its not great either.

    We spent a fortune getting it up to C3. We would absolutely love to get the external walls wrapped to get us at a B grade never mind A, but thats just a pipe dream, no way we can afford that.

    The new SEAI scheme is a gift to the rich and freebies for those on the dole. The rich get their huge houses upgraded for half price, the welfare recipients get it done for free, and a great many of the rest of us cannot afford the 50% off ~€20k it would still cost to get ours done.

    Long story short if you are rich or on the dole the government seems to care about you, the rest of us can eat cake.

    Have a weather station?, why not join the Ireland Weather Network - http://irelandweather.eu/



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 170 ✭✭Shuffl_in


    I'm not looking for anything. I fairly clearly stated "I didn't intend to sound like I'm promoting rent strikes and I'm not".

    People will fight the system if the system puts them in poverty but hopefully it doesn't come to that. For now the situation is bad and getting worse.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,453 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    The idea, which I don't quite believe, is that you get a top up on your mortgage and the reduction in your heating bills will be enough so you actually pay very little more. I saw bit on Eco Eye and it showed a calculation whereby the owner only ended up paying an extra €1 a month. It seemed a bit basic but if true everyone can benefit who owned a house for a while.

    It doesn't just benefit the rich and poor, people are assuming the "rich" just have the cash. Money smart people can see the benefits and borrow on their assets.

    I personally got 3 properties externally insulated when the grants first came out over 10 years ago. Our heating is a lot cheaper than people I know plus the house is way more comfortable. The price to do the work now is a good 40% more expensive now but we have had all these years of saving fuel too. It will have paid for itself in 5 more years.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,453 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    It depends on how you view what is "worse". People seem to think things were better when one salary could buy a house. Only one person could get a job and women had to stay at home. Now because both sexes work two salaries are needed to buy a house. Is that a worse situation?

    In the 80s many people had no central heating and siblings shared small rooms. Now a child is expected to have their own room and a warm house. Better or worse?

    Un-married mothers were sent to institutions and had their child sold. Now we provide housing and benefits. Worse or better?

    Society changes and everything has a cost



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 170 ✭✭Shuffl_in


    mariaalice I have no issue with social housing. Maybe if I knew more about it I would (or wouldn't) but I simply don't.

    I know most who were housed in the new housing estate in my home town I referred to. Most were single mothers at the time. As I said in the OP, fair play to them. A lot of very nice people.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 170 ✭✭Shuffl_in


    Again I'll have to refer back to my OP. In my home town a lot of young families with two salaries can only afford the old council houses. Many can't even afford them.

    Everyone should be entitled to decent housing, especially if they're willing to commit to a mortgage.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,503 ✭✭✭✭Mad_maxx


    its all very well saying lending rules need to loosen but banks are going to need to be able to repossess much easier than is currently the case

    surely people have asked themselves why foreign banks want nothing to do with this market despite far higher rates of return on lending being available ?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,261 ✭✭✭Gant21




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,453 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    Yes and as I just tried to explain to you standards are different and there is a cost to social improvements. Building standards are better now so a new home will tend to be superior to older properties. The council doesn't own the houses for sale but does the newer properties which it gives to it's tenants. As part of the drive to equality council housing was sold to the tenants at a discount. This gave poor people the chance to own and benefit from having an asset they could pass onto family.

    They are the houses you now say private buyers are stuck buying or can't even afford. That is the cost of helping former council tenants own. What exactly do you want to be done? Make the council buy the old places and sell the new builds to people privately at a discount? There is a reason for it as is and I don't know what can be done other than complain.



  • Advertisement
Advertisement