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

Irish Property Market chat II - *read mod note post #1 before posting*

Options
1312313315317318809

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 4,603 ✭✭✭Villa05


    There were conditions attached to the bank bailout

    They could offset the losses the taxpayer covered against future profits leaving them tax free for years. Wonder did the banks pay out bonuses for the negotiaters that secured such a crazy deal. Comical stuff



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Thanks. I had read that but wanted to know if anyone had experience of this?



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,666 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    You can take this stuff to Politics (or Conspiracy Theories) but drop it on this thread. Do not reply to this post.

    More generally - this is not a general politics or general economics thread. The last thirty pages or so seem to think it is.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,515 ✭✭✭wassie


    What are you wanting to know exactly? It seems fairly clear.

    If you dont live in the property for a minimum of 5 years, as per the rules of the scheme, Revenue are entitled to claw back funds. @GoldFour4 explained that claw back is generally on the basis of pro-rata.

    If your intention was to buy and sell within 2 years then that purchase may be considered speculative and against the intent of the scheme.

    If you have particular circumstances that warranted selling early (eg serious illness) then there is the ability to appeal a Revenue decision.

    Clawbacks are set out here in the scheme details:https://www.revenue.ie/en/tax-professionals/tdm/income-tax-capital-gains-tax-corporation-tax/part-15/15-01-46.pdf




  • Registered Users Posts: 8,239 ✭✭✭Pussyhands


    Anyone know why properties seem to be added in clusters despite having different auctioneers? I have alerts set up and I'll see nothing for weeks and then all of a sudden I'll see 3 in a week.

    For example below are dates of alerts for this year so far:

    January: 7,20,21,21,24,26

    February: 2,4,16,22

    March: 8,10,15

    April: 1,1,2,6,6,6,7,8,8



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 148 ✭✭argolis


    I bought in 2005. After the crash we only got back into positive equity around 2016, so it was 8 years and not missing any payments. If we'd bought in 2007 or 2008, I wouldn't be surprised if it took someone closer to 13 years to get out of negative equity.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,504 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    It might not be much longer. Most of the rise on value happened from 2016 on. In rural Ireland houses only started to return to build value from 2016 on.

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Registered Users Posts: 625 ✭✭✭Cal4567



    Going back to the Part V discussion yesterday. It was brought in after 2000 and was presented as a sort of mixed tenue initiative, with all the PR spin you'd expect from a government proposal. It was supposed to involve a fixed calculation where the State got the planning again benefit so the developer would be broadly paid at cost for the delivery of the Part V units. Local authority development on its own right diminished through the Celtic Tiger years and like everything else fell off a cliff in 2008/09 and has only come back in the last 4/5 years alongside the increase in activity by some approved housing bodies. Throughout all this the reliance on Part V units has become ever greater.

    As time has evolved and desperation has increased on behalf of the local authorities in their attempts just to keep housing people, and this is what I cannot understand, this fixed price seems to have been put aside, and as with the example quoted, the State is paying well over the odds.

    Perhaps the financial cost effective solution is for the developer, if they are able to do, provide cheaper units elsewhere, or even provide another site - but that brings up the other point. It doesn't meet mixed tenure goals.

    Another solution is for a whole state construction body, but as someone has said already, how effective would that be? Perhaps the LDA should also take on that's role. Quickly becoming the state's largest developer.



  • Administrators Posts: 53,756 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    The time for the state to set up it's own developer is long past, the time to do this was about almost a decade ago IMO.

    The main problem is labour. There is a shortage of it now, no one is short for work. To attract labour away from the private developers they'd need to offer good rates, which will push wages up further, which will push prices up further. It would also slow down building in the private market, since the labour shortage would become even more acute there.

    There is a maximum number of units Ireland can churn out a year. We're probably close to the max right now, if not at it. Without a sudden injection of new labour from some other source it is hard to see how this output can be increased.



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




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 995 ✭✭✭iColdFusion


    A government developer would be a total disaster, the LDA seem to be doing an okay job at master planning projects but we've all read the various OPW financial shenanigans too.

    The best thing the government could do would be to take a controlling interest in Cairn or Glenveagh, give them zero cost government money and set them to work on government lands building affordable homes for working people, the ratio of affordable vs social is totally screwed at the moment even though the government keep mentioning both of them as if its 50/50, new homes are quickly skyrocketing out of the reach of hard working couples, the 310k 3 bed semi is more like 340-350k now and even worse as the house size increases its not sustainable especially if you need another 15k for finishes and furniture.



  • Registered Users Posts: 995 ✭✭✭iColdFusion


    Interesting document as part of this recent SHD application to ABP in Fermoy, County Cork, if you go into the Part V report they list out the estimated costs for each type of house, they seem to be using old Linesight data but its interesting to see it laid out for each house type:






  • Registered Users Posts: 4,603 ✭✭✭Villa05


    Long enough past to be very close to the next time those conditions come round again

    There is a difference between public service efficiencies and a semi state with a clearly defined objective.

    Even eircom and aerlingus served the state well, with eircom sold at peak value and aerlingus still around while many others collapsed.

    Employment terms and conditions coupled with boom bust policies have made construction trades unappealing to our youth. There is certainly a strong argument for a semi state in this sector. Wages are above average and much better than many of the college courses out there. With the current ageing profile of employees in the sector those conditions may improve and persist.

    Create a degree of certainty in employment and the trades could be very attractive again.

    We are 30 years into private sector dominance and it's been disaster after disaster, brown envelopes, expensive enquires, pyrite, mica, fire hazards, bankruptcy of the country, tax scandals

    At what point do we say, enough. Are we waiting for a greenfell tower moment or will that be acceptable as well, because these developers are funding our political parties.



  • Administrators Posts: 53,756 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    You think pyrite, mica and fire hazards would not have happened if the state built houses? Our state bodies are scandal free?

    For what it's worth, I believe there was a record number of apprenticeships in Ireland last year.

    I'd be fairly confident that "employment terms" and "boom bust policies" have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with someone deciding to take up a trade or not.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,185 ✭✭✭DataDude




  • Registered Users Posts: 1,097 ✭✭✭Roger Mellie Man on the Telly


    ^^^ Epic stuff. I love the Irish.



  • Administrators Posts: 53,756 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    These are nice looking houses but I think if you had 1.3 million you could do a lot better.

    In a 5 bed house I'd be looking for a better 2nd living room area than what's in those.

    Also the driveway entrance is bizarre. Why would you make it so difficult to get 2 cars in / out by having such a narrow entrance?

    Location isn't great either IMO, Sandyford Village is nowhere near Sandyford Luas and the village itself doesn't have much going on at all.

    It actually really bugs me how big downstairs toilets have to be in houses these days for accessibility. It is such a pointless requirement. Total waste of space. That downstairs toilet is huge.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,185 ✭✭✭DataDude


    Absolutely agree. For €1.3m in Sandyford I think you’d need considerably more land and/or larger house. The price might make sense in Blackrock or similar

    Something like this in Greystones is more desirable in every way in my opinion.

    https://www.myhome.ie/residential/brochure/27-the-shore-marina-village-greystones-co-wicklow-a63-y893/4572584



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


    Only a €45k deposit needed to secure this flat that looks like it could've been from the projects in The Wire. They've managed to clean up the crack den / blood stains from the previous occupiers and have even managed to install a totally unuseable kitchen in a narrow hallway.




  • Administrators Posts: 53,756 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    The only thing worse in that one is the garden.

    It beats the Sandyford one in every other way though. Ignoring the fact they've turned one of the 5 bedrooms into a second sitting room, the large kitchen / living area at the back is bigger and wider so you get a better 2nd living area there, that feels a bit separated from the dining area. Those Marina Village houses are really nice IMO.

    If only I had a million euro... 😁

    Have you found yourself a gaff yet?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 13,382 ✭✭✭✭Geuze



    About the labour shortage, there are nearly 40,000 people on the Live Register whose last occupation was related to building.

    https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/lr/liveregistermarch2022/

    See table 5:

    Craft and related =22,000 approx

    Plant and machine operatives = 19,000 approx.

    Should the DSP approach these people and encourage them back into employment?



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,185 ✭✭✭DataDude


    Yep, sorted now. Was hopeful I’d stop watching houses and this forum, yet here I am!



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Lot of chat here recently about MNCs being put off, but good to see that Citi have just announced a Dublin expansion with another 300 new jobs.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,603 ✭✭✭Villa05


    1 yes there would be far less incidents as your building for need rather than profit. Further how many incidents have been reported in Northern Ireland, none that I'm aware of. if it was a virus one would be all over it and implementing the cheaper measures with accountability to prevent a reoccurrence that they have in place there

    2 they've been falling in 2020/21 plus the dropout rate is very high and the number of apprenticeship programs has increased so how many are actually construction related. Your how to milk a cow apprenticeship is not much good at laying blocks, although with the regulation in the Republic, you might get away with it.

    3 So when contemplating your future job, employment terms and the utter dysfunction of the industry are not considerations. Come on, you did not come down in the last shower



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


    Great little country. More evidence of the manipulation of our property market for the benefit of the few.

    An Bord Pleanála’s (ABP) deputy chairperson didn’t declare a conflict of interest when he refused planning permission for a development beside land owned by his property firm.


    ABP board members are required to declare material interests in planning applications under the Planning and Development Act 2000. Failure to do so is a criminal offence.


    Paul Hyde, who also serves as chairperson of the board’s strategic housing development (SHD) division, has a 25 percent shareholding in H20 Property Holdings Ltd, which owns the land in question. Though Hyde was required by law to declare this shareholding, he didn’t disclose it in the 2021 register of interests he submitted to An Bord Pleanála.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Thanks but if you sell after 2 years do you only pay 2/5 of the money back?



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,504 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves



    You are comparing apples and oranges.

    Since 1990 the population of NI has grown for 1.65 million to about 1.9 million less than a 15% increase. The population of the Republic has gone from 3.3 million to 5 million over a 50% increase.

    Because of this we have a younger population which add to housing demand

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Sorry, ignore above message, only seeing this now. Thanks Wassie.



  • Registered Users Posts: 615 ✭✭✭J_1980


    1 - does that include “incidents” like the Grenfell tower?


    except for natural monopolies (roads, railway) public sector spending is always wasteful. And even there is a big difference.

    There is a night/day difference between public and private(toll) roads in Italy/France. Private schools achieve MUCH better results with only marginally higher spending etc



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 995 ✭✭✭iColdFusion


    Jesus those third story roof windows are a total dogs dinner for a new build, could they be more "last minute tacked on Friday evening"?




Advertisement