Winter 21/22 Eviction Ban (was: And just like that, FFFG lose 298000 votes))

Question here, if someone gets a lease for a year on a property and that lease is up and they’re issued with an eviction notice, is that a no fault eviction, or is it just letting them know the contract has ended?

The law is so skewed against landlords that as soon as a tenant reaches 6 months on the lease, they are entitled to a Part 4 Tenancy, which basically means the end date on the lease has no real weight to it any more, unless it is an end date within the first 6 months. The tenant can effectively stay for years on the provisions of that initial lease unless the landlord has cause under very limited conditions to terminate the tenancy.

LINK: https://www.rtb.ie/ending-a-tenancy/ending-a-fixed-term-tenancy/what-is-a-fixed-term-tenancy-what-is-a-part-4-tenancy

And who will these people vote for SF PBP Labour they would all do the same. He'll I say the first 2 would ban paying rent or lower it to a small level

And what will that do. You just allowing it to continue and in my mind if you couldn't be bothered to vote then you can't complain of what is voted

That doesn't work around it.

If I am correct, it's not the lease itself, I believe it's the actual occupation duration. Two back-to-back leases without a break would still likely define a tenant's occupation meeting the threshold for becoming a part 4 tenancy. For example, if a landlord rented a property on a 5 month lease, but allowed the tenant to continue to reside there for a further 2 months without terminating the lease and having them vacate the property, they would exceed the threshold regardless of the end date of the lease being overdue. As I said, the law is very much skewed against landlords.

To take a challenge you need standing, and lots of money. And an exceptionally strong argument.

Very few people have one of these, let alone all three.

The large firms/funds that may have the money are not in a position to make claims of needing properties back for family members, so wouldn't have standing to make that specific argument.

seriously, whats the craic with folks using terms such as communism, seriously, grow up!

yes, we should not be implementing polices that benefits only tenents, while directly screws landlords, a debt moratorium should also be implemented along side this ban, no wonder landlords are running, and i wouldnt blame them either

the reality is, the only solution to this mess is further state interventions, but virtually opposite to what ffg have been doing, theyre truly heading to the opposition benches for a very long time, and the mess could be so severe, sf may not be able to resolve it!

Are there really 298,000 small landlords in this Republic renting out accommodation? If so, how did we get so screwed up on this idea of owning property and the more the better? A hangover from the so called '800 years of occupation'?

I don’t know about the amount of landlords but if there are, the reason is the last crash, late 90’s early 2000’s the banks, the government, businesses every part of the system with authority were telling people to buy houses, that renting was for idiots and it was dead money. Banks were giving interest only and 100% mortgages, taxi drivers were buying apartments in sunny beach Bulgaria, crash happened end of 2007-2008, and suddenly all those ‘starter homes that people had bought were in negative equity.

People had a choice, sell the property at a loss or stay and hope prices go up, most of the people who bought were in their 20’s, 30’s life went on they either had kids or met other people (who may also have had a property) and suddenly the starter home they were saddled with wasn’t fit for purpose, but they couldn’t sell it or they’d be in debt.

So what do they do, they rented them out in the hope that some day they’d be back at the price they paid for them, they moved in with their significant other, or in a lot of cases rented out the starter home to cover the mortgage, while they rented a bigger house if they had kids in the intervening years.

The government sat on its hands and didn’t bother with social housing because weren’t there loads of places to rent and the owners of the properties couldn’t sell them on, so the government just gave HAP payments instead.

Rollonto 2021, property prices have risen, finally those people who never really wanted to be landlords can sell their properties and exit negative equity, they’d essentially been providing a housing service for the best part of two decades without being paid because even if the rent was 2 grand a month the government were taking back 52%, what they had left certainly didn’t cover fees, mortgage and all the rest but it was a help towards it.

This gives the lie to people shouting about paying a landlords mortgage and the landlord would have an asset at the end of it, they won’t those mortgages will be doing well if the interest is paid, the principle is still outstanding.

So here we are all those people have decided to sell and exit without being in debt, and what does the government do after those people played ball for over 16 years? They decided to block them selling their houses with an eviction ban because the government didn’t bother with its responsibilities and build the houses it promised, it’s completely and utterly unfair on those people.

Of course there’s way to keep people from selling that is fair and not verging on the unconstitutional, and that’s to cut taxes on rental income if you cut it to 12% no5 only would you have people not selling you’d have more people invest in BTL’s if a small landlor€ could have a profit of 5-600 euro a month after tax they probably wouldn’t sell, it’s not rocket science, they cut corporation tax and boom we have every significant tech and pharmaceutical company using Ireland as its European hq