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

It wouldn't make sense to jump ship now in that scenario, it would make sense to wait until tenants leave/have somewhere else to go, and then quietly remove the property.

Evicting tenants when there are almost no rentals on the market will just draw attention to someone involved in tax evasion, as the tenants will be on to the RTB and threshold potentially looking for assistance. There are so few rentals on the market tenants have nowhere to go.

Not related to tax evasion but just making the point again - when small landlords get out their tenants will be looking at finding new places with much higher rents in most cases, because the only available supply is coming from new builds and REITS at new market high rents.

The 14% annual rises we see reported in advertised rents will work their way through the whole rental market in spite of the RPZ, as small landlords leave.

The market is a regulated into a mess

I know an Indian guy who bought a property ln dublin city and rents it, I asked about RTB reg and taxation

He put his hand on my shoulder and "my friend that of no interest to me I wouldn't make money if I did".

I said you are breaking the law 1 of your tenants might report you.

He laughs its ok I hold all their passports.

So it makes logical sense that LL are jumping ship the rate of which has constantly increased for the last 5-6 years over a tax change that happened in last September's budget.

There has been a few of us on here have pointed out the issues for the last 12+ months. We pointed out that small LL were exiting before it was ever highlighted in the media. We pointed out the trends before it became public and now @The Spider plucked a story out of his hole that he heard from a banker friend.

The reason small LL are leaving is because the ROI no longer justifies the risk. It has more to do with regulations, dealing with the RTB, and the inability to get a house returned to you.

Houses that are temporary vacant can no longer rented. Look at the great nursing home scheme they bought in a poster indictated that 4 houses took it up nationwide.

Small LL did not increase rent annually and got screwed over by the changes in regulations. That obviously had nothing to do with them leaving.

No it was that they were all tax dodgers.

Nobody is arguing in favour of tax evasion. If this scheme highlights some tax evaders to Revenue - great. All the tax compliant folk will be delighted. The extent to which tax evasion is a factor in the private rental sector is an unknown. There are no reliable stats. Personally, I reckon the level of non-compliance is pretty low. Revenue have data from the RTB, stamp duty on purchases etc. already. I doubt many are dumb enough to chance it nowadays.

As with all the government schemes of recent years, none of it tackles the reason for small LLs leaving. There is nothing to help evict non-paying, anti-social or overholding tenants. There is nothing to address incomes being frozen in RPZ's when input costs (interest rates, repair costs etc.) are all increasing.

We need a solution which increases supply of rentals. That is the best protection tenants can receive. Eviction bans and rent tax credits are just sticking plasters - they dont fix the leaking bucket.

It could be the case that some are getting out because they have to start paying tax and then it isn't worth it.

But the issue there is still that it isn't worth it under the current regulations and taxation etc., the fact they weren't paying tax before isn't the cause of them getting out, it's that they have something better to do with the money, so it's the same theme - it just isn't appealing for small landlords to stay in.

If you know of some not paying tax then they must not be registered so how can they give an eviction notice, sure it would be worthless

If you don't pay tax on certain income, and that goes on for a few years, and the Revenue catch you (rather than you disclosing it before they land on your doorstep....or even worse fail to disclose when they do land on your doorstep) then be prepared for your backtax and penalties to be more than 100% of that income. People who file their own returns (rather than just letting their employer do it for their PAYE) will, by and large, be aware of this.

So it isn't just a case of "sure if they land on my door, I'll just have to pay it on future income".

Do you now know about the new tax credit? Tenants can apply for a tax credit by basically filling out a form (online presumably) and sending it to revenue. The form, as I understand it, basically says "I pay SwimClub X amount of rent and I began my tenancy on 1st Jan 20?? so please give me my 500 quid. Thanks". Up to this, there was no incentive for that tenant to do that. Nor any mechanism aside from regular informing. And if the tenant had a good deal - perhaps even below market value - they might be remiss to inform and likely lose their tenancy. You appear (from many of your posts on here) to be under the apprehension that the only dynamic between a landlord and a tenant is one of a perpetual battle between the two.

Read the article posted by The Spider above.

Revenue can't, and don't, audit everyone. They are far from stupid though. Put yourself in the shoes of a manager in Revenue. Lets suppose Paddy and Mick both bought houses in 2008. You can tell from their Stamp Duty payments. Both are PAYE workers and don't file for any additional income. Paddy suddenly registered as a landlord for 2022 and his tenant claimed their tax credits. Mick just has his PAYE returns as normal.

Now, which one would you be more likely to choose for an audit? Now you have 100 Paddys and 100 Micks and you have time to audit 10. Which group are you likely to audit more of?

(BTW, the fact that very few people have claimed their credit for last year as of yet would indicate to me that there are a large number of tenants out there that are worried about causing trouble for their landlords and losing their tenancies!.......perhaps waiting until the last minute to claim their credit.) https://www.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/tax/over-300000-have-yet-to-claim-new-tax-credit-for-renters-42308646.html

There are people in long term landlord-tenant relationships which predate all this registration etc. There are also people who let to others, not necessarily friends, on favourable conditions. Because they didn't want any hassle and figured the tenant wouldn't bother them if they had a good deal. And that tenant could be still there 10 years later. Happy out.

Going on about the percentage of investors selling residential properties is a nonsense unless you have something to compare it to. Is this like the story that was published a few years ago that implied that many people taking sick days do it to extend their weekend - and that this was backed by the survey which found that 40% of sick days were taken either side of the weekend?

Well you could be right on not causing trouble for the landlord, but don’t underestimate the amount of tenants doing nixers, working on the side or have other things going on that they don’t tell the taxman about, this particularly goes towards IT workers, software engineers, designers etc, combined with a general reluctance to get on revenues radar, they may not be doing any nixers now, but they may have done stuff in the past they didn’t pay tax on and are paranoid about it.

You have recourse to the civil courts for anyone who doesn't pay you rent the same as anyone who owes you any other debt.

The issue that many appear to have problems getting their head around is that they have freely and willingly given the tenant possession of their property. That gives the tenant certain rights as it becomes their home. If the tenant stops paying you, you will get rid of him eventually and you can pursue them for any debt. Now, you might not get any of it back but that is actually a separate issue to your problem of getting them out.

Someone stealing your money would be a criminal act. They could get convicted in a court but that would not guarantee you getting your money back. The person not paying you rent is not analagous to someone who stole your wallet. They are closer to someone whom you loaned money to but didn't pay you back. No matter how emotional you get about it, that is the reality.

We all know that Donald. We do not need to be told. However eventually is a 12 month minimum process. There is cases at present where people are finally being evicted after a three years process. Everything is a separate issue but as the saying goes there is only one left holding the baby.

Your should read your previous post that is quoted above. This is one reason landlords are leaving there properties vacant.

One thing that comes clearly into focus it's clear you have a visceral dislike of landlord especially smaller LL who who have often described as ''have a go LL''.

Yours is not an rational analysis of the present situation. You are blinded by dare I say hatred of those who provide rental accommodation.

You have contributed to to threads where you even lacked empathy where people who only have one property, temporary rented returned to Ireland and could not get there home returned to them.

My only advice to any LL who get a property vacant in the next while is consider the risk before reletting. Definitely if I was a LL with a property with seriously below market rent I would be very reluctant to relet the property

Landlords only have a theoretical recourse to civil court for non-payment of rent or property damage. The reality is very different. Sometimes, you cant trace a defaulting tenant when they leave. They dont normally leave a forwarding address to allow papers to be served. They may not even stay in the country. If you do track them down, the judge will likely give a judgement for payment of small amounts over a long period. After 2 years of non-payment of rent, you could easily have a bill of 30k or more. Getting a judgement to repay that at a fiver a week will take a couple of years just to pay the legal fees - its a useful as a chocolate teapot.

Application to court for an eviction without recourse to the RTB where rent arrears are over 3 months should be introduced (but wont be). Occupancy of someone else's property without any attempt/intent to pay for a prolonged period should be criminalised (but wont be).

Just to note, Dublin City Council are owed over 37m in rent arrears. Maybe if that was collected it could pay for some more social housing as well.

At what stage does the legal process diverge? And who makes that decision as to what laws apply? Is it just split into two in terms of the rules for "landlords" vs "everyone else", or is there a separate set of processes and rights for say mechanics who are owed money vs landlords vs bakery owners etc?

The truth is that the right of recourse is the same for everyone. A landlord might find it difficult to get his money in the same way that a mechanic would. Landlords do not have some kind of special victim status in that regard.

The RIA couldn't even get their 6k invoice paid by Sinn Fein.........

If I am a mechanic I do not have to keep fixing someone's car who has not paid me for work done 12-18 months before.

You post some nonsense with you comparisons. They are not apt.