The eviction ban

That's true. But just because you're temporary doesn't mean that the landlord should be able to kick you out whenever they want.

If however in the scenario I outlined above, the landlord offers me a longer term lease and pays less tax, the landlord still pays less tax whether i stay 1 year or 10 years.

It means that

1. I get the security of knowing that I won't be kicked out through no fault of my own.
2. The landlord pays less tax.

That's a win win for both sides.

If I leave, I give notice and the landlord has time to find another tenant. (If you want to can modify this. Say have an extra months deposit. Or a tenant database. Or a longer notice period etc... The long term lease isn't a solution by itself, it's just one aspect. But it changes property from a short term investment to a long term investment. People are still free to only offer short term lettings but they'd pay higher tax on the earnings.)

One organisation is. The govt and local authorities. Social and affordable housing is loss making. No one other the govt is going to be interested in that.

Trying to outsource those costs to private sector hasn't worked.

Depending on local authority LL used to be able to collect at source. It's was deliberately changed away from that. It's unlikely FFG will change it back.

But that's not the solution to the entire housing crisis. REITs are not the solution just one part of the solution.

Also remember those losses are not cost free, thats money that could be spent in other areas such as Health, education etc. You can let the government take over the rental market and have it loss making but that means a lot less money for other areas. The other people representing those other areas trade unions, charities, voters etc may not take too kindly to those measures when they get hit with cuts/ when expenditure doesn't match inflation as a result.

Edit just to clarify I'm not against local authorities renting at a loss, they have there place,like REITs and small landlords. Local authorities renting at a loss are not the full solution just one part of it.

Its the lack of housing at the bottom end that putting pressure upwards on the whole system. Its pushing that demand into the rest of the system. ITs all connected.

REITs are mainly focused at the max profit part of the market. The top end. They are mostly not a solution to anything housing related.

No it's not. Once again, I said it's one aspect. Here in Germany there's rules that state the apartment has to be in the same condition when you leave. The deposit is three months rent. So when I leave this apartment I will have to repaint it. If not, the landlord hires someone and takes the money from my deposit.

As for furniture and stuff like that, if it needs to be repaired or replaced due to natural wear and tear, then that should be built into the original rent. Renting a property is a business. landlords should plan for stuff like that and be putting part of the money away for it. It's a foreseeable expense. If they're too stupid to be able to plan for foreseeable expenses, they shouldn't be in the business of being a landlord.

Can you imagine a coffee shop owner that doesn't plan for maintenance of the coffee machines? Or a taxi driver that doesn't plan for basic maintenance on their car?

In your head is the average landlord a complete idiot? Are they incapable of this? Are they completely unable to offer a basic service? Because I don't think they're like that. I think they're capable of simple planning.

As for students, there's already tax exemptions for certain types of accommodation offered to them. Expand it. Make it so Sept - June leases are cheaper. It might be worth modifying it according to price range though so that we don't end up with a load of those luxury student accommodations and nothing at the lower end. Which is what we have now.

And as for the foreign workers coming in? The landlord can still offer them a longer lease. If they leave early, he finds someone else. He doesn't have to offer them a short term lease. He can if he wants them out at a certain time, but he doesn't have to. So he would still get the tax break. But if he will only offer leases that are shorter term, then he would be in a higher tax. If he says the max term anyone can stay is 3 months, then it's higher tax.

And this isn't about non paying tenants. It was about incentivising making property available for longer and giving tenants more security. Yes, there should be ways to remove a non paying tenant. No-one is saying otherwise. So honestly, that's a strawman. I made clear when I said it that this suggestion was one aspect and didn't cover everything. It was certainly not designed to be the only rule that applies to any tenancy, that would be madness. I said that you could add in additional details. You decided to completely ignore that. You decided to pretend that it was the only rule that would ever apply to any tenancy.

Are you incapable of expanding on your snide comments?

The CEO’s salary is in line with HSE pay scales and is aligned to point 4 for a HSE Director Regional Health Officer post under the Lansdowne Road Agreement. Peter McVerry Trust does not pay health insurance or provide the CEO with a company car nor is a fuel card provided. There are no top-ups paid to the CEO, senior management team or indeed any Peter McVerry Trust staff member.

All directors are voluntary and receive no remuneration.

Fr Peter McVerry is a founding company director and holds the office of company secretary. He receives no salary, expenses or allowances, nor ever has, for his continued and valuable contribution to Peter McVerry Trust and its challenge to reduce homelessness.

So smartarse tell me, how has Fr Peter McVerry influenced how other charities are run and their salary structures?

We have cash to invest.

We setup up ESB etc as Semi State bodies on a commercial basis for the provision of essential national infrastructure. ESB still returns hundreds of millions annually. Setting up a semi state Housing Development corporation with experts on the board and clear terms of reference should allow us to both invest on required housing infrastructure and achieve a return on that investment. The State could contract the agency for social housing but also the agency could identify opportunities to provide private accommodation on a commercial basis. They could also explore alternate methods of building. A significant proportion of the German housing stock for one is manufactured in factories so built slowly onsite. Biggest blocker to finding new ways of construction in this country are the vested interests who benefit from the status quo. What we are missing is leaders with the vision to propose such a solution and the balls to keep it away from vested interests.

The CEO earns between €110k and €120k, which is what I claimed. Go beyond the publicity blurb which you copied and pasted (without even acknowledging that you copied and pasted it direct from the website) and look at the detailed accounts:

500k goes to chuggers, think of that the next time you drop money in a box. They are not the only charity with high-paying salaries and paid chuggers, but they are among the leading lights. I have no time for charities with bloated administrative structures like this.

It's covered with the deposit. That's what a deposit is for. And I suggested having larger deposits. Also, and I'm going to be sarcastic now, I forgot no-one follows the law in Ireland. We're all just starting fights, stealing money and peeing on the floor of our rented apartment.

Also, we need more social housing. We shouldn't be relying on HAP.

Last time I let, I looked for almost 2 months rent as a deposit (it was a nice round number).

I think they've restricted that since then to 1 month max, so further eroding the few (if any) safeguards for landlords.

And having lived and rented as a tenant in Germany (albeit a long time ago, but I've no reason to believe it's changed much), and lived and rented as a landlord here, I would broadly agree that you are far more likely to run into rogue tenants here than there. The mindsets are just poles apart.

(I too lived in an apartment where the kitchen belonged to the guy I was subletting from - it was and still is one of the madder things I ever came across, could never quite get my head around it!)

Size of the deposit is irrelevant if you any costs above it can't be recovered, and there's no penalty for causing them, unpaid rent, damage etc.

How well do any laws work in Ireland when so little enforcement or penalty.

Besides German has its own crisis. Though I will say its laws are much better.

This thread is kinda going around in circles now. From reading through it I think most people can agree on the key facts:

• The governments of the last 10 years have made a total mess of the rental market
• One cause of the mess has been mismanagement due largely to the introduction of populist policies, which was entirely avoidable (rent control, bans on notices to quit etc.)
• Another cause is the lack of supply, which was more problematic due to multiple factors such as covid, construction labour and materials shortages, planning objections to new builds
• a further cause is the large increase in population in parallel to the supply issues, including refugees from war torn countries
• The government opposition have also played a large part in contributing to the problems, pushing populist policies which have led to supply leaving the rental market, and consistently objecting to new developments which were intended to increase supply
• Charity organisations have also unwittingly and unfortunately contributed to the issues
• A large portion of the rental suppliers, private individual suppliers, have totally lost confidence in the government and it's policies, plus the opposition and their proposed policies, and are leaving the market as part of a mass exodus - leading to an ongoing supply crisis
• The loss of confidence is related to fears of property rights being eroded - in some cases leading to vacant properties and letting only to transient renters like students (ironically students have now become a favoured tentant, a big turnaround) as the property owner needs to know they will be able access the property if and when required
• There is NO short term solution, this will get worse before it gets better. Tokenistic gestures like tax breaks for private suppliers will not suffice, a fundamental overhaul is required.
• Regarding all the parliamentary parties, NO-ONE is blameless, whether in government or opposition, all of them have contributed to the issues

Have I missed anything? Factual I mean.