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

i tend to agree with that view as these houses are a money pit but are just built in a desirable location because of schools, transport links and amenities.

asking prices for average houses in counties like laois down the country are now up 20% in under a year to 265,000 euros

many are ex rentals requiring substantial expensive work

about 50% of purchasers are from outside the county

the new 430,000 euro government so called affordable homes cant come soon enough ......

Nonsense.

All you have to do is read the property supplement on the weekend, where the EA will go on about a house and what they expect it to fetch, while its asking price is lower.
I've seen it many times myself.

Underquoting the asking price is a trick EA's use to push up the price overall. It's pretty undeniable tbh.

The only questions that remain are.

• You are OK with it, as you are fine with these outcomes, or
• Unscuploptis tactics should not be allowed

Hold on. Didn't you die on this hill that the EA had no bearing on the price and it was purely the market that set the price?

Now you are admitting that the EA deliberately sets the price low, to create a fuss and send the actual sales price a lot higher than the original asking price.

Im sure they would also be happy if someone bid the asking price before them, but they had another €10,000 to spend and when they try to offer it the EA says, no, sorry, the house has been sold for the asking price. You just got in there a bit too late, so keep you 10k and keep looking.

You never know if you rent a house and rent if you can sell it when you need the money.

You dont know what new regulations will be here next year never mind further on. You are basically giving full control of your assets to someone else for all the control you are left with. Paying rent or giving the property back is optional to the tenant.

Thats not for me.

I invested 70k in ETFs from a redundancy in 2017. I never touched it. Im happy with the growth. If I wanted to cash it today I could. There will be tax to pay, but i cant complain. Its totally hands off. Automatic €500 goes into it every month. It requires zero work from me.

We bought a house this year. Decided not to touch the savings apart for from the deposit as they make more than the interest on the loan anyway. We could have got a bigger house, or paid a chunk off but i dont think it would have worked out for us. And I was able to stop the €500 gong into the ETFs with once click of a mouse while we got ourselves settled into the house and start it again when i was happy to.

I think there are more phantom phantom bids these days tbh.

At an auction, once the hammer falls, you are committed to buying. Private treaty is different of course, but I think most people expend a bit of time and effort on research at least before making a purchase. And also with their bank.

What myself, and others have tried in vain to explain to you, is that EAs do not have a crystal ball to see into the future, and foresee what people are willing to bid on a property.

There are therefore incompetent and bad at their job.

If EAs are constantly under-quoting and property sells for much higher consistently, questions should be asked on why they are so bad at their job. And that is being polite about it.

An EA is a sales person

A sales person who needs to be qualified and hold a license in a regulated industry. Let's not pretend they are selling fruit on Abbey Street now.

Ideally, the vendor wants multiple bidders bidding against each other, and if the guide gets them interested in bidding, then the EA has done their job well.

Ding ding ding..

We have a winner!

Yes, that is exactly why EAs systematically underquote across the industry. To generate a bidding war and manipulate people into paying more for a property than they otherwise would.

At best it's ethically and morally questionable, at worst it's a practice that should be outlawed.

 then that person really has no one to blame but themselves if they overpay for a property.

Hilarious. You are dismissing decades of research into behavioural economics in your pursuit of the pure idea that every single human who wants to involve himself in a real estate transition is perfectly rational and logical. But then you admit that when an EA manipulates the market, on purpose mind you, that is OK as well, as only suckers will overpay anyway..

Banks really should ensure that borrowers understand the basics of bidding on property before they hand over huge sums of money.

As you should know, any property buyer will need to get an independent valuation from an Estate Agency. So on one hand, the banks and the buyer trust that the valuation is given from an estate agent, but then sure, it's the market that decides anyway, isn't that right, so the valuation could be way off and really does it matter?

I am wondering has there been any cases, where a bank refuses a mortgage because the valuation given doesn't match the final price?

10 years ago houses regularly went for under asking and what they were really worth…

Really worth according to who?

I think you neither understand what an EAs job is, who he works for or how selling a property work.

You would like all the cogs in the machine to favour you. But you need a clear understanding of whos job what is.

I thin like everyone else in the thread, answering you again will be just banging my head against a wall, so you are on your own from here on in.

I wasnt arguing with you :)

You would like all the cogs in the machine to favour you.

Favour? Don't be ridiculous.

Transparent, with an ethical backbone and act according to their regulations, yes.

You bidded against yourself on this house!!

The same argument would conclude that there is no need for any regulators in any Irish market. Banking/Insurance/Energy/Telecommunications/Waste Management etc. etc

Even your local authority. I mean, if there is corruption in your local council, you would be free to go and live elsewhere. Why the need for an Ombudsman so?…………….

As I also alluded to above, why not sell off Irish Water infrastructure? I'm sure some big hedge fund might be interested in it - especially if there will be no regulation or price control. People will have freedom to contract with them or not. So all good.

If your local car salesman sells you a 4 year old car with only 20k miles and assures you that it is in fine condition and never been crashed, then why do we need laws to protect you if it turns out to have been a clocked car with 100k miles on it that was actually written off in a crash? I mean, you had the freedom to contract with him or not if you felt he was a bit immoral/unethical.

Buying and selling property is done so in a free market.

If you think that the property market in Ireland is 'free' I have some magic beans to sell you.

It's one of the most regulated and controlled markets in the state.

 if either party feels there is immoral/unethical activity then don't do business with them pure and simple.

Ah, thats grand so.

Talk about sticking ones head in the sand.

This is the fundamental principle of any business transaction we all undertake every single day of our lives.

Yet, if you buy a pair of socks in JD Sports, the buyer/consumer will have more protection than someone bidding on a property.

Why do you feel the sale/purchase of a property should be any different

It would be great if the property sector came into line with consumer protection in other areas and markets. Why do you think it should stay the same? Should we not demand better consumer protections?

The fairest way to decide what an item is worth is let the market decide.

So you want to strip away the small-ish protections buyers have, and make it a wild west of uber capitalism?

Should we do away with building compliance while we are at it? After all, sure let the market decide and if a house caves in on itself killing people inside, sure you are the sucker who bought it. Am I right?

Regulation does exist in the Estate Agent sector it is not a free for all as you are trying to allude to in your post above. Some regulation is needed in the markets you highlight but it has to be balanced with market efficiencies (whether you want to accept that principle or not).

It is free whether you wish to accept that concept or not. You are not forced to participate you choose to.

You have protection in employing your engineer to inspect the property before purchasing same (deciding if the price is a fair price based on the findings of your engineer etc). You can sue an engineer etc (that's why they have professional insurance).

You also have protection in the contract you sign when purchasing a property.

Building compliance should remain where exactly did I suggest otherwise?

There is a body the Property Services Regulatory Authority but I am sure you knew that.

It is free whether you wish to accept that concept or not.

Cognitive dissonance is strong here.

You don't seem to understand what a Free Market is. The concept has one more to do with economic trade, tariff-free commerce, no trade barriers, and competition between privately owned businesses.

To use that term in the concept of Ireland's property market is a bit of nonsense.

You are not forced to participate you choose to.

Never mind that interacting with the property market is not a choice as if buying a pair of socks.

Access to shelter is a right, so it is proper that the sector is tightly regulated in parts and has good consumer protections built into it. Be it if you are buying or selling a house, or renting one or renting it out.

You have protection in employing your engineer to inspect the property before purchasing same (deciding if the price is a fair price based on the findings of your engineer etc). You can sue an engineer etc (that's why they have professional insurance).

Can I sue the EA given they appear to have engaged in phantom bids?

Building compliance should remain where exactly did I suggest otherwise?

What about the 'Free Market'?

One persons opinion of "sharp practice" is another persons opinion of the operation of a market. You decide which one you feel it is and act accordingly.

of course you can sue but where is your evidence? Or is it just a suspicion based on a gut feeling?

The other bid could have been genuine and they pulled out when got outbid and bought a different house…. From what I can see it’s just a feeling without evidence to back it up so unlikely you would be successful in any legal action.

You are speaking in riddles now.

You want it each and every way. You claim the industry is regulated, but then spout on about a free market. You go on about the 'choice' one has to engage and if they feel something is off, one can disengage, but you make a claim about regulation and oversight which appears to be null and void. So the consumer has little recourse anyway.

We bought a 3-bed mid terrace house last November and ended up paying €40k over asking. It was at the edge of our budget and we felt that, for the size of the property, we were overpaying at the time.

Fast-forward 7 months and one of our neighbours has just sold their house for €150k more than we bought for. Exact same house type and layout. Another house in the same row also sold for €100k more than our place. It's absolute madness at the moment.