Typical stubron Irish

mastermind2005 · 14-01-2008 5:51pm #1

Almost 220,000 houses and apartments are lying vacant across Ireland as the country's rental crisis worsens, the Sunday Tribune has learned. Despite an increase in rent of up to 20% in the last 12 months, 41,600 apartments and 174,900 houses remain unoccupied as the reality of over-building in the past five years starts to hit home. These figures do not include the 50,000 vacant holiday homes around Ireland, or the 30,000 other temporarily vacant properties around the country.

Figures confirmed by the Central Statistics Office (CSO) show that nearly 11,000 housing units lie vacant in the Fingal area of Dublin, 10,000 in the Dublin City Council region, 3,000 in South Dublin and nearly 2,400 in Dun Laoghaire Rathdown. In Cork City, the figure is over 4,000. Limerick has over 3,000 empty houses and apartments, Galway around 1,300 and Waterford over 1,200.

The level of vacancy in Ireland has rocketed since the last available figures in 2002.

In 2006, 174,900 houses, 41,600 apartments and flats, and 50,000 holiday homes, were deemed empty . . . a total figure of 266,500 properties.

In 2002, the figure was just 104,000. The CSO is surprised by the rise. A spokesman said, "In the case of these vacant homes, the (census) enumerator would have gone back to the houses repeatedly to ensure they were actually vacant. . . The vacancy rate has doubled in a four year period. There is evidence that there are a lot of houses out there vacant."

Planning expert Fergal McCabe expressed his astonishment at the figures. "They are surprisingly high, " he said. "It's probably a combination of a few things, including investor purchases that can't be let or sold." In total, 15% of Ireland's available housing is now vacant. Developers in Ireland are currently building houses and apartments at a rate of 20 units per 1,000/population. This is nearly ten times the average European rate, which works out at between two and four housing units per 1,000 people

Extract From http://www.tribune.ie/

Wishbone Ash · 14-01-2008 5:56pm

mastermind2005 wrote: »

Almost 220,000 houses and apartments are lying vacant across Ireland as the country's rental crisis worsens, the Sunday Tribune has learned. Despite an increase in rent of up to 20% in the last 12 months, 41,600 apartments and 174,900 houses remain unoccupied as the reality of over-building in the past five years starts to hit home. These figures do not include the 50,000 vacant holiday homes around Ireland, or the 30,000 other temporarily vacant properties around the country.

Figures confirmed by the Central Statistics Office (CSO) show that nearly 11,000 housing units lie vacant in the Fingal area of Dublin, 10,000 in the Dublin City Council region, 3,000 in South Dublin and nearly 2,400 in Dun Laoghaire Rathdown. In Cork City, the figure is over 4,000. Limerick has over 3,000 empty houses and apartments, Galway around 1,300 and Waterford over 1,200.

The level of vacancy in Ireland has rocketed since the last available figures in 2002.

In 2006, 174,900 houses, 41,600 apartments and flats, and 50,000 holiday homes, were deemed empty . . . a total figure of 266,500 properties.

In 2002, the figure was just 104,000. The CSO is surprised by the rise. A spokesman said, "In the case of these vacant homes, the (census) enumerator would have gone back to the houses repeatedly to ensure they were actually vacant. . . The vacancy rate has doubled in a four year period. There is evidence that there are a lot of houses out there vacant."

Planning expert Fergal McCabe expressed his astonishment at the figures. "They are surprisingly high, " he said. "It's probably a combination of a few things, including investor purchases that can't be let or sold." In total, 15% of Ireland's available housing is now vacant. Developers in Ireland are currently building houses and apartments at a rate of 20 units per 1,000/population. This is nearly ten times the average European rate, which works out at between two and four housing units per 1,000 people

Extract From http://www.tribune.ie/

How is that connected with Irish people being stubborn?

What point are you trying to make?

indiewindy · 14-01-2008 6:08pm

Pride comes before a fall

Mr. Incognito · 14-01-2008 6:14pm

Baa...........Baa..........

Victor · 14-01-2008 6:34pm

I wonder if the CSO will break down the details by locality.

seahorse · 14-01-2008 8:33pm

Well if those figures are to be believed Mastermind people must be particularly stubborn in North County Dublin, where you and I live!

How Strange · 15-01-2008 10:32am

hmm, I wonder how these figures will be affected when the absolutely huge developments in Dublin 8 are completed. I think there are about five in construction at the moment; HSQ, Chocolate Box and something Quay (the old barracks) are the ones that spring to mind.

There is also a skyscraper type thing being built on the Canal near Goldenbridge. There is a new block finished just off the Nangor Rd near the Naas Rd interchange. The blurb says it offers quality living on the door step of the city or some such crap claiming to be near the luas and buses - yes if you don't mind a 15 minute walk.

I'd say there are alot of nervous developers out and that's a serious amount of units to be sold in one area over the next year.

A slight off topic observation with regards to these new developments - if someone buys in a new development and the developer is forced to retain a lot of units or in the case of a larger development being built in phases; to stall building of the remaining phases for the foreseeable future that may have a huge impact on owners in terms of management companies.

By this I mean, the developers can become landlords and rent (as is currently happening) so therefore the majority of the members of the MC would be one person/company. Also, that majority shareholder would hold control until the development is completed and last unit sold so either way if there are any structural defects which are only discovered after a few years which is quite common. Then its a case of good luck to the poor feckers who bought their apartments as there will be a serious conflict of interest in the MC. The majority shareholders (developers) are hardly going to vote against themselves at an AGM/EGM to pursue the developers (themselves) to pursue resolving structural issues. A second example would be pursuing the developer as landlord for unpaid service charges. How will the MC take legal action against a majority shareholder if that shareholder votes against it? As the area of MC's is currently unregulated I don't think there is anything to prevent this scenario.

Bottom line, be aware of this possibility when buying apartments/houses in new developments. As I said its only an observation so I'm interested in other people's opinions.

gurramok · 15-01-2008 10:47am

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

How is that connected with Irish people being stubborn?

What point are you trying to make?

Think he means greed to be more appropiate.

There is no housing shortage. Think of all those homeless dying on the streets who could be housed in an instant, think of the rental market where rents could nosedive if these empty homes were leased, thats the stubborn part!

162,000 gaffs built since 2002 lying empty, thats greed by speculators.:mad:

Morlar · 15-01-2008 11:41am

gurramok wrote: »

162,000 gaffs built since 2002 lying empty, thats greed by speculators.:mad:

Is it not possible a large number of those will be rented out under the radar ?

dazberry · 15-01-2008 1:20pm

How Strange wrote: »

hmm, I wonder how these figures will be affected when the absolutely huge developments in Dublin 8 are completed. I think there are about five in construction at the moment; HSQ, Chocolate Box and something Quay (the old barracks) are the ones that spring to mind.

I live in D8, and yes there is a crazy number of developments going on - and the ones you list are the bigger ones - in Inchicore for instance they're still trying to sell units where the old cinema was, more empty units in the development across from the Oblate church, another 4 or 5 developments on Emmet Rd, another small one on Grattan Crescent, seems to be a big development or two on the Bow Bridge side of Kilmainham too. Not forgetting the old OPW site and some old ex-commerical sites along the canal on the Red line too that are ear marked for apartments afaik.

The interesting thing is that the second hand apartment prices in the area have plummeted - (2 bed) circa 400K down to 315K (presently) and will likely continue falling as there is a large excess of stock. Second hand house prices are also falling - these are a bit more sticky price wise but have still seen reductions in some cases up to 50K (8% - again 2 bed) and considering the varying quality of stock its likely to ratchet down another level soon.

Beyond stock levels, the new apartments are all pretty expensive - is a one bed in the chocolate factory at 350K - actually worth 130K more than a second hand 220k one bed in the Tramyard? How long can this continue???

D.

mastermind2005 · 15-01-2008 1:26pm

@ wishbone - what gurramok said

@ seahorse - do we live together?

i know what you mean, your exactly right, i watch houses on the northside such as http://www.daft.ie/searchsale.daft?search=Search+%BB&s[cc_id]=ct1&s[a_id][0]=2838&s[mnb]=&s[mxb]=&s[mnp]=&s[mxp]=&s[pt_id]=&s[house_type]=&s[mna]=&s[mxa]=&s[search_type]=sale&s[transport]=&s[advanced]=&s[price_per_room]=&s[refreshmap]=1&offset=30&limit=10&id=280096 which hasnt dropped a single cent and its been on the market months and months and months. stubron feckers, and im sure there wondering why noone is buying????? a house is only worth what someone will pay for it not what you think its worth....

qwertyphobia · 15-01-2008 1:36pm

In D8 as well and I have a few under 10 mins walk from me. The one at junction of Herbuton rd and the canal there seams to be some vacant in that. Also the Fatima redevelopment and the Basin lane tower thingy which will be finishing up soon. Also vacent apartments in the one at the top of Pim st just around the cornor from the basin lane one.

seahorse · 15-01-2008 2:46pm

dazberry wrote: »

Beyond stock levels, the new apartments are all pretty expensive - is a one bed in the chocolate factory at 350K - actually worth 130K more than a second hand 220k one bed in the Tramyard? How long can this continue???

LOL, is that a nickname they've been given or are they seriously called the chocolate box/factory??? :eek:

As to how long it'll continue; it'll continue as long as people are prepared to pay 130k more for a new apartment or as long as the developers have the cheek to ask for it. Are people really paying that much in the difference? Surely they cant be? Or is it just a case of the developers chancing their arms and being left with unsold stock as a result?

seahorse · 15-01-2008 2:56pm

mastermind2005 wrote: »

@ wishbone - what gurramok said

@ seahorse - do we live together? i know what you mean, your exactly right, i watch houses on the northside such as http://www.daft.ie/searchsale.daft?search=Search+%BB&s[cc_id]=ct1&s[a_id][0]=2838&s[mnb]=&s[mxb]=&s[mnp]=&s[mxp]=&s[pt_id]=&s[house_type]=&s[mna]=&s[mxa]=&s[search_type]=sale&s[transport]=&s[advanced]=&s[price_per_room]=&s[refreshmap]=1&offset=30&limit=10&id=280096 which hasnt dropped a single cent and its been on the market months and months and months. stubron feckers, and im sure there wondering why noone is buying????? a house is only worth what someone will pay for it not what you think its worth....

Ah well, what'll happen there is, with the direction the market's currently headed, they'll end up with less the longer they hold out. You'd think they'd know that, wouldn't you? That's a typical example of how a persons greed can come back and bite them in the arse.

Amberman · 15-01-2008 2:57pm

The reality is that people (especially greedy speculators) have no idea how to value a house and assume that interest rates at levels not seen for more than half a century will remain at that level for the duration of their buy to let mortgage. Im not even gonna start talking about buying property as a capital appreciation asset Versus as an income producing asset...once people buy property and subsidise tenants in the hunt for capital appreciation, the game is almost up...Im just surprised it lasted as long as it did...pretty stubborn (or greedy/stupid) indeed of the speculators. I sold over 18 months ago...both I and the buyer were delighted.

This is gonna be an awesome crash and it will make those recent crashes in Australia and America look tame.

dazberry · 15-01-2008 3:40pm

seahorse wrote: »

LOL, is that a nickname they've been given or are they seriously called the chocolate box/factory??? :eek:

It used to be a chocolate factory (Roantree? - Kitkat) - hence the name.

As to how long it'll continue; it'll continue as long as people are prepared to pay 130k more for a new apartment or as long as the developers have the cheek to ask for it. Are people really paying that much in the difference? Surely they cant be? Or is it just a case of the developers chancing their arms and being left with unsold stock as a result?

Probably being carried to some extent by the momentium of those units that were bought off the plans in say 2005/2006 - but have only been recently completed. Otherwise section 23 seems to have a lot to do with it.

D.

mastermind2005 · 15-01-2008 4:21pm

seahorse wrote: »

Ah well, what'll happen there is, with the direction the market's currently headed, they'll end up with less the longer they hold out. You'd think they'd know that, wouldn't you? That's a typical example of how a persons greed can come back and bite them in the arse.

your dead right... a short term loss for a long term gain...

I prefare stubron, the houses are loosing value... around 1% per month which on a 400k house is around 4k yet you have people with houses on the market 6-12 months and not dropping a penny! typical.

are you gonna buy yourself

seahorse · 15-01-2008 4:39pm

dazberry wrote: »

It used to be a chocolate factory (Roantree? - Kitkat) - hence the name.

Oh right; I'm a northsider so I'd be more familiar with Cadburys, lol.

dazberry wrote: »

Probably being carried to some extent by the momentium of those units that were bought off the plans in say 2005/2006 - but have only been recently completed. Otherwise section 23 seems to have a lot to do with it.

D.

I don't know anything about section 23; I've heard of it but don't know what it means. I'd imagine it's some sort of tax incentive. Would you mind explaining it to me?

punchestown · 15-01-2008 4:51pm

Section 23 Relief
Section 23 Type Relief provides tax relief for the capital expenditure incurred on the construction, refurbishment or conversion of rented residential accommodation. Section 23 Relief is a tax deductible rental ("Case V") expense or loss. Any rental loss created as a result of this deduction may be set-off against any other Irish rental income of the taxpayer in the current or subsequent periods.
The relief is calculated by reference to the price paid to the property developer. The price paid for the site does not qualify for relief, therefore calculation of the relief is based on a percentage of total cost. The developer will usually identify the percentage (usually 80-95%) of the total costs incurred by him which relate directly to the construction/ conversion. This percentage is the qualifying amount of the purchase price paid. Thus, an apartment costing €200,000 which has a qualifying cost of 90% would attract a Section 23 allowance of €180,000.

To illustrate how this relief can be used, take the following example. An apartment costing €200,000 may have a 90% qualifying cost of construction of €180,000. The qualifying cost of construction is, in effect, the "Section 23" allowance/deduction and can be written off against all Irish rental income in the first letting year. Thus, a landlord with sufficient other Irish rental income could potentially save €79,200 in tax (assuming the landlord pays income tax at the marginal rate of 42% plus 2% levies), reducing the cost of the apartment to €120,800 (before stamp duty). Any unused relief can be carried forward against any Irish rental income indefinitely

seahorse · 15-01-2008 4:59pm

mastermind2005 wrote: »

are you gonna buy yourself

Not on your nelly! I wouldn't buy in these conditions. I really don't see the sense in the idea that it doesn't matter how much a house costs you as long as you're not buying it for an investment, because it is still costing you - and if you can hang on and pay less on the ask price and the interest for the next 20+ years why on earth would anyone jump in now and pay 20/30/40/50% more than they need to?

I mean, there is some merit in most of the arguments for and against, but look at those people down in delgany and elsewhere who've seen massive drops in the value of their homes in no time at all. I wouldn't want to be in their shoes (or their houses, lol) you'd have to feel sorry for them... having said that though, I remember when I read that in the paper the first thing I thought was anyone foolish enough to pay 700k for a 3 bed deserved all they had coming to them! (which was a very nasty thought, I know!)

What I'm doing is just working away and banging away as much money as if I were paying a mortgage or other large loan so that when the time comes and I feel market conditions are right I'll have a decent deposit and also be in the habit of surviving on a certain limited budget.

seahorse · 15-01-2008 5:06pm

Thanks for that Punchestown. I was wondering if it'd ever apply to me in any way, shape or form; apparently not, lol.

I wonder how long, in the current climate, the government will continue to give those sort of construction tax breaks?

dazberry · 15-01-2008 5:31pm

seahorse wrote: »

Oh right; I'm a northsider so I'd be more familiar with Cadburys, lol.

So was I - so you've no excuse

I don't know anything about section 23; I've heard of it but don't know what it means. I'd imagine it's some sort of tax incentive. Would you mind explaining it to me?

www.revenue.ie/leaflets/s23.pdf

D.

gurramok · 15-01-2008 6:46pm

Morlar wrote: »

Is it not possible a large number of those will be rented out under the radar ?

Nah, the CSO themselves said their enumerators found out as much as possible from management agents/neighbours about if any humans lived in the empty gaffs and if they were connected to ESB grid.
Of course we had a thread on boards before about this and someone claimed as a CSO enumerator that was not the case despite their bosses saying it was, i wonder if that person(forget nickname) will come back

I sense though that the city empties are mainly apts from my own anecdotal evidence(i wrote here i think on house bubble thread about Gasworks being empty either in '07 or '06 and guess what, its in the news now about rejected hotel conversion due to lack of sales) and evidence of posters above for example.
A quick look at daft/myhome will show a good deal of 2nd hand apts/houses(mostly apts) for sale built during the boom where they have not even been furnished properly(look at the fotos)

Morlar · 16-01-2008 2:06pm

gurramok wrote: »

Nah, the CSO themselves said their enumerators found out as much as possible from management agents/neighbours about if any humans lived in the empty gaffs and if they were connected to ESB grid.
Of course we had a thread on boards before about this and someone claimed as a CSO enumerator that was not the case despite their bosses saying it was, i wonder if that person(forget nickname) will come back

I sense though that the city empties are mainly apts from my own anecdotal evidence(i wrote here i think on house bubble thread about Gasworks being empty either in '07 or '06 and guess what, its in the news now about rejected hotel conversion due to lack of sales) and evidence of posters above for example.
A quick look at daft/myhome will show a good deal of 2nd hand apts/houses(mostly apts) for sale built during the boom where they have not even been furnished properly(look at the fotos)

You could be right - I am not convinced though. Thanks for the info on that.

patrickolee · 16-01-2008 2:32pm

gurramok wrote: »

Nah, the CSO themselves said their enumerators found out as much as possible from management agents/neighbours about if any humans lived in the empty gaffs and if they were connected to ESB grid.
Of course we had a thread on boards before about this and someone claimed as a CSO enumerator that was not the case despite their bosses saying it was, i wonder if that person(forget nickname) will come back

I think that might have been me? My sister was a enumerator co-ordinator over my area. When I told our enumerator that next door was occupied even though they wouldn't answer the door (I think they had 'social welfare' reasons for not wanting to participate) the house was recorded as a 'Not occupied', even though it clearly is. That same enumerator told me that in our area he had awful trouble getting returns from many of the houses. A couple even got violent with him. Both he and my sister swear they'll never do census work again! At the end of the day, they are getting paid a very small amount to do a ****ty job, so while I'm sure they do the best they can, if a few houses get misrecorded, they are not going to worry about it.

MisterAnarchy · 16-01-2008 2:42pm

I'd like to know how 223,000 Vacant houses are insured ?
Its very difficult and costly to insure a vacant house ,it generally needs to be occupied for 300 days a year.

arctictree · 16-01-2008 2:46pm

I can verify the same. A close friend of mine was an enumerator and he said that some houses would just not answer the door numerous times. This was for various reasons, but basically, a percentage of our population just does not want to be recorded. The enumerators are seen as representing the goverment and for some people they dont want any contact with the authorities.

I would definitley say a certain percentage of the 'empty houses' are not in fact empty, no matter what the CSO managers say...

patrickolee · 16-01-2008 4:27pm

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

I'd like to know how 223,000 Vacant houses are insured ?
Its very difficult and costly to insure a vacant house ,it generally needs to be occupied for 300 days a year.

I think there was another thread in this group just in the last few days who was wondering whether he should insure his house with Hibernian for around 400 a year, or go with 123.ie which quoted around 160. Wouldn't call that expensive and its certainly not difficult.

MisterAnarchy · 16-01-2008 5:02pm

patrickolee wrote: »

I think there was another thread in this group just in the last few days who was wondering whether he should insure his house with Hibernian for around 400 a year, or go with 123.ie which quoted around 160. Wouldn't call that expensive and its certainly not difficult.

Thats for an owner occupied house.
Tell them the house is vacant and unoccupied,see how far 160 will get you then.

gurramok · 16-01-2008 7:51pm

patrickolee wrote: »

I think that might have been me? My sister was a enumerator co-ordinator over my area. When I told our enumerator that next door was occupied even though they wouldn't answer the door (I think they had 'social welfare' reasons for not wanting to participate) the house was recorded as a 'Not occupied', even though it clearly is. That same enumerator told me that in our area he had awful trouble getting returns from many of the houses. A couple even got violent with him. Both he and my sister swear they'll never do census work again! At the end of the day, they are getting paid a very small amount to do a ****ty job, so while I'm sure they do the best they can, if a few houses get misrecorded, they are not going to worry about it.

Nah, wasn't you, i would of remembered you alright

Fair enough, some would of been recorded as dubiously vacant when they were not, its part of margin of error.

It still boggles the mind that 73.5% of the total vacancy rate has been due to new builds built since 2002.

Saying that people who live in older properties tend to answer the door alot more to government employees than those that live in 2002-06 built ones don't wash i'm afraid

Cantab. · 16-01-2008 9:37pm

How Strange wrote: »

hmm, I wonder how these figures will be affected when the absolutely huge developments in Dublin 8 are completed. I think there are about five in construction at the moment; HSQ, Chocolate Box and something Quay (the old barracks) are the ones that spring to mind.

There is also a skyscraper type thing being built on the Canal near Goldenbridge..

Eircom must have smelt a rat when they stealthily pulled their plan for a skyscraper beside Heuston Station. What ever happened to that idea? It appears to me that they stopped building half way up, stuck on a bit of glass and hoped things would be ok. The purpose-printed Eircom hoarding with loads of happy faces mysteriously disappeared one night...

But yeah, huge oversupply in D8 now. That Choco factory full of oompah loompahs is absolutely massive.

Typical stubron Irish

Comments