amcalester Registered User
#316

Loves_lorries said:
I entered into a ten year lease with a local authority a few months ago for a house, highly recommend it, no dealings with tenants and after six months, I'm only responsible for structural issues. The council were very reasonable in terms of the snag list they gave me.

Option for those sick of conventional let perhaps?


Did you get market rate?

Fol20 Registered User
#317

amcalester said:
Did you get market rate?


You won’t get market rate for those as the government manage everything and you just get a cash every month. I would be interest to see what you got though. I would expect 80pc of market rate maybe

amcalester Registered User
#318

Fol20 said:
You won’t get market rate for those as the government manage everything and you just get a cash every month. I would be interest to see what you got though. I would expect 80pc of market rate maybe


Ah yeah, I get that. Was actually wondering how close to market rate the poster got.

Claw Hammer Registered User
#319

One of the big drawbacks as well is that damages only covered up to the value of the deposit.

Loves_lorries Registered User
#320

Fol20 said:
You won’t get market rate for those as the government manage everything and you just get a cash every month. I would be interest to see what you got though. I would expect 80pc of market rate maybe


I'm getting 80% of market rate but I argued for an altogether unrealistically high reference rate and got it. They are so keen for properties, they must have been willing to accept my high figure.

Risk of bad tenant and no power to evict means I'll never do conventional let again, did it for number of years on property in good area, this is a low value house in disadvantaged area.

3 people have thanked this post
DubCount Registered User
#321

Lux23 said:
I don't believe tenancy laws are what's really influencing investor decisions not to purchase properties to let


The number 1 issue negatively impacting investment in long term residential letting, is the risk of a bad tenant not paying and/or wrecking the property, with no consequence on the tenant. Tax, interest rates on buy2let mortgages, unfairness of RPZ, negative press commentary...... are all way behind.

Unless this is fixed, you will never improve the rental market and provide good tenants with better quality at better prices, because it is killing supply and competition. I find it incredible that the biggest problem in the rental market, is never mentioned by Threshold or other similar organisations. This could be fixed with pretty much no cost to the state, but never gets a whisper.

8 people have thanked this post
Loves_lorries Registered User
#322

DubCount said:
The number 1 issue negatively impacting investment in long term residential letting, is the risk of a bad tenant not paying and/or wrecking the property, with no consequence on the tenant. Tax, interest rates on buy2let mortgages, unfairness of RPZ, negative press commentary...... are all way behind.

Unless this is fixed, you will never improve the rental market and provide good tenants with better quality at better prices, because it is killing supply and competition. I find it incredible that the biggest problem in the rental market, is never mentioned by Threshold or other similar organisations. This could be fixed with pretty much no cost to the state, but never gets a whisper.


The media is gratuitously biased against landlords so the phenomenon of rogue tenants is grossly underreported.

The high tax rates are not a huge deal for me, taxes are high here no matter what kind of assets you're working with.

I've 84k staked with my sole current residential property right now, no way would I want a property with real value with the sword of damoclese hanging over it in this environment.

2 people have thanked this post
Loves_lorries Registered User
#323

DubCount said:
The number 1 issue negatively impacting investment in long term residential letting, is the risk of a bad tenant not paying and/or wrecking the property, with no consequence on the tenant. Tax, interest rates on buy2let mortgages, unfairness of RPZ, negative press commentary...... are all way behind.

Unless this is fixed, you will never improve the rental market and provide good tenants with better quality at better prices, because it is killing supply and competition. I find it incredible that the biggest problem in the rental market, is never mentioned by Threshold or other similar organisations. This could be fixed with pretty much no cost to the state, but never gets a whisper.


Threshold are left wing activists who would have an anti landlord mission statement if four bed houses in rathmines were 400 euro per month

8 people have thanked this post
beauf Registered User
#324

Loves_lorries said:
I entered into a ten year lease with a local authority a few months ago for a house, highly recommend it, no dealings with tenants and after six months, I'm only responsible for structural issues. The council were very reasonable in terms of the snag list they gave me.

Option for those sick of conventional let perhaps?


You are still in the same boat when it comes to over holding and tenant damage. AFAIK.

the_syco Registered User
#325

Loves_lorries said:
I entered into a ten year lease with a local authority a few months ago for a house, highly recommend it, no dealings with tenants and after six months, I'm only responsible for structural issues. The council were very reasonable in terms of the snag list they gave me.

Option for those sick of conventional let perhaps?

Section 8 from The Landlords HAP booklet
A local authority may suspend or stop HAP payments if the HAP tenant fails to make the required weekly rent contribution to the local authority.

If the tenant stops paying, you will not be informed that they stopped paying.
You will not be informed that you will no longer get rent from the council.
And it will be up to you to evict them.

1 person has thanked this post
DrDonkey Registered User
#326

Councils would have no problem in getting houses for tenants at 80% market (+ inflation index) for 10 year leases if they guaranteed rents and undertook, at the end of the 10 years, to return the property in the condition that it was given to them.

4 people have thanked this post
Loves_lorries Registered User
#327

beauf said:
You are still in the same boat when it comes to over holding and tenant damage. AFAIK.


Local authority are my tenant.

Loves_lorries Registered User
#328

the_syco said:
Section 8 from The Landlords HAP booklet

If the tenant stops paying, you will not be informed that they stopped paying.
You will not be informed that you will no longer get rent from the council.
And it will be up to you to evict them.


Your confusing the HAP scheme with the long term lease scheme.

My rent is guaranteed even the place is empty during periods. I've never met who lives in my house, I don't even know their name.

1 person has thanked this post
Browney7 Registered User
#329

DrDonkey said:
Councils would have no problem in getting houses for tenants at 80% market (+ inflation index) for 10 year leases if they guaranteed rents and undertook, at the end of the 10 years, to return the property in the condition that it was given to them.


And that would be very awful value for the taxpayer/exchequer. The government can borrow cash for ten years at sub 1% - you're advocating they guarantee a rental yield of 5% and have no asset at the end of the ten years.

Loves_lorries Registered User
#330

Browney7 said:
And that would be very awful value for the taxpayer/exchequer. The government can borrow cash for ten years at sub 1% - you're advocating they guarantee a rental yield of 5% and have no asset at the end of the ten years.


My rental yield is 12% gross, 10% after I pay insurance, property tax and a deduction of one month's rent for repairs (assuming it's no higher on average each year than a months rent)

Want to share your thoughts?

Login here to discuss!