"No outsiders" to buy houses in Meath

Archeron

Just read about this over the weekend. There are rumours that some councils in Meath may ban outsiders from buying houses in County Meath.
How do ye feel about that? Do you think its fair, or do you think its an insult? Being a Dub to Meath movee, I think its very very unfair on people who want to buy a home and cant afford the capital. (cue people jumping up and down and calling people who commute the most evil people in society upon whom all the bad elements of society can be blamed:) )

AngryAnderson

I think we should have a ban on Meath people living in Dublin so. Seems only fair.

FillSpectre

THe "ban" is not all houses built in the area is it? It is it just another standard conditional planning permission for one site or the social welfare scheme only too. In case you didn't know the same applies in Dublin for certain housing.

Archeron

FillSpectre wrote:

THe "ban" is not all houses built in the area is it? It is it just another standard conditional planning permission for one site or the social welfare scheme only too. In case you didn't know the same applies in Dublin for certain housing.

The article didnt go into too much detail, but it did say that it would apply not only to new housing estates, but also for second hand homes. They said it may be down to individual councils to make the final judgement. Still, its not giving a very friendly attitude of Irelands heritage capital.

Hagar

How does this fit in with EU law regarding rights for EU citizens to travel and live anywhere within the EU ?

pclancy

"No outsiders to buy houses in Meath"

Sounds like a tabloid headline to me.

Read something else

Archeron

Hagar wrote:

How does this fit in with EU law regarding rights for EU citizens to travel and live anywhere within the EU ?

Thats a good question. I also wonder how it will affect decentralization. Theres about 200 OPW workers supposed to be moving to Meath as well.

Pigman II

Meath is a local county for local people! We'll have no trouble here!

FillSpectre

Archeron wrote:

The article didnt go into too much detail, but it did say that it would apply not only to new housing estates, but also for second hand homes. They said it may be down to individual councils to make the final judgement. Still, its not giving a very friendly attitude of Irelands heritage capital.

OK then what paper was it in? The detail is very important and local authority housing has had this restriction since it was first built here so it could be a very misleading article.

Local council and affordable housing can be restricted for loacls under EU law.

Hagar

FillSpectre wrote:

Local council and affordable housing can be restricted for loacls under EU law.

"For Locals" How local? Leaving aside any rights/claims our EU brethern might have, can a local council descriminate against another Irish citizen on any grounds whatsoever?

Eoin

I read it in today's Metro - and it was a letter written by a PD candidate so I don't know how impartial you could consider it. I think Wicklow CoCo tried to introduce this a while ago, but thankfully didn't.

ferdi

Are you local?

Gurgle

FillSpectre wrote:

It is it just another standard conditional planning permission for one site

Which is absolutely against the constitution anyway.
But, being Irish, lets just bend over and take it up the ass as usual.

FillSpectre

Hagar wrote:

"For Locals" How local? Leaving aside any rights/claims our EU brethern might have, can a local council descriminate against another Irish citizen on any grounds whatsoever?

Local as in local to the council. Like many things there are restrictions. I can't put my name down on the Donegal housing list, I have to be resident in the area for 2 years. This is a free and afforadable housing it is not an entitlement but a privledge hence no EU rights issues. They can ban you from driving as it is a privlege but they can't ban you from cycling as it is a right. If they grant special persmission to a development so that it enhances locals lives they can also insist it reamins for local use hence a local residents clause. It is not unique to Meath and is not recent

Hagar

FillSpectre wrote:

It is not unique to Meath and is not recent

True, but is it consitutionally legal?

/edit I think your'e wrong about the cycling. If the Govt decide to licence bikes they then can take away your licence and you're walking. End of Story.

FillSpectre

Hagar wrote:

True, but is it consitutionally legal?

/edit I think your'e wrong about the cycling. If the Govt decide to licence bikes they then can take away your licence and your'e walking. End of Story.

It is currently a leagl right to cycle. They would need a referredum to change the constitution to change that.

Yes restrictions by local councils is legal as you don't have the right to buy anything you want. THis has all been done before and I am pretty sure been to and back from the EU courts

Gurgle

FillSpectre wrote:

They would need a referredum to change the constitution to change that.

The 'right to cycle' is actually mentioned in the constitution?

FillSpectre wrote:

you don't have the right to buy anything you want.

Can you link to any reference for this?

iguana

As for the EU side of it, in London Chelsea/Kensington council are considering introducing a similar rule, that property can only be purshased by residents and people who's family are from the area. They want to do it as prices in that area really are very prohibitive, a family house can cost a few million. And I don't think there are restrictions stopping that.

However, I don't think the way they are doing it will really help the ordinary resident. Many people whose families are from Chelsea/Kensington, or who have already bought in the area, would be quite well off and this won't stop them buying investment properties. Yet if someone had worked elsewhere and was now moving to a job in the area, they would have to rent for several years before being allowed to buy.

While I'm sure this legislation is being proposed with the best possible intention, it will need a lot more thought before it comes into practise, if it is to be of benefit to all, rather than the wealthiest residents.

Eoin

Does anyone actually know if this ban (if it is even true) is for anyone buying a house, or for people buying a house through an affordable housing scheme? If it's the latter, then you can understand why a Co.Co. would want to give preference to people from the area. If it's the former, then I would be surprised if this was indeed legal.

As far as I can see, all we have to go on is a vague letter written by a PD election candidate (it wasn't even an article) so I would say the chances are that this is nothing but a free plug for her.

FillSpectre

Gurgle wrote:

The 'right to cycle' is actually mentioned in the constitution?



Can you link to any reference for this?

Actually if you claim it is illegal you need to prove it not me. You have the right to free movement and due to legal things apparerntly that covers the bicycle as a human powered mode of transport. Anything using an engine is restricted.

Do you really need a reference to be told that you don't have the right to buy anything you want in this country? You can't buy and sell people do you need me to find a reference for you are can you grasp the concempt on its own? You also can't build where you want, get the idea. If you think it is illegal you need to show what it is breaking. Not been allowed build,buy or sell a house does not prevent free movement within the EU. Social housing is for local society hence allowable

Archeron

eoin_s wrote:

Does anyone actually know if this ban (if it is even true) is for anyone buying a house, or for people buying a house through an affordable housing scheme? If it's the latter, then you can understand why a Co.Co. would want to give preference to people from the area. If it's the former, then I would be surprised if this was indeed legal.

As far as I can see, all we have to go on is a vague letter written by a PD election candidate (it wasn't even an article) so I would say the chances are that this is nothing but a free plug for her.

I'll post any links when I can find them, but this was not mentioned as reference to affordable housing. It said all housing, including the sale of second hand homes was to be looked at. They said this could cause legal problems for developers who now own land, but havent built yet. The PD candidate letter was in response to the newspaper article.

singingstranger

tbh the housing/planning situation in Meath is completely gone to the dogs. You can only get planning permission if a house is practically a clone of the one nextdoor to it, and only if there's a genuine "housing need" - meaning that sometimes if a growing family could survive in the house they're in, but would like to build a bigger dwelling for themselves, the Council will argue that they could survive in the one that they're in unless they sell their own place first and therefore qualify as being in genuine housing need.

I might have a word with the press officer of MCC though (who I'm on very good terms with) and see what this new rule is because it sounds a tad fishy to me.

Gurgle

FillSpectre wrote:

If you think it is illegal you need to show what it is breaking.

From the constitution:
40(i)
All citizens shall, as human persons, be held equal before the law
Allowing a person from meath to buy a particular property but denying that right to a person from Dublin is a direct violation.

-edit-
Plus all of article 43:

Article 43

1. 1° The State acknowledges that man, in virtue of his rational being, has the natural right, antecedent to positive law, to the private ownership of external goods.

2° The State accordingly guarantees to pass no law attempting to abolish the right of private ownership or the general right to transfer, bequeath, and inherit property.

2. 1° The State recognises, however, that the exercise of the rights mentioned in the foregoing provisions of this Article ought, in civil society, to be regulated by the principles of social justice.

2° The State, accordingly, may as occasion requires delimit by law the exercise of the said rights with a view to reconciling their exercise with the exigencies of the common good.

FillSpectre

Gurgle wrote:

From the constitution:
40(i)
All citizens shall, as human persons, be held equal before the law
Allowing a person from meath to buy a particular property but denying that right to a person from Dublin is a direct violation.

These people are no less equal. No direct violation as no law treats these people different. Conditional sales of alcohol are legal aren't they. YOu want to give a law that treats people of neath different.

Gurgle wrote:

-edit-
Plus all of article 43:

None of those are broken either.
1) People can still own goods
2) Privatre ownership still exists

It is like you didn't read them and just posted them up becasue they are about rights.
People a lot smarter than you have verified this is fine. YOur examples are not even close to proving your point in fact the last one suggests it is ok to violate other rules for the better of society. Give up becasue you aren't going to win against m as the real world proves you wrong

Gurgle

FillSpectre wrote:

These people are no less equal.

To allow one person to buy or build a home in a particular area but not another is not treating them as equals, it is blatant discrimination.

FillSpectre wrote:

Conditional sales of alcohol are legal aren't they.

Alcohol is a controlled substance and the only condition is age.

FillSpectre wrote:

YOu want to give a law that treats people of neath different.

I want to do what now?
I want the law to allow all citizens the same rights, whether they were born in Meath, Dublin, Belfast or Nigeria.

FillSpectre wrote:

People a lot smarter than you have verified this is fine.

Reference please, and while your at it prove that these people are smarter than me.

FillSpectre wrote:

YOur examples are not even close to proving your point in fact the last one suggests it is ok to violate other rules for the better of society.

They are not my examples, they are articles from this nation's constitution.
-edit- and 43.2.2 I believe covers things like gun control.

FillSpectre wrote:

Give up becasue you aren't going to win against m as the real world proves you wrong

No, I'm not going to 'win' against you because you aren't even reading, never mind considering, my points.

johnp

There was a member of the Meath County Council on the radio the other day explaining it.
It only applies to new houses in small towns (he mentioned Duleek as an example), not to large towns like Navan. The idea is that small towns don't have the infrastrucure for large developments, so they want to keep development in these places to a minimum. Buying a 2nd hand home anywhere would not be a problem.
As to the "local" reference, meant people living with 10km were considered local.

I'm a Dub and will need to move to the country to buy a house, but I can see where they're coming from. Anyhow, I wouldn't live in a very small village, so by the sounds of things it won't apply to me. Oh, and I woulnd't live in Meath, but thats another matter

As to the Wicklow reference made by eoin_s, Wicklow County Council do have such selection process for properties. I know a few Dubs who've tried to buy in Wicklow, but have been told that they can't buy that particular house as they are from outside the county. I don't know what their selection criteria are, but they do exist.

Back to the Meath case, if it's for small town, fair enough. If it's a blanket ban, well we'll get a couple of cattle trucks and send Meath folk back home (said with tongue firmly in cheek).

seamus

A county council cannot prevent you from buying a home in their jurisdiction. Sale of land privately requires no approval from the council. That's not to say they couldn't make it difficult for you.

As others have mentioned, this probably applies to the affordable housing schemes, where you do need to apply to the council to get on the scheme. The rationale behind it isn't as bigoted as one may think - it's reasonable that people who are from an area would get a slightly higher preference than those who aren't. This isn't to do with "those damn jackeens" or any kind of social filtering. It's been going on for years, and it's always been the way it operated with social housing, whether you were applying in Limerick or the depths of Darndale.

The bigoted side of it has been going for years too though, particularly with the whole "no one-off housing" fiasco recently. For a long time (and still in plenty of places), if you leave Dublin and try to build a house, you'll have to jump through all the hoops, dot your i's and cross your t's or you'll be denied. If you're a local though, a free pint down the pub will sort you out.

FillSpectre

Gurgle wrote:

To allow one person to buy or build a home in a particular area but not another is not treating them as equals, it is blatant discrimination.

Equal in law. Conditional housing is not a law hence people are treated equally in the law.

Gurgle wrote:

Alcohol is a controlled substance and the only condition is age.

People aren't being treated equally though by law using your logic. Planning is also a controled as is construction so what is the difference?

Gurgle wrote:

I want to do what now?
I want the law to allow all citizens the same rights, whether they were born in Meath, Dublin, Belfast or Nigeria.

There is a law and it isn't been broken.

Gurgle wrote:

Reference please, and while your at it prove that these people are smarter than me.

No reference needed go and try and get on the Donegal housing list from Dublin. THis is not new, been going on for years. You need to prove it is illegal. YOu have failed and seem to have a problem understanding that restrictive planning and sales does not make people treated unequally.

Gurgle wrote:

They are not my examples, they are articles from this nation's constitution.
-edit- and 43.2.2 I believe covers things like gun control.

They were your example of laws being broken. You are wrong and are unable to understand them.

Gurgle wrote:

No, I'm not going to 'win' against you because you aren't even reading, never mind considering, my points.

I read your points and I pointed out that they are not been broken rules as you think. The real world has this already and legal people have verified that it is legal. It is not unique to Meath, Ireland or Europe. THe reaon you will loose is because it has already been verified.

It is protection of services provided for the locals and legal. You want to disagree fine but you can't provide a law broken.

Gurgle

FillSpectre wrote:

Conditional housing is not a law hence people are treated equally in the law.

FillSpectre wrote:

No reference needed go and try and get on the Donegal housing list from Dublin.

Conditional housing, housing lists?
What are you talking about?

Are you that deep in the scrounger mentality that you don't know its possible to live without government handouts?

This has nothing to do with housing lists. This is about preventing people from owning property because they aren't from the area.

What do you not understand?

If this bull**** was applied, it would create a situation where there would be artificially low house prices in meath, to the direct financial benefit of meath people, and the detriment of everybody else who wants to live there.

I would not be permitted to buy my house - instead I would be forced to rent at €900 pm where I'm paying a mortgage at €600 pm, with the difference going into the pocket of someone who is 'entitled' to it only by virtue of having been born in meath.

If this were extended to every county, I would only be allowed to buy a house in Leitrim. Why should I be restricted to Leitrim if I want to own my own home? Theres not much in the line of electronics corporations based there, but to work and live anywhere else in the country I would have to rent off some bloody gouger.

And you're trying to justify this ****e?

dbnavan

Archeron wrote:

Just read about this over the weekend. There are rumours that some councils in Meath may ban outsiders from buying houses in County Meath.
How do ye feel about that? Do you think its fair, or do you think its an insult? Being a Dub to Meath movee, I think its very very unfair on people who want to buy a home and cant afford the capital. (cue people jumping up and down and calling people who commute the most evil people in society upon whom all the bad elements of society can be blamed:) )

Can U give us a source, I find this very hard to believe, I know some county councils only give planning permission to locals or at least priority to locals but they cant tell you where you can or cant buy/sell an existing house.

Gurgle

dbnavan wrote:

I know some county councils only give planning permission to locals or at least priority to locals.

Thats standard practise, they take into account whether you have family in the area, whether you work locally etc.
I think the line taken is that these are factors under which they might give planning permission where it would normally be refused.

The theory is that locals have a greater right to live in the area they grew up in, close to 'the old homeplace' and all that bollox.

Of course much more depends on who you know and how much you donated to their election campaign. Its a cash-for-cash transaction.

I've seen dozens of one-off houses built in Meath over the last 5-6 years, and nearly every one has a 'For Sale' sign on it 18 months after its finished. Obscene profits for the local who just had to live round the corner from Mammy.