"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.

FillSpectre

Gurgle wrote:

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?

I think you have failed to understand what has actually happened and what some politician suggested.

If you had paid attention you might realise that I have been speaking about conditional housing and planning not all housing. Name a place where it is in fact in place that you can't buy any private property unless you are local?

You are getting awful angry about this considering it hasn't happened the way you think it has. Your horror story about if it spreads might be accurate but it hasn't even started. You really need to relax and choose what to get angry about. First start with actually knowing something and then decide if you don't like it then complain but try not to get angry with somebody explaining it to you.;)

If you could explain how and why you think I am scrounger or have the mentality of one I would appreciate it.

seamus wrote:

Sale of land privately requires no approval from the council.

That is not quite true council housing sold can have conditions stating that you may not sell the property for a number of years and/or if you do they must approve the people buying. AS genberal rule it is true though. PLanning can also insist that area remains green even though in private ownership. Property and land deals are very old hence it is not straight forward like other trading.

Gurgle

FillSpectre wrote:

You are getting awful angry about this considering it hasn't happened the way you think it has.

Unless you can explain why its OK to line the pockets of 'locals' to the detriment of everybody else, I'm finished attempting to discuss this with you.

FillSpectre

Gurgle wrote:

Unless you can explain why its OK to line the pockets of 'locals' to the detriment of everybody else, I'm finished attempting to discuss this with you.

I don't need to explain it because it isn't happening why do you think it is? You aren't discussing this with me you are making accusations that aren't true. Nobody is being stopped from buying a private house give me one example of this happening.
Local councils provide housing chances for locals through various means is all that is actually happening.

Eoin

FillSpectre wrote:

Nobody is being stopped from buying a private house give me one example of this happening.
Local councils provide housing chances for locals through various means is all that is actually happening.

That is the point I was trying to determine - the OP seems to think that it applies to any private sales, not just affordable housing schemes.

Hagar

Does anyone remember what date [Strike]Morningstar[/strike] Freelancer was sitebanned?
There is an amazing similarity of style wth FillSpectre.

/Edit wrong name sorry.

Archeron

eoin_s wrote:

That is the point I was trying to determine - the OP seems to think that it applies to any private sales, not just affordable housing schemes.

Hi,
the article I read did say that this would include, in some cases, the private sale of second hand homes as well. I've been scouring the web for more details on this, but apart from the PD person commenting on it, I cant find anything else referencing it.

FillSpectre

eoin_s wrote:

That is the point I was trying to determine - the OP seems to think that it applies to any private sales, not just affordable housing schemes.

I think that is where some people got it wrong. THe OP got it wrong from what was posted up. It was letter by a politician to the paper as far as I could figure.

Hagar

I now know what you were saying in the other thread when you said "morningstar". I am a not morningstar who ever that is. Can't the mods check to be sure. I am banned from the legal forum here though becasue I back chatted to a mod and I am not the right "calibre" apparently.:rolleyes:

FillSpectre

Archeron wrote:

Hi,
the article I read did say that this would include, in some cases, the private sale of second hand homes as well. I've been scouring the web for more details on this, but apart from the PD person commenting on it, I cant find anything else referencing it.

I already mentioned how selling council housing can have conditions even after the council no longer own it. Very old and common practice

Hagar

I have edited my post. I was in error. I got two posters' name mixed up. I should have said Freelancer.
Does that ring any bells?

sandyg

Last year i was proposing in buying a site in louth. It stated "local needs apply". I lived in the area for over 10 years. When i went to Louth co co to see what the story was on building a house i was informed that I had to get three letters from Priest, Local Garda, School stating that i resided in the area for the ten years. I was not allowed to own a house. I was only allowed apply for planning once i was rented and had proof that i was renting
They also told me there and then what type of house i was allowed build even down to the brick on the front.
Whole system is a joke.

Gurgle

FillSpectre wrote:

I don't need to explain it because it isn't happening why do you think it is?

Current situation:
Site for sale subject to planning permission.
I will never get planning permission in Meath.
Meath person gets planning permission.
Meath person builds house.
Meath person sells house.
Meath person makes obscene profit.

Do you want me draw you a picture?
You can colour it in yourself.

FillSpectre

Gurgle wrote:

Current situation:
Site for sale subject to planning permission.
I will never get planning permission in Meath.

Why not? This is only on some lands and the other conditioning is a need to have a house in the local area.

Gurgle wrote:

Meath person gets planning permission.
Meath person builds house.
Meath person sells house.
Meath person makes obscene profit.
Do you want me draw you a picture?
You can colour it in yourself.

That is not the current situation. Planning on site is conditional on local residency there is a claw back on sales of such property sales. Plus as it is not easy and you can only do it once people don't do it. Why do you think they are doing this? Please feel free to draw me an accurate picture so far you just keep making up stories and barely communicating your points.

So far you claimed it was illegal and now everybody is making loads of money duping non-locals.

I think the people who go through the various hoops to build a house are not planning to sell but live there. Why are you so sure they are doing otherwise?

Boggle

Does anyone remember what date Morningstar Freelancer was sitebanned?

What was he banned for?? Fillspectre has similar debating/lecturing styles though...

Last year i was proposing in buying a site in louth. It stated "local needs apply". I lived in the area for over 10 years. When i went to Louth co co to see what the story was on building a house i was informed that I had to get three letters from Priest, Local Garda, School stating that i resided in the area for the ten years. I was not allowed to own a house. I was only allowed apply for planning once i was rented and had proof that i was renting
They also told me there and then what type of house i was allowed build even down to the brick on the front.
Whole system is a joke.

Couldn't agree with you more Sandyg about the system being completely wrong.
Was it you couldn't buy a house or could you not buy a site with a view to building??

Hagar

Boggle wrote:

What was he banned for?? Fillspectre has similar debating/lecturing styles though...

Oddly enough banned for re-regging after a previous site-ban.

sandyg

At present i just refers to anyone buying a site. There are more and more "Local Needs need only apply" type for sale signs going up everywhere. Id say its not long before they try and do somthing about buying a house as well.

Hagar

I'd pay good money to see a non-local homeless, disabled, black, lesbian, single mother contest this type of discrimination in a court of law. I wonder would she get her house/planning permission?

FillSpectre

Boggle wrote:

What was he banned for?? Fillspectre has similar debating/lecturing styles though...

Well I am not him. What has he posted that is worth reading?

Hagar there were attempts to challenge such rules and the EU courts upheld the councils' rights. As I already mentioned this is not discrimination but local services for locals.

Hagar

Nobody is questioning the goals of a council in striving to provide social/affordable housing within its area for people from its area. That's a given all round I would think.

The point that some people are making, myself included, is that as an Irish citizen I should have the same rights as anyone else to buy private property anywhere within Ireland that I choose and live there. A Meath person, Dublin person or whoever from where-ever should not have any extra rights just because they have a historical connection, a accident of birth actually, with a locality.

The point you seem to be making is that several local councils have enacted bye-laws restricting these rights and because of this its ok to take these rights from people. Then we are in the "the law is the law" scenario so it shouldn't be challenged.

Many laws that have found their way onto the statute books have later been repealed or amended because they were found to be flawed in some manner. In many cases flawed laws stay on the books because nobody has the money to go up against lawmakers who are funded from the bottomless pockets of the taxpayer. The taxpayer who the law is actually descriminating against. Very few people can afford to risk bankruptcy proving that a local council weren't over zealous in doing their jobs.

dermot_sheehan

The only control I can see councils having on people moving to the area is the granting of planning permission. Of course refusing to grant permission to someone simply because he is not local is ultra vires the planning and development act 2000, s. 34 of which states the only things planning authorities can look at when considering applications http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/ZZA30Y2000S34.html

Of course councils I assume are hoping no one is willing to go to bord pleanala or seek judicial review of the decision. The problem is they could quite easily refuse permission purportly on other grounds (e.g. one off housing is contrary to the county development plan and contrary to the proper planning of the area) but make exceptions for "locals". Unless someone challenges these exceptions made, by filling an appeal, they effectively can contravene their own development plan in favour of locals.

Gurgle

FillSpectre wrote:

I think the people who go through the various hoops to build a house are not planning to sell but live there. Why are you so sure they are doing otherwise?

Observation.
Field -> Building site -> House -> 'For Sale' sign
:rolleyes:

Don't bother quoting or replying any more, you're on my ignore list.
Actually you are my ignore list.