'Students will be worse off if bedsits banned'

forex

For ages bedsits were ligal, but now ... when house sales & its prices went down, they decided to REDUCE number of available living places by getting rid of bedsits to FORCE people to buy !!!!

THIS IS ALL DONE BY the BIGGEST IRISH BUILDING COMPANIES WHO HAS PROTECTION IN THE GOVERNMENT AND ITS OWN LOBBY ....

=========================================================
http://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/bye-bye-bedsits-1447502.html
http://www.herald.ie/national-news/students-will-be-worse-off-if-bedsits-banned-1450310.html
http://www.herald.ie/national-news/proposed-law-may-rule-out-substandard-rented-homes-1442217.html

'Students will be worse off if bedsits banned'

By Claire Murphy


Friday August 08 2008

The banning of bedsits by the EU will make a bad situation worse for students looking for accommodation, the Union of Students of Ireland has warned.

"Every year 70,000 students come into Dublin for college and only between 6pc-8pc of these will find on-campus accommodation," said Shane Kelly, president of the USI.

While the union welcomed Europe's move to outlaw bedsits because it encourages students to live together, it says that this will cause further difficulties for scholars seeking flats.

"There is significant pressure on the private rental market at this time and the removal of bedsits adds to and compounds an already difficult situation."

Inundated

"We've been inundated with calls from students asking about accommodation, as have the unions in Trinity and UCD. There is a small window of opportunity for students, particularly for first years, to try to get a place."

Minister of State for Housing Michael Finneran recently pledged to eradicate what he calls the '****ensian' conditions of bedsits.

"These standards must reflect the general quality of life improvements in Ireland over the last 10 years," he says.

Shane acknowledges that bedsit housing was often the most appalling in the market.

"Some of the worst accommodation that students had to live in were the bedsits, particularly during the mid 1990s," he recalls. "There are a lot of people looking for rental accommodation. Most students are looking for places that are near to college, are of a particular value and particular quality.

Mr Finneran said that bedsits are usually rented by the most vulnerable members of society.

"The mark of a humane society is how it protects its weaker members and I want to introduce a set of standards that will eliminate sub-standard accommodation from the rental market."

Mr Kelly said that students have had to deal with poor living conditions for years. He said that under the Housing Regulations Act, 1993, an apartment or house is not obliged to have an inside toilet or hot running water. The union said that they are working with the Government to change this situation.

Approximately 50pc of students are renting in what he calls the 'black rental market'. Landlords are often not registered with the Private Residential Tenancies Board (PRTB), and this makes this situation difficult for tenants' rights.

However, Mr Kelly added that he thinks that this new regulation will be positive for students to interact with others in living quarters.

"I think outlawing bedsits is absolutely a good move. By moving into two or three room apartments, students are living with others. They are not living alone or in isolation."

- Claire Murphy

red dave

I don't understand, how on earth can a bedsit be banned?

If it is banned, there would be no way to enforce it unless there are "property police"?

Fully agree with shanty style bedsits been stopped however there surely are lots of good standard bedsits around?

bangersandmash

forex wrote: »

For ages bedsits were ligal, but now ... when house sales & its prices went down, they decided to REDUCE number of available living places by getting rid of bedsits to FORCE people to buy !!!!

I have serious issues with the actions of those in the construction industry over the last few years, but I think this is paranoia on your part. Do you really think it is unfair to ensure that there is a minimum set of standards for landlords to adhere to? Or do you favour landlords taking advantage of young students who are desperate for accommodation? And do you honestly think students paying €100 a week to live in a slum in Dublin are potential property purchasers?

If anything, I applaud the fact that some tax-evading slum landlords will (hopefully) be put out of business, or at least be forced to improve the state of their properties. There is plenty of modern accommodation lying empty in Irish cities. With rents dropping, this will slowly but surely make up for any shortfall in student accommodation.

Read the slightly more measure article in the Times. I personally don't see anything particularly objectionable in the list of standards.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2008/0721/1216565492686.html

stovelid

forex wrote: »

For ages bedsits were ligal, but now ... when house sales & its prices went down, they decided to REDUCE number of available living places by getting rid of bedsits to FORCE people to buy !!!!

THIS IS ALL DONE BY the BIGGEST IRISH BUILDING COMPANIES WHO HAS PROTECTION IN THE GOVERNMENT AND ITS OWN LOBBY ....

Your Da owns a few then, does he?

eth0_

This is a fantastic idea.
I remember looking for a bedsit about 5 years ago and literally every single one I saw I wouldn't put an animal in, they were disgusting, clearly not constructed by a reputable builder, and many of them were a complete fire hazard.

There was a primetime special recently about the dumps landlords are (successfully!) renting out. It was shocking!

SkepticOne

While I hate to see slum landlords profiting from substandard bedsits, I think we need to ask why people rent them rather than, say, one bed apartments. I'm sure most would prefer an apartment but most likely these are too expensive where they want to live.

By banning bedsits we are removing one option but we are not creating others to any great extent. This will only make life hard for those forced to live in bedsits.

Victor

I don't think it will have a huge impact on the market. Houses sub-divided into bedsits will be converted into houses with flats with separate, unshared (but for your flatmates), kitchens and bathrooms.

I don't understand, how on earth can a bedsit be banned? If it is banned, there would be no way to enforce it unless there are "property police"?

They are called housing standards officers and are employed by the housing department of the local council.

stovelid

OP - I've nothing against well maintained 'studio'-type accommodation in general. The problem here is the bedsit (inverted commas) - a particular type of abject, single-room hovel, aimed at students and the poor.

I think we all know the difference between the two.

Victor

Bedsit (Bedroom-Sitting room) typically is a single room that shares some facilities with other units, especially cooking or bathroom facilities.

A studio is a single room apartment that is fully self contained. Obviously the bathroom facilities are in a separate room.

SkepticOne

Victor wrote: »

I don't think it will have a huge impact on the market. Houses sub-divided into bedsits will be converted into houses with flats with separate, unshared (but for your flatmates), kitchens and bathrooms.

I agree that some supply will be created through conversion but the problem is that many bedsit users are not suited to shared flats or houses being middle-aged or elderly. At the same time they can't afford decent studio or one bed apartments (otherwise they would be in them now). Even though some betsits will be converted to studio apartments, there will be less overall "units" created as bathrooms have to be accommodated.

It reminds me of the policy of bulldozing slums in some developing countries as a solution to housing problems. It is a way of sweeping problems under the carpet and avoiding thinking about the underlying causes of the problems. And of course, those evicted now have far greater problems than they would have had if they had been left alone.

Victor

Fair point, but its part of the larger housing question. Isn't it more about bed spaces than 'units'?

Elderly people are probably better off in some sort of sheltered housing than bedsits.

Tar.Aldarion

What's a bedsit, some little crappy apartment with a kettle and a bed?

SkepticOne

Victor wrote: »

Fair point, but its part of the larger housing question. Isn't it more about bed spaces than 'units'?

Elderly people are probably better off in some sort of sheltered housing than bedsits.

The way I see it: If there are alternatives available at the right price, then banning bedsits is unnecessary. Only a small number of people would choose to use them. If alternatives are not available, then banning bedsits does not create those alternatives to the extent required. You are just creating more problems for the people you are purporting to help.

I think units is appropriate here. Once you get over a certain age, sharing stops being an option. A bedsit is the smallest unit. Apartments take up more room. Houses more again. A bed in a hostel is a bed space but it is not a suitable option. Sharing a flat is OK for the relatively young but not suitable for those over a certain age.

Victor

Tara Le d'Arion wrote: »

What's a bedsit, some little crappy apartment with a kettle and a bed?

From above:

Bedsit (Bedroom-Sitting room) typically is a single room that shares some facilities with other units, especially cooking or bathroom facilities.

A studio is a single room apartment that is fully self contained. Obviously the bathroom facilities are in a separate room.

forex

eth0_ wrote: »

This is a fantastic idea.
I remember looking for a bedsit about 5 years ago and literally every single one I saw I wouldn't put an animal in, they were disgusting, clearly not constructed by a reputable builder, and many of them were a complete fire hazard.

There was a primetime special recently about the dumps landlords are (successfully!) renting out. It was shocking!

People you don't understand: this law is AGAINST of all of us and it is not going to impove our living standards. No matter if this is a bedsit or proper size flat, Irish accomodation in general is in a very-very bad conditions.
If our government really thinks about people, but not about their pockets, they should force some kind of living standard with regular checks of all living places - at least ANY size of accomodation must be clean, dry, referbished, warm.
If this is not going to be implemented our flats will remain stinky, dusty, dumpy, noisy and full of mould.

Once again this is NOT ABOUT SIZE, this is about very bad Irish accomodation in general and this law is not going to change it!

forex

stovelid wrote: »

Your Da owns a few then, does he?

I own nothing and my Da owns only own place ...

Ste.phen

We already have housing inspectors to see if places meet the minimum standards, this is just introducing a new, better set of minimum standards!

bobbysands81

Igy wrote: »

We already have housing inspectors to see if places meet the minimum standards, this is just introducing a new, better set of minimum standards!

Yes, the new standards should be much better and are something that will be applauded by all.

Bedsits per se won't be disallowed. However, there should be more stringent standards for heating, cooking facilities, hot water, bathrooms (to be in a serarate room) etc...

Del2005

Igy wrote: »

We already have housing inspectors to see if places meet the minimum standards, this is just introducing a new, better set of minimum standards!

But isn't the problem that the ones we currently have don't meet current standards, so whats the point of increasing the standard if no one checks anyway?

forex

Victor wrote: »

I don't think it will have a huge impact on the market. Houses sub-divided into bedsits will be converted into houses with flats with separate, unshared (but for your flatmates), kitchens and bathrooms.

They are called housing standards officers and are employed by the housing department of the local council.

It will have a huge impact as not all bedsits can be converted and those which can be converted will be ... BUT this will NOT change living standards, because if you join 2 stinky,dumpy rooms, what will you get ? - Double stinky room. Be sure - land lords will do this conversion as cheap as they only can ...

forex

Igy wrote: »

We already have housing inspectors to see if places meet the minimum standards, this is just introducing a new, better set of minimum standards!

Where are they ? And how many of them? Saying we have ... not saying how many does not make any difference. Or may be there are only 5 of them for entire Ireland (Just for information: number of cardiologists in Ireland in 2005 was only 12, so we can also say - "we have", but in order to visit cardiologist you have to be in a waiting list for several years)
"We have" must mean - that he/she can be available within maximum a week.

I live for 6 years in the same flat and I did not have a single visit of such inspector! I am talking about regular inspections. And those land lords who does not keep accomodation according to stanrads I described above should have penalties.

forex

Del2005 wrote: »

But isn't the problem that the ones we currently have don't meet current standards, so whats the point of increasing the standard if no one checks anyway?

Thank you for the comment.

In the same time minimum standards must be reviewed.
E.g. I don't fill conmfortable when I have tepmerature in the room which meets "minimum requirements", and I don't like to be frozen at night hours.
I want to have consistent temperature in my flat of 21-23C' no matter if this is a day or night.

Ste.phen

They only inspect places where the tenant has complained that the place might be substandard. Why would they do anything else?
(There may be a case for random inspections of places on the PRTB register, but overall it could well be a waste of resources)

Del2005

Igy wrote: »

They only inspect places where the tenant has complained that the place might be substandard. Why would they do anything else?
(There may be a case for random inspections of places on the PRTB register, but overall it could well be a waste of resources)

Because many tennants may not be able to afford more and are afraid to report their slum landlord. Randon inspection is the only way to improve things. I'm sure a lot more places in the food industry would be filthy and dangerous if they didn't have random inspections.

Victor

We had an inspection of our place last year, the landlord did some work and it was reinspected.

forex wrote: »

It will have a huge impact as not all bedsits can be converted and those which can be converted will be ... BUT this will NOT change living standards, because if you join 2 stinky,dumpy rooms, what will you get ? - Double stinky room. Be sure - land lords will do this conversion as cheap as they only can ...

But they need planning permission to do that.

shoegirl

SkepticOne wrote: »

While I hate to see slum landlords profiting from substandard bedsits, I think we need to ask why people rent them rather than, say, one bed apartments. I'm sure most would prefer an apartment but most likely these are too expensive where they want to live.

By banning bedsits we are removing one option but we are not creating others to any great extent. This will only make life hard for those forced to live in bedsits.

In most cases its people on welfare claiming rent subsidy who wouldn't qualify for enough to pay for a one bedroomed unit, and also low earners or people who don't want to share but cannot afford a bigger place.
In many cases 1 or 2 bedroomed units are in as bad a condition as bedsits. The difference is usually the bedsit tenants doesn't have to deal with the hassle of cotenancy.

In my own experience of renting in Dublin around 1999-2001 there were two kinds of bedsits:
1. GENUINE bedsits which had their own cooking facilities
2. "fake" bedsits which were really bedrooms set in what was really a house share, but the tenants were set to individually

It would certainly help if the latter were eliminated, but the former were not always bad. One of the nicest places I lived in ever was a bedsit, but I did find that the pleasures of living there were much more dependent on who lived upstairs/downstairs than when I lived in bigger places where you were less impacted by bad (noisy) tenants in neighbouring units.

All the new laws do is force landlords to provide individual toilet/shower facilities which really isn't much. The cost will simply be handed on to tenants where its feasible, and bedsits that cannot be converted will probably just revert to being poor quality houseshares.

shoegirl

forex wrote: »

Where are they ? And how many of them? Saying we have ... not saying how many does not make any difference. Or may be there are only 5 of them for entire Ireland (Just for information: number of cardiologists in Ireland in 2005 was only 12, so we can also say - "we have", but in order to visit cardiologist you have to be in a waiting list for several years)
"We have" must mean - that he/she can be available within maximum a week.

I live for 6 years in the same flat and I did not have a single visit of such inspector! I am talking about regular inspections. And those land lords who does not keep accomodation according to stanrads I described above should have penalties.

They don't really.
I lived in a place that was inspected, and in the case of my (1 bed) flat, the problem was no hot running water, and poor ventilation. As it happened, I had a power shower, so hot running water wasn't needed (I boiled a kettle), and at the time my electricity was free, which was excellent as there was also no heating, just a couple of movable electric fires.

Thanks to my "inspection" hot running water got installed which resulted in the landlord starting to charge me for electricity. As there is no law requiring him not to profiteer on ESB charges, he charged me double what ESB charged him, which really gouged me.

As a result, I left the flat, as just basic use of electricity in a warm summer weather was costing me 10 euros a week (4 years ago). I moved out as I realised that to heat and light the place in winter was going to cost me over 25 euros a week, and I couldnt afford that.

What I am highlighting here is minimum standards are fine, but they do not protect tenants against unscrupulous landlords who will pass on the cost, and in many cases try to clawback costs through similar profiteering, much of which is perfectly legal.

(And yes, I did check into the legality - there is a law in other countries preventing landlords from overcharging tenants for utilities, but not in Ireland - your landlord can charge you what they like for water, waste collection, clearning, etc - and this is limitless).

bobbysands81

forex wrote: »

Where are they ? And how many of them? Saying we have ... not saying how many does not make any difference. Or may be there are only 5 of them for entire Ireland (Just for information: number of cardiologists in Ireland in 2005 was only 12, so we can also say - "we have", but in order to visit cardiologist you have to be in a waiting list for several years)
"We have" must mean - that he/she can be available within maximum a week.

I live for 6 years in the same flat and I did not have a single visit of such inspector! I am talking about regular inspections. And those land lords who does not keep accomodation according to stanrads I described above should have penalties.

Thousands of "targetted" inspections are carried out each year. Local Authorities get paid for the amount of actual inspections they carry out so it is within everyone's interest to have inspectors carrying out inspections.

If you feel that your rented accomodation is in breach of the 1993 standards then give your Local Authority a call and ask them to inspect it. The 1993 standards aren't great though, the new regs will really strengthen things up.

I know a lot of the LA's don't just go to any rented accomodation, they target where to go, there's little point an inspector going to a brand new apartment complex, far better to go to a dwelling that mightn't be reaching the minimum standards so as to give the tax payer and the person renting optimum value for money and help.

Everybody should have a decent basic standard of living. These regs definitely improve minimum standards and ensure that someone doesn't have to defecate, sleep and prepare food in the one room. For hygiene reasons alone this should be applauded.

Igy - Inspections are overwhelmingly "random" (by that I mean inspections are not just carried out on the back of complaints received). However, if you make a complaint a Local Authority MUST investigate.

Forex - This law is overwhelmingly for us, not against us. How is it possibly against "us"???Greedy landlords won't like it though.

Shoegirl - Have a tenancy agreement with your landlord and they won't be able to rip you off. Why would you accept paying over the odds for electricity?

forex

bobbysands81 wrote: »

...These regs definitely improve minimum standards and ensure that someone doesn't have to defecate, sleep and prepare food in the one room. For hygiene reasons alone this should be applauded.

Do you have to defecate in the middle of your room? Not yet? Very soon you'll have to, as this is what Land Lords will do after converting bedsits to match new law. As this law is ONLY about living places without toilets.

There is nothing wrong in cooking, I am sure that if tenant behaves like a pig - having multiple rooms will not solve the issue.
There is nothing wrong in sharing bathroom. I guess you know that when you use a public laundry there is another thousand people who used it before you, may be they better close public laundries for just for "hygiene reasons" ?

This is not about cooking and sleeping, this is about what people can afford to pay for and this is about terrible price level.

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Igy - Inspections are overwhelmingly "random" (by that I mean inspections are not just carried out on the back of complaints received). However, if you make a complaint a Local Authority MUST investigate.

Go ahead and make an official complain to your Land Lord, of course your "wishes" will be executed, but unfortunately you'll be forced to leave this place, just because Land Lord will increase your rents.
Now ask yourself - Do you need increase which you can't afford ? - No. What if you have kids, is it easy for you to change place ? - No. Can you get a place in the kindergarten in the new area ? - No.
In the same time you know that if you try to find other accommodation it will be in about the same conditions.

In the situation when tenders don't wish to complain and land lords don't wish to improve or fix living places ONLY regular inspections will do the job.
Land Lord should know that in case of faulty - he will have penalties. What penalties currently do they have ? Nothing or few euro. It MUST be CHEAPER for Land Lord to refurbish/improve living place then to pay penalties.

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Forex - This law is overwhelmingly for us, not against us. How is it possibly against "us"???Greedy landlords won't like it though.

Please read my previous posts, I believe I made my point clear. In addition to say if this law will take place - renting prices will go high.

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Shoegirl - Have a tenancy agreement with your landlord and they won't be able to rip you off. Why would you accept paying over the odds for electricity?

bobbysands81, you have forgotten that you live in the country where Land Lords dictates their conditions. If you are looking for accommodation, you might notice that some times you can see a lot of people coming for viewing. If you ask Land Lord to read & sign your 'tenancy agreement', he'll kindly ask you to come next time and call the next person in the queue ... Finally you'll end up staying in the hostel with 5 other people in the room and all of them will be coughing, smoking, snoring, and all of you will go to the same bathroom, share the same kitchen, shower and you'll all will be eating from the same dishes ...
So, what is better? To stay in the hostel or have own room when nobody disturbs you.

SkepticOne

Can someone provide a link to this EU regulation please?

bobbysands81

forex wrote: »

Do you have to defecate in the middle of your room? Not yet? Very soon you'll have to, as this is what Land Lords will do after converting bedsits to match new law. As this law is ONLY about living places without toilets.

How will I soon have to go to the toilet in "the middle of my room?" These regs are about bringing standards into the 21st Century.

forex wrote: »

There is nothing wrong in cooking, I am sure that if tenant behaves like a pig - having multiple rooms will not solve the issue.

But these regs are an attempt to modernise and improve the housing stock that is out there. If a tenant abuses the house they're in that's a totally different matter and is illegal too. I also think that the law is too much on the side of the tenant and nowhere near enough on the side of the landlord when it comes to some issues.

forex wrote: »

There is nothing wrong in sharing bathroom. I guess you know that when you use a public laundry there is another thousand people who used it before you, may be they better close public laundries for just for "hygiene reasons" ?

What's your point? You seem to be making random points at me as if you think I'm saying one thing and meaning another.

forex wrote: »

This is not about cooking and sleeping, this is about what people can afford to pay for and this is about terrible price level.

Yes, rent is more than likely going to increase as a result of this. Landlords have a habit of creaming off their tenants anyway.

forex wrote: »

Go ahead and make an official complain to your Land Lord, of course your "wishes" will be executed, but unfortunately you'll be forced to leave this place, just because Land Lord will increase your rents.
Now ask yourself - Do you need increase which you can't afford ? - No. What if you have kids, is it easy for you to change place ? - No. Can you get a place in the kindergarten in the new area ? - No.
In the same time you know that if you try to find other accommodation it will be in about the same conditions.

In the situation when tenders don't wish to complain and land lords don't wish to improve or fix living places ONLY regular inspections will do the job.
Land Lord should know that in case of faulty - he will have penalties. What penalties currently do they have ? Nothing or few euro. It MUST be CHEAPER for Land Lord to refurbish/improve living place then to pay penalties.

Complaint to Landlord... kindergarten... etc... what are you on about??? I agree that penalties should be greater. It should also be pointed out that if some of the rental housing stock was not in such a bad state then minimum requirements wouldn't be needed.

forex wrote: »

bobbysands81, you have forgotten that you live in the country where Land Lords dictates their conditions. If you are looking for accommodation, you might notice that some times you can see a lot of people coming for viewing. If you ask Land Lord to read & sign your 'tenancy agreement', he'll kindly ask you to come next time and call the next person in the queue ... Finally you'll end up staying in the hostel with 5 other people in the room and all of them will be coughing, smoking, snoring, and all of you will go to the same bathroom, share the same kitchen, shower and you'll all will be eating from the same dishes ...
So, what is better? To stay in the hostel or have own room when nobody disturbs you.

I really don't get the points you are making... Are you now saying that sharing a bathroom is bad? You were all on for it earlier.

Also Landlords nearly always ask people to sign a tenance agreement (it's a lease!).

In simple terms, and without going off in a tangent and a rant please tell me why you think these new regs are bad. Also please tell me who you think they are bad for?