Rent prices

jane82

Jaysis they re raising. Is there any plan to get them back down abit. Ive never seen them this high.
What happens if it gets to a stage where average working people cant afford rent.
We arnt far off two minimum wage families having to double up in the one apartment at these prices.
For the first time since the crash I feel.I may even be concerned enough to join the protesting people.

biko

are too damn high

subway

rent is dead money, buy a house

biko

Is that you Bertie?

Penny Tration

Supply and demand. There's a lack of rental properties in some areas, so those areas can command a higher rent because there aren't enough properties for all of the people who need them.

Sucks, but it happens.

Michael D Not Higgins

https://www.daft.ie/report/
11% rise last year in Dublin

Turtyturd

subway wrote: »

rent is dead money, buy a house

Would agree with this.....but don't just buy one OP. Buy a second one and lease it out, for a low amount obviously.

jane82

Would nama not rent a few houses out? Do they really have a load of good ones?

For Forks Sake

Turtyturd wrote: »

Would agree with this.....but don't just buy one OP. Buy a second one and lease it out, for a low amount obviously.

And then some Bulgarian property. Top, top investment.

Dravokivich

We were looking for a place to rent recently and were lucky we got a good place at far lower than the going rate in the area. The only affordable places would have meant upwards to 3 hours a day commuting to work for me and the additional costs in comparison to the rent would have been negligible.

jane82 wrote: »

Would nama not rent a few houses out? Do they really have a load of good ones?

Nama are there to protect the property market by holding back on the amount of property available. It's the only way they can get as high a return as possible on the properties they hold, which is their primary focus.

everdead.ie

jane82 wrote: »

Would nama not rent a few houses out? Do they really have a load of good ones?

Nama is already the biggest landlord in the country it makes hundreds a million a year in rent money.

For Forks Sake

jane82 wrote: »

Would nama not rent a few houses out? Do they really have a load of good ones?

Not in areas that anyone wants to live in tbh.

For Forks Sake

everdead.ie wrote: »

Nama is already the biggest landlord in the country it makes hundreds a million a year in rent money.

Most of that is off commercial property.

jane82

So will the builder have to get building again or what?

everdead.ie

For Forks Sake wrote: »

Most of that is off commercial property.

My firt three apartments in Dublin were all Nama owned down in the IFSC. there are residential properties as well not sure how many "family homes" ie three four bed homes/apartments they have though. They seem to be mostly one and two beds.

everdead.ie

jane82 wrote: »

So will the builder have to get building again or what?

Ya the issue is at the moment in Dublin only a third of the necessary housing is being built a year. It won't be long before the Government introduce tax schemes to get more builders building again to try and alleviate the problem.

It will have a bright side a number of people will be taken off the live register and it should bring rent and the cost of buying down as supply meets demand.

The obvious issue is if it will be handled correctly this time with proper planning and every completed house need to be inspected to see if it meets standards.

The tax relieve should also only be brought into areas where housing is needed and not just because there is an empty field somewhere.

UCDVet

Not sure why anyone is surprised by this. Of course rents are going to go up!

darkpagandeath

Something something rent allowance propping up minimum rental price ..... No need to lower price catch 22

jane82

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Something something rent allowance propping up minimum rental price ..... No need to lower price catch 22

But thats the thing. Its way higher than rent allowance in dublin now. People on R A are having to pay the difference.
Its driving people into serious poverty.

Inspector Coptoor

Too many 1 bed shoe box apartments in South Dublin, I live in one.
Great address/location but that's about it.

I'm lucky in a way.
Living with my fiancée & we're paying €825 a month so my outlay is only €412.50.
In the same place now almost 4 years so that's €40k gone, but, the "going rate" for a similar apartment in our block is now €1100-€1150, so essentially we're saving €3600 on rent that can go towards wedding/house deposit.

However, had we bought a few years ago, the mortgage would be around €1600 a month and we'd be in negative equity.

Hard to know what to do in the short to medium term.

average_runner

Where would be living to have a mortage of 1600 a month?? We bought a 4 bed for 450,000, 100,000 cash and a tracker. Paying 800 a month now for a nice big house!

Inspector Coptoor

Given a mortgage of €300k over 30 yeRs would cost you €600k, you're looking at €1650 a month.

When did you buy?
Where?
Just look at the current prices in south Dublin. I'm not even talking about D4 & Blackrock, I'm talking Stilorgan & Leopardstown.
€400k for a semi-d with 3 bedrooms

darkpagandeath

jane82 wrote: »

But thats the thing. Its way higher than rent allowance in dublin now. People on R A are having to pay the difference.
Its driving people into serious poverty.

That's kind of my point if there was no guaranteed price they could get and use as a minimum they would actually have to let the market dictate the price. And prices could lower, Guaranteed RA price props up the price artificially.

pctosh

Supply and demand
Shocking amount of immigrants

Alf Veedersane

We got lucky. We must've got in at the perfect moment or we'd still be renting.

Renting is only dead money if you can affford to buy yourself a house you plan on living in for 10+ years, IMHO.

I never did see the attraction at scrambling to pay a mortgage every month for the next 25-30 years

average_runner

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

Given a mortgage of €300k over 30 yeRs would cost you €600k, you're looking at €1650 a month.

When did you buy?
Where?
Just look at the current prices in south Dublin. I'm not even talking about D4 & Blackrock, I'm talking Stilorgan & Leopardstown.
€400k for a semi-d with 3 bedrooms

Just before the trackers went. Doesnt matter where i bought, the house value was 450 at the time.

Rent is dead money, you get nothing in return, buying is not, even if your house only ends up with a value of 2000 euro, you still get something that is yours to do what you want to it and not wonder will you have to leave after lease is up.

Only buy what you can afford, but think of the future, say 2 kids and one of ye lose a job. Calculate the worst scenario

anncoates

Apparently they just need to repossess all the damn houses and then the market "will find its level" and then rent will be €5 a week and we can all pick up a gaff in Rathgar for €500.

Alf Veedersane

average_runner wrote: »

Only buy what you can afford, but think of the future, say 2 kids and one of ye lose a job. Calculate the worst scenario

So...buy a hovel with a mortgage the same as your rent?

average_runner

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

So...buy a hovel with a mortgage the same as your rent?

If thats what you can afford when then yes. We don't want to go back to the situation we previously had.

Can get a good size 2 bed for 160,000 outside the city like Lucan etc

Inspector Coptoor

average_runner wrote: »

Just before the trackers went. Doesnt matter where i bought, the house value was 450 at the time.

Rent is dead money, you get nothing in return, buying is not, even if your house only ends up with a value of 2000 euro, you still get something that is yours to do what you want to it and not wonder will you have to leave after lease is up.

Only buy what you can afford, but think of the future, say 2 kids and one of ye lose a job. Calculate the worst scenario

It depends on your viewpoint.
I'm getting a service - ie, shelter, at well below the market value.

Don't want to go into too much personal details but we're both in secure jobs with decent salaries.
Once the wedding is out of the way at the end of the year, we'll start focussing on getting a house/mortgage.

Inspector Coptoor

average_runner wrote: »

If thats what you can afford when then yes. We don't want to go back to the situation we previously had.

Can get a good size 2 bed for 160,000 outside the city like Lucan etc

I currently cycle to work, going in and out to Lucan would make that commute harder.
My fiancée needs to be located close to where we are now due to the on call nature of her job.
It's not as simple as move to the periphery of Dublin

Alf Veedersane

average_runner wrote: »

Can get a good size 2 bed for 160,000 outside the city like Lucan etc

I'd rather have rented where I was for the same price as the mortgage for a house in Lucan given the extra expense that would have involved.

I'd find more value in renting and enjoying living where I live than owning and not enjoying where I live.

OldNotWIse

It's scary alright. We are going through the mill at the moment with our landlord who is essentially attempting an illegal eviction because rents have shot up since we signed a lease. Tough sh1t I say but she's hopping, no doubt thinking about the extra money she could be getting now. If you check DAFT, it shows price fluctuations per property and most have increased substantially in the very recent past. We are thinking about sharing when our lease expires :mad: Or maybe moving in with mammy and giving her the money instead

average_runner

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

I currently cycle to work, going in and out to Lucan would make that commute harder.
My fiancée needs to be located close to where we are now due to the on call nature of her job.
It's not as simple as move to the periphery of Dublin

Work out the range from your other half workplace and yours.
Her response time for getting to work etc. How bad traffic in her area is.
Example Lucan has bus lane, so 30 -40 mins during rush hour to city centre.

For you its easy, you cycle, you can live within 10-12 mile radius of work as it be a 30-40 min cycle which is grand and good for you.

average_runner

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

I'd rather have rented where I was for the same price as the mortgage for a house in Lucan given the extra expense that would have involved.

I'd find more value in renting and enjoying living where I live than owning and not enjoying where I live.

Thats your choice and fair play.

OldNotWIse

average_runner wrote: »

Just before the trackers went. Doesnt matter where i bought, the house value was 450 at the time.

Rent is dead money, you get nothing in return, buying is not, even if your house only ends up with a value of 2000 euro, you still get something that is yours to do what you want to it and not wonder will you have to leave after lease is up.

Only buy what you can afford, but think of the future, say 2 kids and one of ye lose a job. Calculate the worst scenario

What happens if you have a mortgage of 400k on a property thats only worth 200k? Will you still have something left?

average_runner

OldNotWIse wrote: »

What happens if you have a mortgage of 400k on a property thats only worth 200k? Will you still have something left?

Wont you have a house after you paid it off? What does it matter if your going to live there forever and your happy?

Our house is out of negative equity, but i dont care if it goes up 200,000 or down as its my home.

tmc86

11% rise in rent, that's gotta be the whole country right?

Dublin alone rent has gone up 20% in our experience over the last two years.

Won't be able to afford to buy for another few years so no choice but to grin and bear it.

OldNotWIse

average_runner wrote: »

Wont you have a house after you paid it off? What does it matter if your going to live there forever and your happy?

Our house is out of negative equity, but i dont care if it goes up 200,000 or down as its my home.

Negative equity is clearly not an issue of you are planning to stay there forever. It might be an issue for your successors though.

average_runner

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Negative equity is clearly not an issue of you are planning to stay there forever. It might be an issue for your successors though.

Why?

Property has proven thru history that its a bad investment opportunity, so you buy to live in it, negative equity wont matter. Always buy what you can afford if things go pear shape.

The Diabolical Monocle

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

I'm getting a service - ie, shelter.

So is he.

But he owns something at the end.

awec

average_runner wrote: »

Why?

Property has proven thru history that its a bad investment opportunity, so you buy to live in it, negative equity wont matter. Always buy what you can afford if things go pear shape.

Well, negative equity does matter because you are paying more for something than it's worth. You are in higher debt and you get nothing in return for that larger debt.

I would far rather be in the situation where I am renting than be in negative equity.

average_runner

awec wrote: »

Well, negative equity does matter because you are paying more for something than it's worth. You are in higher debt and you get nothing in return for that larger debt.

I would far rather be in the situation where I am renting than be in negative equity.

But your always paying over the odds for renting as you end up with nothing.

Also what i paid in rent for city centre 15 years has double since. Yes wages will go up but the cost of the mortgage will not double.

OldNotWIse

average_runner wrote: »

Why?

Property has proven thru history that its a bad investment opportunity, so you buy to live in it, negative equity wont matter. Always buy what you can afford if things go pear shape.

Again, I know. Its not an issue if you live there all your life. Most people move more than once though. Especially those who bought in a celtic tiger panic just to get on the ladder with the intention to upgrade when the family got bigger or the value went up etc. A relative of mine is stuck in a dogbox she overpaid for when she first married. Chilod number 2 is due soon. I dont think she envisaged rearing two children in a 2 bed, 5th floor apartment in an unfinished complex. Not everyone buys their dream home first time.

awec

average_runner wrote: »

But your always paying over the odds for renting as you end up with nothing.

You have somewhere to live without the worry that you are paying 400,000 for something worth 200,000.

This is like arguing that someone shouldn't lease a car but rather pay 10,000 euro for one worth 5,000 euro because while they may as well flush that extra 5,000 euro down the toilet they'll own a 5,000 euro car at the end of it.

When you are renting you at least have options open to you. When you are in negative equity your options are very limited because you are financially screwed.

OldNotWIse

average_runner wrote: »

But your always paying over the odds for renting as you end up with nothing.

You're paying for a service ie; somewhere to live. Not everything has to be an investment.

Alf Veedersane

average_runner wrote: »

But your always paying over the odds for renting as you end up with nothing.

Having nothing tangible after spending money isn't the same thing as having nothing.

If I got public transport all my life I wouldn't consider it money that was wasted when I could have had a car.

awec

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Again, I know. Its not an issue if you live there all your life. Most people move more than once though. Especially those who bought in a celtic tiger panic just to get on the ladder with the intention to upgrade when the family got bigger or the value went up etc. A relative of mine is stuck in a dogbox she overpaid for when she first married. Chilod number 2 is due soon. I dont think she envisaged rearing two children in a 2 bed, 5th floor apartment in an unfinished complex. Not everyone buys their dream home first time.

I'm willing to bet that this person would much rather be in the scenario that they are renting their apartment rather than owning it.

average_runner

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Again, I know. Its not an issue if you live there all your life. Most people move more than once though. Especially those who bought in a celtic tiger panic just to get on the ladder with the intention to upgrade when the family got bigger or the value went up etc. A relative of mine is stuck in a dogbox she overpaid for when she first married. Chilod number 2 is due soon. I dont think she envisaged rearing two children in a 2 bed, 5th floor apartment in an unfinished complex. Not everyone buys their dream home first time.

I agree with with you there, but I didnt buy my dream home first time either. What I did do was my homework. I bought a two bed house where I knew i could raise a family if i couldnt afford to move.

The problem in the celtic tiger panic was, people didnt think much about the future.
I hope we learn from this, but i fear we wont as the same mistakes are starting again.

Inspector Coptoor

average_runner wrote: »

But your always paying over the odds for renting as you end up with nothing.

Also what i paid in rent for city centre 15 years has double since. Yes wages will go up but the cost of the mortgage will not double.

To address your earlier point about range, my OH has to be within 15-20 min distance of workplace when the call comes in

I'm paying considerably under the odds at present.

House ownership would be nice, but I don't WANT to live in Lucan or somewhere else that would cost €50 to get a taxi home after a night out.

Inspector Coptoor

average_runner wrote: »

I agree with with you there, but I didnt buy my dream home first time either. What I did do was my homework. I bought a two bed house where I knew i could raise a family if i couldnt afford to move.

The problem in the celtic tiger panic was, people didnt think much about the future.
I hope we learn from this, but i fear we wont as the same mistakes are starting again.

This is a great point, which is why I'm so cautious about buying in the next 12-24 months