County Council Long Term Leasing Scheme

Searching for house

Has anyone ever been successful in finding a landlord to lease their property under the county council long term leasing scheme? It's a scheme whereby you rent a property long term between 10 and 20 years. The council look after the property during the tenancy and the landlord receives 80% of the current market rent value. The rent is governed by the differential rent scheme.

I have recently been told that my husband and I can look for a four bedroom house under this scheme. However, I have no idea where to start looking. Are there any particular websites where I can search for a landlord? I have been trawling the internet the last week but I am not having much luck. The county council staff, although very nice and helpful, do not have a list of landlords wanting to rent their properties. They acknowledge that it is difficult to find a landlord willing to partake in the scheme.

I would really love to get some advice. I feel that we have been given a fantastic opportunity but I have no idea where to start!

Thanks so much.

No Pants

Searching for house wrote: »

the landlord receives 80% of the current market rent value.

What landlord wouldn't jump at that.

Searching for house

I suppose it suits some landlords as their property would be rented long term and therefore they would not lose out on rent when the property is empty or have to maintain the property?

fussyonion

This is the RAS scheme, yes?

Gatling

fussyonion wrote: »

This is the RAS scheme, yes?

That's what I was thinking


I stand corrected ,

http://www.dublincity.ie/Housing/Home/Pages/LongTermLeasingInitiative.aspx

http://www.dublincity.ie/Housing/Long TermLeasingInitiative/Pages/default.aspx

fussyonion

Searching for house wrote: »

Has anyone ever been successful in finding a landlord to lease their property under the county council long term leasing scheme? It's a scheme whereby you rent a property long term between 10 and 20 years. The council look after the property during the tenancy and the landlord receives 80% of the current market rent value. The rent is governed by the differential rent scheme.

I have recently been told that my husband and I can look for a four bedroom house under this scheme. However, I have no idea where to start looking. Are there any particular websites where I can search for a landlord? I have been trawling the internet the last week but I am not having much luck. The county council staff, although very nice and helpful, do not have a list of landlords wanting to rent their properties. They acknowledge that it is difficult to find a landlord willing to partake in the scheme.

I would really love to get some advice. I feel that we have been given a fantastic opportunity but I have no idea where to start!

Thanks so much.

It sounds like RAS.
There isn't any websites that have the names of Landlords, but it's a good idea.

All you can do is place your own ad on Gumtree or Daft, your local supermarket notice board, evening paper etc.

I know it's hard to find a willing Landlord but you just have to keep looking.
Incidentally, how long have you been on the Housing List?

No Pants

Searching for house wrote: »

therefore they would not lose out on rent when the property is empty or have to maintain the property?

But they are losing out on rent; 20%.

fussyonion

No Pants wrote: »

But they are losing out on rent; 20%.

Yes but for some Landlords, having a guaranteed tenant in a long lease is much more enticing.
It's not for everyone, but for some, it's definitely something that works for them

delthedriver

My guess it would be difficult in the Dublin Area as property prices are increasing as too are rents.


Landlords may not be interested in renting when they can get substantially more rent on the Open market and there are plenty of people queuing up to rent.


Example 2 bed apt in D 4 last year earning €1350 per month now commanding €1900 per month.

fussyonion

I will echo what delthedriver said; it is looking to be harder and harder for people like yourself, OP, given what some places are going for.

I know when I was offered the scheme, it was relatively new in the district I was renting and there were Landlords willing to participate.

I do think it's going to be a little tougher for you to find somewhere as more and more people on Rent Allowance are being offered RAS/ASH schemes as an alternative to Council housing, but keep trying and best of luck.

murphaph

The op is not talking about RAS. Long term leasing to the council is like a commercial lease. The landlord is not the end tenant's landlord. No PRTB registration. Council maintain property internally. The council effectively leases a council house from you.

The_Conductor

delthedriver wrote: »

My guess it would be difficult in the Dublin Area as property prices are increasing as too are rents.


Landlords may not be interested in renting when they can get substantially more rent on the Open market and there are plenty of people queuing up to rent.


Example 2 bed apt in D 4 last year earning €1350 per month now commanding €1900 per month.

Looking at a 2 bed apartment in Lucan last night (not mine!) apparently there are already multiple offers of 1250 a month on the table, and one very interested couple willing to trump any other offer on the table (its in the same apartment block as some of their work colleagues, and they have the facility to work from home a few days a week). I don't think 2 beds in Lucan *ever* made 1250 (or higher)?

No Pants

fussyonion wrote: »

Yes but for some Landlords, having a guaranteed tenant in a long lease is much more enticing.
It's not for everyone, but for some, it's definitely something that works for them

Might as well not have a guaranteed tenant when you're losing approximately 2.5 months of rent per year.

Gatling

No Pants wrote: »

Might as well not have a guaranteed tenant when you're losing approximately 2.5 months of rent per year.

But a guaranteed fixed rental income for 10- 20 years where you have little or no landlord responsibility

The_Conductor

Gatling wrote: »

little or no landlord responsibility

Clarify this.
Its come up here several times in this forum- with the council and the landlord both claiming the other is responsible for day-to-day management of the property........
You need it clarified in writing- and proper details given to the tenant for points of contact when things go wrong (as they will do).
Its rarely the case that the landlord simply hands over the property and walks off laughing into the sunset- to come back 20 years later, and renegotiate the deal then).

From the landlord's perspective- you need to copperfasten the rental element in writing- the government have been very active in applying unilateral reduction in rents for landlord's- on the expectations that market rents would fall by a commensurate amount- and they'd be home and dry- which has not happened in Dublin or Cork- which is why there are so few properties available on the schemes there............

Both prospective tenants and prospective landlords, need to do their homework on this- there is more involved for both tenants and landlords, than immediately meets the eye.

yankinlk

lots of info here. http://www.dublincity.ie/Housing/Long%20TermLeasingInitiative/Documents/FAQs_Long_Term_Leasing_Nov2012.pdf

madness. what happens in ten years when the cooker breaks down 3 times, who repairs or replaces it? very vague around details. any LL would be insane to accept this offer, especially since the rent allowed is most likely a pittance compared to the rest of the market. 80% of nothing is nothing. what a time to come up with an idea like this, when rents are sky rocketing.... doomed to never be taken up, where were they when it would have suited LL's struggling??

Mrs OBumble

No Pants wrote: »

But they are losing out on rent; 20%.

Only 8% after tax though, for many landlords.

yankinlk

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Only 8% after tax though, for many landlords.

doesnt matter, as i said. they will determine the market rate, and in my city its basically set at the lowest possible rent for the worst condition house in the worst area of the city, and they dont increase it no matter what. and in a market where rents are going up.... i dont even need to finish that sentence, this idea is going nowhere. the only people that will seek this idea out will be tenants.

The_Conductor

yankinlk wrote: »

doesnt matter, as i said. they will determine the market rate, and in my city its basically set at the lowest possible rent for the worst condition house in the worst area of the city, and they dont increase it no matter what. and in a market where rents are going up.... i dont even need to finish that sentence, this idea is going nowhere. the only people that will seek this idea out will be tenants.

Unfortunately- you're right- and given the total lack of enthusiasm of any landlords in the high demand areas of Dublin/Cork/Galway to subscribe to the scheme- it really is a theoretical rather than a practical housing solution- as its simply not worth a landlord's while subscribing to the scheme- when its set so low below the actual market rate.

@ 80% of the lowest rate in a given area- could well be 50% or even lower- of the average market rate for the area- and if its a reasonable property in a high demand area- why should a landlord subsidise the council in this manner?

It just doesn't add up for landlords (and thats before the entire Pandoras box of who is responsible for the day-to-day running of the tenancy even rears its ugly head.........)

The_Conductor

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Only 8% after tax though, for many landlords.

Given that its 20% below the *lowest* market rate for the area (which could be for a hovel- when the landlord is expected to meet reasonable standards)- it could well be 50% below the average market rate for a given location and standard of property- and for a better located and/or equipped property- it could be at an even higher discount to the open market rate.

The presumption is that its 20% less than a landlord might get were he/she to let the property on the open market- this is unfortunately not the case- its actually 20% less than the lowest asking price in the area (and normally there are damn good reasons for a landlord to offer a discount to prospective tenants- so the 20% discount will for all intents and purposes be on an entirely different class of property).

There really is damn all reason for a landlord to subscribe to this scheme- it makes little financial sense.

Mrs OBumble

And WTF does this line one page 2 of that DCC document mean:


Q. Does the property need to be furnished?

A. Yes, the property should be furnished. It will be the tenant’s responsibility to accept ownership of the furnishings.


Does that mean that the house is eventually given back to the owner unfurnished????

Gatling

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

And WTF does this line one page 2 of that DCC document mean:


Q. Does the property need to be furnished?

A. Yes, the property should be furnished. It will be the tenant’s responsibility to accept ownership of the furnishings.


Does that mean that the house is eventually given back to the owner unfurnished????

I believe they become responsible for furnishings ,ie maintain ,clean and replace if damaged ,

But the way its worded is a bit confusing

marathonic

As someone who has queried this in Donegal, the two schemes I was offered, neither of which I have accepted is:

RAS: It's a four year lease and the council pay 10% below market rent. The property should be furnished and all your responsibilities as a landlord remain, including maintenance, insurance, PRTB registration, etc. The tenant can already be in place when you apply for this scheme.

Long Term Leasing: This is a 10 year lease and the property should be unfurnished. The rent is reviewed every 4 years. The council will do a snaglist prior to signing the lease. They then take over maintenance completely and, at the end of the lease, the landlord does their own snaglist. Given they are required to hand back the property in it's original state, the council will insure the property. No PRTB registration is required.


With the second scheme, some of the additional 10% loss of rent over the first scheme will be covered via the reduced costs. I've also heard that banks may be willing to accept rent received under this long-term lease when assessing you for a new mortgage (they won't count rent for a private rental at all).

Searching for house

Thanks everyone for the replies! It is the long lease scheme for Co. Wicklow. I feel as though there is little hope in finding a landlord but I will definitely put a notice up on Gum tree and also in my local supermarkets etc. as you just never know.

Thanks

yankinlk

gov could end the rental emergency over night by making these schemes tax free.

delthedriver

yankinlk wrote: »

gov could end the rental emergency over night by making these schemes tax free.

Good idea!

The_Conductor

yankinlk wrote: »

gov could end the rental emergency over night by making these schemes tax free.

Never going to happen.
The few tax free schemes that are still out there- such as forestry- are all up for review, with the intention to wind them down (over the next decade/15 years).

If the manner in which rental income was taxed- was more cognisant of professional landlords who obey the letter and spirit of the law- and who clear any debts on rental properties in an efficient manner- you might have some argument for special arrangements.

Landlords are subsidised currently- by having 75% of mortgage interest allowable as a deductible expense- when you compare them to other interests in the sector- such as owner occupiers- who are not afforded this concession.

Landlords argue, quite legitimately, that allowing mortgage interest as an expense is simply the same as it is treated in any other business. Quite true. However, it produces a perverse incentive, and not just in this sector- across all business sectors, to rely on cheap borrowed money- and why bother paying it back, when its an allowable expense............

The Economist recently had a very interesting opinion piece on the merits of allowing the cost of finance be used as a tax deductible expense- they weren't looking at the residential sector in particular- more across the board- and they came to the conclusion that the private sector is addicted to cheap credit- and where they might traditionally have raised funds in other manners- they couldn't be arsed anymore- it was far cheaper to throw borrowed money at it instead.

The whole purpose of cheap money was to try to get end consumers spending again- it was supposed to trickle down 'to the little people' who in turn would keep the wheels of the economies turning over. That has not proven to be the case- it instead was exported to countries who could scarcely figure how to spend it- of late the BRIC group of countries- previous to that- the European periphery- including ourselves- building up problems for the future.

Its all well and good coming up with imaginative schemes to try to resuscitate the rental market and encourage landlords to provide units in locations that people actually want to live. Keep in mind- that lady living in her car in Tallaght- *has* as a council provided property in Athy in Kildare- she doesn't want to live there though- as she says she has no family or ties to the community. She wants a semi-detached in Tallaght, with a garden for her children to play in (read the Indo and Irish Times interviews- some of the comments attributed to her were quite amazing). If people want to live in Dublin/Wicklow/Kildare/Meath- we need to figure how to accommodate them. Ye traditional semi detached with a garden- has to go out the window. We need high density apartments- with appropriate facilities and amenities- cognisant of diverse population demographics- a bulk of very young children- and pensioners, such as we have never had before.

Giving landlords a tax break- is bollox- all you're going to do is create a further inflation of the bubble- you need an all-inclusive look at the sector- alongside a sea change in people's attitudes.

delthedriver

The_Conductor wrote: »

Never going to happen.
The few tax free schemes that are still out there- such as forestry- are all up for review, with the intention to wind them down (over the next decade/15 years).

If the manner in which rental income was taxed- was more cognisant of professional landlords who obey the letter and spirit of the law- and who clear any debts on rental properties in an efficient manner- you might have some argument for special arrangements.

Landlords are subsidised currently- by having 75% of mortgage interest allowable as a deductible expense- when you compare them to other interests in the sector- such as owner occupiers- who are not afforded this concession.

Landlords argue, quite legitimately, that allowing mortgage interest as an expense is simply the same as it is treated in any other business. Quite true. However, it produces a perverse incentive, and not just in this sector- across all business sectors, to rely on cheap borrowed money- and why bother paying it back, when its an allowable expense............

The Economist recently had a very interesting opinion piece on the merits of allowing the cost of finance be used as a tax deductible expense- they weren't looking at the residential sector in particular- more across the board- and they came to the conclusion that the private sector is addicted to cheap credit- and where they might traditionally have raised funds in other manners- they couldn't be arsed anymore- it was far cheaper to throw borrowed money at it instead.

The whole purpose of cheap money was to try to get end consumers spending again- it was supposed to trickle down 'to the little people' who in turn would keep the wheels of the economies turning over. That has not proven to be the case- it instead was exported to countries who could scarcely figure how to spend it- of late the BRIC group of countries- previous to that- the European periphery- including ourselves- building up problems for the future.

Its all well and good coming up with imaginative schemes to try to resuscitate the rental market and encourage landlords to provide units in locations that people actually want to live. Keep in mind- that lady living in her car in Tallaght- *has* as a council provided property in Athy in Kildare- she doesn't want to live there though- as she says she has no family or ties to the community. She wants a semi-detached in Tallaght, with a garden for her children to play in (read the Indo and Irish Times interviews- some of the comments attributed to her were quite amazing). If people want to live in Dublin/Wicklow/Kildare/Meath- we need to figure how to accommodate them. Ye traditional semi detached with a garden- has to go out the window. We need high density apartments- with appropriate facilities and amenities- cognisant of diverse population demographics- a bulk of very young children- and pensioners, such as we have never had before.

Giving landlords a tax break- is bollox- all you're going to do is create a further inflation of the bubble- you need an all-inclusive look at the sector- alongside a sea change in people's attitudes.

It is ironic , the lady in the car in Tallaght already has a council house in Athy but does not want to live there because she has no family ties or ties to the community.


My sympathy for her is limited, spare a thought for all the young couples from Dublin who were forced by market forces to buy houses in Dublin's expanding commuter belt including Athy. They have no family ties or ties to the community, but they make the effort to settle into the community, whilst travelling long distances to work.


Spare a thought also for people who have lost their jobs and relocate to other parts of the country to take up employment in area where they too have no family ties, but they just get on with it,


Choosing to live in a car over living in her assigned Council house in Athy is her choice. IMHO this lady is nothing more than a publicity stunt on behalf of SF.

yankinlk

So if u are saying there is NO rental emergency? Not just that lady.
I dont argue that u have a point, im no financial expert. Maybe make the allowable interest two teired for example... 50% if u rent to anyone, 100% if you take RAS or some such gov scheme.

The RAS/LTI schemes means the Gov can somewhat control the rent charged to the market, thru the rent ceilings allowed. They could also enforce a policy of not allowing any interest to anyone caught taking MORE from tenants than the RAS money (a practice that was rampant, a may still be so Im not sure).

Sticking tenants in Hotels is not sustainable thats for sure, altho im sure some of the Bank owned hotels are only too delighted to have their business propped up.

delthedriver

Cannot see landlords in Dublin or any of the main cities signing up to RAs or any other long term scheme.


Rents are sky rocketing in Dublin, there are queues of people viewing rental units. Landlords would be off their heads to sign up to such paltry amounts being offered by RAS


There is a lot more wear and tear on the fabric of the house and contents where RAS tenants are in situ as they spend more time in the premises as opposed to a working couple who spend only 10 hours per day in the unit.


To a certain extent there is a greater degree of helplessness amongst RAS tenants who tend to bother landlords about every little thing, whereas the working couple just want to go about their business with as little contact with landlord as possible.

Gatling

delthedriver wrote: »

Cannot see landlords in Dublin or any of the main cities signing up to RAs or any other long term scheme.


Rents are sky rocketing in Dublin, there are queues of people viewing rental units. Landlords would be off their heads to sign up to such paltry amounts being offered by RAS


There is a lot more wear and tear on the fabric of the house and contents where RAS tenants are in situ as they spend more time in the premises as opposed to a working couple who spend only 10 hours per day in the unit.


To a certain extent there is a greater degree of helplessness amongst RAS tenants who tend to bother landlords about every little thing, whereas the working couple just want to go about their business with as little contact with landlord as possible.

Pretty broad generalisations

fussyonion

delthedriver wrote: »

Cannot see landlords in Dublin or any of the main cities signing up to RAs or any other long term scheme.


Rents are sky rocketing in Dublin, there are queues of people viewing rental units. Landlords would be off their heads to sign up to such paltry amounts being offered by RAS


There is a lot more wear and tear on the fabric of the house and contents where RAS tenants are in situ as they spend more time in the premises as opposed to a working couple who spend only 10 hours per day in the unit.


To a certain extent there is a greater degree of helplessness amongst RAS tenants who tend to bother landlords about every little thing, whereas the working couple just want to go about their business with as little contact with landlord as possible.

You make some valid points but the part highlighted in bold isn't something I agree with.
Just because someone is working doesn't necessarily mean they aren't going to bother their LL with anything.

Also, a lot of RAS tenants ARE working. The scheme allows them to work full or part time as opposed to Rent Allowance which meant you couldn't work.

I don't think it goes by whether someone is a RAS tenant or a non-RAS tenant to say they'd bother/not bother the LL.

I was a Rent Allowance tenant and never bothered my LL about anything; I did everything myself.

delthedriver

Gatling wrote: »

Pretty broad generalisations

Please feel free to elaborate

delthedriver

fussyonion wrote: »

You make some valid points but the part highlighted in bold isn't something I agree with.
Just because someone is working doesn't necessarily mean they aren't going to bother their LL with anything.

Also, a lot of RAS tenants ARE working. The scheme allows them to work full or part time as opposed to Rent Allowance which meant you couldn't work.

I don't think it goes by whether someone is a RAS tenant or a non-RAS tenant to say they'd bother/not bother the LL.

I was a Rent Allowance tenant and never bothered my LL about anything; I did everything myself.

Well I respect your views. You are exceptional in my experience. IMHO where people are working they just want to get on with their lives like you, if there was an issue you sorted it.

Gatling

delthedriver wrote: »

Please feel free to elaborate

Read above fussyonion ,said it all ,

Except that part about wear and tear doesn't matter if your there 5 hours or out 10 hours things still need doing regardless and as for tenants been on to landlords its there job isn't it to fix and deal with there customers for a better word,
People who work are just as likely if not more likely to get on to landlords as those who dont

delthedriver

Gatling wrote: »

Read above fussyonion ,said it all ,

Except that part about wear and tear doesn't matter if your there 5 hours or out 10 hours things still need doing regardless and as for tenants been on to landlords its there job isn't it to fix and deal with there customers for a better word,
People who work are just as likely if not more likely to get on to landlords as those who dont

Absolutely , the tenant is the landlord's customer, no issue there.


It amazes me however the number of dishwashers, washing machines, microwave ovens , sofas , tables , beds ,chairs I have replaced , the original items being new at the commencement of the tenancy!


The wear and tear rate is definitely higher , where tenants are in the property 24 hours!

I can understand why landlords are not accepting Rent Allowance or RAS in Dublin

Gatling

I've been renting 15 years most long term let's ,I've never once had to have a bed ,cooker ,dishwasher replaced ,
But if your replacing goods every 12 months for tenants ,you either have bogey tenants or bogey appliances ,

My only complaints are usual based on beds that I don't talk to landlords over ,
Just have my own bed that I bought for specific needs

chopper6

No Pants wrote: »

Might as well not have a guaranteed tenant when you're losing approximately 2.5 months of rent per year.

Always with the short-term gain,eh?

No Pants

chopper6 wrote: »

Always with the short-term gain,eh?

I'm not a landlord, so no.

delthedriver

Gatling wrote: »

I've been renting 15 years most long term let's ,I've never once had to have a bed ,cooker ,dishwasher replaced ,
But if your replacing goods every 12 months for tenants ,you either have bogey tenants or bogey appliances ,

My only complaints are usual based on beds that I don't talk to landlords over ,
Just have my own bed that I bought for specific needs

Perhaps I have been unlucky?


TBF I have perhaps been spoiled by some wonderful tenants, on the other hand a tenant waiting for the landlord to change the light bulbs ...............!

Ray Palmer

Gatling wrote: »

I've been renting 15 years most long term let's ,I've never once had to have a bed ,cooker ,dishwasher replaced ,
But if your replacing goods every 12 months for tenants ,you either have bogey tenants or bogey appliances ,

My only complaints are usual based on beds that I don't talk to landlords over ,
Just have my own bed that I bought for specific needs

That is magical good luck. I wouldn't say any tenant is worse or better on appliances but every tenant is quite destructive on everything. I actually keep spare appliances about as they get broken so often by tenants.

There is a slight difference in a family let compared other tenants but then the kids destroy many other things.

Gatling

Ray Palmer wrote: »

That is magical good luck. I wouldn't say any tenant is worse or better on appliances but every tenant is quite destructive on everything. I actually keep spare appliances about as they get broken so often by tenants.

There is a slight difference in a family let compared other tenants but then the kids destroy many other things.

I think its down to respecting other peoples property ,we have 2 kids but were not running the washing machine or other appliances 24 /7 ,use the cooker hob daily and oven maybe once a month ,

I've seen tenants do the landlord having to replace everything down to the light bulbs ,
We ve no light bulbs when we moved there was 12 bulbs blown in 3 rooms ,which were replaced within a few months they all blew most of which were Long life efficient bulbs ,
Landlord had 2 electricians to check over the whole place and found no issues ,so only use lamps in the sitting room in the evening's and night lights for the kids rooms

delthedriver

Ray Palmer wrote: »

That is magical good luck. I wouldn't say any tenant is worse or better on appliances but every tenant is quite destructive on everything. I actually keep spare appliances about as they get broken so often by tenants.

There is a slight difference in a family let compared other tenants but then the kids destroy many other things.

It amazes me how I can get 10 years + out of a washing machine , dishwasher etc. Meanwhile a tenant could be unlucky to only get 2 years out of the same quality appliances.

Ray Palmer

delthedriver wrote: »

It amazes me how I can get 10 years + out of a washing machine , dishwasher etc. Meanwhile a tenant could be unlucky to only get 2 years out of the same quality appliances.

Your telling me. I have said this before, I bought 4 washing machines all the same model. 1 for my mother, 1 for me and 2 for tenants. Still using ours as is my mother after 10 years and the machines lasted roughly 2 years in the rentals. New machines bought for the tenants and again only lasted about 2 years, same again and again and again. Never again will I buy high end appliances for rentals it makes no difference.

As for bulbs blowing we had a similar problem in our own property. It was ESB power supply surging. Spent a long time investigating it before we got it sorted.

Also had a tenant complain about bulbs blowing and it was their fault. Halogen bulbs can blow if you don't clean them when handled and some of the energy bulbs have a similar problem. Rub them down before putting them up and use a cloth when putting them in. I told the tenants about the placing of bulbs they just ignored it but yelled pretty load about it happening.

murphaph

In Germany most leases contain a "small repairs clause" which can (by law) allow a LL to decline any small repairs of items that are handles by the tenant up to €410 per year. So, the pump in the heating system remains the LL's problem as the tenant doesn't touch it but light bulbs or even a kitchen tap would fall under the small repair clause and if they break, the tenant must fix them (up to €410 in any year).

No LLs in Germany are getting phonecalls about blown lightbulbs! I wouldn't even entertain such a call from a tenant.

MadDog76

Searching for house wrote: »

Has anyone ever been successful in finding a landlord to lease their property under the county council long term leasing scheme? It's a scheme whereby you rent a property long term between 10 and 20 years. The council look after the property during the tenancy and the landlord receives 80% of the current market rent value. The rent is governed by the differential rent scheme.

I have recently been told that my husband and I can look for a four bedroom house under this scheme. However, I have no idea where to start looking. Are there any particular websites where I can search for a landlord? I have been trawling the internet the last week but I am not having much luck. The county council staff, although very nice and helpful, do not have a list of landlords wanting to rent their properties. They acknowledge that it is difficult to find a landlord willing to partake in the scheme.

I would really love to get some advice. I feel that we have been given a fantastic opportunity but I have no idea where to start!

Thanks so much.

As an ASH Scheme tenant my advice would be to find the house you're happy with in an area you're happy with and rent it privately for a period of time (if possible!!) ........ build up a good relationship with your Landlord then approach him/her about the Ash Scheme pointing out all the positive benefits (of which there are many!!) to him/her and you might get lucky!
That's what myself and my wife did and we are now SDCC Tenants on the Ash Scheme .......

MadDog76

fussyonion wrote: »

This is the RAS scheme, yes?

No the RAS Scheme is completely different than the Ash Scheme in lots of ways ........ for example you MAY be employed and still qualify for the RAS Scheme whereas with the ASH Scheme you MUST be in employment to qualify!

MadDog76

The_Conductor wrote: »

Clarify this.
Its come up here several times in this forum- with the council and the landlord both claiming the other is responsible for day-to-day management of the property........
You need it clarified in writing- and proper details given to the tenant for points of contact when things go wrong (as they will do).
Its rarely the case that the landlord simply hands over the property and walks off laughing into the sunset- to come back 20 years later, and renegotiate the deal then).

From the landlord's perspective- you need to copperfasten the rental element in writing- the government have been very active in applying unilateral reduction in rents for landlord's- on the expectations that market rents would fall by a commensurate amount- and they'd be home and dry- which has not happened in Dublin or Cork- which is why there are so few properties available on the schemes there............

Both prospective tenants and prospective landlords, need to do their homework on this- there is more involved for both tenants and landlords, than immediately meets the eye.

Each ASH lease is slightly different and is tailored to meet the needs/requirements of individual Landlords/Tenants .......... both parties must be completely happy with the final lease agreement BEFORE anything is signed.

Also the rent can be reviewed on a yearly basis (if the Landlord wishes) in order to be in-line with the rental market prices for that year ......... the Tenants pay 10% of their take-home pay in rent regardless.

Nothing is set in stone with the ASH Scheme regarding leases, the Council are very open to negotiation with Landlords .......... for example our Landlord wanted 90% of the average rent prices in our area and the Council agreed. In fact he ended up 50 euros better off per month than what we were paying him privately!!

MadDog76

yankinlk wrote: »

doesnt matter, as i said. they will determine the market rate, and in my city its basically set at the lowest possible rent for the worst condition house in the worst area of the city, and they dont increase it no matter what. and in a market where rents are going up.... i dont even need to finish that sentence, this idea is going nowhere. the only people that will seek this idea out will be tenants.

The Council don't determine the market rate, the Landlord and the Council determine the market rate together and negotiate what the Council will pay and what the Landlord is happy to accept ........... it's a Scheme that does/is working for many Landlords and Tenants alike.

fussyonion

MadDog76 wrote: »

No the RAS Scheme is completely different than the Ash Scheme in lots of ways ........ for example you MAY be employed and still qualify for the RAS Scheme whereas with the ASH Scheme you MUST be in employment to qualify!

No that's not true. My partner and I were going to do the ASH scheme and it didn't mention anywhere that we needed to be in employment.
The difference between RAS and ASH is that the ASH scheme allows the LL to choose his tenant. The RAS scheme means the Council chooses.

MadDog76

fussyonion wrote: »

No that's not true. My partner and I were going to do the ASH scheme and it didn't mention anywhere that we needed to be in employment.
The difference between RAS and ASH is that the ASH scheme allows the LL to choose his tenant. The RAS scheme means the Council chooses.

Maybe you and your partner WERE going to do the ASH Scheme but me and my wife actually DID the Ash Scheme ........ we went through the whole 5 month process (including proof of employment) and are now 2 weeks into our ASH Scheme Tenancy ........... you MUST be in employment to finally sign the ASH Scheme lease with SDCC ....... fact.