High rents and rent controls (Moved to Irish Economy) Mod Warning in First Post.

steddyeddy

A friend of mine recently had to stop her PhD and try to continue her work abroad due to a sharp rise in her rent. Another friend doing a masters in law with two kids might have to postpone the course because her rent has risen to unaffordable levels and she can't find a new place. In the commercial sector we have businesses closing due to unaffordable rents.

Landlords putting up rents are affecting business, putting jobs in jeopardy and causing our educated to leave the country and offer their skills in places with more reasonable rent.

Why does such a large section of society have to be affected by one group of people? what would be so wrong with rent controls or much higher taxes on rental income?

humanji wrote: »

I've moved this over to the Irish Economy forum. Please note the different charter here.

Mod: I think this is a fair request, can posters please stick to the main topic. Posters are welcome to start a thread here or on the main politics board about PHD's and free third level fees, would be an interesting discussion. Thanks.

Stheno

steddyeddy wrote: »

A friend of mine recently had to stop her PhD and try to continue her work abroad due to a sharp rise in her rent. Another friend doing a masters in law with two kids might have to postpone the course because her rent has risen to unaffordable levels and she can't find a new place. In the commercial sector we have businesses closing due to unaffordable rents.

Landlords putting up rents are affecting business, putting jobs in jeopardy and causing our educated to leave the country and offer their skills in places with more reasonable rent.

Why does such a large section of society have to be affected by one group of people? what would be so wrong with rent controls or much higher taxes on rental income?

How much higher do you think the taxes should be? Most landlords pay property tax, second home tax, and 52% on rental income!

The problem is not landlords, it's a shortage of supply in the residential sector.

As for the commercial sector, that's due to tenants signing leases with upwards only rent reviews.

steddyeddy

Stheno wrote: »

How much higher do you think the taxes should be? Most landlords pay property tax, second home tax, and 52% on rental income!

The problem is not landlords, it's a shortage of supply in the residential sector.

As for the commercial sector, that's due to tenants signing leases with upwards only rent reviews.

High enough to make massive rent increases not worthwhile. Most landlords only offered upward only rent reviews. They are immoral and should be abolished.

Iwasfrozen

steddyeddy wrote: »

A friend of mine recently had to stop her PhD and try to continue her work abroad due to a sharp rise in her rent. Another friend doing a masters in law with two kids might have to postpone the course because her rent has risen to unaffordable levels and she can't find a new place. In the commercial sector we have businesses closing due to unaffordable rents.

Landlords putting up rents are affecting business, putting jobs in jeopardy and causing our educated to leave the country and offer their skills in places with more reasonable rent.

Why does such a large section of society have to be affected by one group of people? what would be so wrong with rent controls or much higher taxes on rental income?

There's nothing "immoral" about voluntary contracts. Landlords have a right to set prices as high as the market will accept.

Stheno

steddyeddy wrote: »

High enough to make massive rent increases not worthwhile. Most landlords only offered upward only rent reviews. They are immoral and should be abolished.

I think you need to seperate the commercial and residential markets, they have been affected differently.

If people want to live in an area and are happy to pay stupendously high rent to do so, then landlords as businesspeople will exploit that.

During the boom landlords did the same with commercial properties, and the legal agreements the tenants of those properties signed were found to be valid last week in court in a case Bewleys took.

In 2008 I rented a house by myself for about 50% what it goes for now. As the market has risen so have rents, for commercial properties tenants are finding themselves locked into agreements they signed.

Why do you think landlords should be subject to controls in the market they operate in? Very few other businesses are?

I rent btw

anncoates

The minute there's a surfeit of rental properties again, boards will be full of people merrily advising everybody to lowball their landlords under threat of renting elsewhere , just like a few years back.

That's because nobody actually gives a sht about cyclical unregulated markets until it suddenly affects them and then the world collapses. ..

steddyeddy

Stheno wrote: »

I think you need to seperate the commercial and residential markets, they have been affected differently.

If people want to live in an area and are happy to pay stupendously high rent to do so, then landlords as businesspeople will exploit that.

During the boom landlords did the same with commercial properties, and the legal agreements the tenants of those properties signed were found to be valid last week in court in a case Bewleys took.

In 2008 I rented a house by myself for about 50% what it goes for now. As the market has risen so have rents, for commercial properties tenants are finding themselves locked into agreements they signed.

Why do you think landlords should be subject to controls in the market they operate in? Very few other businesses are?

I rent btw

I think markets should be subject to controls if they have can potentially have a negative impact on society and the economy.

The court found the lease legal not appropriate, good for or economy or good for business in general.

Stheno

steddyeddy wrote: »

I think markets should be subject to controls if they have can potentially have a negative impact on society and the economy.

The court found the lease legal not appropriate, good for or economy or good for business in general.

I'm not really with you, during the boom I lived in the midlands and commuted to Dublin due to housing costs.

And I did say they found the lease was valid, are you expecting the courts now to consider a PESTLE analysis everytime they make a decision?

steddyeddy

Stheno wrote: »

I'm not really with you, during the boom I lived in the midlands and commuted to Dublin due to housing costs.

And I did say they found the lease was valid, are you expecting the courts now to consider a PESTLE analysis everytime they make a decision?

No I'm not expecting the courts to do anything other than enforce the law. I expect changes to be made in the law regarding the contracts.

Stheno

steddyeddy wrote: »

No I'm not expecting the courts to do anything other than enforce the law. I expect changes to be made in the law regarding the contracts.

To say what? "we restrict the free supply of goods or services at a rate accepted in the market"?

shruikan2553

The problem is that people are finding it more difficult to get a mortgage to buy a house, they still need somewhere to live so they rent. Lots of people get stuck renting so demand increases. Many people cant afford to get another property to rent out or end up losing any houses they do own so supply drops.

The problem all comes down to there isnt enough places to live. We need more places to live in the cities. Controlling rents just means there is more competition for what is there, it does nothing to fix the actual problem.

steddyeddy

Stheno wrote: »

To say what? "we restrict the free supply of goods or services at a rate accepted in the market"?

To say we will make upward only rent reviews illegal.

sock puppet

steddyeddy wrote: »

A friend of mine recently had to stop her PhD and try to continue her work abroad due to a sharp rise in her rent. Another friend doing a masters in law with two kids might have to postpone the course because her rent has risen to unaffordable levels and she can't find a new place. In the commercial sector we have businesses closing due to unaffordable rents.

Landlords putting up rents are affecting business, putting jobs in jeopardy and causing our educated to leave the country and offer their skills in places with more reasonable rent.

Why does such a large section of society have to be affected by one group of people? what would be so wrong with rent controls or much higher taxes on rental income?

So who do you want to lose out under these new rules? The number of housing units won't change so somebody is going to have to be made homeless under your changes.

Who do you want to make homeless?

steddyeddy

sock puppet wrote: »

So who do you want to lose out under these new rules? The number of housing units won't change so somebody is going to have to be made homeless under your changes.

Who do you want to make homeless?

I'm talking about landlords increasing rent adding to the homeless crisis. The homeless crisis is primarily about a housing shortage.

Reformed Character

steddyeddy wrote: »

High enough to make massive rent increases not worthwhile. .

Then they just cease renting which makes the problem worse but making the shortage of rental accommodation worse!

steddyeddy

What would happen if upward only rent reviews were banned?

Stheno

steddyeddy wrote: »

To say we will make upward only rent reviews illegal.

That only applies to the commercial sector, I've certainly had my residential rent reduced in the past eight years, then it went up as rents increased, so no upward only rents tbh in the residential market.

shruikan2553 wrote: »

The problem is that people are finding it more difficult to get a mortgage to buy a house, they still need somewhere to live so they rent. Lots of people get stuck renting so demand increases. Many people cant afford to get another property to rent out or end up losing any houses they do own so supply drops.

The problem all comes down to there isnt enough places to live. We need more places to live in the cities. Controlling rents just means there is more competition for what is there, it does nothing to fix the actual problem.

+1 more property is the issue.

steddyeddy

Reformed Character wrote: »

Then they just cease renting which makes the problem worse but making the shortage of rental accommodation worse!

They would stop renting because they couldn't charge what they did previously? It doesn't have to be a rent cap. It could be a cap or limit on the amount you can raise rent by.

Stheno

steddyeddy wrote: »

What would happen if upward only rent reviews were banned?

Nothing in the residential sector imo

You are still not seperating residential from commerical, it was commercial which had only upward reviews.

Tail Docker

"Not working, but deciding instead to study can affect your ability to afford stuff" thread shocker.

steddyeddy

Stheno wrote: »

That only applies to the commercial sector, I've certainly had my residential rent reduced in the past eight years, then it went up as rents increased, so no upward only rents tbh in the residential market.



+1 more property is the issue.

Yes I know. It's still a major issue though which affects businesses, jobs and the economy.

sock puppet

steddyeddy wrote: »

I'm talking about landlords increasing rent adding to the homeless crisis. The homeless crisis is primarily about a housing shortage.

If your friend's rent wasn't increased they'd still live there while someone else wouldn't. Rent controls will merely shift the homelessness around, it'll still be the same level.

So I'll ask again, which groups of people do you want to make homeless so that others can remain in their homes?

steddyeddy

Tail Docker wrote: »

"Not working, but deciding instead to study can affect your ability to afford stuff" thread shocker.

A PhD is paid and it most certainly is work. I do one and come out with 500 plus a week (untaxed research money and lab demonstrating and teaching). I'm lucky enough to get my rent paid for me too but if I would find it hard to rent in this country.

steddyeddy

sock puppet wrote: »

If your friend's rent wasn't increased they'd still live there while someone else wouldn't. Rent controls will merely shift the homelessness around, it'll still be the same level.

So I'll ask again, which groups of people do you want to make homeless so that others can remain in their homes?

That's idiocy. You're confusing the rent issue with the housing shortage. I'm not saying that rent changes will cure homelessness. I said that rents are too high and having a negative impact on our economy.

steddyeddy

Stheno wrote: »

Nothing in the residential sector imo

You are still not seperating residential from commerical, it was commercial which had only upward reviews.

I know it only applies to the commercial sector. This thread is about the negative impact of high rents in general.

Tail Docker

steddyeddy wrote: »

A PhD is paid and it most certainly is work. I do one and come out with 500 plus a week (untaxed research money and lab demonstrating and teaching). I'm lucky enough to get my rent paid for me too but if I would find it hard to rent in this country.

Guessing you missed out a "not" there, but what do you want? You rent, why? Because property is too dear for you to buy, probably. But you want the use of that property cheaply. Go do a phd on that one.

shruikan2553

steddyeddy wrote: »

That's idiocy. You're confusing the rent issue with the housing shortage. I'm not saying that rent changes will cure homelessness. I said that rents are too high and having a negative impact on our economy.

Why are they high and what is wrong with them being high?

People are still paying for them if they can afford them, hence it is so high. I dont see what you are trying to achieve with lower rents. Instead of John earning 70k being only able to afford to live there Mary on 30k can also apply to live there as well?

steddyeddy

Tail Docker wrote: »

Guessing you missed out a "not" there, but what do you want? You rent, why? Because property is too dear for you to buy, probably. But you want the use of that property cheaply. Go do a phd on that one.

It doesn't affect me as I said my rent is paid for but I don't think it's good enough one section of society holding the rest to ransom.

Sulla Felix

We need provision for high density, long term suitable housing ie: apartments that you can swing a cat in. There's a shortage of appropriate housing and building more estates (where? People don't want a long commute or they'd be living in the feeder towns already) isn't the answer.

Tail Docker

steddyeddy wrote: »

It doesn't affect me as I said my rent is paid for but I don't think it's good enough one section of society holding the rest to ransom.

Which section is that? The section that sets property prices? Price and supply equates to rental values. If you paid 450k for a house, would you rent it for €50 a month? No? So go figure. You're the alleged "academic".

kingchess

get a loan from the bank and buy your own house,if you can not then you have to rent-from some one who got a loan to buy a house to let out,this some one must pay back that loan,pay income tax,property tax etc and try to make a profit as well, otherwise why bother investing in a house??

steddyeddy

Tail Docker wrote: »

Which section is that? The section that sets property prices? Price and supply equates to rental values. If you paid 450k for a house, would you rent it for €50 a month? No? So go figure. You're the alleged "academic".

What would be wrong with limiting amounts a landlord could raise rents by in a certain amount of time? What would the negative impact be?

steddyeddy

I'll put it this way would people be happy for health (another social necessity) to be influenced exclusively by market forces?

kingchess

steddyeddy wrote: »

What would be wrong with limiting amounts a landlord could raise rents by in a certain amount of time? What would the negative impact be?

the landlord would not borrow money to invest in a house,less houses available to rent

steddyeddy

kingchess wrote: »

the landlord would not borrow money to invest in a house,less houses available to rent

Have you got evidence that this would happen?

Sulla Felix

steddyeddy wrote: »

What would be wrong with limiting amounts a landlord could raise rents by in a certain amount of time? What would the negative impact be?

In situ tenants already have a protection something like that. If you're paying 600 now and your rent review is tomorrow the rent isn't going to double unless you were paying massively under the going rate the last year.

BornToKill

steddyeddy wrote: »

To say we will make upward only rent reviews illegal.

The creation of commercial leases with provision for upward only rent review has been illegal since 2012. The legislation is not retrospective. The rationale for not applying it retrospectively was that this would constitute a breach of constitutionally protected property rights.

entropi

Tail Docker wrote: »

Which section is that? The section that sets property prices? Price and supply equates to rental values. If you paid 450k for a house, would you rent it for €50 a month? No? So go figure. You're the alleged "academic".

What sane person would buy a house for 450k then rent for 50 euro a week, let alone a month...cop on to yourself! You ask stupid questions, you get stupid answers.

I know of a few people renting residential and have had landlords put prices up by a fifth of the previous rental price, which they would not afford so had to move from their previous home to somewhere less efficient. What's the point in using outright greed when you're still getting a reasonable income from a rental property, from a tenant who causes no problems? There's no justifiable explanation in my opinion.

Iwasfrozen

entropi wrote: »

What sane person would buy a house for 450k then rent for 50 euro a week, let alone a month...cop on to yourself! You ask stupid questions, you get stupid answers.

I know of a few people renting residential and have had landlords put prices up by a fifth of the previous rental price, which they would not afford so had to move from their previous home to somewhere less efficient. What's the point in using outright greed when you're still getting a reasonable income from a rental property, from a tenant who causes no problems? There's no justifiable explanation in my opinion.

It seems the basic principals of capitalism, demand and supply are lost on you...

House of Blaze

In 2006 ish I was paying 1600 a month for a one bedroom share in a landlords house (with a wall separating the two halves of the house in fairness) out in still organ.

Had a grand a month to play with after that as well..

Those were days!

Tarzana

anncoates wrote: »

The minute there's a surfeit of rental properties again, boards will be full of people merrily advising everybody to lowball their landlords under threat of renting elsewhere , just like a few years back.

I don't see a problem with this. Why wouldn't people ask for a rent reduction or move to somewhere with lower rent? That's the rental market finding its level in the opposite direction. Rents are crazy now, but one can't really complain about landlords getting market rate. But nobody should feel bad about looking for a rent reduction if the market allows it.

K-9

Stheno wrote: »

How much higher do you think the taxes should be? Most landlords pay property tax, second home tax, and 52% on rental income!

The problem is not landlords, it's a shortage of supply in the residential sector.

As for the commercial sector, that's due to tenants signing leases with upwards only rent reviews.

I'd doubt most landlords are paying 52 percent tax just from rents alone, maybe because it's a second income but not as a primary source of income.

Jesus Wept

Stheno wrote: »

How much higher do you think the taxes should be? Most landlords pay property tax, second home tax, and 52% on rental income!

The problem is not landlords, it's a shortage of supply in the residential sector.

As for the commercial sector, that's due to tenants signing leases with upwards only rent reviews.

Easily resolved by not having a second home.

ArseBurger

All I'm hearing is ire and begrudgery from people who didn't make any profit from selling houses to each other in the frenzy.

Augmerson

Does NAMA still have a load of properties withheld from the market?

Sh1tbag OToole

This is all only a problem in Dublin. Everyone wants to be in this sh1thole for some unknown reason

Augmerson

Sh1tbag OToole wrote: »

This is all only a problem in Dublin. Everyone wants to be in this sh1thole for some unknown reason

In Laois rents have gone up by 50 to 100 euro. I don't know the numbers but there must be people being pushed out of Dublin to renting there now.

Sh1tbag OToole

Augmerson wrote: »

In Laois rents have gone up by 50 to 100 euro. I don't know the numbers but there must be people being pushed out of Dublin to renting there now.

I'll be pushed out myself soon. Impossible to find a decent shared house. Renting a whole flat would cost most of my wages and most want 12 month commitment

Tail Docker

entropi wrote: »

What sane person would buy a house for 450k then rent for 50 euro a week, let alone a month...cop on to yourself! You ask stupid questions, you get stupid answers.

I know of a few people renting residential and have had landlords put prices up by a fifth of the previous rental price, which they would not afford so had to move from their previous home to somewhere less efficient. What's the point in using outright greed when you're still getting a reasonable income from a rental property, from a tenant who causes no problems? There's no justifiable explanation in my opinion.

You did read my post right? Or did you get confused and read something else, then post that just for the craic?

humanji

I've moved this over to the Irish Economy forum. Please note the different charter here.

anncoates

Tarzana wrote: »

Why wouldn't people ask for a rent reduction or move to somewhere with lower rent?.

Didn't say otherwise.

But the flip side of an unregulated rental market is that when the tables are turned (re: supply) landlords can then do exactly the same thing, that is, seek the highest rents they can.

And then suddenly all the passionate proponents of unregulated rents suddenly start crying for the government to help them out.