Dublin rents up 10.5% from last year

TheBandicoot

http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/0918/644580-rent/

12% increase for apartments though.

"But the affordability as you say for a person on the average industrial wage of €36,000, means that they're now spending 41% of their net income after taxes on their rent and the affordable or the sustainable level would be 30%."

As someone who happens to be on exactly that average wage, interesting. 41% of my monthly salary is €1148, 30% is €840.

One in five households now live in private rented accommodation.

Will this lead the government taking note and dealing with the issues important to this large voting block? i.e deposit protection, dispute resolution etc..

gaius c

TheBandicoot wrote: »

Will this lead the government taking note and dealing with the issues important to this large voting block? i.e deposit protection, dispute resolution etc..

That's silly talk. Renters are too busy buying Linden Village in the local offie to ever register, let alone vote.

drumswan

TheBandicoot wrote: »

Will this lead the government taking note and dealing with the issues important to this large voting block? i.e deposit protection, dispute resolution etc..

Nobody gives a toss about private renters

superman28

The priority for the government is

- Actively try and re-inflate property bubble in Dublin - helps negative equity (large voter block) , improves consumer sentiment, makes government controlled banks balance sheets look healthy.

- Ensure a policy of almost zero repossessions occur from banks and government controlled banks

- Stop the building of any new social housing and keep rent allowance at the same rate (force those on social welfare outside of the capital to the midlands and cheaper rental areas)

- Do absolutely nothing for those who rent.

What you can do about it,, as the priorty remains in the vested interests I don't see the government doing anything about it. The media will not show up to take pictures if you are forced out of your rental accommodation.. if you stop paying your mortgage for 5 years,, they might show up..

Michael D Not Higgins

PRTB Director Anne Marie Caulfield ...
"But the affordability as you say for a person on the average industrial wage of €36,000, means that they're now spending 41% of their net income after taxes on their rent and the affordable or the sustainable level would be 30%."

I'd like to see where the PRTB are basing those affordability figures on. The UK for instance uses 40% of gross wage as affordable.

Idbatterim

The priority for the government is

- Actively try and re-inflate property bubble in Dublin - helps negative equity (large voter block) , improves consumer sentiment, makes government controlled banks balance sheets look healthy.

- Ensure a policy of almost zero repossessions occur from banks and government controlled banks

- Stop the building of any new social housing and keep rent allowance at the same rate (force those on social welfare outside of the capital to the midlands and cheaper rental areas)

- Do absolutely nothing for those who rent.

What you can do about it,, as the priorty remains in the vested interests I don't see the government doing anything about it. The media will not show up to take pictures if you are forced out of your rental accommodation.. if you stop paying your mortgage for 5 years,, they might show up..

the thing is non of them seem to give a s**t about the situation! by no party having any interest in it, it means the others can ignore it too!

ted1

TheBandicoot wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/0918/644580-rent/

12% increase for apartments though.



As someone who happens to be on exactly that average wage, interesting. 41% of my monthly salary is €1148, 30% is €840.



Will this lead the government taking note and dealing with the issues important to this large voting block? i.e deposit protection, dispute resolution etc..

Do you live alone? is 1148 after tax ?

Michael D Not Higgins

ted1 wrote: »

Do you live alone? is 1148 after tax ?

Even married single income isn't that much after tax.

TheBandicoot

I live with my parents.

€1148 is 41% of my net income(based on what arrived in my bank account yesterday), so yes, after tax.

Michael D Not Higgins

TheBandicoot wrote: »

I live with my parents.

€1148 is 41% of my net income(based on what arrived in my bank account yesterday), so yes, after tax.

Well, see the thing is, that equates to €47,500 a year before tax.

TheBandicoot

Don't see how. If 1148 is 41%, 100% is 2800, monthly net. Times 12 is €33600. My gross salary is €36000.

I do see from my payslips I am not paying much PAYE, so *shrug*. I was unemployed from October last year until April(but didn't register this anywhere, as I was still working, for my own company, just not getting paid(and the company never traded)) so maybe that is why, I recall HR here mentioning something about a tax refund or something i was getting.

Michael D Not Higgins

TheBandicoot wrote: »

€1148 is 41% of my net income

TheBandicoot wrote: »

If 1148 is 41%, 100% is 2800, monthly gross.

Gross or net? Looks like net, since you mentioned after tax and you've built up some additional tax credits when you weren't working (which still seems high)

Your tax situation doesn't represent the average worker on €36k.

ted1

TheBandicoot wrote: »

Don't see how. If 1148 is 41%, 100% is 2800, monthly gross. Times 12 is €33600. My gross salary is €36000.

I do see from my payslips I am not paying much PAYE, so *shrug*. I was unemployed from October last year until April(but didn't register this anywhere, as I was still working, for my own company, just not getting paid(and the company never traded)) so maybe that is why, I recall HR here mentioning something about a tax refund or something i was getting.

So you only pay 6% PRSI +PAYE+USC. This is a great country who says we pay to much tax.

And your living at home , what exactly is your point?

TheBandicoot

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

Gross or net? Looks like net, since you mentioned after tax and you've built up some additional tax credits when you weren't working (which still seems high)

Your tax situation doesn't represent the average worker on €36k.

Net, sorry.

Can you explain what you mean by additional tax credits from not working? I don't understand. I wasn't on the dole or anything, I simply had a period where I was living on savings so was not paying any PAYE for 6 or 7 months.

Crap, that's actually more worrying- what would the average net salary be for someone on €36k?

ted1 wrote: »

So you only pay 6% PRSI +PAYE+USC. This is a great country who says we pay to much tax.

And your living at home , what exactly is your point?

I'm kind of worried myself now tbh, didn't realise tax is that much- was probably a mistake to take this job lol.
My point was that I would rather not live at home, but on the 'average industrial wage', even with my weird circumsances, and even with paying what the PTRB considers an unsustainable amount of 41%, I could only pay €1150 on rent, which is not enough for a decent apartment to myself. The average person on the average wage then must either commute from a long distance or house share.

Michael D Not Higgins

Well you're being paid €36k a year so that's €3k gross a month. Since you only started the job in April/May you're only being paid for 8 months this year, which is €24k. The tax credits are usually evenly split throughout the year so you pay the same tax every month. You spent 4 months not paying tax this year so you have those additional credits on top of those you'd normally have.

tl;dr next year you're going to be paid €500 less a month.

TheBandicoot

Oh, I see, thank you very much. That's quite a fair system really.

That's depressing though- I knew I should have pushed for more pay or gone somewhere else, but at the time I was very eager to just get making money again after eating through savings on a failed business. Oh well.

Michael D Not Higgins

TheBandicoot wrote: »

Oh, I see, thank you very much. That's quite a fair system really.

That's depressing though- I knew I should have pushed for more pay or gone somewhere else, but at the time I was very eager to just get making money again after eating through savings on a failed business. Oh well.

You're already at the average wage, why are you depressed? The only way is up from where you are. And remember that it's easier to get another job when you're already working, and easier to negotiate the wage too.

TheBandicoot

Because the average wage is not enough for the lifestyle I want

Also I'm not a great employee(evidenced by me being here right now- I'm lazy and will do the bare minimum to keep up appearances ) and I don't want the responsibility of higher level roles, so I am unlikely to ever progress too far in my career beyond where I am now or so- I'd think I'd max out around a €50k position in a few years then stay there. Anyway, irrelevant to this thread.

Lux23

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

I'd like to see where the PRTB are basing those affordability figures on. The UK for instance uses 40% of gross wage as affordable.

That doesn't make any sense, why base an affordability index on money that isn't actually in your pocket? Tory rubbish.

MouseTail

I don't think single people earning the average industrial wage were ever able to comfortably afford to rent an apartment in the Capital. They would houseshare or live in a studio. One bed apartments affordable for couples on average wage pooling resources or singles on higher incomes.

Michael D Not Higgins

Lux23 wrote: »

That doesn't make any sense, why base an affordability index on money that isn't actually in your pocket? Tory rubbish.

The Americans do the same. They say 30% of gross. Obviously there's local factors to take into account for the different levels, e.g. different tax levels, but these are just rules of thumb. The reason they use gross is that people know their gross salary.

MouseTail

superman28 wrote: »

The media will not show up to take pictures if you are forced out of your rental accommodation.. if you stop paying your mortgage for 5 years,, they might show up..

Did you miss all the media coverage of the couple in Castleknock evicted from their rental?

gaius c

MouseTail wrote: »

Did you miss all the media coverage of the couple in Castleknock evicted from their rental?

That's a bit of an outlier and the fact that Coyne is an ex-developer (with property related debts being a bit part of the reason why they are renting) means other ex-developers like Jerry Beades come running to his rescue.

uli84

just got a nice email about 200 euro rent increase, well above 10%

Fkall

uli84 wrote: »

just got a nice email about 200 euro rent increase, well above 10%

How does your new rent compare to the rates charged for similar properties in the area.

Many of my tenants are receiving rent increases of 20-30% because I have not increased rents for several years. Typically the new rent is set €100 to €150 below the going rate.

Crusades

uli84 wrote: »

just got a nice email about 200 euro rent increase, well above 10%

Well where else do you think the increase in exchequer returns is coming from?

As a country, we really must get over congratulating ourselves for economic growth based on property-related tax receipts.

Tarzana

uli84 wrote: »

just got a nice email about 200 euro rent increase, well above 10%

Look into it, a €200 increase might be market rate and fair, or it might be the LL taking the piss. Find out which it is, and try and move if it's an LL písstake. If it's not, either absorb the increase or move somewhere more affordable.

custom_build

Tarzana wrote: »

Look into it, a €200 increase might be market rate and fair, or it might be the LL taking the piss. Find out which it is, and try and move if it's an LL písstake. If it's not, either absorb the increase or move somewhere more affordable.

Or try and negotiate.

Crusades

custom_build wrote: »

Or try and negotiate.

I know of someone who got slapped with a €400 increase on a €2400 per month house in D6.

He negotiated a deal whereby he pays half the rent in cash and the increase was only €100.

Tarzana

custom_build wrote: »

Or try and negotiate.

Well yeah, maybe. You'd have to be a super tenant for the landlord to be happy to subsidise you though.

drumswan

Tarzana wrote: »

Well yeah, maybe. You'd have to be a super tenant for the landlord to be happy to subsidise you though.

If the landlord is 'taking the piss' then you dont have to agree to the increase. Telling people to move is way off.

Tarzana

drumswan wrote: »

If the landlord is 'taking the piss' then you dont have to agree to the increase. Telling people to move is way off.

If you don't agree to the increase, the landlord ask you to leave at the end of the tenancy. Giving notice, obviously. Who would ever agree to an increase if it was a case of the landlord asking to increase the rent and the tenant saying no and getting to stay put? Seriously like. I'm not telling people to move. I'm saying pay the increase or as others have said, try to negotiate. If neither works, then yeah, you're a-moving!

drumswan

Tarzana wrote: »

If you don't agree to the increase, the landlord ask you to leave at the end of the tenancy. Giving notice, obviously. Who would ever agree to an increase if it was a case of the landlord asking to increase the rent and the tenant saying no and getting to stay put? Seriously like.

You dont know what you are talking about. The landlord cannot raise the rent above market rate. He cannot 'take the piss' with the rent, its illegal. You assume part 4 rights at the end of the tenancy, the landlord cannot just tell you to leave.

Tarzana

drumswan wrote: »

You dont know what you are talking about. The landlord cannot raise the rent above market rate. He cannot 'take the piss' with the rent, its illegal. You assume part 4 rights at the end of the tenancy, the landlord cannot just tell you to leave.

It appears I got mixed up in my typing in the first post. If the LL is asking for over the market rent, you can stay and don't have to pay more once you show that he/she is asking for above MV (the onus likely being on the tenant to show that). If he/she is raising it to market rate, not much the OP can do, unless they think the LL will struggle to replace them. They'd likely have to pay the same rent if they move elsewhere.

drumswan

Tarzana wrote: »

It appears I got mixed up in my typing in the first post. If the LL is asking for over the market rent, you can stay and don't have to pay more once you show that he/she is asking for above MV (the onus likely being on the tenant to show that). If he/she is raising it to market rate, not much the OP can do, unless they think the LL will struggle to replace them. They'd likely have to pay the same rent if they move elsewhere.

Yep, thats it. My own is up for renewal shortly, I can hardly wait.

Michael D Not Higgins

Tarzana wrote: »

It appears I got mixed up in my typing in the first post. If the LL is asking for over the market rent, you can stay and don't have to pay more once you show that he/she is asking for above MV (the onus likely being on the tenant to show that). If he/she is raising it to market rate, not much the OP can do, unless they think the LL will struggle to replace them. They'd likely have to pay the same rent if they move elsewhere.

The tenant doesn't have to do anything but lodge a dispute with the PRTB. The PRTB will then rule it as being market rate or not. There's no onus on the tenant to show anything.

Tarzana

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

The tenant doesn't have to do anything but lodge a dispute with the PRTB. The PRTB will then rule it as being market rate or not. There's no onus on the tenant to show anything.

The tenant has to lodge a dispute - the tenant. Obviously, it's the PTRB who'll decide it, but the landlord isn't going to be going to them, now is he?

Michael D Not Higgins

Tarzana wrote: »

The tenant has to lodge a dispute - the tenant. Obviously, it's the PTRB who'll decide it, but the landlord isn't going to be going to them, now is he?

You said the onus was on the tenant to show they're not paying market rent. This is clearly misleading.