Bed-sits to make a come back

handlemaster

Joan Burton has mentioned the government will revisit the use of bed sits . These bedsits were always popular in Dublin at the lower end of the market. Hopefully somthing will be done as alot of people cant afford the high rents been currently charged.

Michael D Not Higgins

This is unwelcome news. It is short sighted back pedalling from the government to address the supply issue while ignoring the reasons they got rid of them in the first place.

handlemaster

Heres the ref


http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/joan-burton-indicates-the-ban-on-providing-bedsit-accommodation-in-the-capital-may-be-lifted-to-tackle-homeless-crisis-30795027.html

handlemaster

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

This is unwelcome news. It is short sighted back pedalling from the government to address the supply issue while ignoring the reasons they got rid of them in the first place.

Aggreed to an extent. But if y our homeless now today is what counts.

Michael D Not Higgins

handlemaster wrote: »

Aggreed to an extent. But if y our homeless now today is what counts.

It shows the government that they had the right idea to address the poor quality but never did anything to address the supply side.

To use a media phrase, there's a lack of joined-up thinking.

crusher000

Lived in them when I was a student many years ago. Where anything but luxurious but served there purpose and were affordable. Again regulation will have to come into it and this will add to their cost.

shruikan2553

The problem is balancing them between absolute ****holes vs cost. Need enough standards to make the livable but too many leads to rising prices.

Seeing the prices some really terrible places go for Im not expecting much.

Greenmachine

Joan Burton now in bed with slumlord millionaires(figuratively for the libel morons). Disgusting behaviour. At the very worst, they should review the inspection reports of the places they have shut down, apply CPO to the best of the bad bunch. Whatever is closest to code which can reasonably be brought to standard. I hope this does not pass, if it does, I expect labour will burn. You would be better in a homeless hostel than in some of the bedsits I have seen. The last thing we want to see again, is a free for all, from these vultures.

crusher000

Also if you can get 2000 a month for a house or go to the cost of fixing up all the rooms for a bedsit don't see this being an option for landlords. To much to invest and won't make back in the short term.

markmacken

I think this really has to happen. If this government is serious about the homeless problem in Ireland, then they have to allow people to take whatever option they can afford. Living somewhere small and pokey is better than living on the street.

CatFromHue

In my, uneducated, opinion the homeless issue has two sides.

One being the poor lad who passed away on the weekend but has been long term homeless and has other problems so may not actually want to move into a bedsit.

The other being people/families who've been made homeless as they can't keep up with the rent.

I'm not sure a bedsit will solve either problem tbh.

Michael D Not Higgins

This will likely not affect the homelessness problem at all anyway. There's more than one reason people are on the streets. It's more likely that the bedsits will be taken up at the lower end of the market, by those who can't afford the rising rent costs and those looking for places that take rent allowance.

L1011

At this time out from the ban, are there really that many empty bedsits still sitting there? Most will have at least started some modernisation work or have been sold to be single family residences.

the_syco

When they existed, the tenants seemed to have no rights, lived in shoddy conditions in apartments that didn't need to fulfil any sort of current conditions. I wonder if they were made legal again, would they need to have minimum conditions?

L1011

the_syco wrote: »

When they existed, the tenants seemed to have no rights, lived in shoddy conditions in apartments that didn't need to fulfil any sort of current conditions. I wonder if they were made legal again, would they need to have minimum conditions?

The only one they could even consider removing would be the requirement for a dedicated bathroom per unit - the rest aren't really even possible for consideration. You can't expect to put people from emergency accomodation in to somewhere with no or inappropriate cooking and clothes washing/drying kit.

the_syco

L1011 wrote: »

The only one they could even consider removing would be the requirement for a dedicated bathroom per unit

Consider removing? I meant under some bullpoop loophole, they didn't have to include a heap of items. Some 1973 thing, I think?

Mrs OBumble

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

This will likely not affect the homelessness problem at all anyway. There's more than one reason people are on the streets. It's more likely that the bedsits will be taken up at the lower end of the market, by those who can't afford the rising rent costs and those looking for places that take rent allowance.

Yup. And that will get some of those folks out of 1brms that they don't want to afford, so those 1brms will be available for people currently in 2brms that they don't want to afford etc.

Some will be taken by people who would like to move out of home, but currently cannot afford to. So a family that might want a 4brm might cope with a 3brm. Etc.


Every little helps.

murphaph

Yep. A little bit of nanny state control is to be rolled back in the face of common sense. Bedsits are and were better than a doorway in December. No matter how bad they were.

jd83

this won't solve anything l.There will just be a load of ridiculously priced dumpy crap holes on daft that like the apartments anyone who currently can't afford still won't be able too.

MagicMarker

Do the folks sleeping in doorways usually have 1 month up front and 1 month deposit in their pockets???

Don't see how this will help them tbh.

murphaph

Adding supply will obviously help in a housing crisis.

murphaph

MagicMarker wrote: »

Do the folks sleeping in doorways usually have 1 month up front and 1 month deposit in their pockets???

Don't see how this will help them tbh.

Bedsits never operated in the same way as normal rentals. LL's would often take a week's deposit and rent would be collected weekly.

Sala

The government can't push this issue onto private landlords and expect it to be magically fixed. Homelessness for many people is more than just not being able to afford rent... if the government wants to bring back bedsits they should create them themselves. There are plenty of old cheap houses in central places in town (in fact., I believe the council owns a number of derelict properties (http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/sweaty-equity-earns-family-keys-to-their-new-dublin-home-1.2015805). They could easily create bedsit style accommodation i.e. small living quarters, but that are well kitted out. Instead of handing people money to hand over to private landlords, many of whom I'd would say, looking at the old bedsit style apartments, probably couldn't care less whether their tenants could heat their room adequately, or whether the place was a fire hazard. The state could easily provide bedsits that are safe and secure themselves, and provide better security of tenure for their tenants. But they won't. Like rent allowance, they want to shove social problems onto the private sector and hope it all somehow works itself out.

Greenmachine

murphaph wrote: »

Bedsits never operated in the same way as normal rentals. LL's would often take a week's deposit and rent would be collected weekly.

Anyone I know who was in a bedsit, never knew when the landlord would be around, sometimes every week, then they might not be seen for month and the tenant was supposed to keep the accrued rent for the landlord to help himself too when he felt like finally calling around.

Greenmachine

Sala wrote: »

The government can't push this issue onto private landlords and expect it to be magically fixed. Homelessness for many people is more than just not being able to afford rent... if the government wants to bring back bedsits they should create them themselves. There are plenty of old cheap houses in central places in town (in fact., I believe the council owns a number of derelict properties (http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/sweaty-equity-earns-family-keys-to-their-new-dublin-home-1.2015805). They could easily create bedsit style accommodation i.e. small living quarters, but that are well kitted out. Instead of handing people money to hand over to private landlords, many of whom I'd would say, looking at the old bedsit style apartments, probably couldn't care less whether their tenants could heat their room adequately, or whether the place was a fire hazard. The state could easily provide bedsits that are safe and secure themselves, and provide better security of tenure for their tenants. But they won't. Like rent allowance, they want to shove social problems onto the private sector and hope it all somehow works itself out.

Dead link.

I think I might have been the only other person in this thread opposed to putting these landlords back in business.

handlemaster

Greenmachine wrote: »

Dead link.

I think I might have been the only other person in this thread opposed to putting these landlords back in business.

Because the public landlord left years ago.. you have no choice

endacl

Never imagined I'd have an opportunity to post this relatively obscure-ish, yet oddly appropriate little piece of the 80s ...

L1011

the_syco wrote: »

Consider removing? I meant under some bullpoop loophole, they didn't have to include a heap of items. Some 1973 thing, I think?

I meant from the current regulations. The Pre-63 rules allowed you to get away with murder, starting with no planning permission...

foggy_lad

handlemaster wrote: »

Joan Burton has mentioned the government will revisit the use of bed sits . These bedsits were always popular in Dublin at the lower end of the market. Hopefully somthing will be done as alot of people cant afford the high rents been currently charged.

Typical knee-jerk reaction from a lazy politician to the latest news of a homeless man who died within spitting distance of the dail.

This man was offered and brought to hostel accommodation on more than one occasion and refused it. There are many more people who are homeless because of their own actions, because they take drugs or are alcoholics or allow addicts and alcoholics use their flat or home as a flop-house or halfway house. No landlord whether they own a mansion or the worst of shoebox bedsits wants these people and a change back to the way it was will not help the "new" homeless who are homeless because of the banks.

Rowing back on the change in the law will only suit many wealthy owners of multiple units who are holding out on updating their properties hoping for just such a move by a lazy inept politician.

MarkAnthony

Ah Foggy - I was actually going to say something very similar but the kneejerk was banning them in the first place in fairness.

They should have been phased out by ever increasing rental standards, but the key here is proper enforcement. Irish standard policy seems to be so just keep legislating but do naff all in relation to enforcement.

Even a down and out should at least have a room to call home. Now I'd prefer it if these where of a decent standard but for now I think getting them off the street would be a plus. Not that we're talking massive numbers here as the media would have us believe but frankly one is one too many.

The whole accommodation situation in Ireland needs looking at. Supply in Dublin has to be resolved. Bedsits of a reasonable standard have a place in that process but so does change in regard to social housing and NAMA getting the apartments that have been sold on to investment companies rented out. They can easily put the impetus there by making it a condition of the sale.

Finally derelict houses and land - don't get me started here. Stop listing buildings that will never be renovated. Stoneybatter is not improved by rows of derelict houses that noone in their right mind is going to renovate to the standards required by virtue of their listed status.

Sorry that rambled off the point somewhat.

foggy_lad

murphaph wrote: »

Bedsits never operated in the same way as normal rentals. LL's would often take a week's deposit and rent would be collected weekly.

They would also regularly "clear house" by evicting everyone or selected tenants while they were out and putting their bags and belongings out onto the street! these people were the lowest sort of scum as far as oiir landlords went.

MagicMarker wrote: »

Do the folks sleeping in doorways usually have 1 month up front and 1 month deposit in their pockets???

Don't see how this will help them tbh.

Most of these sh1t holes were not and will never be eligible for any form or rent supplement and that means the LL charges loweer rent to get people in the doors who pay out of their dole or pension but the lower rent means even less or no maintenance or safety and fire protection at all!

The overall effect of betsits is that the poorest of society end up very largely worse off with no security of tenure in their accommodation.