Expensive property lying idle for 30 years. Why?

I understand there are frequently disputes over wills, but a couple of houses on Elgin Road in Dublin 4 lying idle for 30 years is surely caused by something else?

"...the property requires complete refurbishment throughout given it’s remained uninhabited for over 30 years."

Look at the state of No. 4 Elgin Road (note what seem to be notes that stuck on to the wall in Image 6 - were squatters there for years?) and also No. 6 Elgin Road.

Anybody any idea of why such valuable properties could be allowed to deteriorate so much?

Skerries

looks like the neighbour has built another house at the far end of the garden and the entrance is through the lane going by pictures 7 and 8
*edit* actually looks like they all have apart from the abandoned house so potential to monetize the property if you're loaded

bleary

http://www.dublininquirer.com/2016/06/07/vacancy-watch-4-and-6-elgin-road-in-embassy-land/
Full discussion here. Owned by Albert Reynolds brother. Had planning permission now lapsed.

Hollister11

If someone own's them, then what they do with them doesn't matter as long as they are not breaking the law.

air

Just goes to show that we need property taxes that are punitive on properties in urban areas that are empty for long periods.

daithiK1

air wrote: »

Just goes to show that we need property taxes that are punitive on properties in urban areas that are empty for long periods.

I am im not sure if tax would have any impact here. There are quite a few un-occupied houses, in that area for years that attract high end gardener fees way and above x times average wages or whatever tax due

Nekarsulm

air wrote: »

Just goes to show that we need property taxes that are punitive on properties in urban areas that are empty for long periods.

Trouble is, such taxes would quickly be applied to occupied houses as well.
An example is Rates on commercial buildings and spaces. It matters not if it is rented or idle. You might not be able to get your wee shop rented, but the Council/Corpo will still require paying regardless.

MouseTail

Nekarsulm wrote: »

Trouble is, such taxes would quickly be applied to occupied houses as well
.

How could a vacant property or landbanking tax be applied to occupied houses?

air

daithiK1 wrote: »

I am im not sure if tax would have any impact here. There are quite a few un-occupied houses, in that area for years that attract high end gardener fees way and above x times average wages or whatever tax due

I don't doubt it but at least society would be getting something back in that case for the loss of the property's utility.

Everyone has their own views on taxation policy but in my opinion efficiency should be at it's core. It should be structured in such a way as to encourage optimal utilisation of public resources.

riclad

i know a nice house with a large garden,in a great location.empty ,windows boarded up.
they applied for permission to extend it in 2006.
house is empty for 10-15 years .
Then the crash happened.
the owner may have died, the owner could be short on money to fix the house up.
They may be waiting for prices to go.
the owner could have died ,and have no relatives in ireland.
Theres 1000,s of empty houses in ireland.
it would be worth maybe 100-140k at the moment.
its about 30 years old at least.

LeinsterDub

People in nursing homes are often living for 20 years. Family don't want to sell their house or the person themselves doesn't want to rent or sell their house.

Teyla Emmagan

air wrote:

Everyone has their own views on taxation policy but in my opinion efficiency should be at it's core. It should be structured in such a way as to encourage optimal utilisation of public resources.

That's not a public resource. It's a private house. Who are you going to tax next? Old people living in big houses by themselves? Apply a bedroom tax like in the UK? Personally I am all for the freedom to do what you want with your own property.

riclad

Family may want to wait for the owner to pass away then the person named in the will gets the house,
Or its given to 1 or more of the persons named in the will.
Its risky to spend your money on repairs etc if you don,t currently own the house .

LeinsterDub

Teyla Emmagan wrote: »

Personally I am all for the freedom to do what you want with your own property.

So I can build a 40 storey extension on my house? Turn my house into a nightclub?

Teyla Emmagan

LeinsterDub wrote:

So I can build a 40 storey extension on my house? Turn my house into a nightclub?

I think you'll find you won't get planning permission for that.

Arcade_Tryer

Would squatter's rights apply here?

LeinsterDub

Teyla Emmagan wrote: »

I think you'll find you won't get planning permission for that.

Asking for permission and doing what ever you want are mutually exclusive.

riclad

I think to get squatters rights you need to live in a building a no of years,
A house with no esb supply,or water ,that could be difficult to do.
planning permission laws laws are there for a reason,
you can,t open a pub, club,disco in the middle of a housing estate ,
Just cos you own a house there .
property rights have limits .
there was a bloke who moved into a empty private 3 storey house near stephens green.
Last time i read he is fighting the council to stay there .
He is there for years .http://www.irishexaminer.com/farming/news/what-are-squatters-rights-exactly-308255.html
i know people who moved into empty council flats .15 years ago,
when the council had 100,s of empty flats ,
now the council,seals all flats ,boards them up .
if they are empty for a few weeks.

ie you could move into a flat ,put a new lock on the door .
go to rent office, they would give you a rent book,
pay the rent ,And you would become a Legal tenant in a few weeks.
The council would be happy cos they had rental income,
the tenant would clean up the flat and decorate it.
it was better to have someone living in a flat ,than have it empty
and derelict.
every block had a few empty units.

2RockMountain

The Elgin Road houses aren't on the Derelict Sites register;

http://www.dublincity.ie/main-menu-services-planning/derelict-sites

air

Teyla Emmagan wrote: »

That's not a public resource. It's a private house. Who are you going to tax next? Old people living in big houses by themselves? Apply a bedroom tax like in the UK? Personally I am all for the freedom to do what you want with your own property.

The house itself isn't a public resource but roads passing it are, the electricity, water and gas services are etc.
By lying idle, it's preventing someone else from living in that location and making use of those resources or forcing them to commute from further afield to get to the same location.

I'm not in favour of punitive taxation of housing, just of empty houses, they cost us all and provide nothing.
The turnover of housing is far below what it needs to be in the country, penalising empty houses and urban plots would go a long way to addressing that.

I never said anything about old people living alone, under occupied housing is already penalised to some extent as a single occupant has to pay the full property tax regardless.

riclad

theres Empty houses where the owner is passed away,
the council can take them over if the are a danger to the public.
They have to wait at least 10 years .
i know a house 5 years ago ,the council knocked it down to and built a 3storey apartment block there .
It,s on the corner ,at the end of the street ,so it looks good .
this house was a 3bed ,200 years old.
it was derelict 15-20 years.

newacc2015

air wrote: »

The house itself isn't a public resource but roads passing it are, the electricity, water and gas services are etc.
By lying idle, it's preventing someone else from living in that location and making use of those resources or forcing them to commute from further afield to get to the same location.

I'm not in favour of punitive taxation of housing, just of empty houses, they cost us all and provide nothing.
The turnover of housing is far below what it needs to be in the country, penalising empty houses and urban plots would go a long way to addressing that.

I never said anything about old people living alone, under occupied housing is already penalised to some extent as a single occupant has to pay the full property tax regardless.

So what about tens of thousands on welfare not working in the city taking up housing that workers would rent. Should we ship them out to the suburbs?

Because pointing the finger at private property owners, look at the amount of land the Government and semi-states own which is not used or fully utilised. It is futile giving out at the odd empty house when DCC has tons of empty sites which they are doing nothing with

I would hardly call a few hundred in LPT paid by a single occupier a burden to them. Property taxes in most of America are low single digits versus our 0.15%. There is plenty living in glorified trailers in poor states in America paying higher LPT than some people living in luxury homes in this country

air

It's pretty well acknowledged that property taxes are only heading in one direction. When they increase further they will help encourage higher occupancy.
The welfare recipients and public land issue is a strawman argument.
Empty residential property is a problem, why not address it simply and easily via taxation?

I can't see any major downsides to doing it.

Villa05

Teyla Emmagan wrote:

That's not a public resource. It's a private house. Who are you going to tax next? Old people living in big houses by themselves? Apply a bedroom tax like in the UK? Personally I am all for the freedom to do what you want with your own property.

A private house that derives much of its value from public resources outside it's door.

Cigarettes and alcohol are private goods that do harm and cost the state money and are rightly heavily taxed.

Housing is a scarce resource, under utilisation of same leads to homelessness and larger bills for the state in housing people amongst lower income groups. It may also lead to building of houses where there may not be requirement for homes as the existing stock is not being fully utilised.

Taxation should be used to promote efficiency

Tigger

Nekarsulm wrote: »

Trouble is, such taxes would quickly be applied to occupied houses as well.
An example is Rates on commercial buildings and spaces. It matters not if it is rented or idle. You might not be able to get your wee shop rented, but the Council/Corpo will still require paying regardless.

Rates are only demanded on the occupants and only on occupied premises

the_syco

newacc2015 wrote: »

So what about tens of thousands on welfare not working in the city taking up housing that workers would rent. Should we ship them out to the suburbs?

To a purpose built ghetto? Maybe. However, this is not a popular view.

Nekarsulm

Tigger wrote: »

Rates are only demanded on the occupants and only on occupied premises

False.Rates are payable on empty premises. Some counties, (Meath is one) allows you a 50% reduction if premises is empty. If a tenant shuts up and leaves unpaid rates, the bill attached to the owner/next tenant.

2RockMountain

newacc2015 wrote: »

So what about tens of thousands on welfare not working in the city taking up housing that workers would rent. Should we ship them out to the suburbs?

WHy would you assume that all or most people in social housing are not working?

riclad

Theres loads of people in social housing working 9-5, full time,in a 3 bed house there may be 2-3 people working.
As long as the rent is paid ,all the income is declared on the form provided ,the council will allow them to stay there ,
At least while the main tenant is alive .
some one could be on a low wage ,working partime, and still get a council flat.
i heard of a politician in the uk on a high wage, he still lives in a council house.
At this point 80 per cent plus of council house were bought out,
by the former tenant anyway.
Maybe 20-15 per cent of houses are rented from the council.
may be 2per cent or more of council units are empty ,
awaiting renovation .

sorry for going off topic.

TheChizler

2RockMountain wrote: »

newacc2015 wrote: »

So what about tens of thousands on welfare not working in the city taking up housing that workers would rent. Should we ship them out to the suburbs?

WHy would you assume that all or most people in social housing are not working?

They did say "on welfare". And didn't give any indication as to the proportion.

4ensic15

Tigger wrote: »

Rates are only demanded on the occupants and only on occupied premises

Rates are demanded on vacant commercial premises in Dublin. A partial rebate is allowed but there is not getting off scot free.

There's a good, but short, letter in today's Irish Times about what should happen to all these vacant properties:

Housing Action Plan and the housing crisis

Here's an extract that I fully agree with:

There is no lack of housing units in Ireland. There are 260,000 vacant units with a further 45,000 temporarily vacant. These are all connected to current infrastructure. They are also social black holes.
By focusing primarily on these idle properties we would kill many birds with the one stone. We could solve the housing crisis. We could provide a micro-economic boom to small-scale builders, tradesmen and renovators. We could bring life back to town and village centres, where considerable vacancy exists nationally. We would not ghettoise social housing as this vacancy demographic is widespread. We would not add to sprawl and the associated traffic issues this brings.
Yes, the Housing Action Plan contains some carrots, eg local authority up-front rent to fund renovation. Sadly it contains no stick for those unwilling to put a property to use or to sell it. No stick either for local authorities not taking swift action on dereliction.

As pointed out by several people here, it is our taxes which provide the infrastructure and social services which give houses such as in the op their value. Imagine the value of these houses in, say, rural Donegal and you get an idea of the naive nonsense spouted by the "private property is sacrosanct" lobbyists. The value of all private property depends to a very large extent on the infrastructure and services which our taxes provide to the surrounding areas. Thus, houses like these sitting idle are wasting these taxpayer-funded resources and denying their use to potential residents. As such the owners should be financially penalised by the state while this continues.

In terms of good governance, there's no policy justification for the absence of such penalties on people who are hoarding vacant properties in sought-after areas. As the government for the past five years Fine Gael has simply bottled it, yet again.

2RockMountain

2RockMountain wrote: »

The Elgin Road houses aren't on the Derelict Sites register;

http://www.dublincity.ie/main-menu-services-planning/derelict-sites

There's a very, very informative article in the Dublin Inquirer from 9 March 2016 about DCC's "derelict sites" list: officially, there are only 59 derelict properties in the entire city. Here's the entire list for 2016 Now, everyone of us know there are far, far more derelict sites in reality than this and it is easily in the thousands. But the article says DCC is afraid of being brought to court because the courts tend to rule in favour of developers/private owners and on this point there is widespread agreement that the derelict sites legislation is wholly inadequate and the onus is on legislators to return and give it teeth. "The limitations of the Derelict Sites Act is that “It’s really intended to make people clean them up, it’s not intended to ensure that a vacant site gets developed,”

The article also points out that the zeal of the council official can make the world of difference: "What he believes made a lot of difference for these sites, was the dedication of the council official who plugged away at it.

If more council officials had worked with such zeal, the council might have also pocketed more money from sites. The value of land has changed a lot over the years, but right now in the inner-city, it is about €4 million for an acre. So, for a site that covers a quarter of an acre and was put on the Derelict Sites Register with an annual levy of 3 percent, the council could have brought in €30,000."

Dublin Inquirer: Losing Patience: why are there so many rundown sites along the Red Line?

Nekarsulm

If you get a Thom's Directory out of the library, it's a great way to track down owners of such properties. Though what you plan to do when you find out is another matter.