Residential tenancies bill 2016 proposals and discussion

Donal55

April 73 wrote: »

Does the proposal not have to be voted into law?

All set for next week if the FG/FF govt can iron out some small details!

flowerific

I can see a lot of LL currently charging under the market rent, Refurbishing their properties. A lick of Magnolia paint a few minor improvements etc.

tommyb123

Hey folks. So we got a letter from the estate agents last week telling us our rent will be going up by 300euro a month in March. We moved in in feb 2015. Because the rent review was already carried out does this mean we will not be covered under this new legislation?

Donal55

Sarn wrote: »

The minister, on RTE news, just pointed out that people coming to the end of the current two year rent freeze will only have up to a 4% increase.

No guarantee its 4% either. FF were on newstalk earlier and they appear happy with a figure thats lower.
Damian English wouldn't refute that there could be room for negotiation either.

Yourself isit

Eric Cartman wrote: »

only, if you run a normal self employed business, your expenses are covered before tax, on 1600 of rent you get to keep 800 and still have to pay a 900+ mortgage.

Eh. 50% would only apply if it was a second income. And landlords can deduct expenses.

Sarn

tommyb123 wrote: »

Hey folks. So we got a letter from the estate agents last week telling us our rent will be going up by 300euro a month in March. We moved in in feb 2015. Because the rent review was already carried out does this mean we will not be covered under this new legislation?

There is an interpretation that the 90 day review cannot happen until the anniversary of the start of the tenancy i.e. 2 years + 90 days. Would be worth checking out.

JoeCole26

Donal55 wrote: »

Or the landlord could just turf you out when your lease is up and get in a new tenant on 1500 per month for the next few year with 4% increases!

My landlord is one of the REIT, so doubt they would be up to something like this, well, I hope not anyway.

Saadyst

JoeCole26 wrote: »

So for example, im in an apartment now paying €1,325pm, and lease is up start of Feb. Most they can increase the rent to for the next year is €1,378? If thats the case im delighted with that, gives me a chance to continue to save towards a mortgage when the supply is out there in hopefully 2/3 years without the fear of the landlord putting the rent up to whatever they feel like. Definitely a good move imo.

I'm in a very similar scenario - LL wants to increase rent by 16% from start of Feb. They had sent me an email to this effect but nothing signed.

Can I go back and say that the maximum is now 8%?

MayBea

Yourself isit wrote: »

Eh. 50% would only apply if it was a second income. And landlords can deduct expenses.

Well the current legislation does not consider the situation where a couple with kids rent their 2-bed apartment, so they themselves can rent a 3-bed house.
Hypothetically, if they rent it for 1600, they get approx. 800 after tax. However, their mortgage payments are 1400 and they're renting a 3-bed for 1800. So, not only they are topping up their "rental income" by 600 to cover the mortgage payments, they're spending another 1800 to rent somewhere else and this does not count as an expense.

tommyb123

Im reading up on that on threshold. it says "In most situations rent reviews can only take place if it has been 24 months or more since the last review.". Wonder what that means. In what situations does this not apply? If it is correct does that mean when the two years are up you will get the first three months at the increase at your old rate. ie i we moved in in feb 2015 so the review can only happen from Feb 2017 and the rent can only increase after 90 days from that date? So disregarding the new legislation we should not be getting a rent increase until May!!!

murphaph

This also means that a landlord who might previously have let increases slide will always apply the max increase every year.

Kapips88

Has the length of the part 4 gone to 6 years too?

Soon to be endless?

Selik

What will be the definition of "renovations" here exactly in order for a property to quality as a new let not tied to the 3 year rule?

Sad Professor

Kapips88 wrote: »

Has the length of the part 4 gone to 6 years too?

Soon to be endless?

Yes, but won't make much difference. Most landlords use the selling or moving in excuse to get rid of tenants.

pillphil

ted1 wrote: »

They need to tackle bad tenants aswell. If a tenant falls to pay rent they should be immediately giving the boot. None of this over staying rubbish. If they are anti social they should be giving the boot.

Non-Payment of Rent – Effective Termination Procedures
Where a tenant does not pay rent and adhere to a Determination Order there can be serious consequences for a landlord, with the most extreme being that landlord loses the property due to an inability to maintain their mortgage payments. The length of time it can take for an eviction order to be enforced in the courts can result in a landlord not receiving any rent for a dwelling for a considerable period of time. Special measures will be introduced to deal with the specific challenge of enforcement in the instances of non-payment of rent. Changes to RTB procedures will be introduced to reduce the time taken to repossess a property in such circumstances. Subject to consultation with stakeholders, the proposed changes are as follows:

A fast track process will be introduced to enable landlords to regain possession quickly where the non-payment of rent constitutes the grounds for termination;

To avail of the new procedure, the landlord must have served a valid Notice of Termination for non-payment of rent and have lodged a dispute with the RTB seeking an order that the tenant comply with the Notice of Termination;

Where the RTB makes an order directing a tenant to vacate a dwelling and the tenant does not comply with that order and continues not to pay rent, the new procedure will provide for an emergency application to be made to the District Court to enforce the order; and

The decision as to whether an emergency application should be made to court will be made by the RTB having considered the circumstances of the case, including the amount of rent arrears and the length of time for which rent has not been paid.

text

Baby01032012

Sad Professor wrote: »

Yes, but won't make much difference. Most landlords use the selling or moving in excuse to get rid of tenants.

The thing with the selling or moving in, landlord has to make a signed statement in front of solicitor to that effect.

The_Conductor

Baby01032012 wrote: »

The thing with the selling or moving in, landlord has to make a signed statement in front of solicitor to that effect.

Since when?
Even if you did make a statement in front of a solicitor- its a statement of intent, nothing more, nothing less- a landlord could make such a statement in front of a solicitor- and then either through a change in circumstances, or whatever- go and do something else altogether..........

Sigh- it genuinely sounds like they are desperately trying to get landlords to leave the sector- perhaps its an attempt to bring more properties onto the market for sale? One way or the other- I don't see how this benefits either landlords or tenants.

4ensic15

The_Conductor wrote: »

Since when?
s.

Since the 2015 Act came into force. Or at least when the relevant section of it did.

boundlessSea

Rent controls like this will just discourage people from renting out accommodation.

To stop the rate of increase of rent for accommodation, the government need to allow higher buildings in designated areas, review how planning is done and if necessary centralise it more temporarily to increase the number of planning applications granted, ensure that tax on any income including rent from rental properties does not exceed 40%, reduce level of rent control, ensure that the vast majority of cases in which tenants stop paying rent are resolved within 3 months, make it easier to evict anti social tenants, and to not bind owners of property to renting to a tenant for many years.

In return for these gains landlords should be obligated to keep property to higher standard.

Donal55

boundlessSea wrote: »

Rent controls like this will just discourage people from renting out accommodation.

To stop the rate of increase of rent for accommodation, the government need to allow higher buildings in designated areas, review how planning is done and if necessary centralise it more temporarily to increase the number of planning applications granted, ensure that tax on any income including rent from rental properties does not exceed 40%, reduce level of rent control, ensure that the vast majority of cases in which tenants stop paying rent are resolved within 3 months, make it easier to evict anti social tenants, and to not bind owners of property to renting to a tenant for many years.

In return for these gains landlords should be obligated to keep property to higher standard.

You're looking for an awful lot in return for looking after your own property?

Donal55

Baby01032012 wrote: »

The thing with the selling or moving in, landlord has to make a signed statement in front of solicitor to that effect.

No problem for them. Pay a €100 for solicitor's letter then:
Typical excuses 101: 'I never got the asking price so I'm taking in tenants again'.
'The daughter didn't like living alone so she moved back into the home place'.

the_syco

matrim wrote: »

If it's not financially viable at a time when when rents are at an all time high, and tenants are barely able to afford them, then when will it be viable?

50% of the rent gained is taxed. Thus, although the tenant is paying at an all time high, the landlord is getting an all time low.

Lux23 wrote: »

So hopefully that will mean more houses for sale? People keep saying this as if the house will just disappear.

Instead of 4 people renting a four bed, you'll now have two people in the four bed.

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Of Jobs, not just public service. Can't keep piling in jobs to Dublin and no where else.

Why would a job want to be outside Dublin? They have a workforce there.

scriba

We are landlords by circumstance. We rented out our house in Cork City just before the two year freeze, at what is now nearly 400 below the going rate. During the last few years, we have had to move to various locations in Cork and Kerry for my wife's career, each time paying increasingly inflated rents as available stock diminishes to a trickle of availability. When we started, we were paying and receiving the same rent. Now, thanks to government interference, we are paying 400 higher and unable to raise our rent to compensate.

Here's the thing. We don't want to raise our rent by 400 to market rent. Or even 200. We rented to a nice couple for 100 below market at the time. We did this because we didn't believe in gouging people who needed a place to live. Even now, we don't want to extract from my tenants the full increase in rent that we are paying. But in order to compensate a little, we needed to raise our rent by about 15% after the two year period. That option is now gone for us.

We no longer have full control of our asset. Our government taxes our income, and will tax us also for the time we used it as a rental property if we (hopefully) sell it, at enough to have a deposit for another house - childcare, commute, and rent have pretty much decimated our potential for saving. We just want out - we'd sell tomorrow if the price was enough.

It could be worse. I like our tenants, which is good, considering that they'll probably be staying years now! Our mortgage is still being paid, although we're making a 500 loss after tax. But the way I see it, government interference in the market is costing us 400 a month more than it was back in Aug 2015, when we made business decisions in good faith. And that's not fair either.

murphaph

Many landlords will now move to the airbnb model. It'll be very difficult to enforce if they try to ban it. It's banned here in Berlin but still plenty of Facebook pages dedicated to short term lets.

Muahahaha

But Airbnb isnt a realistic option for every landlord, only for those in city centers or near to tourist attractions.

I think overall these new rules are a good thing. I realise landlords are getting hammered in taxes but if they were investing in shares or other investments they would still have to pay the same income tax. Its swings and roundabouts really.

Also this is a three year temporary plan. The idea is that it gives the construction sector time to get this long awaited supply coming through. We already have had reports that rents are now higher than the Celtic Tiger era and another report showing that rents were due to increase by a further 25% over the next 2 years. So this is the government putting a temorary brake on the market till supply stabilises the price of rent. Once that happens the restrictions come off and landlords have a free market again.

sunnysoutheast

Muahahaha wrote: »

But Airbnb isnt a realistic option for every landlord, only for those in city centers or near to tourist attractions.

I think overall these new rules are a good thing. I realise landlords are getting hammered in taxes but if they were investing in shares or other investments they would still have to pay the same income tax. Its swings and roundabouts really.

Also this is a three year temporary plan. The idea is that it gives the construction sector time to get this long awaited supply coming through. We already have had reports that rents are now higher than the Celtic Tiger era and another report showing that rents were due to increase by a further 25% over the next 2 years. So this is the government putting a temorary brake on the market till supply stabilises the price of rent. Once that happens the restrictions come off and landlords have a free market again.

I very much doubt it will be temporary TBH, far too easy for opposition politicians to spin it into "....giving free rein to grubby landlords" if it's rolled back.

If anything I'd say open-ended tenure tenancies with index-linked rent control are on the way soon.

Why anyone would willingly become a landlord in the current circumstances is beyond me. You literally have no idea what regulatory regime will be applicable. I actually thought the rollout of Irish Water or the impending Waste Charges fiasco was inept enough, but this takes the biscuit.

c montgomery

Muahahaha wrote: »

But Airbnb isnt a realistic option for every landlord, only for those in city centers or near to tourist attractions.

I think overall these new rules are a good thing. I realise landlords are getting hammered in taxes but if they were investing in shares or other investments they would still have to pay the same income tax. Its swings and roundabouts really.

Also this is a three year temporary plan. The idea is that it gives the construction sector time to get this long awaited supply coming through. We already have had reports that rents are now higher than the Celtic Tiger era and another report showing that rents were due to increase by a further 25% over the next 2 years. So this is the government putting a temorary brake on the market till supply stabilises the price of rent. Once that happens the restrictions come off and landlords have a free market again.

No different tax on shares, 30% capital gains tax as opposed to 52% on rental for many landlords

CiboC

scriba wrote: »

But in order to compensate a little, we needed to raise our rent by about 15% after the two year period. That option is now gone for us.

If you are over two years since the last review, why can't you issue a notice of rent review immediately, tomorrow, before the legislation is enacted?

scriba

CiboC wrote: »

If you are over two years since the last review, why can't you issue a notice of rent review immediately, tomorrow, before the legislation is enacted?

Cheers. Unfortunately, we're about 15 months since the start of that tenancy, so nowhere near the next review date.

athtrasna

CiboC wrote: »

If you are over two years since the last review, why can't you issue a notice of rent review immediately, tomorrow, before the legislation is enacted?

The legislation is nowhere near being enacted and FF are hinting that they won't support it so it may be dead in the water. A government proposal is no longer guaranteed to be passed so I really don't get the panic. Legislation tends to change significantly at committee stage anyway.