Great amount of legislation proposed in 2018 to change the Residential Tenancies Act

GGTrek

Some TDs have gone beserk, a lot of very amateurish Private Bills which would cause mayhem to the rental market. These TDs are a joke and I am still waiting for the govvie proposal which for sure will come in the summer.

In chronological Order

23 Jan 2018 Residential Tenancies (Amendment) Bill 2018 https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/bills/bill/2018/5/

31 Jan 2018 Overcrowded Housing Bill 2018 https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/bills/bill/2018/11/

21 Mar 2018 Residential Tenancies (Residential Tenancies Board) (Amendment) Bill 2018 https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/bills/bill/2018/32/

29 Mar 2018 Residential Tenancies (Greater Security of Tenure and Rent Certainty) Bill 2018 https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/bills/bill/2018/35/

2 May 2018 Short-term Lettings Bill 2018 https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/bills/bill/2018/42/

16 May 2018 Residential Tenancies (Rent Pressure Zones & Student Accommodation) (Amendment) (No.2) Bill 2018 https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/bills/bill/2018/52/

The legislative fervor of some TDs is unstoppable and they just don't unterstand that they are destroying the rental market. Their bills will just drastrically reduce supply. They don't care, they just want to look good on the media and are running a race on who is putting out the most stupid and restrictive bill on any type of tenancy in Ireland. I suggest to read each bill in detail, for sure the worst one is the bill proposed on the 29th of March (usual communist thinking against private property), but combined with the other ones they will destroy the market very quickly (except for commercial tenancies which they are not touching yet, but who knows with these idiots).

I am just worried that the government bill will just collect all the garbage from these piecemeal bills and put in into a single bill and I am thinking it is probably time to sell.

Varik

From reading one of them you won't be able to sell without the tenant in tow, and would put money on that ending up in any final draft.


Winner of biggest fool seems to be Darragh O'Brien, extending rent pressure zone regulations to student accommodation. Student accommodation empty out once a year, they've the easiest time to make any changes they need whether cutting losses or changing use.

Samuel T. Cogley

Where the feck are these idiots when there is a genuine issue, such as road safety?

While some of that legislation is laudable there's an awful lot of just messing about. What's the intended purpose of the Short term lettings notification?

mrslancaster

Does the proposed change in the 29,th March bill take away the ground to terminate at the end of the 6 year cycle?

Does that mean a tenancy in a private property will be similar to a local council tenancy & can last indefinitly?

Also the sale of property will not be a reason. How would that work if banks require property to be vacant for buyers. can a property only be sold for cash?? How many cash buyers are there?

Fol20

So let me guess everything they are discussing is for the tenant and nothing for the landlord. Normally it’s meant to be a two way street of bargain. Yet again more crap that won’t fix the situation and drive more and more ll out of the market

the_syco

31 Jan 2018 Overcrowded Housing Bill 2018; Amendment of section 63 of Act of 1966 - 2;
I could be reading this incorrectly, but if the family has kids, and there isn't room for said kids, after two years it becomes overcrowding, does the landlord then get fined?

29 Mar 2018 Residential Tenancies; Grounds for termination by landlord
7. Section 34 (Grounds for termination by landlord) of the Principal Act is amended

(ii) in paragraph 5, by substituting “, no reasonable measures can be taken to maintain the dwelling fit for human habitation during the refurbishment or renovation” for “in a way which requires the dwelling to be vacated for that purpose”.

So the LL can't build an extra room even if he could?

mrslancaster

Does amendment 6 of 29th mar mean the entire country is to be a RPZ

when is the CPI % published? The new formula uses the last % in the calculation

It seems the regulations will get even more complicated with these changes.

mrslancaster

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Where the feck are these idiots when there is a genuine issue, such as road safety?

While some of that legislation is laudable there's an awful lot of just messing about. What's the intended purpose of the Short term lettings notification?

I'm not used to reading legal stuff but does that bill mean any service involved in short term lets would need a psra licence? Would that be the likes of websites that advertise holiday lets or cleaning services

And if you do airbnb in your home for more than 6 weeks in the year it will be commercial, so what do home owners need, is it a change of use planning permission?

tuskacz

They have their interest in this. Many of them are property owners. If you were landlord, would you be interested in increasing property supply? No, because that would decrease rental prices = your income 

It's like a judge who would have a mortgage himself and who would rule about person who has mortgage in arrears. Conflict of interests.

ted1

tuskacz wrote: »

They have their interest in this. Many of them are property owners. If you were landlord, would you be interested in increasing property supply? No, because that would decrease rental prices = your income 

It's like a judge who would have a mortgage himself and who would rule about person who has mortgage in arrears. Conflict of interests.

If they were looking out for themselves the landscape would be very different and you could quickly and without hi cost evict bad and non paying tenants.

mrslancaster

Thanks GGTREK for the links - from reading it seems there will be some changes.

For anyone else who is interested:-

29 Mar 2018 Residential Tenancies (Greater Security of Tenure and Rent Certainty) Bill 2018 == due for discussion Wed 30/5

first stage debate was in March. here is the link: https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/dail/2018-03-29/23/

Residential Tenancies (Student rents, rights and protections) Bill 2018 ==due for discussion 29/5

GGTrek

They are all private members bills, so even if they are due for discussion, it is very unlikely they will move quickly. Now the big worry is what the government bill will include this summer.

29 Mar 2018 Residential Tenancies (Greater Security of Tenure and Rent Certainty) Bill 2018 is just a reproposal of some communist measures present in the Anti Eviction Bill of Sinn Fein, AAA, Labour that was narrowly defeated by one vote in January 2017. It is a very communist bill since it wants to make tenancies indefinite (removes section 34(b)), reduce the eviction for family to just spouse and children, make the whole of Ireland a rent pressure zone, prohibit eviction for sale, and shift social responsibility for tenants to private landlords, ...

As some poster said above, none of the bills introduces any incentive for landlords, just negatives from top to bottom. These TDs just cannot think for a second about the supply side and the massive damage their bills would cause to supply, because they are just playing politics and want to look good on the media. New tenants will be screwed and screwed even more, in addition should any of the communist measures be close to approval I suspect the number of evictions will increase massively (exactly the opposite of what the do-gooder TDs intended)

rossmores

Its good for the legal profession thought, i have had to retain legal services on 2 occasions in the last year alone thanks to the regulations.
I consider myself a decent landlord in the past now i have to operate in a hostile over regulated market.
That idiot communist march 29th jan o sullivan stated clearly on radio she wanted small LLs out ignoring the fact that this effects the tenants within... i rest my case

Scienceless

GGTrek wrote: »

They are all private members bills, so even if they are due for discussion, it is very unlikely they will move quickly. Now the big worry is what the government bill will include this summer.

Once the government bill is published, will it take long for whatever measures are included to take effect?

GGTrek

The govvie bill will be fast. In 2016 they managed to pass it in a couple of weeks in order to give as little time as possible for landlords to issue eviction notices or rent increases.

GGTrek

Well as previous poster mrslancaster mentioned the Dail is going ahead tonight by putting student accommodation under the remit of the RTB and RPZ. As usual Sinn Feinn is leading the charge. They are still hoping that thousands of student accommodations will be built after passing such law! The lefties at the student unions do not seem to understand that the rent caps will not apply to newly built accommodation (unless some last minute amendment is added).

https://www.rte.ie/news/politics/2018/0529/966744-housing-tenancy/

Claw Hammer

It may also mean that the building of student accommodations units will slow down or stop.

Scienceless

So is there any way of tracking the progress of the government bill, or any of the proposals involved?

Claw Hammer

Look up oireachtas.ie

The chances of any of these bills becoming law is quite low.

Scienceless

Claw Hammer wrote: »

Look up oireachtas.ie

The chances of any of these bills becoming law is quite low.

I’m assuming you mean the bills quoted in the first post in this thread?

Came across this online:

http://www.housing.gov.ie/sites/default/files/publications/files/2018-04-20_review_of_rent_pressure_zones_final_2.pdf

It mentions several issues to be addressed and says work is underway to draw up a government bill to do so on page 11.

GGTrek

This was the debate yesterday on Student Accommodation rent caps proposals:
https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/dail/2018-05-29/41/
https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/dail/2018-05-29/42/
It will be put now into committee stage, so it will take months before it goes back to the Dail for vote.

The most important part of the debate (apart from the bu...t from the amateur TDs who clearly proposed the amendment of the RTA without any legal advice) is the following from the govvie (I put the most important parts in bold):
"I am happy to tease that through with the Deputy but the most important element is that different aspects of licensing versus tenancy have different rights. I have a copy of the UCD licence and I am happy to give it to the Deputy. There are very specific details contained in it about what a licensee is entitled to and the service he or she will get and can expect. It is very different to a tenancy agreement. This is about looking to make sure we have the right legislation to protect people and to make sure that if we intervene in this area we can give the students the protection they need. We must ensure the legislation cannot be challenged and fail at a later stage.

When we debated rent pressure zones and changes in that regard I recall that a lot of our work was based on scientific data to make sure we got it right, that we would not lose a challenge if it happened and by intervening in a positive way that we could defend. We are not confident that the Bill put forward by Sinn Féin would put us in that position as there is still a bit of work to be done behind those ideas.

There is a risk that the expected supply of student accommodation coming on stream could be negatively affected by the proposed application of the Residential Tenancies Acts to student-specific accommodation provided under licence agreement. It does not mean that we do not intervene. It does not mean that we do not do anything, but we have to measure it and balance it to make sure we get it right. There is a fair increase in accommodation being brought through the system.

While the Government is not in a position to support the Bill at this stage, we do not oppose it. The Departments of Education and Skills and Housing, Planning and Local Government will consider the Bill's proposals further. They have been doing so in recent times. In the event it is considered that there is a policy-based case for legislation in this area, proposals will be introduced, either in a stand-alone Bill or in the context of the second of two residential tenancies (amendment) Bills envisaged for this year. It is not a case of telling students that we do not support them or are not with them. Rather, we want to get this right."

I believe the most important debate will be today to see the position of the government on the communist RTA amendment proposde by Jan O'Sullivan. What I am interested in is the position of the government, because it will give a good hint about what the government is willing or unwilling to accept and what will go through this year. If for example the government is willing to impose that Ireland can only have indefinite tenancies by removing Section 34(b) (like the communist proposal is trying to do) then I am done with Ireland, since it is for all effects an expropriation of property by tenancy. Even marriages nowadays can be broken, why a tenancy cannot be terminated if one of the parties is not willing to continue it! This is pure communist thinking and unacceptable for me.

GGTrek

The debate on the communist proposal from Jan O'Sullivan has just been published and it is mixed news.
https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/dail/2018-05-30/29/

The not too bad news:
- termination due to selling will be kept, since they say it would be "uncostitutional" to remove this possibility
- there will not be a blanket extension of RPZ to the whole of Ireland and change the 4% rule to the CPI
- the definition of family for termination notices will not be changed

The very bad news:
- it seems that the govvie will agree that one month deposit is the maximum allowed (this can be easily overcome by charging more than one month rent in advance or the last month rent in advance) but it is a big interference on the risk sustained by landlords where one month deposit was fine in 2003 when you were sure that in 28 days you could perform a peaceful re-entry if the tenant was not paying, not now
- it looks like there is chance that Section 34(b) will be abolished which means indefinite tenant agreements for landlords and at will tenancies for tenants (short notice period and they are off!). This is a deal breaker for me, since it is expropration by the backdoor

What the govvie said:

[This is the June Bill]"When enacted, the legislation will make it an offence to contravene the rent pressure zones, allow the Residential Tenancies Board to investigate and enforce independently the implementation of rent pressure zones and other measures, give greater security of tenure by extending notice to quit periods, in many instances, almost doubling them, and provide for rent transparency, which is welcomed by all sides of the House. The Bill will be published shortly. It was meant to happen this week, but there has been a slight delay. I hope it can be enacted before the summer recess, but it depends on how quickly we can get it through the Houses. That should not be difficult, given that its measures are supported, but if amendments to the Bill might be better suited to a second Bill that will be before us later in the year, I would prefer that option to be taken in order that the first Bill, on which there is broad agreement, can be passed by the Oireachtas before the summer recess. The second Bill will deal with more complex issues [I wonder which are these complex issues!] and need more time to be walked through by the House...
We support the publication of rents payable to ensure rent transparency. We support the proposal on a deposit not exceeding one month's rent...
On tenancies of indefinite duration, extending a Part 4 tenancy from four years to six has happened, but we need to go further. [further than what!]...
The Minister, Deputy Murphy, addressed the changes proposed in Deputy Jan O'Sullivan’s Bill. We agree with parts of it but we cannot agree with it all. We are bringing in a Bill ourselves in the month ahead. Hopefully, we can include some of these proposals in that. A second Bill is being published for the autumn. With a bit of effort, we may be able to squeeze things in. Everything one does when one intervenes in the rental market must be analysed carefully, which the Deputies opposite will appreciate. That is why things will be done in the autumn if it is not possible to get them through in this Bill or the Bill coming through in June. "

So the govvie will propose his first bill in June and a second one in the Autumn, again the rules of the game are being changed twice in the same year and they are all against landlords. Instead of focusing on supply the govvie and the TDs are tinkering again and again with the RTA causing again and again instability in the rental market. Some TDs were blabbering about the high taxes and incentives for landlords, but it was just the usual bu..it with no consequences. No mention of the massive problem of overholding and starting to put serious financial penalties on overholding tenants or streamlining the RTB process by removing the lengthy appeals and making determination orders directly enforceable. Absolutely no incentives for landlords as usual. Some bu...t TD said that rents should halve by magic! These people and the govvie are a joke but they cause serious problems.

the_syco

On tenancies of indefinite duration, extending a Part 4 tenancy from four years to six has happened, but we need to go further.

I wonder what effect will this have on the amount of places to rent in the next year or so?

GGTrek

The net effect will be a further reduction of rented accommodation supply since the socialist one size fits all does not fit the vast majority of landlords. Indefinite tenancies have always been introduced by socialists/communists with their limited understanding of economics.

For me personally it is a deal breaker: I shall not allow any person to own my property just by paying a monthly fee whose value is decided by a third party called government. If indefinite tenancies are introduced, I am selling everything.

unattendedbag

Is there no landlord association or lobby group that can fight this from the other side? Who is advocating for rights to landlords? If legislation is at the proposal stage then pressure should be put on for quick evictions and solutions for the problem tenants.

Lumen

unattendedbag wrote: »

Is there no landlord association or lobby group that can fight this from the other side? Who is advocating for rights to landlords?

IPOA and RLAI.

GGTrek

Lumen wrote: »

unattendedbag wrote: »

Is there no landlord association or lobby group that can fight this from the other side? Who is advocating for rights to landlords?

IPOA and RLAI.

Yes, run like a senior citizens club. I tried twice to get answers from them about their lobbying efforts, never received an answer, I gave up.

Lumen

GGTrek wrote: »

Yes, run like a senior citizens club.

Sounds representative of Irish landlords

Varik

GGTrek wrote: »

Yes, run like a senior citizens club. I tried twice to get answers from them about their lobbying efforts, never received an answer, I gave up.

Problem is when they do try and do something they get called a cartel, and accused of price fixing. Different rules apply to them.

Fol20

Are you able to expense IPOA membership? If all LL were a member of a decent organization at least we would have some clout behind us. At the moment, the only way i see this happening is when a REIT get strong enough they will do the heavy hitting for us and the ironic thing is that is what tenants want.

I saw on the news today there will be over 1000 build to rent apartments in cherrywood.

GGTrek

Fol20 wrote: »

Are you able to expense IPOA membership? If all LL were a member of a decent organization at least we would have some clout behind us. At the moment, the only way i see this happening is when a REIT get strong enough they will do the heavy hitting for us and the ironic thing is that is what tenants want.

Yes you are able to expense IPOA membership, unfortunately having membership does not mean you will be involved in the decision making process.

Claw Hammer

The IPOA is dominated by old style pre-63 landlords. They are too mean to take cases against legislation.

DubCount

Claw Hammer wrote: »

The IPOA is dominated by old style pre-63 landlords. They are too mean to take cases against legislation.

To be fair, I think there are legal difficulties in taking such a case. There is a concept in Irish law called "Maintenance and Champerty". Excuse my uneducated explanation of this but it basically stops someone taking a case in which they do not have a direct interest. So the IPOA cannot take a test case for one of their members, or fund one of their members to take a test case.

Claw Hammer

DubCount wrote: »

To be fair, I think there are legal difficulties in taking such a case. There is a concept in Irish law called "Maintenance and Champerty". Excuse my uneducated explanation of this but it basically stops someone taking a case in which they do not have a direct interest. So the IPOA cannot take a test case for one of their members, or fund one of their members to take a test case.

It is accepted that members of an association can fund one of their members in a case. likewise a family member can fund the case of another. maintenance and champerty is not the reason for not taking a case. it is pure meanness.

Scienceless

GGTrek wrote: »

So the govvie will propose his first bill in June and a second one in the Autumn, again the rules of the game are being changed twice in the same year and they are all against landlords.

Is there any indication that the situation re landlords in receipt of below market rents due to RPZ restrictions might be addressed in either of the pending government bills?

GGTrek

Scienceless wrote: »

GGTrek wrote: »

So the govvie will propose his first bill in June and a second one in the Autumn, again the rules of the game are being changed twice in the same year and they are all against landlords.

Is there any indication that the situation re landlords in receipt of below market rents due to RPZ restrictions might be addressed in either of the pending government bills?

None

GGTrek

Claw Hammer wrote: »

DubCount wrote: »

To be fair, I think there are legal difficulties in taking such a case.  There is a concept in Irish law called "Maintenance and Champerty".  Excuse my uneducated explanation of this but it basically stops someone taking a case in which they do not have a direct interest.  So the IPOA cannot take a test case for one of their members, or fund one of their members to take a test case.

It is accepted that members of an association can fund one of their members in a case. likewise a family member can fund the case of another. maintenance and champerty is not the reason for not taking a case. it is pure meanness.

Could not agree more, the IPOA is doing a massive disservice to landlords in Ireland. If they just said we are looking for help for a member to mount a legal challenge to the RTA 2016 I would have gladly helped financially. As I said before, it is run like a senior citizens club.

Scienceless

GGTrek wrote: »

None

Obviously it’s not a headline issue like others being discussed here, but it was at least acknowledged in the outcome of the public consultation re the review of the rent predictability measure. Maybe some hope for those ll’s caught in below market rent situations who will be forced to sell up if it’s not addressed.

GGTrek

Scienceless wrote: »

GGTrek wrote: »

None

Obviously it’s not a headline issue like others being discussed here, but it was at least acknowledged in the outcome of the public consultation re the review of the rent predictability measure. Maybe some hope for those ll’s caught in below market rent situations who will be forced to sell up if it’s not addressed.

Please read the full debate and you will see that there is no mention at all about it. Just some words thrown out about high taxation of landlords but with no legislative action about it. Some TD actually said he wants rents halved by law now!
Do you realize that the majority of TDs want small landlords out? It was actually well explained by the minister.
Do not expect anything positive for landlords to come out from the Dail. The only solution for landlords is a very expensive legal challenge that will finally stop any further action from these populist TDs. The communists in Ireland actually want to change the constitution to restrict (read almost abolish) private property rights, problem is that in a referendum they will probably loose since 80% of the Irish people own at least a property.

Lcgalway

Does anyone know how long this bill would take to enact if there are no objections or issues. I know it has different stages and multiple things can slow it down. But if no issues roughly how long does it take

GGTrek

Lcgalway wrote: »

Does anyone know how long this bill would take to enact if there are no objections or issues. I know it has different stages and multiple things can slow it down. But if no issues roughly how long does it take

The govvie is taking forward this bill at the moment:
https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/press-centre/press-releases/20180611-rights-of-tenants-homeless-on-housing-committee-agenda/
https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/bills/bill/2018/5/
https://whitneymoore.ie/2018/06/21/residential-tenancies-amendment-bill-2018-the-implications-for-landlords/

And another round of BS about standards where the Threshold has been called but no landlords association:
https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/press-centre/press-releases/20180703-housing-committee-to-discuss-standards-in-rental-sector/

In my opinion the govvie will not be able to pass any legislation before the summer break. After that it is anybody's guess, really depends on political will.

subrosa

The Joint Committee on Housing, Planning and Local Government has conducted per-legislative scrutiny on the heads of government's new bill. The debates are available here:

Session with the RTB:

https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/joint_committee_on_housing_planning_and_local_government/2018-06-12/2/

Session with Threshold, IPOA and USI:

https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/joint_committee_on_housing_planning_and_local_government/2018-06-14/3/


This is the government bill. None of the other bills have any hope of becoming law, although they can influence government thinking. Some of the measures in the government bill were lifted from the Soc Dems bill earlier in the year. The Minister has spoken of his desire to have two residential tenancies bills this year, although the time-frame is very tight. The second may focus on a reworked deposit protection scheme.

GGTrek

subrosa wrote: »

The Joint Committee on Housing, Planning and Local Government has conducted per-legislative scrutiny on the heads of government's new bill. The debates are available here:

Session with the RTB:

https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/joint_committee_on_housing_planning_and_local_government/2018-06-12/2/

Session with Threshold, IPOA and USI:

https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/joint_committee_on_housing_planning_and_local_government/2018-06-14/3/


This is the government bill. None of the other bills have any hope of becoming law, although they can influence government thinking. Some of the measures in the government bill were lifted from the Soc Dems bill earlier in the year. The Minister has spoken of his desire to have two residential tenancies bills this year, although the time-frame is very tight. The second may focus on a reworked deposit protection scheme.

Thank you verymuch. Have you got any link to the proposed legislation they discussed in the debates? They were referring to head number X, head number Y, ... It was very confusing to read the debate without seeing theactual proposals.

Some parts I managed to understand are really scary: like anonymous complaints at the RTB against landlords (but not against tenants:D). This reminds me of the good old fascist/communist tradition. Some of the people in the committee are from the hard left and not much use listening to them, but when the words come from the head of the RTB, things become serious. It looks like another massive anti-landlord legislation that will further reduce supply as the IPOA respresentative pointed out and was almost completely ignored by the committee who ignored the fact that you cannot force people to be landlords and landlords do not have a duty of social care of their tenants.

Fol20

They brought up some interesting points in the article.

For one I would love it if there was a dispute with rent arrears, the tenant would mandatorily have to provide the rent to the RTB if they wanted to appeal a case and bring the paid rent up to the pro rata amount. At least that way the tenant has some skin the the game so that if they loose their appeal, it is given to the ll.

Another interesting point is that they are looking for tenants to support RTB since they are the people receiving the protection.i wish the tenant had to pay full or at least half of the cost of a registration since they do not provide any type of real protection to ll.

Is it true that for every 3 rental properties, one is bought as a btl again?

I do believe accidental ll should be pushed out of the market(if they can, or at least give it to an agency that can manage the house properly).

How can reits get away with not paying any tax while the vast majority of ll pay 53pc. I wish all profit incl reits were taxes evenly. Maybe at amount of 40 or whatever the equivalent is when you account for reits

I also found it interesting that. They would like the IPOA to receiving funding from RTB or state funding to “professionalize” ll. It’s an interesting viewpoint on the matter.

Likewise, they are also talking about being in criminal sanctions against ll. They brought up a very valid point that why don’t criminal sanctions also come in against non rent paying tenants. At least that way it is fair to both sides. Don’t get me wrong, I would prefer they don’t bring this in but at least it’s fair to both sides.

Lastly, although it makes complete sense for one body to be unified to deal with issues, I would be seriously worried if everything was left to the RTB on its current state. It is already understaffed to Cope with existing demand for their services.

Varik

REITs are required to pay out 90% of their income to shareholders, which are taxed at the top marginal tax rate for most.

The government get more out of every euro they make than they would a normal limited company.

GGTrek

Varik wrote: »

REITs are required to pay out 90% of their income to shareholders, which are taxed at the top marginal tax rate for most.

The government get more out of every euro they make than they would a normal limited company.

Disagree. Most investors in REITs are pension funds (foreign ones as well) who get a very preferential tax treatment on distribution of dividends.

GGTrek

Fol20 wrote: »

They brought up some interesting points in the article...

.

What you posted are the wishes and submissions of IPOA. Nothing to do with the new proposed legislation which seems to be very anti-landlord again. The RTB directors debate gives a much better picture of the proposed changes.

GGTrek

I found another good piece of info on Sinn Féin website:
http://www.sinnfein.ie/files/2018/HPLG-381-2018_Letter_from_Min_Murphy_re_Referral_Residential_Tenancies_A__Bill_2018.pdf
The general scheme of the current amendment bill proposal is still not out, but there are proposal there at page 4 that will absolutely kill the private rental market as we know it (it will go to how it was in the UK in the 70s, where there was almost no private rental market). The worst proposal is the introduction of indefinite tenancies, this is what I call expropriation. Selling looks like a good option at the moment.

Pkiernan

As soon as my tenants Part IV is up I'm taking my place off the market and using it as a crash pad for my family and I. It's in a great location.

Not worth the hassle after the Govt. takes their 54% cut.

Another unit off the market.

Mike Allen from Focus Ireland was given an interview on morning Ireland about 5 to 9 this morning.

He's pushing for indefinite tenancies which will transfer when the house is sold as far as I can see. (moral and social obligations of landlords etc etc)

He wasn't asked why anyone would be encouraged to invest in a house to be a landlord if they can never ever get the house back.
Also admits thousands of empty houses countrywide.

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2018/0712/978092-homeless-ireland/

handlemaster

More socialist nonsence