Apollo house mk2 - 35 Summerhill Parade?

This evenings rent protest outside the GPO seems to have ended with the occupation of a house in Summerhill Parade

https://www.broadsheet.ie/2018/08/07/meanwhile-at-the-gpo-4/
A “direct action” event calling “Take Back The City” hosted by North Dublin Bay Housing Crisis Community, Blanchardstown Housing Action Committee, Dublin central housing action, Dublin Renters’ Union, Take Back Trinity, Brazilian Left Front, and Migrants and Ethnic-minorities for Reproductive Justice.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/housing-activists-occupy-vacant-dublin-property-1.3589152?mode=amp

A large number of people already got evicted from the house back in May due to fire safety.

How well organised are they and can the cops boot them out again?

johnnyskeleton

Brazilian Left Front? I thought we were called the Peoples Front of Brazillia?

Seriously though, in terms of the Gardai, there is an offence of unlawful occupation of a dwelling:

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1971/act/25/enacted/en/print.html

Also criminal damage, theft of a service etc. However, these provisions are rarely enforced by the gardai, who will often say first off that they cant act without a complaint and second off that its a civil matter.

So the private landlord is likely to have to spend 25 grand getting an emergency high court injunction or the likes.

garhjw

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Brazilian Left Front? I thought we were called the Peoples Front of Brazillia?

Seriously though, in terms of the Gardai, there is an offence of unlawful occupation of a dwelling:

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1971/act/25/enacted/en/print.html

Also criminal damage, theft of a service etc. However, these provisions are rarely enforced by the gardai, who will often say first off that they cant act without a complaint and second off that its a civil matter.

So the private landlord is likely to have to spend 25 grand getting an emergency high court injunction or the likes.

Disgraceful people are allowed to do this to someone's property and not get arrested. I feel sorry for the landlord having to deal with these type of people in their property.

zl1whqvjs75cdy

Ethnic minorities for reproductive justice? Catchy title.

Samuel T. Cogley

garhjw wrote: »

Disgraceful people are allowed to do this to someone's property and not get arrested. I feel sorry for the landlord having to deal with these type of people in their property.

It's not a LL but a developer who is holding on to a number of vacant properties in the area in the middle of a housing crisis. If you do that you run the risk of squatters.

garhjw

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

It's not a LL but a developer who is holding on to a number of vacant properties in the area in the middle of a housing crisis. If you do that you run the risk of squatters.

True but it doesn’t excuse criminal behaviour.

Gatling

I see paul Murphy is the first political cheerleader on scene

Edgware

Gatling wrote: »

I see paul Murphy is the first political cheerleader on scene

Maybe someone should go up and occupy his place

Eric Cartman

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

It's not a LL but a developer who is holding on to a number of vacant properties in the area in the middle of a housing crisis. If you do that you run the risk of squatters.

the risk of squatters , making them sound like rats, which is a fair comparison.
I think the same rules should apply for removal

rossmores

It’s wrong that so many people that don’t want to work are allowed live and ghettoize the north city center while those who do and could make it better are forced to commute.
[font=Calibri", "sans-serif]Get a job ye parasites and clean the litter you leave behind ye.[/font]

AlekSmart

I wonder if any of the folks involved in this action have any of the €200,000+ that remains unaccounted for after the Apollo House gig...?

It's not only Developers that follow the money.....:rolleyes:

The_Conductor

I heard one of them being interviewed on RTE radio yesterday evening on the way home- it went along the lines of:

The house has been left to rack and ruin since May- and is in a very poor state. Its full of dust. Some of us are going to go get our hoovers from home- and we'll do it up nicely- one of the guys knows how to hook up the electricity- and make it habitable. Its a beautiful Georgian house with high ceilings- it deserves to have people live in it. If we don't occupy it- the owner will probably do it up and airbnb it.........

I'm against property being left vacant as much as the next person- however, what do actions like this mean for property rights- and surely a more appropriate manner of dealing with it- would be a vacant property/site tax in the first instance- followed by CPO by the local authority?

Apparently the developer is trying to get vacant possession of a group of the properties in a row and do them up (no idea whether they intend to let them or flog them- but given the location- I doubt they'd get top dollar for them).

We have a very vocal group of people- who seem to imagine that property rights are tenuous and nebulous- and don't really mean anything.

As a total aside- the properties were vacated in May- for a long list of breaches of fire safety regulations. Who is liable if the current shower go and hook up dodgy electricity connections- and there is an inferno? Of course- they'll blame the owner- yet- its barely been vacant for 10 weeks and he/she hasn't had an opportunity to get remedial work done (if this is indeed what they plan to do).

We have a housing crisis. This type of 'direct action' may make journalists salivate and generate lots of coverage for newspapers- but ultimately- all it does is give the Minister a smokescreen to hide behind- he can wax lyrically on the relative rights and wrongs of the case- instead of what he is planning to do that will actually make a difference for those who either don't have accommodation- or just as importantly- are being priced out of accommodation.

We need solutions- this 'direct action'- is not a solution- its a distraction.

Xterminator

They occupiers are alleging that the developer illegally evicted the tenants that were there. Allegation made in public, so they could be sued for libel if this were untrue.

irish times reports

In May 20 foreign nationals were evicted with only 24 hours notice from the property, after an inspection by Dublin Fire Brigade found fire safety concerns.

The property owner has 'forgotten' to register their name since the property was purchased in 2016.

And their demand is that the council use the powers they already have to purchase the vacant property and use it to house some of the people on the housing list. not an unreasonable demand.

source irishtimes.

On Tuesday night two men in a black SUV, believed to be associates of the owner of the building, parked outside the home for several hours, before leaving. When asked if they were connected to the owner of the property by The Irish Times, they declined to comment."

In all honesty it could be a property purchased with the proceeds of crime, etc. But even its its just someone who doesn't give a **** about their tenants and has legitimately purchased the building, it doesnt matter. homeowners have rights but obligations too.

We live in a society and there is a housing crisis. I fully agree DCC should use its CPO powers to buy and rent out vacant/derelict properties. And their not doing it enough, and they don't have access to funds to purchase enough property to make a dent in the housing list. Whats missing is the political will. If the protestors make enough headlines, the powers that be will take action that otherwise would not be taken.

The DCC has revenue raising powers through the property tax where they could raise funds to CPO vacant property and house homeless.

However I fear this would bring people to the streets to fight it. :pac: :pac:

The Brazilian left front need to understand their opponent here.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/dublin-city-council-rejects-plan-to-increase-local-property-tax-1.3227075

Lux23

garhjw wrote: »

Disgraceful people are allowed to do this to someone's property and not get arrested. I feel sorry for the landlord having to deal with these type of people in their property.

Do you think they care about the state of their property?

garhjw

Lux23 wrote: »

Do you think they care about the state of their property?

It has been vacant for a couple of months. I presume the OWNER is preparing a planning application to renovate the property. Besides that, it is their property to do with as they wish. The OWNER is not responsible for the provision of social housing.

What next - the commies invade my holiday home in Wexford because it is only used a month a year?

johnnyskeleton

The_Conductor wrote: »

I heard one of them being interviewed on RTE radio yesterday evening on the way home- it went along the lines of:

The house has been left to rack and ruin since May- and is in a very poor state. Its full of dust. Some of us are going to go get our hoovers from home- and we'll do it up nicely- one of the guys knows how to hook up the electricity- and make it habitable. Its a beautiful Georgian house with high ceilings- it deserves to have people live in it. If we don't occupy it- the owner will probably do it up and airbnb it.........

The ESB know how to hook up the electricity. Presumably this guy knows how to do it without having to pay for it or demonstrate legal occupation of the premises!

I'm against property being left vacant as much as the next person- however, what do actions like this mean for property rights- and surely a more appropriate manner of dealing with it- would be a vacant property/site tax in the first instance- followed by CPO by the local authority?

Apparently the developer is trying to get vacant possession of a group of the properties in a row and do them up (no idea whether they intend to let them or flog them- but given the location- I doubt they'd get top dollar for them).

Yup. Who would want to buy the house off him if it will come with a potential squatter problem?

We have a very vocal group of people- who seem to imagine that property rights are tenuous and nebulous- and don't really mean anything.

In a way, what these people are doing is far worse than say stealing someone's bag or wallet in a nightclub. In the latter case, it is inconvenient for a night or two, annoying to happen and costs a few hundred to replace. But stealing someone's property goes on for weeks and will leave them with a legal and repairs bill well into 5 figures.

So yeah, I'd be in favour of them being prosecuted for theft, criminal damage etc. The civil consequences of line up in the High Court, put in a mealy mouthed affidavit and then agree to vacate the premises after a few weeks and a meaningless order to pay the costs just won't cut it really.

As a total aside- the properties were vacated in May- for a long list of breaches of fire safety regulations. Who is liable if the current shower go and hook up dodgy electricity connections- and there is an inferno? Of course- they'll blame the owner- yet- its barely been vacant for 10 weeks and he/she hasn't had an opportunity to get remedial work done (if this is indeed what they plan to do).

If it's a dodgy electricity connection, the person who does the connection and the people who encourage others to live there could potentially be prosecuted for endangerment or manslaughter.

We have a housing crisis. This type of 'direct action' may make journalists salivate and generate lots of coverage for newspapers- but ultimately- all it does is give the Minister a smokescreen to hide behind- he can wax lyrically on the relative rights and wrongs of the case- instead of what he is planning to do that will actually make a difference for those who either don't have accommodation- or just as importantly- are being priced out of accommodation.

And also not to be forgotten is that if professional landlords feel that they are constantly under attack, they might decide not to bother renting out their properties anymore. Renters don't benefit long term from this type of carryon.

The only people who benefit are the political agitators. Ironically I've heard them being criticised by other socialists for making it so high profile and demanding that the government step in, when they should simply have appropriated the property for themselves and told the evil government to eff off!

garhjw

Does anyone know if this is still going on or did they get the offenders out of the house?

The_Conductor

garhjw wrote: »

Does anyone know if this is still going on or did they get the offenders out of the house?

No- they're still there- and they're actively seeking donations of furniture, food and anything else people are willing to bring the occupants.

Sigh.........

Meanwhile the usual politicians are gunning them on- the most recent being Ciaran Cuffe of the Green Party- who is calling for a 'right to occupy any residential property that has been vacant for a period of a year'. (this current property was only vacant since the third week in May- which seems to have been missed by him- however, why let inconvenient facts stand in the way of a good political soundbite).

Apparently they expect to be in there for the long haul- and are in the process of identifying other properties owned by the same owners ( Pat and PJ O'Donnell of the POD fame) in the area- and they intend on invading them in a similar manner.

garhjw

It's a disgrace that such criminality is allowed to continue without consequences. And for some "politicians" to support it.... what type of people vote for them.
This sets a dangerous precedent. I hope that people defend their property to the full extent the law allows.

garhjw

It's a disgrace that such criminality is allowed to continue without consequences. And for some "politicians" to support it.... what type of people vote for them.
This sets a dangerous precedent. I hope that people defend their property to the full extent the law allows.

GGTrek

Check the facebook group Dublin Central Housing group. They took the initiative for the illegal occupation. They are a hard left group that will only understand violence and expecting houses for all for free in central Dublin!

garhjw

And so it starts.... although not sure how they can pursue wasters for costs if they d9nt habe anything in the first place


https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/notice-to-quit-served-on-activists-occupying-dublin-property-1.3596008?mode=amp

I presume we are going to have a dramatic scene of them getting dragged out by the cops in front of the Irish Times cameras?


Tuesdays Irish Times property section: "Priced out of Summerhill, try Mountjoy" :pac:

tintin67

Does anyone know if they want this and other properties in the area to be occupied entirely by dozens of young Brazilians again or will they allow the odd Irish person to live there? There needs to be a serious crackdown on giving student visas to South Americans supposedly studying English unless they can prove they have adequate resources to pay for decent accommodation for the length of their stay.

Mrs OBumble

tintin67 wrote: »

There needs to be a serious crackdown on giving student visas to South Americans supposedly studying English unless they can prove they have adequate resources to pay for decent accommodation for the length of their stay.

Define decent though.

May students will happily live in hostel typw accommodation because their stay is only temporary. And realistically it's appropriate for tbeir age and life stage.

tintin67

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Define decent though.

May students will happily live in hostel typw accommodation because their stay is only temporary. And realistically it's appropriate for tbeir age and life stage.

I would suggest a minimum of around €8000 for each year's stay.This would be about half the cost of 2 people sharing a one-bed apartment in Dublin. Every case of extreme overcrowding in the last couple of years in Dublin that I have come across involves Brazilian students. There obviously is insufficient accommodation for the amount of visas being issued so a requirement to have something like this amount in their bank account should discourage those who really only want to come here to work and are happy to live in slum conditions.

I know it would be tough on genuine poorer students but it is only a matter of time before there is a massive loss of life in one of these doss houses packed with foreign nationals.

Edgware

tintin67 wrote: »

I would suggest a minimum of around €8000 for each year's stay.This would be about half the cost of 2 people sharing a one-bed apartment in Dublin. Every case of extreme overcrowding in the last couple of years in Dublin that I have come across involves Brazilian students. There obviously is insufficient accommodation for the amount of visas being issued so a requirement to have something like this amount in their bank account should discourage those who really only want to come here to work and are happy to live in slum conditions.

I know it would be tough on genuine poorer students but it is only a matter of time before there is a massive loss of life in one of these doss houses packed with foreign nationals.

If they don't come who will serve your Latte every morning?

tintin67

Edgware wrote: »

If they don't come who will serve your Latte every morning?

If the only way a business can survive is by having a constant pool of cheap exploitable labour living in slum conditions then I'd rather that business didn't exist. I'm sure Dublin could cope with fewer coffee shops, burger joints etc.

Arcade_Tryer

The_Conductor wrote: »

Meanwhile the usual politicians are gunning them on- the most recent being Ciaran Cuffe of the Green Party- who is calling for a 'right to occupy any residential property that has been vacant for a period of a year'. (this current property was only vacant since the third week in May- which seems to have been missed by him- however, why let inconvenient facts stand in the way of a good political soundbite).

To be fair, this type of behaviour is a result of bad policy and potential negligence on behalf of politicians; Dublin desperately needs a range of property taxes including a land value tax and a vacant property tax. Capital acquisitions tax thresholds also need to be lowered significantly.

tintin67 wrote: »

Does anyone know if they want this and other properties in the area to be occupied entirely by dozens of young Brazilians again or will they allow the odd Irish person to live there? There needs to be a serious crackdown on giving student visas to South Americans supposedly studying English unless they can prove they have adequate resources to pay for decent accommodation for the length of their stay.

That didn't take long.

Arcade_Tryer

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

To be fair, this type of behaviour is a result of bad policy and potential negligence on behalf of politicians; Dublin desperately needs a range of property taxes including a land value tax and a vacant property tax. Capital acquisitions tax thresholds also need to be lowered significantly.
That didn't take long.

Absolutely. We have a minority of people getting rode with rents and a majority of voting homeowners dont care so theres little incentive to fix the situation.

Arcade_Tryer

tintin67 wrote: »

If the only way a business can survive is by having a constant pool of cheap exploitable labour living in slum conditions then I'd rather that business didn't exist. I'm sure Dublin could cope with fewer coffee shops, burger joints etc.

A profitable business does not make its workers live in slum conditions. Bad policy does. Nice try though.

Edgware

tintin67 wrote: »

If the only way a business can survive is by having a constant pool of cheap exploitable labour living in slum conditions then I'd rather that business didn't exist. I'm sure Dublin could cope with fewer coffee shops, burger joints etc.

These Brazillians would be better off back in the slums of Rio than having the chance to learn English and earn some money in Dublin

tintin67

Edgware wrote: »

These Brazillians would be better off back in the slums of Rio than having the chance to learn English and earn some money in Dublin

Nobody living in the slums of Rio would have the resources or inclination to pay for an English language course in Dublin, to pay the air fare and the accommodation costs. Fabulous idea anyway to transport them from the slums of Rio to the new slums of Dublin, all in the midst of a massive housing crisis when people who actually come from the area are forced to live in hostels, hotels or on the streets because the affordable flats and houses they would have lived in 20 years ago are all now packed with foreign nationals being exploited by employers and landlords alike.

Now protesting at the Customs House.

https://www.newstalk.com/Protesters-occupy-the-Department-of-Housing-in-Dublin-city

Good stuff.

Edgware

tintin67 wrote: »

Edgware wrote: »

These Brazillians would be better off back in the slums of Rio than having the chance to learn English and earn some money in Dublin

Nobody living in the slums of Rio would have the resources or inclination to pay for an English language course in Dublin, to pay the air fare and the accommodation costs. Fabulous idea anyway to transport them from the slums of Rio to the new slums of Dublin, all in the midst of a massive housing crisis when people who actually come from the area are forced to live in hostels, hotels or on the streets because the affordable flats and houses they would have lived in 20 years ago are all now packed with foreign nationals being exploited by employers and landlords alike.

I suppose these foreigners are also taking jobs from the North inner city residents who just can't seem to get a start

The_Conductor

Apparently- they have complied with the terms of the court order- and vacated 35 Summerhill Parade. They have now invaded two fresh properties on North Frederick Street. Sigh......... This could run and run............

Assetbacked

Excellent timing all of this publicity with the protests coinciding with the Daft rental report issued today. To overstate just how big of a crisis the rental market in Dublin is impossible; people who worked through the recession whilst renting are in a worse position now than they were the last few years. It is astounding.

garhjw

Assetbacked wrote: »

Excellent timing all of this publicity with the protests coinciding with the Daft rental report issued today. To overstate just how big of a crisis the rental market in Dublin is impossible; people who worked through the recession whilst renting are in a worse position now than they were the last few years. It is astounding.

Normal people shouldnt take notice of what lay about commies do. I wonder how many of these “people” have ever bothered working. I wonder how much they cost tax payers every month.

Assetbacked

garhjw wrote: »

Assetbacked wrote: »

Excellent timing all of this publicity with the protests coinciding with the Daft rental report issued today. To overstate just how big of a crisis the rental market in Dublin is impossible; people who worked through the recession whilst renting are in a worse position now than they were the last few years. It is astounding.

Normal people shouldnt take notice of what lay about commies do. I wonder how many of these “people” have ever bothered working. I wonder how much they cost tax payers every month.

I think it’s more of a disgrace how much money is moved through the economy tax free ie multinationals and SPVs which were used to bought all of the land in Dublin.

garhjw

Assetbacked wrote: »

I think it’s more of a disgrace how much money is moved through the economy tax free ie multinationals and SPVs which were used to bought all of the land in Dublin.

Let them go and protest outside the REITs and multinationals then instead of invading and damaging peoples’ property. They could go and get a job instead of living off tax payers money. There are plenty of jobs out there for people of all abilities / skills.

Assetbacked

garhjw wrote: »

Assetbacked wrote: »

I think it’s more of a disgrace how much money is moved through the economy tax free ie multinationals and SPVs which were used to bought all of the land in Dublin.

Let them go and protest outside the REITs and multinationals then instead of invading and damaging peoples’ property. They could go and get a job instead of living off tax payers money. There are plenty of jobs out there for people of all abilities / skills.

Where will they live to go work these jobs? Dublin is unaffordable for those working for a below average salary.

the_syco

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

It's not a LL but a developer who is holding on to a number of vacant properties in the area in the middle of a housing crisis. If you do that you run the risk of squatters.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/high-court/owners-of-occupied-summerhill-property-apply-to-high-court-1.3597460

Mr O’Donnell, who holds the properties in trust for the members of the benefit plan

The court heard there are 67 members of the benefit plan, including 18 pensioners, who are employees and former employees of Pat O Donnell & Company.

Thought that meant that the trust was paying for peoples retirement?

Assetbacked wrote: »

Where will they live to go work these jobs?

Perhaps where they live now?

handlemaster

I dont care the issue you have if you occupy a property that is not yours and you dont have the owners permission to be there you should be thrown out. All costs legal and rental value of the property for the time occupied should be charged and enforced

garhjw

So when will the police move in?

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/were-not-going-anywhere-firework-and-pellets-thrown-at-protesters-refusing-to-leave-property-despite-high-court-injunction-37263952.html

4ensic15

When the High Court makes an order for the arrest of the persons in occupation.

Edgware

handlemaster wrote: »

I dont care the issue you have if you occupy a property that is not yours and you dont have the owners permission to be there you should be thrown out. All costs legal and rental value of the property for the time occupied should be charged and enforced

Ah but what about the what abouts

Eric Cartman

Why can't a riot squad just follow these lot around so the next building they move to they just get tear gassed and battoned out of it.

Invading other peoples legitimate private property is wrong and there is 0 justification for such.

4ensic15

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Why can't a riot squad just follow these lot around so the next building they move to they just get tear gassed and battoned out of it.

They are entitled to due process.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Invading other peoples legitimate private property is wrong and there is 0 justification for such.

When the High Court makes the arrest order, it should be executed vigorously.

Eric Cartman

4ensic15 wrote: »

They are entitled to due process.


When the High Court makes the arrest order, it should be executed vigorously.

I agree with point 2 , but point 1, due process, they broke into a building, surely due process is the same as any other home invader, remove them immediately.

4ensic15

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I agree with point 2 , but point 1, due process, they broke into a building, surely due process is the same as any other home invader, remove them immediately.

It has to be established as a fact in court. It is possible that the criminal trespass legislation could be tweaked. A certain ethnic minority have been doing the same thing for years on land, and there is never any condemnation about it.