Air BnB [and other platforms] to be effectively outlawed in high demand areas

1874

The_Fitz wrote: »

Will this ultimately drive down rents in Dublin as more properties enter the long term rent market?

Will this drive down rents? well why would it?
You are assuming more properties will enter the longterm rental market, some may not, they may stay off the market, others may be sold, which means someone may move from a rented place to an owner place, in fact, if a buyer moves from a family home, it may not even open up a space in the rental market, so
will this drive down rents? I doubt it, probably wont affect them at all, and as has been seen in the recent past, token ill considered adjustments in the property market just keeps creating more problems.
The only solution and the only way rents will go down, is, if there is sufficient property built at an affordable price that is available to buy/rent that opens up a lot of spaces in existing rented properties.

The_Fitz

1874 wrote: »

Will this drive down rents? well why would it?
You are assuming more properties will enter the longterm rental market, some may not, they may stay off the market, others may be sold, which means someone may move from a rented place to an owner place, in fact, if a buyer moves from a family home, it may not even open up a space in the rental market, so
will this drive down rents? I doubt it, probably wont affect them at all, and as has been seen in the recent past, token ill considered adjustments in the property market just keeps creating more problems.
The only solution and the only way rents will go down, is, if there is sufficient property built at an affordable price that is available to buy/rent that opens up a lot of spaces in existing rented properties.

Was just a question

If you are unable to rent out a second property short term then it will have to go on to the market somehow. I am assuming that a lot of airbnbs are attributed to property investors (potentially a completely wrong assumption).

1874

The_Fitz wrote: »

Was just a question

If you are unable to rent out a second property short term then it will have to go on to the market somehow. I am assuming that a lot of airbnbs are attributed to property investors (potentially a completely wrong assumption).

Thats fair enough, Im just giving an answer, but you were making a big assumption previously, and now again youre doing the same, Im correcting your assumptions which I think are hugely incorrect.
It is not necessarily the case that someone (an owner) if unable to rent out short term (AirBnB) that the property will absolutely have to go on the market somehow at all, it may but it may not.
The same as piecemeal reintroduction of individual properties here and there will not affect the asking rent, it just means, property being rented will be set at the market rate, its not like a swathe of longterm rentals is being introduced to the market, like for example if a large quantity of properties were built and released for renting all together.

the_syco

The_Fitz wrote: »

Will this ultimately drive down rents in Dublin as more properties enter the long term rent market?

No. I'd say most of the properties will be sold to non-investors.

The_Fitz wrote: »

I am assuming that a lot of airbnbs are attributed to property investors (potentially a completely wrong assumption).

I'd say a lot of the investors who use AirBnB do so because it doesn't have the risks of overholding or damage. If they can't use AirBnB, I doubt they'll go back to the market that they left, especially with the threat of more rules being introduced and will thus sell up.

1874

1874 wrote: »

Will this drive down rents? well why would it?
You are assuming more properties will enter the longterm rental market, some may not, they may stay off the market

So no net loss, but seeing as the owner is looking to generate income from the property fairly safe to assume most will sell or rent out

others may be sold, which means someone may move from a rented place to an owner place

Meaning that there is an extra rental property opeining up

, in fact, if a buyer moves from a family home, it may not even open up a space in the rental market

Meaning that there is now one less person to compete against for a rental property!!

The_Fitz

the_syco wrote: »

No. I'd say most of the properties will be sold to non-investors.


I'd say a lot of the investors who use AirBnB do so because it doesn't have the risks of overholding or damage. If they can't use AirBnB, I doubt they'll go back to the market that they left, especially with the threat of more rules being introduced and will thus sell up.

Selling to non-investors will mean less competition for properties, no?

If they can't use Airbnb where will they go? Surely if they don't sell up they'll be putting the property on the long term let market?

1874

Deleted User wrote: »

So no net loss, but seeing as the owner is looking to generate income from the property fairly safe to assume most will sell or rent out
Meaning that there is an extra rental property opeining up
Meaning that there is now one less person to compete against for a rental property!!

No net loss? of what?
Id say some will sell, some will rent out, some wont do either, they may be able to hold off for any number of reasons.

There is not an extra property rental becoming available, there is the existing property, thats not extra. If a person/family who buys, purchases a former rental property then it actually takes one rental out of supply, one less rental and one less renter is overall no change, one less person to compete against for rentals (if thats how you view it) is insignificant anyway when there is a shortage of supply, talking in terms of small numbers of properties doesnt resolve the overall problem and wont bring rents down. For that to occur, you'd need a lot of properties available for purchase or longterm rents available in a range of locations where they are needed. Unless lots of properties are being built all over Ireland, then I cant see how rents will fall.

Graham

Whichever way you look at it, there are potentially hundreds of properties that will return to the residential property market in one form or another.

Many of the current AirBnB hot properties are centrally located apartments. Carrying costs for these could be well into 4 figures by the time you've accounted for service charges/insurance.

There aren't many property investors who would hold an empty property for long, particularly when capital appreciation is relatively limited.

GGTrek

Deleted User wrote: »

So no net loss, but seeing as the owner is looking to generate income from the property fairly safe to assume most will sell or rent out


Meaning that there is an extra rental property opeining up


Meaning that there is now one less person to compete against for a rental property!!

You are making big and very simplistic assumptions. There will be more property available for the people who have money, for the middle and low income earners (mostly the people who rent) the situation will worsen substantially. Very few small investors will be insane enough to put the property back into the Irish rental market, you are believing too much of the propaganda given by the politicians.


Unless a huge financial crisis hits demand, supply will not improve given the massive constraints and disincentives the politicians have put in the market. They would have to un..k all the legislation they have passed in the past 10 years on the private residential market and that is not going to happen for ideological reasons (very much like the propaganda you believe).


The REITs and investment funds (only ones providing new rental accommodation at the moment) do not cater to low and middle income earners. When the rental market figures will come out mid year it will just show that rental supply is going down.


The airbnb legislation is just another piece of propaganda from the politicians.

an_fathach

Graham wrote: »

Whichever way you look at it, there are potentially hundreds of properties that will return to the residential property market in one form or another.

Many of the current AirBnB hot properties are centrally located apartments. Carrying costs for these could be well into 4 figures by the time you've accounted for service charges/insurance.

There aren't many property investors who would hold an empty property for long, particularly when capital appreciation is relatively limited.

Maybe, I know in my close family we have one Dublin property which there is no way is going to the rental market but we had planned using it for low intensity airbnb so it could be commonplace.

Graham

an_fathach wrote: »

Maybe, I know in my close family we have one Dublin property which there is no way is going to the rental market but we had planned using it for low intensity airbnb so it could be commonplace.

It has been said a few times.

The "I'm taking my ball and going home" approach is unlikely to work for those who are keeping a property for investment purposes.

an_fathach

Graham wrote: »

It has been said a few times.

The "I'm taking my ball and going home" approach is unlikely to work for those who are keeping a property for investment purposes.

An assertation.

1874

Hard to say,
given the current climate for privately rented property, I think a lot of landlords are in it as they are locked in, others may have paid off enough of their mortgage that its practical to stay at it as it gives a better return than deposits, but with the way things have gone with nothing in the way of leveling out the very biased legislation against landlords in particular about moving on delinquent tenants and promptly, preventing tenants gaming the system over trivialities.
Id say many who can move a tenant under the current legislation and arent relying on the income to pay the bills may do so, others might be able to hold off on getting tenants to see how any future changes pan out.
The amount they are losing from not taking rent is probably less than what they will lose compared to a worst case scenario, which could cost them a lot.

Some legislation has set probably essential standards around increases, but its penalised those who were taking less than market rate, and has done nothing to deal with delinquent tenants, which is why people likely shifted towards airBnB in the first place, they either experienced that or feared it. Doing nothing to fix problems drove that and that has led to problems in rentals and where landlords view getting out as an option and consequently to cost increases as tenants compete with each other for whats available. There are some simple solutions to encourage good landlords/investors/tenants, but either those that are in charge are clueless and dont know what the problems are or how to deal with them or they do know and dont care or are actually manipulating the situation. One way or the other, very little good seems to be getting done.

Graham

an_fathach wrote: »

An assertation.

Yup.

I absolutely assert that most property investors are looking for a return.

"Sure I just bought the place for the craic", isn't a phrase you'd hear too often. Not since the early noughties anyway

an_fathach

Graham wrote: »

Yup.

I absolutely assert that most property investors are looking for a return.

"Sure I just bought the place for the craic", isn't a phrase you'd hear too often. Not since the early noughties anyway

A lot of people who might be classed as investors don't act like investors because houses are so tangible and sentimental a financial asset and houses will be left vacant. No idea how many though.

Samuel T. Cogley

Amirani wrote: »

Depends on how short term lets are defined really. If you have a place and rent it out for 9 months a year to Dublin college students and then 3 months to foreign students on a working holiday then I can't see this being a problem under proposed legislation.

Anything over 2 weeks isn't short term AFAIK.

Graham

Two weeks was the figure floated in the October announcement.

Samuel T. Cogley

The_Fitz wrote: »

Will this ultimately drive down rents in Dublin as more properties enter the long term rent market?

No as even with the number of units there are and assuming they all go back on to the rental market, there won't be enough to generate any sort of competition. All that will happen is a small blip where rents stagnate for a bit (maybe 4 months).

L1011

Added to the title there, as other platforms are not ways around the legislation change

1874

1874 wrote: »

No net loss? of what?
Id say some will sell, some will rent out, some wont do either, they may be able to hold off for any number of reasons.

There is not an extra property rental becoming available, there is the existing property, thats not extra. If a person/family who buys, purchases a former rental property then it actually takes one rental out of supply, one less rental and one less renter is overall no change, one less person to compete against for rentals (if thats how you view it) is insignificant anyway when there is a shortage of supply, talking in terms of small numbers of properties doesnt resolve the overall problem and wont bring rents down. For that to occur, you'd need a lot of properties available for purchase or longterm rents available in a range of locations where they are needed. Unless lots of properties are being built all over Ireland, then I cant see how rents will fall.

There are hundreds of properties tied up in AirB&B. Release those back and it does not matter who moves in, rent or purchase. It means that there are 100's of less people looking for a home.

How is this hard to grasp??

JJJackal

Deleted User wrote: »

There are hundreds of properties tied up in AirB&B. Release those back and it does not matter who moves in, rent or purchase. It means that there are 100's of less people looking for a home.

How is this hard to grasp??

What will the effect on Tourism be? What will the effect on people whose job/business it is letting apartments as Air BnBs?

L1011

JJJackal wrote: »

What will the effect on Tourism be? What will the effect on people whose job/business it is letting apartments as Air BnBs?

There are thousands of hotel/aparthotel beds under construction, as well as student units which are normally let out over the summer. Its unlikely there'll be an appreciable impact on tourism.

The owners of units are going to have other ways to make money from the unit. There could be cleaners who need to find new employment, but in the areas with the most pressure on accommodation there is also a shortage of people willing to work in those jobs anyway. And the new/expanded hotels will need them.

JJJackal

JJJackal wrote: »

What will the effect on Tourism be? What will the effect on people whose job/business it is letting apartments as Air BnBs?

They're breaking planning laws. Those properties are supposed to be residential, not tourism. Hundreds of hotel rooms are coming on stream now.

Oh and "Home Needs>Tourists Needs"

CoffeeBean2

Have the new rules become law? While I have read reports about what is coming for a few months. I have not come across the finalized laws, or any mention of when those finalized laws will be released.

CoffeeBean2

CoffeeBean2 wrote: »

Has the new rules become law? While I have read reports about what is coming for a few months. I have not come across the finalized laws, or any mention of when those finalized laws will be released.

What new rules?
The law has always been clear, just now being enforced.

CoffeeBean2

[Deleted User] wrote: »

What new rules?
The law has always been clear, just now being enforced.

If the law was always clear, could you enlightening me as to what is happening on the 1st of June?

JJJackal

JJJackal wrote: »

What will the effect on Tourism be? What will the effect on people whose job/business it is letting apartments as Air BnBs?

We keep hearing about the thousands housed in hotels and B&Bs. Once these are housed, those beds will once again be available for tourists.

CoffeeBean2

[Deleted User] wrote: »

We keep hearing about the thousands housed in hotels and B&Bs. Once these are housed, those beds will once again be available for tourists.

I know of a family of four that were staying in a hotel, they moved into a house short term, which better suited them (had a kitchen for starters), and cost less than half the hotel, but had to move back into a hotel as the gov would only cover payments to hotels or B&Bs. If they wanted to stay in the house, they had to pay themselves, and they couldn't cover deposit or first month's rent.

CoffeeBean2

CoffeeBean2 wrote: »

I know of a family of four that were staying in a hotel, they moved into a house short term, which better suited them (had a kitchen for starters), and cost less than half the hotel, but had to move back into a hotel as the gov would only cover payments to hotels or B&Bs. If they wanted to stay in the house, they had to pay themselves, and they couldn't cover deposit or first month's rent.

How did they come up with the deposit when they moved to the house? I’m sure one of the many homeless “Charities” would be only too glad to share some of their multi millions to help those they claim to be there for.

CoffeeBean2

[Deleted User] wrote: »

How did they come up with the deposit when they moved to the house?

I believe the gov paid as there was confusion. Once the gov discovered it wasn't a B&B, they cut payments until the family were back in a hotel.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I’m sure one of the many homeless “Charities” would be only too glad to share some of their multi millions to help those they claim to be there for.

Solving the problem you were created to achieve would just do yourself out of business.