Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Anti Eviction Bill

Options
12346»

Comments

  • Options
    #152
    Mad_maxx
    Registered Users Posts: 13,505 ✭✭✭✭Mad_maxx


    Geuze wrote: »
    Yes, we used to have a high OO rate.

    But our rate has fallen, and we are not longer way ahead of other countries rates.

    Many point to Germany without adding that Germany is the exception rather than the rule for the most part


  • Options
    #153
    4ensic15
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,691 ✭✭✭4ensic15


    beauf wrote: »
    So everyone's happy. Great.

    So there's no need for all these threads on boards then.

    The people who are happy are naturally keeping their mouths shut. The only people posting in these threads are moaners.


  • Options
    #154
    trishabon
    Registered Users Posts: 53 ✭✭trishabon


    Banks do as they please. I lived in a complex for three years that had 4 apartments, that I knew of, standing empty for most of that time. Being a very popular complex, I asked the caretaker why this was and he told me that they belong to the banks and they were waiting on buyers. In some countries the banks will rent vacant properties out on a rolling 30 day lease at 1% of the property value. When I inquired about a mortgage I was told that people over 50 don't get mortgages.


  • Options
    #155
    notharrypotter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,112 ✭✭✭notharrypotter


    trishabon wrote: »
    When I inquired about a mortgage I was told that people over 50 don't get mortgages.
    I think that you will find that people over 50 can easily get a mortgage.


    The issue is over what term.


    For many people now working till 70 is a realistic proposition (obviously certain fields will need to be excepted on the grounds of public safety).


    The shorter the term the higher the repayment amount.


    For some the figures do not stack up.


    Regarding your other comment of rental on a rolling monthly basis.
    In Ireland after 6 months you have rights for the next 6 years.
    Some would move when asked but some won't.
    It's the "won't" that will colour it for the others.


  • Options
    #156
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    beauf wrote: »
    So everyone's happy. Great.

    So there's no need for all these threads on boards then.
    4ensic15 wrote: »
    The people who are happy are naturally keeping their mouths shut. The only people posting in these threads are moaners.


    I think the fact that prices for property is relatively low for apartments, and yet the number of landlords is declining shows there are more unhappy than happy people right now. Regardless of anything else, the sector needs to look like a good investment to solve the current rental crisis, all this meddling does the opposite.


    Moan over.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #157
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,283 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    Mad_maxx wrote: »
    I only own one residential property now and I entered into a ten year lease with Limerick city Council last summer, way I see it, the state has so much power over you now, you might as well have the state as your tenant

    Might buy a property at auction next week and if I get it chances are I'll again let to the council, granted I deal in cheap properties where less capital is staked

    wait till you get it back and you have to replace every carpet, wooden floor, piece of furniture, the kitchen, bathroom and solve a mould problem.


  • Options
    #158
    Mad_maxx
    Registered Users Posts: 13,505 ✭✭✭✭Mad_maxx


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    wait till you get it back and you have to replace every carpet, wooden floor, piece of furniture, the kitchen, bathroom and solve a mould problem.

    I'm prepared for that


  • Options
    #159
    trishabon
    Registered Users Posts: 53 ✭✭trishabon


    notharrypotter wrote: »
    I think that you will find that people over 50 can easily get a mortgage.


    The issue is over what term.


    For many people now working till 70 is a realistic proposition (obviously certain fields will need to be excepted on the grounds of public safety).


    The shorter the term the higher the repayment amount.


    For some the figures do not stack up.


    Regarding your other comment of rental on a rolling monthly basis.
    In Ireland after 6 months you have rights for the next 6 years.
    Some would move when asked but some won't.
    It's the "won't" that will colour it for the others.
    Thanks for clearing that up for me... It's moot now as I no longer have the deposit I had 6 years ago and I also had nobody to advise me so when I got turned down by two banks I gave up. If only I had known about Boards then...


  • Options
    #160
    4ensic15
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,691 ✭✭✭4ensic15


    Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »
    I think the fact that prices for property is relatively low for apartments, and yet the number of landlords is declining shows there are more unhappy than happy people right now. Regardless of anything else, the sector needs to look like a good investment to solve the current rental crisis, all this meddling does the opposite.


    Moan over.

    Rented apartments were much more likely to have been owned by accidental landlords or celtic tiger fantasists. The accidentals are getting out and the fantasists have been repossessed. Apartments are not particularly attractive to an investor. Service charges are a pain and apartments don't appreciate as at as good a rate as houses.


  • Options
    #161
    murphaph
    Registered Users Posts: 19,018 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    Mad_maxx wrote: »
    I'm prepared for that
    You shouldn't have to be if you are in fact leasing the entire property to the council. Your responsibility for interior maintenance ceases while the council is the leaseholder. You are only responsible for structural maintenance, like any typical commercial lease.

    If the council attempt to return the property to you with such issues you should not take it. They should return it to you in at least as good a condition as they got it. They are not a residential tenant. Those rules do not apply.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #162
    Mad_maxx
    Registered Users Posts: 13,505 ✭✭✭✭Mad_maxx


    murphaph wrote: »
    You shouldn't have to be if you are in fact leasing the entire property to the council. Your responsibility for interior maintenance ceases while the council is the leaseholder. You are only responsible for structural maintenance, like any typical commercial lease.

    If the council attempt to return the property to you with such issues you should not take it. They should return it to you in at least as good a condition as they got it. They are not a residential tenant. Those rules do not apply.

    I know that's the deal on paper but I also know if the people living decide to wreck the place, the council won't evict them as they would then have another homeless family on their books

    People might look after it fine but I knew the risk when opting for a long term lease


  • Options
    #163
    murphaph
    Registered Users Posts: 19,018 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    Mad_maxx wrote: »
    I know that's the deal on paper but I also know if the people living decide to wreck the place, the council won't evict them as they would then have another homeless family on their books

    People might look after it fine but I knew the risk when opting for a long term lease
    I would expect the council to fully renovate the property if it was wrecked by their tenants, as they would have to do in the case of a council owned property. In fact I suspect that leased properties are managed by the same department that manages council owned properties as they are the landlord to the occupier. They are probably used to redecorating between tenants.

    To me there should be no such risk with the lease option. They get the property at a good discount compared to market rates. All the risk should be on their side.


  • Options
    #164
    Mad_maxx
    Registered Users Posts: 13,505 ✭✭✭✭Mad_maxx


    murphaph wrote: »
    I would expect the council to fully renovate the property if it was wrecked by their tenants, as they would have to do in the case of a council owned property. In fact I suspect that leased properties are managed by the same department that manages council owned properties as they are the landlord to the occupier. They are probably used to redecorating between tenants.

    To me there should be no such risk with the lease option. They get the property at a good discount compared to market rates. All the risk should be on their side.

    Hope you are correct and you appear well informed, Eric Cartman thinks differently


  • Options
    #165
    4ensic15
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,691 ✭✭✭4ensic15


    murphaph wrote: »
    I would expect the council to fully renovate the property if it was wrecked by their tenants, as they would have to do in the case of a council owned property. In fact I suspect that leased properties are managed by the same department that manages council owned properties as they are the landlord to the occupier. They are probably used to redecorating between tenants.

    To me there should be no such risk with the lease option. They get the property at a good discount compared to market rates. All the risk should be on their side.

    The council do not repair properties. They sign a contract with the landlord stating they will only accept responsibility for tenant damage up to the value of the deposit! Since by definition the tenants have no assets to pursue, the landlord gets stiffed.


  • Options
    #166
    murphaph
    Registered Users Posts: 19,018 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    4ensic15 wrote: »
    The council do not repair properties. They sign a contract with the landlord stating they will only accept responsibility for tenant damage up to the value of the deposit! Since by definition the tenants have no assets to pursue, the landlord gets stiffed.
    That's the position for HAP, RAS etc. The long term leasing is a different animal. There is no tenant deposit because the property owner's tenant is the council. The occupier is the council's tenant.

    It's one of the only benefits of the long term leasing. You effectively hand the whole thing over to them for a decade or two. You are only responsible for structural repairs.


  • Options
    #167
    JJJackal
    Registered Users Posts: 1,016 ✭✭✭JJJackal


    Property rights - from citizens information
    The Constitution declares that the State will vindicate the property rights of every citizen. This means that you have a right to own, transfer and inherit property. You also have the right to bequeath property upon your death. The State guarantees to pass no law to abolish these rights.

    Article 43 acknowledges that these rights ought to be regulated by the principles of social justice. This means that the State may pass laws limiting your right to private property in the interests of the common good. If the State passes a law that restricts your property rights, it may be required to compensate you for this restriction.

    Examples of restrictions or limitations on your right to own property include town and regional planning, protection of national monuments, compulsory acquisition of land and property taxes

    I think this bill impacts on a constitutional right to transfer property??


  • Options
    #168
    tretorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,800 ✭✭✭tretorn


    Im not sure it does.
    The tenant always had rights and this bill is enhancing these rights, doubt if a constitutional action would succeed.


  • Options
    #169
    JJJackal
    Registered Users Posts: 1,016 ✭✭✭JJJackal


    I agree that the tenant has rights - A landlord also has rights though


  • Options
    #170
    3DataModem
    Registered Users Posts: 3,948 ✭✭✭3DataModem


    Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »
    My tenants Part 4 comes to an end in April and I won’t be extending it. Im getting out of letting completely.

    I hope you have already served notice, otherwise the tenancy may not be ending in April.


  • Options
    #171
    3DataModem
    Registered Users Posts: 3,948 ✭✭✭3DataModem


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    wait till you get it back and you have to replace every carpet, wooden floor, piece of furniture, the kitchen, bathroom and solve a mould problem.

    Seems OK after 10 years.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #172
    Fian
    Registered Users Posts: 2,187 ✭✭✭Fian


    I gather this bill was to be debated on pat kenny today. I didn't hear it - did anyone here? How did it go?


  • Options
    #173
    Mad_maxx
    Registered Users Posts: 13,505 ✭✭✭✭Mad_maxx


    murphaph wrote: »
    That's the position for HAP, RAS etc. The long term leasing is a different animal. There is no tenant deposit because the property owner's tenant is the council. The occupier is the council's tenant.

    It's one of the only benefits of the long term leasing. You effectively hand the whole thing over to them for a decade or two. You are only responsible for structural repairs.

    I'm getting 850 per month for a two bed townhouse which cost me 83 k all in, not having to deal with tenants is a major plus


Advertisement