Property Market 2019

awec

2nd hand semi D will be the first class of house to see prices level off, since it's the section of the market most directly impacted by help to buy (and in some areas of the country it's the only section of the market impacted by it).

Rew

Maurice Yeltsin wrote: »

A
Ballybrack and Sallynoggin are around the 370k plus mark from memory. I'm seriously wondering if some fund is gradully buying up the houses there with the intent of tossing them and building mansions in their place, I can't work out who in their right mind pays that figure to live in an area that is still 50/50 owed by the council (not in terms of snobbery, more in terms of people would think you were on drugs to entertain paying 380k for a house in a heavily LA owned area of west Dublin, but someone is buying them for this in a similar part of the south east). The obvious answer would be people who grew up in Kiliney given a generous few quid from the parents, but do people like this really end up living in Ballybrack?

It's sad really, someone from Ballybrack/ Shankill who wishes to settle where they grew up is bizarrely better off doing FA with their life and qualifying for housing, god knows they won't afford it with the pay from most jobs or with most trades. Affordable housing schemes are needed all over Dublin but particularly in areas like this.

Half of Killiney/Glenageary is really Sallynoggin and the other half is Ballybrack so the lines are a bit blurred esp when it comes to schools. They are half the price of a-joining areas and easy access to all the things that make those desirable areas. I don't think there is much mansion building going on, the new ones near Ballybrack currently aren't selling. There is a big site opposite the Graduate thats going to get built on soon and the development on Glenageary rd upper looks fairly advanced which is houses and apartments.

Bluefoam

I thought this was a bizaar article/ad: What first time buyers need to know about bidding...

https://www.irishtimes.com/sponsored/bank-of-ireland-first-time-buyers/bidding-on-a-house-what-first-time-buyers-need-to-know-1.3824448

Not allot, use the free money the government give you and buy a new place... no bidding involved.

Jaster Rogue

Bluefoam wrote: »

I thought this was a bizaar article/ad: What first time buyers need to know about bidding...



Not allot, use the free money the government give you and buy a new place... no bidding involved.

That HTB grant has already been factored into the price of new builds though. They went up by €20k almost overnight when the scheme was first announced.
Also some people prefer to buy in more settled, established areas beside good schools, transport links, employment, no social housing, front/back gardens, etc.

L1011

Jaster Rogue wrote: »

That HTB grant has already been factored into the price of new builds though. They went up by €20k almost overnight when the scheme was first announced.

I'm sure if I could be bothered to dig I'd find my post saying they would too.

The old FTB grant (killed in 2002) inflated prices also - they dropped almost identically as soon as it was cut. FTB treatment via stamp duty was much more effective, although with 1% sub-1M there's nothing really to cut now.

scarepanda

FTB, buying second hand home, do we qualify for any grants/schemes such as the HTB scheme? Ive been looking and can't find anything concrete one way or the other.

Sleepy

No. Nothing available for those handing money to other private citizens rather than property developers.

awec

Sleepy wrote: »

No. Nothing available for those handing money to other private citizens rather than property developers.

For good reason.

HTB on second hand sales would be absolutely insane.

cruizer101

awec wrote: »

For good reason.

HTB on second hand sales would be absolutely insane.

Because it makes loads of sense on New Homes? :pac:

I agree with you but really if there is a sort of first time buyer incentive it should be across the board rather than putting money directly into developers hands.

Mickiemcfist

cruizer101 wrote: »

Because it makes loads of sense on New Homes? :pac:

I agree with you but really if there is a sort of first time buyer incentive it should be across the board rather than putting money directly into developers hands.

The idea wasn't really meant to make it easier to buy a house, it was to get developers developing. It was a good idea, despite our cultural distaste for helping developers again.

Bluefoam

Mickiemcfist wrote: »

The idea wasn't really meant to make it easier to buy a house, it was to get developers developing. It was a good idea, despite our cultural distaste for helping developers again.

Its also to encourage people to buy outside the M%) in large numbers...

awec

cruizer101 wrote: »

Because it makes loads of sense on New Homes? :pac:

I agree with you but really if there is a sort of first time buyer incentive it should be across the board rather than putting money directly into developers hands.

It makes infinitely more sense for new homes when the whole point of it was to incentivise builders to build more houses.

If it were available for second hand properties then all that's going to happen is people who already have houses are going to get a windfall from the government.

cruizer101

awec wrote: »

It makes infinitely more sense for new homes when the whole point of it was to incentivise builders to build more houses.

If it were available for second hand properties then all that's going to happen is people who already have houses are going to get a windfall from the government.

I never said it should be available for second hand homes.

I said if there is an incentive scheme for first time buyers it should apply equally no matter what house you are buying.

This scheme was more of an incentive for developers which is fair enough but in that case it shouldn't have been through first time buyers it should have been directly to developers, .e.g. reduced planning costs or vat reduction.

Instead this idiotic scheme meant new homes instantly went up in price by 20k no matter if you were ftb or not.

Bluefoam

cruizer101 wrote: »

I never said it should be available for second hand homes.

I said if there is an incentive scheme for first time buyers it should apply equally no matter what house you are buying.

This scheme was more of an incentive for developers which is fair enough but in that case it shouldn't have been through first time buyers it should have been directly to developers, .e.g. reduced planning costs or vat reduction.

Instead this idiotic scheme meant new homes instantly went up in price by 20k no matter if you were ftb or not.

But it also had the effect of encouraging young people to move to the ouskirts (and further) of Dublin... which was much needed at the time. So they killed two birds with one stone.

awec

cruizer101 wrote: »

I never said it should be available for second hand homes.

I said if there is an incentive scheme for first time buyers it should apply equally no matter what house you are buying.

This scheme was more of an incentive for developers which is fair enough but in that case it shouldn't have been through first time buyers it should have been directly to developers, .e.g. reduced planning costs or vat reduction.

Instead this idiotic scheme meant new homes instantly went up in price by 20k no matter if you were ftb or not.

How can it apply equally if it's not available for second hand homes?

I imagine the reason it was done via the incentive was it is nicer politics. Announcements of tax breaks for developers would have been attacked by all the usual suspects. Ultimately though the end result is the same.

The_Conductor

It does have the unfortunate effect that it has segregated FTBs into new estates- while pre-existing owners of property have no relative benefit to buy in new estates, and have a perverse disincentive to do so versus a FTB- while there is a level playing field for second hand property. As FTBs now make up over 50% of the market (and investors have dwindled)- it also means that movement in the non-FTB market is subdued when looking at historical norms.

If, as is apparent, the whole intent of the FTB 'grant' was to provide a sop to developers- a far fairer manner of doing so- would have been to reform VAT on new builds- or address development levies etc- rather than playing with smoke and mirrors in the manner in which has been done.

awec

An interesting question is has the HTB scheme been a success?

I would think it probably has, given the rising number of new builds out there. This probably would have happened anyway, but HTB probably kickstarted this a bit.

At some point, probably in the very near future, there'll have to be a decision made on whether or not it's still required.

aloooof

awec wrote: »

An interesting question is has the HTB scheme been a success?

I would think it probably has, given the rising number of new builds out there. This probably would have happened anyway, but HTB probably kickstarted this a bit.

At some point, probably in the very near future, there'll have to be a decision made on whether or not it's still required.

I think it was due to end in 2018, but was extended to the end of this year. Will be interesting if it will be further extended beyond 2019.

cruizer101

awec wrote: »

How can it apply equally if it's not available for second hand homes?

I imagine the reason it was done via the incentive was it is nicer politics. Announcements of tax breaks for developers would have been attacked by all the usual suspects. Ultimately though the end result is the same.

What I mean is if there was to be money given to FTB it shouldn't have been what was implemented, it should have been something else e.g. mortgage interest relief or stamp duty relief, something that was not related to the type of house being purchased.

I'd agree it was about the optics it looked better to give money to ftb rather than to developers directly.

End result the same? I wouldn't necessarily agree, I believe by pushing up the prices of new home by 20k it would have had an overall push on the price of all houses which may not have happened if the cost to developer was reduced and so the selling price wasn't as high. No way of proving mind.

Overall I think the scheme was a bad idea anyway.

Mickiemcfist

The_Conductor wrote: »

If, as is apparent, the whole intent of the FTB 'grant' was to provide a sop to developers- a far fairer manner of doing so- would have been to reform VAT on new builds- or address development levies etc- rather than playing with smoke and mirrors in the manner in which has been done.

Fairer in what manner? Helping out those already on the property ladder to buy a bigger or newer house? Thus increasing the pool of new build purchasers & ultimately prices of same? Most of whom probably already profited from other incentives like 0 stamp duty, SSIA's etc.

0gac3yjefb5sv7

awec wrote: »

2nd hand semi D will be the first class of house to see prices level off, since it's the section of the market most directly impacted by help to buy (and in some areas of the country it's the only section of the market impacted by it).

The HTB scheme is for new builds, not 2nd hand...

Bob24

cruizer101 wrote: »

I said if there is an incentive scheme for first time buyers it should apply equally no matter what house you are buying.

It was never mean to be an incentive for all FTBs though. It was meant as a way to increase developer margins for new starter homes sold to FTBs so that developers build more of these.

Whether it was a good idea is debatable, but it would be wrong to think it was ever meant to be an incentive for FTBs to buy more. It was always an incentive for developers to build more, knowing well that any euro given as a grant to FTBs would end up into a developers pocket as the market was very constrained and adding more money into it would simply rise prices - and thus developers profits.

Interested Observer

Pheonix10 wrote: »

The HTB scheme is for new builds, not 2nd hand...

I assume the point being made is HTB made new builds more attractive which suppressed demand for similar second hand homes, hence their prices leveling off.

awec

Pheonix10 wrote: »

The HTB scheme is for new builds, not 2nd hand...

Yes, but the majority of houses being bought by first time buyers are likely to be 3 bed semi-Ds, which is going to reduce demand for 3 bed semi-Ds in the second hand market.

The_Conductor

Mickiemcfist wrote: »

Fairer in what manner? Helping out those already on the property ladder to buy a bigger or newer house? Thus increasing the pool of new build purchasers & ultimately prices of same? Most of whom probably already profited from other incentives like 0 stamp duty, SSIA's etc.

If it was genuinely to help first time buyers- rather than to provide a sop to developers- it shouldn't matter whether a property is new- or not.

Its a sop of developers, plain and simple- but the manner in which its structured- means its far cheaper for a FTB to buy a new unit- than it is to buy a unit in a more mature area- so there is a disincentive to look at secondhand property. Meanwhile a non-FTB, who is not affected by this ridiculous scheme- gets their choice of the secondhand market- with a clearrun- given the lack of FTB's who are going to buy........

The scheme has resulted in a new stratification- with younger FTBs in new estates in West Dublin/North Kildare- and older non-FTBs in more mature areas.

The_Conductor

awec wrote: »

An interesting question is has the HTB scheme been a success?

I would think it probably has, given the rising number of new builds out there. This probably would have happened anyway, but HTB probably kickstarted this a bit.

At some point, probably in the very near future, there'll have to be a decision made on whether or not it's still required.

Its gotten construction up to 20k+ units per annum- from virtually nothing.
However- these tend to be in commuterville rather than where people would actually like to live- with vast constructions of low density urban sprawl (and no commensurate investment in services, facilities and amenities for the areas in question).

We need large numbers of apartments in the centres of our cities- 1 and 2 bed apartments- highrise, high density- and highly spec'ed units (we're not trying to make new ghettoes after all). Lots of people would be only too happy to consider good, well build, highly spec'ed apartments in city centres- rather than having to face a 2-3 hour commute- yet, we're not giving them this option.

We need to cop the hell on, get over our hangups about high rise- and build where people need to live. Low density urban sprawl should be the exception- not the norm.

Jaster Rogue

The_Conductor wrote: »

Its gotten construction up to 20k+ units per annum- from virtually nothing.
However- these tend to be in commuterville rather than where people would actually like to live- with vast constructions of low density urban sprawl (and no commensurate investment in services, facilities and amenities for the areas in question).

We need large numbers of apartments in the centres of our cities- 1 and 2 bed apartments- highrise, high density- and highly spec'ed units (we're not trying to make new ghettoes after all). Lots of people would be only too happy to consider good, well build, highly spec'ed apartments in city centres- rather than having to face a 2-3 hour commute- yet, we're not giving them this option.

We need to cop the hell on, get over our hangups about high rise- and build where people need to live. Low density urban sprawl should be the exception- not the norm.

Couldn't agree more.
And to add, the demographic who would buy into high-rise city living (25 -35 young single professionals) are not known for ghettoizing areas or engaging in antisocial behaviour. Quite the opposite actually.

cruizer101

The_Conductor wrote: »

Its gotten construction up to 20k+ units per annum- from virtually nothing.

It has?? I'm sure it has had some effect but I would think the increase in house prices has had a far bigger effect, very hard to quantify its effect

Browney7

The_Conductor wrote: »

It does have the unfortunate effect that it has segregated FTBs into new estates- while pre-existing owners of property have no relative benefit to buy in new estates, and have a perverse disincentive to do so versus a FTB- while there is a level playing field for second hand property. As FTBs now make up over 50% of the market (and investors have dwindled)- it also means that movement in the non-FTB market is subdued when looking at historical norms.

If, as is apparent, the whole intent of the FTB 'grant' was to provide a sop to developers- a far fairer manner of doing so- would have been to reform VAT on new builds- or address development levies etc- rather than playing with smoke and mirrors in the manner in which has been done.

Providing VAT reductions and reductions to developer levies wouldn't have had the effect of getting around the 10% deposit requirements for first time buyers though. This was most definitely another aim of the scheme and applying it to new builds only was to create some smoke and mirrors where it could be said "it resulted in extra supply coming on stream".

You could argue it's a nice grant to people building their own property in rural areas also who are more likely to vote for the status quo.

Mickiemcfist

The_Conductor wrote: »

If it was genuinely to help first time buyers- rather than to provide a sop to developers- it shouldn't matter whether a property is new- or not.

Its a sop of developers, plain and simple- but the manner in which its structured- means its far cheaper for a FTB to buy a new unit- than it is to buy a unit in a more mature area- so there is a disincentive to look at secondhand property. Meanwhile a non-FTB, who is not affected by this ridiculous scheme- gets their choice of the secondhand market- with a clearrun- given the lack of FTB's who are going to buy........

The scheme has resulted in a new stratification- with younger FTBs in new estates in West Dublin/North Kildare- and older non-FTBs in more mature areas.

Why can't a policy have a dual aim? First aim - get construction going again - achieved. Second aim - help FTB's who have very little hope of saving a deposit in a tougher rental climate than any current homeowner has encountered - achieved.

A disincentive for FTB's to look at second hand property also had the beneficial effect of not driving up the cost of those houses. Which you pointed out..so literally everyone wins here, first time buyers, second hand buyers & developers.

Yes we now have a lot of younger FTB's in the suburbs - but give them 3 years & they'll have the equity to move where they like. Giving a VAT decrease to developers isn't going to fling existing homeowners out of their homes into the queues to buy new homes so I'm not sure how exactly you expected this age-mixed utopia to come about.