Older people to be offered incentives to downsize homes

seasidedub

Idbatterim wrote: »

Just increase the next to non existent lpt...

Obviously you don't own a home or you wouldn't so quick to call it "next to non-existent". Most of us have to work very hard, save and sacrifice a lot in order to pay it. Mine is 790e on a bog-standard house in an area which was nothing special and where I always lived, but suddenly became "desirable".

1874

Idbatterim wrote: »

Just increase the next to non existent lpt...

Well, if thats the case its in line with the non existent return for it

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

That's a great argument for increasing property taxes.

ok, Im all ears, what is it? I doubt it very much though, getting nothing in return for it. Id happily pay similar to the UK if it was ringfenced for services and made its way into libraries, sports facilities, amenities and swimming pools. Live in a built up area, the return is, the average cost of providing that service should go down and be more likely, bins paid for.
What do we get for it? nothing it seems, just get bilked and then bilked again, and no justification other than it must be so.

tayto lover

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Bedroom tax like in the UK should be first on the list, and rightly so, provided tenants can stay in their area following downsizing by the Council.

Might make a lot more sense to incentivise large private home owners to convert their properties into two. You know, an upstairs self contained unit, and a downstairs for the owners. No one has to move, but space is maximised. I cannot see many really doing this, but might be worth exploring just the same.

How will the Govt know how many bedrooms I have?

1874

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Bedroom tax like in the UK should be first on the list, and rightly so, provided tenants can stay in their area following downsizing by the Council.

Might make a lot more sense to incentivise large private home owners to convert their properties into two. You know, an upstairs self contained unit, and a downstairs for the owners. No one has to move, but space is maximised. I cannot see many really doing this, but might be worth exploring just the same.

Correct me if Im wrong, but that was solely for council housed people, certainly not something Id insisit on foisting onto elderly people, christ let them have something and enjoy their old age, next thing some extremist will insist on a bedroom tax on private homeowners if they have spare bedrooms, or how about a window tax.
Incentivise home owners to convert their properties into two units, retrofits would be massively expensive, may not be in keeping or suit an area, where everyone may not be doing it. Better to start froms cratch and just build proper energy efficient apartment blocks with mixed living, turf anyone out who dciks around or is anti social, have security etc than retrofit here and there, The govt just removed the incentive scheme for home owners to renovate, do you think theyll offer incentives for people to retrofit which is a much bigger deal? Better to go purpose built one up one down than retrofit.

Spanish Eyes

tayto lover wrote: »

How will the Govt know how many bedrooms I have?

Only applies to Council tenants, and councils SHOULD know which size houses are rented to whom.

1874

tayto lover wrote: »

How will the Govt know how many bedrooms I have?

you'll be flogged in public until you tell,

Idbatterim

seasidedub wrote: »

Obviously you don't own a home or you wouldn't so quick to call it "next to non-existent". Most of us have to work very hard, save and sacrifice a lot in order to pay it. Mine is 790e on a bog-standard house in an area which was nothing special and where I always lived, but suddenly became "desirable".

My motor tax a year is two and a half times that figure. That figure would rent you an acceptable room in Dublin per month. Shane Ross proposed a grant to split homes a few months back. One generation f*cked, yet on the other hand , the hypocrite politicians say, “we can’t have massive rises in lpt” they have no issue with masses more money being landed out by the young on rip off rents or forced to live at home. No issue with property prices rising multiple fold a month of what the yearly lpt would be, Funny that. Morally corrupt vermin... when there is a fifty percent marginal income tax rate over a relative pittance, being paid by the working poor, I think the lpt can be highlighted for the farce it is. Way too many in this country have far to easy a ride, paid for often by those that can’t even afford their own property

Spanish Eyes

1874 wrote: »

Correct me if Im wrong, but that was solely for council housed people, certainly not something Id insisit on foisting onto elderly people, christ let them have something and enjoy their old age, next thing some extremist will insist on a bedroom tax on private homeowners if they have spare bedrooms, or how about a window tax.
Incentivise home owners to convert their properties into two units, retrofits would be massively expensive, may not be in keeping or suit an area, where everyone may not be doing it. Better to start froms cratch and just build proper energy efficient apartment blocks with mixed living, turf anyone out who dciks around or is anti social, have security etc than retrofit here and there, The govt just removed the incentive scheme for home owners to renovate, do you think theyll offer incentives for people to retrofit which is a much bigger deal? Better to go purpose built one up one down than retrofit.

Correct, the bedroom tax applies only to Council Tenants.

I agree with your other points. Just put the retrofit out there for people's views.

Artifacting

Incentivising people to look at downsizing is about as far as would be politically acceptable here. If you started to go down the route of trying to force older people out of larger homes, I think you'd be looking at FG's political retirement. Anything to do with property and homes here tends to be political dynamite.

I mean there are big advantages to moving closer to towns, cities and facilities when you're older as it gives you a lot more freedom and independence. However, I'd still see a few issues with some people seeing it as an asset grab.

Idbatterim

Artifacting wrote: »

Incentivising people to look at downsizing is about as far as would be politically acceptable here. If you started to go down the route of trying to force older people out of larger homes, I think you'd be looking at FG's political retirement. Anything to do with property and homes here tends to be political dynamite.

100% nail on the head. Incentives are as far as it will go. Even offering them money will probably be deemed “offensive and an attack on the elderly” ...

1874

Idbatterim wrote: »

My motor tax a year is two and a half times that figure. That figure would rent you an acceptable room in Dublin per month. Shane Ross proposed a grant to split homes a few months back. One generation f*cked, yet on the other hand , the hypocrite politicians say, “we can’t have massive rises in lpt” they have no issue with masses more money being landed out by the young on rip off rents or forced to live at home. Funny that. Morally corrupt vermin... when there is a fifty percent marginal income tax rate over a relative pittance, being paid by the working poor, I think the lpt can be highlighted for the farce it is. Way too many in this country have far to easy a ride, paid for often by those that can’t even afford their own property

your motor tax, well you have a choice there, a fixed address and little opportunity to move, then youre stuck, big difference. As for Shane Ross, that guy is a sham. So yu're unhappy with one tax, which will not go down and you propose another to make it fairer? until they are doing better with taxes, I want to see improvements in services not just throw more money onto problems.

Spanish Eyes

Artifacting wrote: »

Incentivising people to look at downsizing is about as far as would be politically acceptable here. If you started to go down the route of trying to force older people out of larger homes, I think you'd be looking at FG's political retirement. Anything to do with property and homes here tends to be political dynamite.

But why not start with Council housing?

There are many three and even four bed properties totally under occupied since kids have gone and maybe the last person there is widowed.

There are few incentives for such people to surrender their big home for a smaller more manageable property that suits their needs.

Many families would benefit from an increased supply of larger Council property surely?

Private property owners can do whatever they wish. It is their home and paid for by themselves.

Graham

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

But why not start with Council housing?

Isn't that the apparent plan?

The unpublished report says older people living in social housing will be offered financial incentives before the end of the year, ahead of extending the scheme to private homeowners.

seasidedub

If you have social housing and are paying a low rent possibly out of social welfare payments- meaning it's free - then you should get housing appropriate to your needs and be made move when you no longer need a larger space. Sorry, but you have not provided your own housing so you get what is appropriate and that's it. If your kids are grown, out you go so another family can get housing appropriate to their needs.

If you've bought your home and sweated to pay off the mortgage then it's NOBODY'S business whether you stay in your large detached house or not. Nobody's. We don't live in a Stallinist state, no matter how much Coppinger, Murphy et al would like to. Yes, it might be better to move/downsize. But it's the homeowner's choice. Called democracy.

And property tax is NOT cheap here. I lived in a large, detached house 20 mins by bus from the centre of Helsinki and property tax was 500e a year. Here in a bog-standard house 45 minutes by bus to city centre it's 790e.

They want us to move to flats with up to 3k a year "maintenance fees" which cover bins and little else. I've lived in apartments in Europe with nowhere near those fees. How would I pay 200e fees a month on a pension? They just want us to die basically. Feck off.

Idbatterim

1874 wrote: »

your motor tax, well you have a choice there, a fixed address and little opportunity to move, then youre stuck, big difference. As for Shane Ross, that guy is a sham. So yu're unhappy with one tax, which will not go down and you propose another to make it fairer? until they are doing better with taxes, I want to see improvements in services not just throw more money onto problems.

Totally true about the motor tax. That is a personal choice. I’ve a big issue with the us v them divide. Which there is here with property owners v non owners. Starts at the top. It makes total sense for the owners and vested interests, to financially nail the young / poor to the wall. A roof over the head isn’t a luxury , so everything else gets culled or paired to the bone to pay for it. My primary issue is with the government for allowing it and encouraging it. You are very right about the value for money too woth taxes , appalling value!

Graham

There are no proposals to force anyone to move anywhere.

seasidedub

Idbatterim wrote: »

My motor tax a year is two and a half times that figure. That figure would rent you an acceptable room in Dublin per month. Shane Ross proposed a grant to split homes a few months back. One generation f*cked, yet on the other hand , the hypocrite politicians say, “we can’t have massive rises in lpt” they have no issue with masses more money being landed out by the young on rip off rents or forced to live at home. No issue with property prices rising multiple fold a month of what the yearly lpt would be, Funny that. Morally corrupt vermin... when there is a fifty percent marginal income tax rate over a relative pittance, being paid by the working poor, I think the lpt can be highlighted for the farce it is. Way too many in this country have far to easy a ride, paid for often by those that can’t even afford their own property

Buy a cheaper car. I drive a polo SO I CAN STAY IN MY HOME

1874

Graham wrote: »

There are no proposals to force anyone to move anywhere.

I didnt think anyone said force, but gentle brow beating, berated in the media for being so selfish, next it will be us, or probably already has. They should set up a hotline to rat out old people who are still alive.

Spanish Eyes

Graham wrote: »

Isn't that the apparent plan?

Yes, but it is not highlighted. The immediate response seems to be from private property owners. They can do what they wish really, and no one is forcing that cohort to do anything at all.

State provided accommodation is a different matter, and incentivising them should be more to the fore.

Sheep Shagger

Why should someone move out of their big house, don't bother with incentives- just build enough to meet demand, that will push prices down it there are adequate credit measures in place (banks not throwing money like its confetti).

Mucking around with subsidies, incentives etc just distorts the market. We should have learnt that from the last boom and bust.

And before anyone asks no I dont have massive gaff.

Cryptopagan

1874 wrote: »

I didnt think anyone said force, but gentle brow beating, berated in the media for being so selfish, next it will be us, or probably already has. They should set up a hotline to rat out old people who are still alive.

Yeah, Fine Gael, which enjoys strong support among older voters, is going to browbeat and berate the elderly for existing.

Cryptopagan

Sheep Shagger wrote: »

Why should someone move out of their big house, don't bother with incentives- just build enough to meet demand, that will push prices down it there are adequate credit measures in place (banks not throwing money like its confetti).

Mucking around with subsidies, incentives etc just distorts the market. We should have learnt that from the last boom and bust.

And before anyone asks no I dont have massive gaff.

There are plenty of elderly people living alone who would be happy to trade down, if it was made easy and convenient. I don’t know how people are spinning incentives to downsize into “government running granny out of her house.”

1874

Cryptopagan wrote: »

Yeah, Fine Gael, which enjoys strong support among older voters, is going to browbeat and berate the elderly for existing.

They put the idea out there indirectly, see how many bites or how much opposition they get

Cryptopagan

Cryptopagan wrote: »

There are plenty of elderly people living alone who would be happy to trade down, if it was made easy and convenient. I don’t know how people are spinning incentives to downsize into “government running granny out of her house.”

The vast, vast majority of older homeowners have zero intentions of ever moving again. Most have lived were they are now for years, have raised their families and the idea of giving it all up and go through the stress of moving to a smaller gaff in a strange area is absolutely abhorrent to them, I'd say. Sure, some would jump at the chance, but I'd be willing to bet it's fewer than 5%.

Topgear on Dave

A smaller gaff in a strange area is understandably abhorrent, but a smaller gaff very nearby may be a possibility.

I know some folks here saying they will never leave their large house but if it comes to a point that your not able to manage the maintenance, afford the heating or climb the stairs etc etc then their needs to be an option there, nearby in your local community for older people.

Some folks, not all.

I think this is a great idea and should be available to all, Council house renters and property owners. Now that my chicks have finally flown the coop, I’d like to make sure that they cannot return! Seriously though. I’d love somewhere smaller, a two bed house or apartment would be easier manage than a four bed on 3/4 acre. We have been looking for something like that but there’s nothing available in our area.

Spanish Eyes

Just wondered if there are any current (private) developments offering downsized accommodation for say over 60s who want their own front door, but have access to assistance and communal activities if they want that.

There are some out there I know, but seem to be available only to those who do not own their own properties. I could be wrong about that though.

I get the feeling that private complexes that I am referring to will have HUGE annual maintenance fees.

I'm thinking of an elderly relative here. I can google, I know this, but not much is coming up TBH other than for those who qualify for social housing.

Graham

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Just wondered if there are any current (private) developments offering downsized accommodation for say over 60s who want their own front door, but have access to assistance and communal activities if they want that.

I can't think of any.

Looks like the proposals will contain some ideas how such developments may come about.

Expect to see new planning guidelines along the lines of x% of developments should be suitable for/exclusively available to.....

Spanish Eyes

Graham wrote: »

I can't think of any.

Looks like the proposals will contain some ideas how such developments may come about.

Expect to see new planning guidelines along the lines of x% of developments should be suitable for/exclusively available to.....

Indeed. the 20% or so of developments that have to include social housing may turn into a requirement to provide for downsizing seniors instead.

I am guessing the lack of provision of such options for seniors is what the Gov is after now, since there doesn't seem to be any option other than staying where you are for the moment.

But I reckon the annual maintenance fee would be HUGE. Maybe if that was paid by Gov, well there's one incentive right there.

Cuddlesworth

Rubberchikken wrote: »

nothing, except death, will 'incentivise' me to leave my large home, with very large garden.

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Nor me ! Its not very large but I like space now to spread out , plus rooms when my tribe come to visit , plus room for the grandkids toys . I am going nowhere !

I think its great that the world is so black and white to you, that you can say there is nothing that would make you "leave" your home. But for a lot of people there will come a point where maintaining a large house becomes a huge burden on them. Its sad to sometimes see how bad it can get.

seasidedub wrote: »

If you have social housing and are paying a low rent possibly out of social welfare payments- meaning it's free - then you should get housing appropriate to your needs and be made move when you no longer need a larger space. Sorry, but you have not provided your own housing so you get what is appropriate and that's it. If your kids are grown, out you go so another family can get housing appropriate to their needs.

I'm not sure you understand the word incentive.
If you've bought your home and sweated to pay off the mortgage then it's NOBODY'S business whether you stay in your large detached house or not. Nobody's. We don't live in a Stallinist state, no matter how much Coppinger, Murphy et al would like to. Yes, it might be better to move/downsize. But it's the homeowner's choice. Called democracy.

And property tax is NOT cheap here. I lived in a large, detached house 20 mins by bus from the centre of Helsinki and property tax was 500e a year. Here in a bog-standard house 45 minutes by bus to city centre it's 790e.

They want us to move to flats with up to 3k a year "maintenance fees" which cover bins and little else. I've lived in apartments in Europe with nowhere near those fees. How would I pay 200e fees a month on a pension? They just want us to die basically. Feck off.

Incentive. Look up the word.