Ireland has the highest proportion of under occupied dwellings in the EU.

Graham

Ireland has the highest proportion of under occupied dwellings in the EU.

70% of the population in Ireland were living in under-occupied dwellings in 2016.
In contrast, fewer than 15% of the population in Europe were living in dwellings deemed to be too large.

https://www.independent.ie/business/irish/majority-of-underoccupied-dwellings-in-europe-found-in-ireland-37011949.html / Eurostat

beauf

Graham wrote: »

I think we're a way off that beauf:

Ireland has the highest proportion of under occupied dwellings in the EU.

70% of the population in Ireland were living in under-occupied dwellings in 2016.
In contrast, fewer than 15% of the population in Europe were living in dwellings deemed to be too large.

https://www.independent.ie/business/irish/majority-of-underoccupied-dwellings-in-europe-found-in-ireland-37011949.html / Eurostat

I wonder how that relates to how many live in urban/rural areas compared the urban density in other countries.

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=People_in_the_EU_-_statistics_on_housing_conditions

It will be interesting to see a breakdown of the age profile if occupants and housing type and location of those properties under occupied.

Irish media (and reporter's) have a habit of being economical with the stats it reports. They do this a lot with cycling stats

Macha

Surely that underoccupancy relates directly to poor planning? With urban and rural sprawl, how many of those properties are near public transport links, amenities etc.

beauf

Probably a reflection on our legal system, the time it takes and the cost to change property. Also disfunctional rental legislation.

pwurple

pwurple wrote: »

Under occupancy here is precisely because of our high owner occupancy. The traditional set up is to buy a house as a couple with 3 or 4 bedrooms and under-occupy it.

Over time, have two children, who move out and under occupy their own place somewhere else. Their childhood bedroom is left, unoccupied as a shrine, until the parents shuffle on to one of them passing away, or maybe into a nursing home... Once they are both gone, probate and repurposing the house takes another number of years.

Over the 60 or 70 years of living in the 4 bed house, it is used to capacity for maybe 18 of those.

So now homelessness is caused by selfish people saving up, getting a mortgage, rearing a family and wanting to actually live in the house they actually BOUGHT?

Graham

Who said people were selfish?

The fact is we have the highest rates, if not the highest rate of under-occupancy in the EU. There's no point pretending otherwise.

What that tells us is we're using property inefficiently.

FYI under occupancy is also a significant issue in LA housing.

Graham

Mod Note

As this is an interesting enough topic on its own, I've split the under occupancy discussion out to its own thread.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

beauf wrote: »

Probably a reflection on our legal system, the time it takes and the cost to change property. Also disfunctional rental legislation.

Things you don’t like?

Franz Von Peppercorn II

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So now homelessness is caused by selfish people saving up, getting a mortgage, rearing a family and wanting to actually live in the house they actually BOUGHT?

Yes. To a certain extent. So is the refugee crisis. What either need is a bed not a house.

Cal4567

Deleted User wrote: »

So now homelessness is caused by selfish people saving up, getting a mortgage, rearing a family and wanting to actually live in the house they actually BOUGHT?

No. It is just no efficient within the wider built economy. Probably ok up until the Celtic Tiger years but now we have become a bit like everywhere else with all everywhere else issues, such as housing demand. Before the CT years we could have survived as we always did, but those days have gone.

beauf

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

Things you don’t like?

Is there any situation where people want more legal delays and added expense?

I don't get what you are asking....

Graham

Ireland has chronic dwelling under occupancy because of legal delays?

OldMrBrennan83

The first answer to the headline is So What? Is this the next thing now, no point in working for anything?

With everyone being forced into bike and buses and now this will prompt being forced to live in shoeboxes, it's getting to the stage where there's not much point in bothering with anything.


_

beauf

Graham wrote: »

...
The fact is we have the highest rates, if not the highest rate of under-occupancy in the EU.. .

What that tells us is we're using property inefficiently.

FYI under occupancy is also a significant issue in LA housing.

... It's very hard to discuss when we have no background on there or what is underutilised. It's just a random stats with no background or context.

People jump to assumption is old people in large houses when previous reports suggested this wasnt that big an issue. Also people wanting to rent or buy first property don't generally buy or afford these houses.

So then we usually come back to mobility of being able to change houses. Likewise older people downsizing. But people suggesting that have usually no experience if trying to do that. They assume it's a lot easier and cheaper than it is.

This rush to build smaller and denser properties that are poorly serviced with amenities and locations will be a mistake. We've done it before. But never learn the lessons.

When we compare underutilised housing Europe wide we are comparing with places like Romania. Which have very little underutilization. Is that what we want.

The housing shortage isn't caused by this. It's other policies. Many deliberate.

beauf

OldMrBrennan83 wrote: »

The first answer to the headline is So What? Is this the next thing now, no point in working for anything?

first timer buyers and rented are over represented on these forums. So the discussions are biased in favor of their immediate issues. If you were on financial forum there would be biased differently, as the age and economic profile would be different. That's just life.

beauf

Graham wrote: »

Ireland has chronic dwelling under occupancy because of legal delays?

If course not. It's multi faceted issue. Not caused by any one factor that people love to blow out of proportion.

What's the average time taken to sort out a Will or downside an older person property. Why do people generally not do it. Are we building retirement village that are fully serviced? What's the cost to change. If someone is in a nursing home how long before their house is repurposed?

Graham

beauf wrote: »

People jump to assumption is old people in large houses when previous reports suggested this wasnt that big an issue. Also people wanting to rent or buy first property don't generally buy or afford these houses.

I can't imagine that assumption is correct. While it's no doubt part of the issue, there is no way it could account for 70%.

ml100

Deleted User wrote: »

So now homelessness is caused by selfish people saving up, getting a mortgage, rearing a family and wanting to actually live in the house they actually BOUGHT?

Wasn't there some numbers published a while ago of the number of council owned houses with only 1 occupant, maybe the government should start there.

is_that_so

beauf wrote: »

What's the average time taken to sort out a Will or downside an older person property. Why do people generally not do it. Are we building retirement village that are fully serviced? What's the cost to change. If someone is in a nursing home how long before their house is repurposed?

Probate typically takes 4-6 months and depends on "delays" in the Probate Office, may be a good bit longer if there is property involved. Downsizing is a problem in the sense that there may be nowhere to downsize to. A couple I knew wanted to move from 3 bed suburban into an inner suburbs 2 bed apartment. They had even gone Sale Agreed before they added up the ongoing cost of management and other ancillary fees on the apartment they liked, so they remained in the house.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

beauf wrote: »

Is there any situation where people want more legal delays and added expense?

I don't get what you are asking....

You listed stuff you don’t like. How is either causing this? If people wanted to downsize they would. “Interference in the housing market” is a statement not a proof.

Graham

ml100 wrote: »

Wasn't there some numbers published a while ago of the number of council owned houses with only 1 occupant, maybe the government should start there.

Something in the region of 25% of LA housing is under occupied.

It's certainly one area that needs to be looked at.

Similarly, given the increasing numbers of 1 and 2 person households it's also fairly obvious there's not going to be a 3-bed semi in the burbs for everyone in the audience.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

ml100 wrote: »

Wasn't there some numbers published a while ago of the number of council owned houses with only 1 occupant, maybe the government should start there.

This was the bedroom tax applied in the U.K.

is_that_so

ml100 wrote: »

Wasn't there some numbers published a while ago of the number of council owned houses with only 1 occupant, maybe the government should start there.

No, the point is that we now have too many oversized houses to match our likely modern household units. Bad planning is an awful lot more to blame along with our reluctance to see beyond the house with a garden.

beauf

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

You listed stuff you don’t like. How is either causing this? If people wanted to downsize they would. “Interference in the housing market” is a statement not a proof.

So I say it's multi faceted and you wanted to discuss it as a single issue? I don't agree with your premise.

I tried to help some family to downsize and there was nothing suitable or cost effective to down size too. I heard similar from other people also.

No idea what you mean by interference or from where you are referencing that.

Graham

beauf wrote: »

I tried to help some family to downsize and there was nothing suitable or cost effective to down size too. I heard similar from other people also.

Planning/taxation policy could start and influence behaviour there for both owners and developers.

beauf

is_that_so wrote: »

No, the point is that we now have too many oversized houses to match our likely modern household units. Bad planning is an awful lot more to blame along with our reluctance to see beyond the house with a garden.

I'm not seeing a oversupply of houses. When they do go on sale they get snapped up, at the right price point.

That there is a huge demand for apartments in cities is a separate issue. REITs are concentrating on apartments they seem to be the majority of new builds at the moment. Of course they won't be cheap.

Graham

Interesting commentary from Conor Skeehan in an Indo article from the end of last year:

The supply of traditional semi-detached houses will meet and "begin to exceed" demand in the New Year for the first time since the recovery from the economic crash more than a decade ago, according to housing experts.
But the "over-supply" of what will be in many cases unaffordable houses in locations congested and poorly served by public transport will lead to what is being called a "new housing crisis".

Mr Skehan predicts the over-supply of the wrong type of housing, the lack of convenient rental properties, and increasing rents will lead to the emergence of what he calls a "new urban politics".

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/new-housing-crisis-on-horizon-as-supply-comes-on-stream-in-wrong-areas-37666390.html

is_that_so

beauf wrote: »

I'm not seeing a oversupply of houses. When they do go on sale they get snapped up, at the right price point.

That there is a huge demand for apartments in cities is a separate issue. REITs are concentrating on apartments they seem to be the majority of new builds at the moment. Of course they won't be cheap.

There's a huge deficit of apartments as well, something like 10K in Dublin. We actually need the cheaper end ones as well, lots of them - not the communal area for 40 idea, but there is scope for something like that too. Most of all we have to go upwards.
I agree with the repurposing or resizing of some properties as a possible option to be explored.

beauf

Graham wrote: »

Planning/taxation policy could start and influence behaviour there for both owners and developers.

Remember the tax incentive apartments back in the 90s

4ensic15

Graham wrote: »

Ireland has chronic dwelling under occupancy because of legal delays?

It would be more to do with the mechanics of downsizing. It is a daunting prospect for a septuagenarian to contemplate selling tyheir home and buying another. They may not have ready cash for deposits, legal fees and the ability to borrow. In addition, Selling, renting and buying again is not easy. No wonder they stay in their houses till they die.

Graham

4ensic15 wrote: »

It would be more to do with the mechanics of downsizing. It is a daunting prospect for a septuagenarian to contemplate selling tyheir home and buying another. They may not have ready cash for deposits, legal fees and the ability to borrow. In addition, Selling, renting and buying again is not easy. No wonder they stay in their houses till they die.

70% of the population live in under occupied dwellings.
70% of the population are not septuagenarians.

beauf

Graham wrote: »

70% of the population live in under occupied dwellings.
70% of the population are not septuagenarians.

Exactly.

I think it's how this statistic it's measured. When you look at the details it's weighted to favor poorer economies and or highly density in cities and urbanisation in general. Also a long history of same. I don't think Ireland ticks any of these boxes.

Graham

I see no weighting

under-occupied dwellings meaning that the dwellings were deemed to be too large, in terms of excess rooms and more specifically bedrooms, for the needs of the occupant household.

Nobelium

Is it any wonder when the monocity policy is to close down as much as possible in the rest of Ireland and move everyone and everything to Dublin.
And then people wonder why there is a Dublin housing crisis.
Not good for Dublin or Ireland.

BarryD2

There's plenty of unoccupied or under occupied dwellings in rural parts of Ireland, including many small towns and villages. Are these slanting the statistics? Though rural parts of say France are also becoming sparsely populated.

Still in relation to Ireland, no reason why there shouldn't be a more rigorous resettlement policy for people who require LA housing.

Sonny noggs

Not helped by social housing being allocated for life. Couple with kids given 3 or 4 bedroom house, kids move out in their 20’s, couple remain in the house for decades.

Graham

Much of the under occupancy is in Dublin and not in Social housing.

This is by no means a social housing issue.

It's a housing issue.

Nobelium

BarryD2 wrote: »

Still in relation to Ireland, no reason why there shouldn't be a more rigorous resettlement policy for people who require LA housing.

That's treating symptoms not the cause, something we already do too much of.
Cause and effect. We should be directing most of our efforts to addressing causes, not effects.

margo321

I'd like to see the house or rather houses owned by politicians. how they can afford them should be highlighted. fat cats. cheek of them to tell normal people how to.live.

BarryD2

Graham wrote: »

Much of the under occupancy is in Dublin and not in Social housing.

There are swathes of the city between the canals which could be cleared in favour of apartment blocks. Regeneration seems to be part and parcel of cities in North America, why not here? Who has the will to do it?

TSQ

Nobelium wrote: »

That's treating symptoms not the cause, something we already do too much of.
Cause and effect. We should be directing most of our efforts to addressing causes, not effects.

Not understanding what you mean.. surely 3 bed family home over time becoming 3 bed elderly widow’s home = under occupancy = cause/contributes to lack of supply for families in high demand areas (and with social housing, the rent also reduces in line with the occupancy rate, unlike in the real world). Failure to move the social tenant to a small flat means even more 3 bed social homes would have to be built, rather than recycling the existing supply in a rational manner.

lalababa

Our 4 biggest cities especially Dublin are just humungous suburbs. When the kids fly the nest youre left with just mom & dad. Alot of these moms & dad's especially if they are comfortable have a holiday home in the country.Terrible planning in the cities Joe....ha..ha. I live in Cork where it can take an hour just to drive across the river, and even MORE suburbs are spouting like mushrooms on the outsirts. The 'plan' seems to be build more suburbs and be damned.Many smaller towns in Ireland are ' dying on their feet' especially anything away from coastal tourism. You know the typical one long street of misery towns. Nobody is moving into the town houses. Most I know either try for a LO house or build a new big house in a field if they have a decent income. I'm not sure what they have against the old town houses.?? Down in West cork & Kerry I was doing abit of canvassing type work a few winter's ago and the amount of unocuupied holiday homes was an eye-opener. I'm sure things are similar all along the coast.
What's to be done. ??

Graham

TSQ wrote: »

Not understanding what you mean.. surely 3 bed family home over time becoming 3 bed elderly widow’s home = under occupancy = cause/contributes to lack of supply for families in high demand areas

Applies to all types of housing.

Grab All Association

Sonny noggs wrote: »

Not helped by social housing being allocated for life. Couple with kids given 3 or 4 bedroom house, kids move out in their 20’s, couple remain in the house for decades.

It’s the councils own making here. Let’s take the council estate up the road from me as an example of what should be done to combat this. Btw they were built in the 1970s.

2 bedroom homes which were allocated to the mid-aged to elderly single/couple and 3-4 bedroom houses built for couples with children. When the children would move out and upon the death of an aged neighbour, the couple would move over to occupy the smaller house, reducing their weekly rent and freeing up a 3/4 bedroom house. rThis is still happening to this day.

Vs

LA Housing estates built since the 1980s are a minimum of 3 bedrooms with no option to downsize or any 2 bed houses in the locality. It’s unreasonable to expect people in these estate to move out of the area.

Lumen

Long retirement doesn't provide a incentive to trade down, because a 100k lump sum would only provide maybe 300/mo in annuity income.

The main incentive is cashflow, and that would be helped by a chunky property tax and more active management of social housing.

The problem with any attempt to tackle this issue is that 70% don't want it so it's electoral suicide. So we get hand wringing and inaction.

People don’t want to live in shoe boxes and are fully entitled to live in houses that are the size they wish. I really think some here are on a different planet sometimes when they appear to think otherwise. Just because there isn’t someone full time in a room doesn’t mean it’s not needed. A lot of people need rooms for when family call home, grand kids call or other visitors call for example.

Planning our own build at the moment at we would be planning in at least one and most likely two rooms above what will be occupied at anyone time due to wanting lots of space for my wife’s family who are from a few hours away and will want to be able to come and stay regularly.

It’s similar for most homes where the children have moved out too, if they aren’t living local their children and/or grandchildren will want to come and stay regularly so the space is needed if if not fully occupied. On top of that why on earth would someone want to sell their family home and downsize after spending years getting it to the way they want and all the memories it’s holds.

These type of stats are meaningless imo as they totally ignore the reality of how people want to live. Any suggestion at trying to tax people out of their home should be met with a very solid brick wall and I’d hope people would be on the streets protesting at even the suggestion of it.

Graces7

lalababa wrote: »

Our 4 biggest cities especially Dublin are just humungous suburbs. When the kids fly the nest youre left with just mom & dad. Alot of these moms & dad's especially if they are comfortable have a holiday home in the country.Terrible planning in the cities Joe....ha..ha. I live in Cork where it can take an hour just to drive across the river, and even MORE suburbs are spouting like mushrooms on the outsirts. The 'plan' seems to be build more suburbs and be damned.Many smaller towns in Ireland are ' dying on their feet' especially anything away from coastal tourism. You know the typical one long street of misery towns. Nobody is moving into the town houses. Most I know either try for a LO house or build a new big house in a field if they have a decent income. I'm not sure what they have against the old town houses.?? Down in West cork & Kerry I was doing abit of canvassing type work a few winter's ago and the amount of unocuupied holiday homes was an eye-opener. I'm sure things are similar all along the coast.
What's to be done. ??

When I was trying to find house to rent in that area, so many holiday rentals lying empty all winter as you have seen. They say it is easier and more profitable doing this than renting the year round.

Graces7

TSQ wrote: »

Not understanding what you mean.. surely 3 bed family home over time becoming 3 bed elderly widow’s home = under occupancy = cause/contributes to lack of supply for families in high demand areas (and with social housing, the rent also reduces in line with the occupancy rate, unlike in the real world). Failure to move the social tenant to a small flat means even more 3 bed social homes would have to be built, rather than recycling the existing supply in a rational manner.

Old folk are not chess pieces.

STB.

Graham wrote: »

Who said people were selfish?

The fact is we have the highest rates, if not the highest rate of under-occupancy in the EU. There's no point pretending otherwise.

What that tells us is we're using property inefficiently.

FYI under occupancy is also a significant issue in LA housing.

Is that what it tells us Graham?

The bolded part above - is this statement in relation to social housing or the lack of affordable housing or both ? Because that's not what those statistics tell you.

We are now at the point that we believe statistics in isolation without context. Are we now at the stage where we believe these headlines or are they a smokescreen for years of bad planning and inertia. What are the differing factors that these stats don't account for ?

The historic culture (the desire to want to own a home) is different in Ireland vs those that don't (the vast majority of Europe).

Population centres and housing density. Outside of Dublin we have situations whereby the large majority of land is traditionally agricultural, with one off housing etc. We are an island.

Overcrowding is actually a huge issue in some parts of Europe (one sixth) as a result of the differing culture and environment.

The stats are meaningless comparatively, but I do understand how and why these figures are leaked into the media as some form of answer to a housing crisis that is not caused by "inefficiency" by those supposedly living in dwellings that are too big for them! The ability to buy a home is dictated by a market and ones income.

I'd also like to see figures specifically for Dublin alone.

Lumen

Graces7 wrote: »

Old folk are not chess pieces.

It's a reasonable condition of having other people pay for your housing.

Graham

A couple of years old but these figures show why it's not a social housing issue.

Less than 10% of housing is social housing.

1,147,552 | owner occupied
143,178 | local authority
326,493 | private rented

Given that 70% of the population are not retired, it's not an 'old people' issue.

Those looking in the direction of social housing/elderly may have to start to look closer to home.