Property Market 2020

Bass Reeves

JimmyVik wrote: »

You wont be smiling if you are a landlord these days
I have done extensive research on just that over the last few years and I would never become one in Ireland.

It all depends on ROI. As long as you do not go chasing capital return and make sure you have a timely of 10%+ then it's an ok investment. Nobody gives you money for nothing

JimmyVik

Villa05 wrote: »

The issue is that the last 2 governments have been adding to the problem rather than attempting a solution.

Buying up existing housing for social housing rather than building on land they own
Paying 1 billion a year on rents
Selling state controlled housing to vulture funds and reits
Stoking the demand side without doing anything on the supply side
Layers and layers of regulation, beuracracy, and nimbyism blockin/slowing new builds

Is it not too much to ask to avoid having children being in homeless situation. The fact that the numbers of children classed as homeless has grown is yet another monumental failure

I was talking to a friend the other day who has had two totally different offers on his apartment.
The first was a letter from a REIT who want to buy it. They are trying to buy the whole block as he knows other owners have got that letter too.
The second was an offer from the council to extend his long term lease to 25 years. He has been on a 10 years long term lease with them for about 2 years now, so 8 years left.


Now this is fishy to me I wonder if the REIT have inside knowledge of the council making 25 year leases. REIT buys all properties knowing the council will lease them for 25 years. Call me suspicious.

The Belly

JimmyVik wrote: »

I was talking to a friend the other day who has had two totally different offers on his apartment.
The first was a letter from a REIT who want to buy it. They are trying to buy the whole block as he knows other owners have got that letter too.
The second was an offer from the council to extend his long term lease to 25 years. He has been on a 10 years long term lease with them for about 2 years now, so 8 years left.


Now this is fishy to me I wonder if the REIT have inside knowledge of the council making 25 year leases. REIT buys all properties knowing the council will lease them for 25 years. Call me suspicious.

Probably need another Mahon tribunal thats last 4-5 years and costs 300 million:)

JimmyVik

Bass Reeves wrote: »

It all depends on ROI. As long as you do not go chasing capital return and make sure you have a timely of 10%+ then it's an ok investment. Nobody gives you money for nothing

Its the people giving you nothing for something that would be my problem.

JimmyVik

The Belly wrote: »

Probably need another Mahon tribunal thats last 4-5 years and costs 300 million:)

I read somewhere last year about whole estates/blocks being pre-leased to the council by REITS, even before they started building them.
I wish I could get in on that tax free cash cow.

wassie

You can - just invest in the REIT.....

Villa05

farmerval wrote:

.... I think one of the big issues with housing has been the rise in rental demand from increased numbers living here. The upward push has left the social welfare end of the market with nowhere to go. With virtually no construction from 2008 to 2020 all the available capacity i gone out of the market.

Might not be entirely accurate. Policy of sourcing social housing from the private market in the form of rentals and purchases have left the low paid workers with only sub standard or no accomodation.
Government need to contribute to the housing pool greater than what they are consuming

JimmyVik wrote:

Now this is fishy to me I wonder if the REIT have inside knowledge of the council making 25 year leases. REIT buys all properties knowing the council will lease them for 25 years. Call me suspicious.

I've posted here a link where a council was paying 750k in a long term lease for a 2 bed apartment on completion of the apartment block. Council in charge of maintenance
I'd like to see the justification for that, again the state is big part of the problem. Voters are starting to see this

SozBbz

Villa05 wrote: »

I've posted here a link where a council was paying 750k in a long term lease for a 2 bed apartment on completion of the apartment block. Council in charge of maintenance
I'd like to see the justification for that, again the state is big part of the problem. Voters are starting to see this

Seriously, where is the office of the C&AG in all of this? Isnt their job literally to be the watchdog of public spending and to ensure tax payer funds are not misused, either intentionally or through incompetence?

From their website;

We work in a number of ways in accordance with our statutory remit to improve the use of public money and resources, and strengthen public accountability.

To be clear, I've zero issue with public money being spent of social or affordable housing - but why does it seem we're always paying top dollar and signing up to costly Ts&Cs. The public sector needs to bring in some serious external procurement expertise sharpish, because this looks to me as if the private sector is running rings around them.

Hubertj

Villa05 wrote: »

Might not be entirely accurate. Policy of sourcing social housing from the private market in the form of rentals and purchases have left the low paid workers with only sub standard or no accomodation.
Government need to contribute to the housing pool greater than what they are consuming




I've posted here a link where a council was paying 750k in a long term lease for a 2 bed apartment on completion of the apartment block. Council in charge of maintenance
I'd like to see the justification for that, again the state is big part of the problem. Voters are starting to see this

750k? I would like to see the business case for that. I presume it will come down to whatever accounting / financial principle used to calculate. Opex, Capex etc etc

Assetbacked

Villa05 wrote: »

Might not be entirely accurate. Policy of sourcing social housing from the private market in the form of rentals and purchases have left the low paid workers with only sub standard or no accomodation.
Government need to contribute to the housing pool greater than what they are consuming




I've posted here a link where a council was paying 750k in a long term lease for a 2 bed apartment on completion of the apartment block. Council in charge of maintenance
I'd like to see the justification for that, again the state is big part of the problem. Voters are starting to see this

Absolutely voters are starting to see it and unless rents are brought down to more affordable levels, the voters will punish the government. At the moment, the Greens, FF and FG have gotten into bed together. That means that if voters aren't happy with the housing situation by the next election, in order to get an alternative government, voters will need to (and will actually) vote for alternatives to these parties, namely SF.

The Belly

SozBbz wrote: »

Seriously, where is the office of the C&AG in all of this? Isnt their job literally to be the watchdog of public spending and to ensure tax payer funds are not misused, either intentionally or through incompetence?

From their website;



To be clear, I've zero issue with public money being spent of social or affordable housing - but why does it seem we're always paying top dollar and signing up to costly Ts&Cs. The public sector needs to bring in some serious external procurement expertise sharpish, because this looks to me as if the private sector is running rings around them.

As with everything within the public sector expenditure it's not their earned money so costs don't matter.

cnocbui

Assetbacked wrote: »

Absolutely voters are starting to see it and unless rents are brought down to more affordable levels, the voters will punish the government. At the moment, the Greens, FF and FG have gotten into bed together. That means that if voters aren't happy with the housing situation by the next election, in order to get an alternative government, voters will need to (and will actually) vote for alternatives to these parties, namely SF.

SF are the only party at the last election with even the hint of tax cuts in their platform. There is some danger I might of voted for them on that basis alone. It would probably do this country some long term good to have something politically disruptive happen. The Greens are worse in my opinion, and they have twice now been let loose with their chicken little policies, which are essentially tax increases. Last time it was motoring and now it will be home heating fuel and motoring.

Bass Reeves

The Belly wrote: »

As with everything within the public sector expenditure it's not their earned money so costs don't matter.

TBF that is not the complete answer. There is procurement procedures that have to be abided by. Both the NCH and the NBP both suffered from extremes of these. With the NCH there was a rush to start it. It was decided to go for a design/build tender contract. Add in a brown field small site and you were always going to have a disaster. Most of the costing were on a time and materials basis.

The NBP suffered from the idea that we could get a second Telco able to compete with Eir. We set the terms and conditions that made it uneconomical for any Telco Inc Eir

Dunkettle was similar but they pulled it. Politically it was impossible to pull the other two

PommieBast

SozBbz wrote: »

The public sector needs to bring in some serious external procurement expertise sharpish, because this looks to me as if the private sector is running rings around them.

Trouble is getting such expertise off-the-shelf would at the very least likely involve politically disastrous remuneration packages.

Cantstandsya

PommieBast wrote: »

Trouble is getting such expertise off-the-shelf would at the very least likely involve politically disastrous remuneration packages.

This is the hilarious part.

The people whinging about public sector incompetence are the very same who balk at any hint of pay rises/high pay in general in the public sector.

You get what you pay for.

SozBbz

PommieBast wrote: »

Trouble is getting such expertise off-the-shelf would at the very least likely involve politically disastrous remuneration packages.

They need to hire people who would be "Poacher turned Gamekeeper". The good ones wouldn't be cheap but even the most expensive would be cheaper than massively overpaying for housing.

I know you basically can't fire Public Sector people in this country but redeploy them to something where they can't do so much damage.

cnocbui

Cantstandsya wrote: »

This is the hilarious part.

The people whinging about public sector incompetence are the very same who balk at any hint of pay rises/high pay in general in the public sector.

You get what you pay for.

Oh spare me. When I was employed in a PS, some of my fondest memories were of every department head running around getting people to order new photocopiers, asking people to order new laptops, etc, to make sure they spent every cent of their annual budget lest the politicians got wind that they didn't actually need every cent that was allocated and might reduce their budgets.

Woe betide any manager lax enough not to have spent every cent of the tax payers money by the end of the financial year.

It's not that the PS is incompetent, so much as it always operates with the best interests of the PS as top priority.

The TV series Yes Minister wasn't fiction, it was a series of training videos.

The Belly

PommieBast wrote: »

Trouble is getting such expertise off-the-shelf would at the very least likely involve politically disastrous remuneration packages.

Accountability is the problem.

There is no penalty or cost for the decision-makers if a policys fails or there are massive over runs .

They still get their increments regardless of performance and still get their defined pension and Lumpsum.

That is the case from the Taoiseach right down to any public sector employee who gets their contract for indefinite duration.

It is practically impossible to be fired for being useless.

E-voting machines comes to mind 54 million paid for them and sold for 9 euro each when they didnt work. Martin Cullen retires on a 100k defined pension 150k tax free lumpsum and moves to Florida.

This may be off the point of the thread but it illustrates why the government cant effect and has no incentive to implement successful policy.

awec

Cantstandsya wrote: »

This is the hilarious part.

The people whinging about public sector incompetence are the very same who balk at any hint of pay rises/high pay in general in the public sector.

You get what you pay for.

The problem with pay rises / high pay in the public sector is that they come generally with no strings attached. Add to this the issue of public sector work essentially being a job for life and you have massive inefficiency issues.

There would be far less whinging if pay rises came with much stricter performance requirements. If you aren't cutting the mustard then you're gone.

You can't have the carrot without the stick.

Villa05

Cantstandsya wrote:

The people whinging about public sector incompetence are the very same who balk at any hint of pay rises/high pay in general in the public sector.

Your post is contradictory, besides these issues are common sense, it does not need people on massive salaries to identify and fix them

The real question is how much of it is cronyism, incompetence or just poor systems.

GreeBo

Cantstandsya wrote: »

You get what you pay for.

Getting what we pay for would be an excellent start.

neutral guy

Hubertj wrote: »

You’re wrong. Over 300k people emigrated. Canada New Zealand Australia etc...

No,I am not wrong.I exactly mentioned that people emigrated.

JJJackal

neutral guy wrote: »

First hit to rental market.About 110K people will get Covid payment reduced from 350 to 203

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/government-to-avoid-cliff-edge-on-covid-19-payment-changes-1.4296769

How do you figure? These people got a 75% plus income rise during COVID. They are now going back to pre covid pay. Plus if they were earning 150 they will still get more ie 203. How will going back to normal pre covid in one effect the rental market? Based on ur theory covod spurred these lads on to rent more expensive places

neutral guy

JJJackal wrote: »

How do you figure? These people got a 75% plus income rise during COVID. They are now going back to pre covid pay. Plus if they were earning 150 they will still get more ie 203. How will going back to normal pre covid in one effect the rental market? Based on ur theory covod spurred these lads on to rent more expensive places

They had rise already before Covid ! And money they are getting as Covid are the same as they earned before ! Person who work less than 19.5 hours per week ,up to 3 days per week getting social welfare support which bring them income to average minimum wage !

https://www.employment-matters.ie/part-time-staff-cant-afford-to-work-more-than-20-hours-per-week/

The answer to that is very clear. In Ireland if an employee works less than 20 hours per week they can still hold onto all the social welfare payments which they may be entitled to such as lone parent and rent allowance plus their wages for 20 hours per week and actually come out at the end of the week making more than they would if they worked full time hours.

If person do not have job he getting 203 euros only what is less than he earned before ! And less than Covid payment ! And because his incomes lower than 350 before and lower than Covid payment many of them will have problem pay rent !

Hubertj

neutral guy wrote: »

They had rise already before Covid ! And money they are getting as Covid are the same as they earned before ! Person who work less than 19.5 hours per week ,up to 3 days per week getting social welfare support which bring them income to average minimum wage !

https://www.employment-matters.ie/part-time-staff-cant-afford-to-work-more-than-20-hours-per-week/

The answer to that is very clear. In Ireland if an employee works less than 20 hours per week they can still hold onto all the social welfare payments which they may be entitled to such as lone parent and rent allowance plus their wages for 20 hours per week and actually come out at the end of the week making more than they would if they worked full time hours.

If person do not have job he getting 203 euros only what is less than he earned before ! And less than Covid payment ! And because his incomes lower than 350 before and lower than Covid payment many of them will have problem pay rent !

I think it is only their Covid payment that is reduced. It is not eliminated so any other welfare supports remain in place?

neutral guy

Hubertj wrote: »

I think it is only their Covid payment that is reduced. It is not eliminated so any other welfare supports remain in place?

If person lost job he will lose additional social welfare payment because he are unemployed what many already are.Getting Covid payment they was OK for that moment but when them Covid payment been reduced to 203 they basically are on social welfare alowance now .
The more information about part time workers and them incomes here :

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/social_welfare/social_welfare_payments/social_welfare_payments_and_work/jobseekers_benefit_and_work.html

Today on news I heard that record ammount of people signed out of Covid payment but nobody did not say that some of them been thrown out to social welfare.

Mic 1972

How do people on Covid payment or Social Welfare influence the property market?

Hubertj

neutral guy wrote: »

If person lost job he will lose additional social welfare payment because he are unemployed what many already are.Getting Covid payment they was OK for that moment but when them Covid payment been reduced to 203 they basically are on social welfare alowance now .
The more information about part time workers and them incomes here :

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/social_welfare/social_welfare_payments/social_welfare_payments_and_work/jobseekers_benefit_and_work.html

Today on news I heard that record ammount of people signed out of Covid payment but nobody did not say that some of them been thrown out to social welfare.

Again the only thing that has happened is the covid payment was reduced. Other welfare payment such as job seekers you link to are not eliminated. My reading is you continue to receive both.

neutral guy

Hubertj wrote: »

Again the only thing that has happened is the covid payment was reduced. Other welfare payment such as job seekers you link to are not eliminated. My reading is you continue to receive both.

Digits approx

Working 3 days per week person earning 210 euros home
Because person allowed to social welfare support he getting 140 euros extra
What bringing his incomes to 350 ( as Covid payment are )
Person lost job due with Covid and for that reason he automatically lost social welfare support because
He are unempployed
Because he getting Covid payment
Now Covid payment are reduced to this person to 203 euros per week
Person not working/Not allowed to support and his incomes only 203 euros
What this person can do ? He goes to social welfare office and apply for social welfare benefit which will be bigger than or the same as 203 euros reduced Covid payment
Doing that he can apply for other social welfare support payments as rent supplement,etc,etc,etc
In this situation media singing : Government perfectly managed situation,record amount of people signed out of the Covid,Life getting better!
What in reality simple not true and situation just getting worse.Because many people signing out of the Covid payment because they applying for social welfare/emigrating.

lir6777

neutral guy wrote: »

Digits approx

Working 3 days per week person earning 210 euros home
Because person allowed to social welfare support he getting 140 euros extra
What bringing his incomes to 350 ( as Covid payment are )
Person lost job due with Covid and for that reason he automatically lost social welfare support because
He are unempployed
Because he getting Covid payment
Now Covid payment are reduced to this person to 203 euros per week
Person not working/Not allowed to support and his incomes only 203 euros
What this person can do ? He goes to social welfare office and apply for social welfare benefit which will be bigger than or the same as 203 euros reduced Covid payment
Doing that he can apply for other social welfare support payments as rent supplement,etc,etc,etc
In this situation media singing : Government perfectly managed situation,record amount of people signed out of the Covid,Life getting better!
What in reality simple not true and situation just getting worse.Because many people signing out of the Covid payment because they applying for social welfare/emigrating.

I think the unemployment rate is going to be in sharp focus over the coming months, I can't imagine the covid payment figures are going to be all that people are looking at. Also, as quite a few people have already pointed out, emigration is unlikely to be on the increase right now. People who have moved to Ireland from other countries may return home, but the days of Irish people booking a one-way ticket to Australia, the UK or the US are gone for now- Australia is closed to us this year, and the rates of COVID in the us and the UK would mean you'd be entering a far more volatile situation again.