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

Thinking of renting out our house

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Browney7
    Registered Users Posts: 3,099 ✭✭✭Browney7


    DubCount wrote: »
    The stats from the RTB looks to be somewhere just over 1 in 100 (though like all stats from the RTB, they are far from clear). This only covers cases opened with the RTB. It does not count times where LLs dont bring cases (for example, Tenant stops paying rent, gets notice from LL, wrecks the house and leaves - there is no case with the RTB).

    Its worth noting that the 1 in 100 stat is also an annual stat. If you want to rent out property for 30 years, your stat goes to 30 in 100 which is even more scary.

    I was a LL for 15 years. I know lots of LLs. I would say on a straw pole of those I know, about half have suffered a loss of in excess of €10k at some point in their time as a LL - myself included. Its not a certainty, but it is sufficiently risky to make the whole venture unappealing,

    On the thirty year point, if you say 1% is the chance of a dispute in a year costing you 20 grand in actual losses, the probability you have at least 1 dispute over 30 years is 1 - (.99^30) = 26.10%. So a 74% chance over 30 years of getting 30 years of rent (so 1300*12*30 = 470k of gross income) or a 26% chance of having at least one dispute costing you cash plus lost rent (22% chance of 1, 3.3% of 2, 0.3% of 3 and so on).

    The point that a landlord needs to be well capitalised is noted and any landlord sailing close to the wind with their liquidity needs to be very careful and should consider their investment as should any leveraged investor.


  • Options
    #33
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    listermint wrote: »
    How many rentals end up in that situation. Do we actually have stats. Because it always seem to the the go to on boards. The world's falling down negative boooo.

    Is it even 1 percent

    if you think this thread is negative, don't look at the rents falling thread. I think they are anticipating some kinda purge situation...

    its interesting that we don't have reliable stats on it. Who's interest does that serve...;)


  • Options
    #34
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Browney7 wrote: »
    ....
    The point that a landlord needs to be well capitalised is noted and any landlord sailing close to the wind with their liquidity needs to be very careful and should consider their investment as should any leveraged investor.

    This is it entirely. You'd think renters would want a LL who isn't well capitalised to be discouraged from entering the market. Otherwise the heating might fail in the middle of winter and the LL might not have the cash to fix it, etc.


  • Options
    #35
    JimmyVik
    Registered Users Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭JimmyVik


    DubCount wrote: »
    The stats from the RTB looks to be somewhere just over 1 in 100 (though like all stats from the RTB, they are far from clear). This only covers cases opened with the RTB. It does not count times where LLs dont bring cases (for example, Tenant stops paying rent, gets notice from LL, wrecks the house and leaves - there is no case with the RTB).

    Its worth noting that the 1 in 100 stat is also an annual stat. If you want to rent out property for 30 years, your stat goes to 30 in 100 which is even more scary.

    I was a LL for 15 years. I know lots of LLs. I would say on a straw pole of those I know, about half have suffered a loss of in excess of €10k at some point in their time as a LL - myself included. Its not a certainty, but it is sufficiently risky to make the whole venture unappealing,


    Also the legislation changes so often that its impossible to play the game.
    Like now for instance where there is a big push to get it so that landlords cant even have vacant possession to sell. That will effect the value of your property big time.
    Its just too hard to get your own property back.
    Good luck though. I wouldnt do it in a million years.


    And you need to be capitalized enough so that you can live with no rent for 2 years potentially, big damage repair bills and upkeep of the property while you are still trying to get the rigue tenant out. If you get a nice tenant though, then you only have the high taxes to pay.


  • Options
    #36
    listermint
    Registered Users Posts: 33,692 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    Niner leprauchan wrote: »
    Ill respond to you when you learn to read full posts and take the chip of your shoulder about landlords.

    Interesting take you have there. I'm making the case for the OP to enter the market as a landlord as there is little evidence that problems are wide spread and that they will lose a fortune entering the market. I think on the first page I asked for problem stats and we got 2 percent back as the figure of problem tenants.

    So yeah, chip on my shoulder about landlords means I'd convice someone that it's not as high risk as it's being made out.


    Seems your process of deduction is broken and also you love a good winge about breaking even on an asset that someone else is paying down for you.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    listermint wrote: »
    .... I'm making the case for the OP to enter the market as a landlord as there is little evidence that problems are wide spread and that they will lose a fortune entering the market. ....

    Nice strawman.

    He asked what were the pitfalls. Not which are the widespread pitfalls. Regardless of how often it happens you'd think you would want to know the worse case scenario.

    We don't know if they are widespread or not. As there are no accurate. Stats. But since many in the business know someone who has had a problem or had a problem themselves. It seems likely the stats are very light. Best case and very unrealistic it's 2%. Many have posted the best case and worse case as balance.

    At the end of the day the OP can decide if the risk is worth it. Many are deciding it's not worthwhile and leaving place vacant. In a market with failing rents and increasing supply does it really matter to anyone other than the OP.


  • Options
    #38
    Iodine1
    Registered Users Posts: 380 ✭✭Iodine1


    [QUOTE=listermint;

    Seems your process of deduction is broken and also you love a good winge about breaking even on an asset that someone else is paying down for you.[/QUOTE]

    You can just drop the idea that tenants are paying the mortgage. They are not. The landlord has to pay tax on the rent first and his mortgage is not tax deductible so he inevitably ends up subsidising the mortgage.


  • Options
    #39
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    listermint wrote: »
    Interesting take you have there. I'm making the case for the OP to enter the market as a landlord as there is little evidence that problems are wide spread and that they will lose a fortune entering the market. I think on the first page I asked for problem stats and we got 2 percent back as the figure of problem tenants.

    So yeah, chip on my shoulder about landlords means I'd convice someone that it's not as high risk as it's being made out.


    Seems your process of deduction is broken and also you love a good winge about breaking even on an asset that someone else is paying down for you.

    When you take full posts, read them and understand them without selective chopping and mixing, we can discuss it.


  • Options
    #40
    listermint
    Registered Users Posts: 33,692 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    Iodine1 wrote: »
    You can just drop the idea that tenants are paying the mortgage. They are not. The landlord has to pay tax on the rent first and his mortgage is not tax deductible so he inevitably ends up subsidising the mortgage.

    If a landlord does that they are in the minority. And even at that it's to the tune of a hundred or two which is why people sell on the asset.

    The asset is paid for by the tenant you know it I know it that's the point if owning and renting property it's not a charity.


  • Options
    #41
    listermint
    Registered Users Posts: 33,692 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    beauf wrote: »
    Nice strawman.

    He asked what were the pitfalls. Not which are the widespread pitfalls. Regardless of how often it happens you'd think you would want to know the worse case scenario.

    We don't know if they are widespread or not. As there are no accurate. Stats. But since many in the business know someone who has had a problem or had a problem themselves. It seems likely the stats are very light. Best case and very unrealistic it's 2%. Many have posted the best case and worse case as balance.

    At the end of the day the OP can decide if the risk is worth it. Many are deciding it's not worthwhile and leaving place vacant. In a market with failing rents and increasing supply does it really matter to anyone other than the OP.

    No strawman. Just a bunch of landlords telling people not to landlord.

    Weird that. If it's not worth it then why not get out, get out now.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    listermint
    Registered Users Posts: 33,692 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    Niner leprauchan wrote: »
    When you take full posts, read them and understand them without selective chopping and mixing, we can discuss it.

    When you stop pretending that you aren't in a decent position and stop playing the poor mouth we can talk.

    Being selective about what you respond to seems like your doing the same yourself.


  • Options
    #43
    bobbyy gee
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,306 ✭✭✭bobbyy gee


    you pay tax on rental plus management fee


    https://www.irishtimes.com/business/personal-finance/why-are-landlords-leaving-the-market-in-large-numbers-1.3360363?mode=amp


  • Options
    #44
    Edgware
    Registered Users Posts: 5,875 ✭✭✭Edgware


    First make up your mind how long you want to rent out for. If you want to sell in four years time then rent three. Have the house prepared so that it is nicely presented. If you have a good property I would recomend making contact with a relocation agent. They are employed by multi nationals to sort out accommodation for new members of management. They are always looking for good properties suitable for families. If you can get a foreign family who will be on a 3 year contract and then leaving it will work out fine.
    Other than that sell now. The last thing you want is to get landed with some scumbag who will wreck the place, default on rent and take you to the useless ****wit P.R.T.B.


  • Options
    #45
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    listermint wrote: »
    When you stop pretending that you aren't in a decent position and stop playing the poor mouth we can talk.

    Being selective about what you respond to seems like your doing the same yourself.

    I'm not a landlord.

    Again, if you read posts properly you would know that and also that the shower and painting were just two examples of their annoyances.

    Perhaps, if you squinted and tried really hard you would have seen the last part of my comment which stated that I found a lot of damage on moving back in which cost far more than the deposit to repair. In addition to the shower, washing machine, dishwasher and painting.

    But that chip on your shoulder about landlords bring multi millionaires and only moaning, probable got in your way.


  • Options
    #46
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    listermint wrote: »
    No strawman. Just a bunch of landlords telling people not to landlord.

    Weird that. If it's not worth it then why not get out, get out now.

    OP asked for he pitfalls, he got them, you asked for stats you got them.
    After that its up to people make their own choice.

    Why does it matter if some people say it not worth it? Even if they are wrong or right, they are entitled to express that opinion.


  • Options
    #47
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,068 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    listermint wrote: »

    The asset is paid for by the tenant you know it I know it that's the point if owning and renting property it's not a charity.

    A tenant pays rent in return for use of the property, nothing more. I doubt most people would claim their employer pays their mortgage even though wages received from employer are used to do so.


Advertisement