Vacant Properties in Ireland

Hubertj

schmittel wrote: »

I don't think there is anything cryptic about the Savills post.

Are you saying you still don't see a problem with the vacancies?

If not, why not - because you think the data is false?

It’s the horses bit that confuses me. Added expense of keeping a horse too. Also need a saddle room to store gear.

Regarding the savils report it looks like they used CSO data as well so would be interesting to see how they used the data set to arrive at their % of vacant properties.

Bass Reeves

schmittel wrote: »

I don't think there is anything cryptic about the Savills post.

Are you saying you still don't see a problem with the vacancies?

If not, why not - because you think the data is false?

It is not that the data is false it's your perception that there is a vast amount of houses out there that are capable of being rented or houses that are capable with minimal investment being liveable in.

If you watched cheap Irish homes on TV you would have seen the state of these houses. Most need investment of a minimum of 50k and some a complete revamp to make them.liveable in.

It is virtually impossible to get a mortgage to buy such a property and bring it back to a modern standard of habitation. There fore you need to have substantial savings to buy such houses.

Even semi finished houses build in the late noughties may be in different state repair/condition . A certain amount will have gone semi derelict from break-in and anti social behaviour.

In smaller towns and villages 20-30 % of older street houses are vacant. If you walk through older city terraces and town houses you will notice some with gardens overgrown and a boarded up window.

As already stated there are a substantial number of 18th century town houses which were bedsits now lying idle. Nobody lives over the old shops and businesses in either cities, towns or villages now because of insurance and fire requlation issues.

The assumption that these can or will flood the market over the next 5 years is an myth. Neither will demand subside as there are 60k plus students doing the leaving every year. Deaths last year were about 30k. Last year we had about 6.5 deaths/1000, births were 13.5/1000. Every demographic suggests demand for housing will continue for the foreseeable future

hometruths

Hubertj wrote: »

It’s the horses bit that confuses me. Added expense of keeping a horse too. Also need a saddle room to store gear.

I suspect you understand the horse reference perfectly!

Hubertj wrote: »

Regarding the savils report it looks like they used CSO data as well so would be interesting to see how they used the data set to arrive at their % of vacant properties.

The Savills report uses market data which is exactly why it makes for such an interesting comparison. The info is in the report linked.

But simple non cryptic question - which vacancy rate seems more likely to be correct in the live rental market: 1.5% or 6%?

Timing belt

schmittel wrote: »

I suspect you understand the horse reference perfectly!



The Savills report uses market data which is exactly why it makes for such an interesting comparison. The info is in the report linked.

But simple non cryptic question - which vacancy rate seems more likely to be correct in the live rental market: 1.5% or 6%?

Everyone in entitled to there opinion and if we all agreed on the same thing then there would be no debate here.

Personally I think that the no of vacancies has a minimal impact on the overall housing regardless of it being 1.5% or 6% for the simple reason that if it was economically beneficial to the owner to make these vacant properties liveable they would have done so and the stock would have entered the housing market.

Yes some on here think that the no of vacancies is down to a deliberate strategy of some hedge funds and they may be right but I don't see it myself probably because I don't see house prices booming due to the restrictions on the amount of a mortgage that individuals can get due to the central bank rules. And therefore I don't see what financial benefit a hedge fund would hope to gain by sitting on vacant properties.

Bass Reeves

schmittel wrote: »

I suspect you understand the horse reference perfectly!



The Savills report uses market data which is exactly why it makes for such an interesting comparison. The info is in the report linked.

But simple non cryptic question - which vacancy rate seems more likely to be correct in the live rental market: 1.5% or 6%?

In a rental market 1.5% vacancy rates is 5.5days per year, a 6% is 21days per year. Assuming changing of tenants, student accommodation in private rentals etc 6% would the most likely

Added note

Local Authorities take 3-6 months to revamp houses that are being relet

hometruths

Bass Reeves wrote: »

It is not that the data is false it's your perception that there is a vast amount of houses out there that are capable of being rented or houses that are capable with minimal investment being liveable in.

If you watched cheap Irish homes on TV you would have seen the state of these houses. Most need investment of a minimum of 50k and some a complete revamp to make them.liveable in.

It is virtually impossible to get a mortgage to buy such a property and bring it back to a modern standard of habitation. There fore you need to have substantial savings to buy such houses.

Even semi finished houses build in the late noughties may be in different state repair/condition . A certain amount will have gone semi derelict from break-in and anti social behaviour.

In smaller towns and villages 20-30 % of older street houses are vacant. If you walk through older city terraces and town houses you will notice some with gardens overgrown and a boarded up window.

As already stated there are a substantial number of 18th century town houses which were bedsits now lying idle. Nobody lives over the old shops and businesses in either cities, towns or villages now because of insurance and fire requlation issues.

The assumption that these can or will flood the market over the next 5 years is an myth. Neither will demand subside as there are 60k plus students doing the leaving every year. Deaths last year were about 30k. Last year we had about 6.5 deaths/1000, births were 13.5/1000. Every demographic suggests demand for housing will continue for the foreseeable future

Fine, that may all be true, but the comparison I made re Savills is nothing to do with the "semi finished houses build in the late noughties" or street houses in small towns and villages that are boarded up.

And I am not taking about flooding the market over the next 5 years. I am talking about properties that were supposedly actually on the rental market and available. The CSO found that these properties numbered maybe 5 times as many than all other sources indicate were actually on the market.

All you points about half built houses are similiar to the Marius34 school of thought. The only vacancies are not really available supply etc etc they are long term vacancies, etc etc. Or they are in the arse end of nowhere, no demand in Leitrim etc.

Fine. Fair enough. So lets look only vacancies in the sector that does represent immediate and available supply with huge demand - the rental sector in Dublin.

The data says that there were 7500 - i.e there is no shortage.
The market tells us there were 1300 - i.e there is a chronic shortage.

There has to be some reason to explain this difference - what is it?

My own conclusion is that a number of landlords are choosing to keep their properties vacant thereby restricting supply and contributing to the housing crisis.

I get not everybody will arrive at the same conclusion as to the reasons behind the difference in the rental sector, so what are the other conclusions?

Timing belt

schmittel wrote: »

Fine, that may all be true, but the comparison I made re Savills is nothing to do with the "semi finished houses build in the late noughties" or street houses in small towns and villages that are boarded up.

And I am not taking about flooding the market over the next 5 years. I am talking about properties that were supposedly actually on the rental market and available. The CSO found that these properties numbered maybe 5 times as many than all other sources indicate were actually on the market.

All you points about half built houses are similiar to the Marius34 school of thought. The only vacancies are not really available supply etc etc they are long term vacancies, etc etc. Or they are in the arse end of nowhere, no demand in Leitrim etc.

Fine. Fair enough. So lets look only vacancies in the sector that does represent immediate and available supply with huge demand - the rental sector in Dublin.

The data says that there were 7500 - i.e there is no shortage.
The market tells us there were 1300 - i.e there is a chronic shortage.

There has to be some reason to explain this difference - what is it?

My own conclusion is that a number of landlords are choosing to keep their properties vacant thereby restricting supply and contributing to the housing crisis.

I get not everybody will arrive at the same conclusion as to the reasons behind the difference in the rental sector but what is it?

AIRBNB

hometruths

Timing belt wrote: »

Everyone in entitled to there opinion and if we all agreed on the same thing then there would be no debate here.

Personally I think that the no of vacancies has a minimal impact on the overall housing regardless of it being 1.5% or 6% for the simple reason that if it was economically beneficial to the owner to make these vacant properties liveable they would have done so and the stock would have entered the housing market.

Yes some on here think that the no of vacancies is down to a deliberate strategy of some hedge funds and they may be right but I don't see it myself probably because I don't see house prices booming due to the restrictions on the amount of a mortgage that individuals can get due to the central bank rules. And therefore I don't see what financial benefit a hedge fund would hope to gain by sitting on vacant properties.

100% agree. And the reason they are deciding it is not economically beneficial is due to taxes/rent controls/tenants overholding etc.

Thus they leave it vacant. Perfectly logical and understandable decision.

hometruths

Timing belt wrote: »

AIRBNB

100% agree. A huge volume of properties classified as Rental Stock are actually operating as STLs.

I think the government should recognise this is a contributing factor and put a stop to it.

hometruths

Bass Reeves wrote: »

In a rental market 1.5% vacancy rates is 5.5days per year, a 6% is 21days per year. Assuming changing of tenants, student accommodation in private rentals etc 6% would the most likely

Added note

Local Authorities take 3-6 months to revamp houses that are being relet

The vacancy figures refer to % of total properties rather than % of time.

Bass Reeves

schmittel wrote: »

The vacancy figures refer to % of total properties rather than % of time.

Yes but at any moment in time if an audit take place CSO for instance and they check that house and the house is empty it vacant but a rented property

Bass Reeves

schmittel wrote: »

100% agree. A huge volume of properties classified as Rental Stock are actually operating as STLs.

I think the government should recognise this is a contributing factor and put a stop to it.

Baloney

There is a limited market for STL's if the AerBnB type. There are a lot of houses that are used as mainly summer let's only. These may not be listed as holiday homes and in general are along the west coast.

Even if there was how can you force people to long term let. Government's find it hard to coerce it easier to encourage but the problem is you can end up with over supply in the wrong area

hometruths

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Baloney

Fair enough. But they're still vacant. Why?

Bass Reeves wrote: »

There is a limited market for STL's if the AerBnB type. There are a lot of houses that are used as mainly summer let's only. These may not be listed as holiday homes and in general are along the west coast.

I'm talking about Dublin rental properties. Not holiday homes on the west coast.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Even if there was how can you force people to long term let. Government's find it hard to coerce it easier to encourage but the problem is you can end up with over supply in the wrong area

100% agree.

hometruths

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Yes but at any moment in time if an audit take place CSO for instance and they check that house and the house is empty it vacant but a rented property

And at on the 24th April 2016 in time they found 7500 vacant rentals between tenancies.

On 1st May 2016 1300 rental properties were advertised for rent on daft.

Timing belt

schmittel wrote: »

And at on the 24th April 2016 in time they found 7500 vacant rentals between tenancies.

On 1st May 2016 1300 rental properties were advertised for rent on daft.

How many council old properties were available for rent at that time is that data anywhere?

And if a flat was rented but not occupied during the census would this count. I.e. people away on holidays, down the country for the weekend, away with work etc.

Bass Reeves

schmittel wrote: »

And at on the 24th April 2016 in time they found 7500 vacant rentals between tenancies.

On 1st May 2016 1300 rental properties were advertised for rent on daft.

First off no LA advertises it properties on daft. How many LA houses are between tenancies at any one time. Is it in the high hundreds/ thousands.

I relet both my properties this year neither was advertised. Most rural rentals are not advertised they are rented by word of mouth. How many tenancies are relet to friends of previous tenants. Lots of students do a runner during April as they are on study time before exams. They may have handed back there keys.

Believe it even though Census details are not available to revenue some landlords are paranoid and lie because they may be getting a bit of cash imagine that.

There are a myriad of reasons but 1.3k rentals on daft compare to there being 326k rental properties in Ireland in 2016. Slightly less than 50%are LA houses rest are private landlords

hometruths

Bass Reeves wrote: »

First off no LA advertises it properties on daft. How many LA houses are between tenancies at any one time. Is it in the high hundreds/ thousands.

Answering TimingBelt's query on this here too. You'll see from the Savills post I deducted 1000 properties to account for this. Figure based on total of 872 voids (LA terminology for vacant) in LA rental properties in 2017 from National Oversight and Audit Committee

Bass Reeves wrote: »

I relet both my properties this year neither was advertised. Most rural rentals are not advertised they are rented by word of mouth. How many tenancies are relet to friends of previous tenants.

A huge amount I'd guess. One of the reasons landlords love it is it cuts down on vacancies, so that logic does not explain high vacancies.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Lots of students do a runner during April as they are on study time before exams. They may have handed back there keys.

Do they really in a middle of housing crisis, when they know it will be difficult to find accommodation when they come back to do their exams.

Maybe they do, and this causes 1000s of properties to be vacant on the census weekend, and then let in the week after. But if this was the case I'd think we'd have heard about. Headlines such as "Students cause 4 times as many rentals to be available as normal, but for this weekend only"

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Believe it even though Census details are not available to revenue some landlords are paranoid and lie because they may be getting a bit of cash imagine that.

I am only talking about properties that are classified as vacant rental properties.

Absolutely I believe landlords lie to Census. But do you think if they're trying to hide their rental income cash or otherwise, they will tell the Census the property is rental?

Though I do think it is likely some degree of lying to divert attention from else up is a large part of the explanation

Bass Reeves wrote: »

There are a myriad of reasons but 1.3k rentals on daft compare to there being 326k rental properties in Ireland in 2016. Slightly less than 50%are LA houses rest are private landlords

Where are you getting the 50% LA figure from?

hometruths

Timing belt wrote: »

How many council old properties were available for rent at that time is that data anywhere?

And if a flat was rented but not occupied during the census would this count. I.e. people away on holidays, down the country for the weekend, away with work etc.

See reply to Bass re council properties.

Holidays, down the country etc etc would be classified as Temporarily Absent. i.e it is counted as an occupied property, nothing to do with vacancy figures.

Bass Reeves

schmittel wrote: »

Do LA advertise their properties on daft? Where are you getting the 50% LA figure from?

Sorry I mid read part of it there are nearly half a million rented properties in Ireland. 326k by private landlords or voluntary bodies.nearlu 150k from LA. So about 30% add in voluntary bodies and you have a huge whack of rental properties that is never going on daft.

Even though I rented without advertising both houses were empty over a month as I cleaned them out, repainted some rooms and carried out other minor repairs. As well one tenant was finishing another lease

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-cp1hii/cp1hii/tr/#:~:text=Rented households approach the half million mark&text=Renting from a local authority,2011 to 326,493 in 2016.

hometruths

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Sorry I mid read part of it there are nearly half a million rented properties in Ireland. 326k by private landlords or voluntary bodies.nearlu 150k from LA. So about 30% add in voluntary bodies and you have a huge whack of rental properties that is never going on daft.

Agreed - LA/voluntaries don't go on daft. Which is why I excluded them from the figures.

124k privately owned properties in Dublin. 1300 privately owned properties available for rent in Dublin on daft. Very low vacancy rate for privately owned properties.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Even though I rented without advertising both houses were empty over a month as I cleaned them out, repainted some rooms and carried out other minor repairs. As well one tenant was finishing another lease

Fair enough. No doubt a proportion of these vacancies are as you describe here. But equally 80% of them seems unlikely.

Bass Reeves

schmittel wrote: »

Agreed - LA/voluntaries don't go on daft. Which is why I excluded them from the figures.

124k privately owned properties in Dublin. 1300 privately owned properties available for rent in Dublin on daft. Very low vacancy rate for privately owned properties.



Fair enough. No doubt a proportion of these vacancies are as you describe here. But equally 80% of them seems unlikely.

What exactly is your point

There is houses not being rented that are vacant

You allow a LA figure sub 1k for over 147k rental properties as a vacancy rate dose that make sense to you you.

The CSO shows 7k ish rental properties vacant out of nearly half a million or a vacancy rate of 3.5% ish. There is nothing to see here except you fertile imagination. A 13 day average vacancy rate over half a million rental properties

hometruths

Bass Reeves wrote: »

What exactly is your point

There is houses not being rented that are vacant

You allow a LA figure sub 1k for over 147k rental properties as a vacancy rate dose that make sense to you you.

The CSO shows 7k ish rental properties vacant out of nearly half a million or a vacancy rate of 3.5% ish. There is nothing to see here except you fertile imagination. A 13 day average vacancy rate over half a million rental properties

There is nothing like 147k LA rental properties in Dublin, that's nonsense.

CSO are showing a lot more than 7k vacant rental properties, sorry but that's not true either.

As for your 13 day average vacancy rate, apologies, but that's garbage too.

PropQueries

What I would be concentrating on is the elephant in the room i.e. the c. 123,000 properties that were not placed under any category but also not categorised as either "Boarded up - habitable" or "Abandoned farm house".

That's a lot of properties that really can't be wished away by hoping the enumerators made wrong judgement calls at that time.

Timing belt

PropQueries wrote: »

What I would be concentrating on is the elephant in the room i.e. the c. 123,000 properties that were not placed under any category but also not categorised as either "Boarded up - habitable" or "Abandoned farm house".

That's a lot of properties that really can't be wished away by hoping the enumerators made wrong judgement calls at that time.

What county are the majority in?

PropQueries

Timing belt wrote: »

What county are the majority in?

It's the equivalent of over 6 years worth of current new build housing supply. Either way, it's significant and important (especially with the new WFH phenomenon), even if they were all based in Co. Roscommon.

Timing belt

PropQueries wrote: »

It's the equivalent of over 6 years worth of current new build housing supply. Either way, it's significant and important (especially with the new WFH phenomenon), even if they were all based in Co. Roscommon.

So 130k people are willing to move out of Dublin and live in rural Ireland I don’t think so. I would like it to happen but unfortunately living in rural Ireland is very different

PropQueries

Timing belt wrote: »

So 130k people are willing to move out of Dublin and live in rural Ireland I don’t think so. I would like it to happen but unfortunately living in rural Ireland is very different

At an average of two persons per residential units it would be 246,000 persons or 369,000 persons if each unit housed a couple and one child.

In relation to moving to Roscommon, many would at the right price. Many, many people in the Celtic Tiger years moved to Carlow, Portlaoise, Mullingar and were spending upwards of €250,000.

Offer them houses at below €100k each and a significant number of families would move. Especially as they will all have proper broadband within the next 5 years. If a significant number of people move, the services follow.

For example, Abbott employs approximately 3,000 people across 11 sites in Ireland, the company has six manufacturing facilities located in Clonmel, Cootehill, Donegal, Longford and Sligo and a third party manufacturing management operation in Sligo.

If skilled professionals have moved to Longford to work in Abbott, they will move to Roscommon. They may prefer Dublin, but just like in previous recessions, they will move if the incentives are offered i.e. cheap housing, jobs (WFH), broadband etc.

Every time there's a recession in Ireland, we move to England, Canada etc. at the drop of a hat.

Timing belt

PropQueries wrote: »

In relation to moving to Roscommon, many would at the right price. Many, many people in the Celtic Tiger years moved to Carlow, Portlaoise, Mullingar and were spending upwards of €250,000.

There is a big difference between Carlow, Portlaoise, Mullingar and rural Ireland. The places you mention are all possible to commute from and I would not classify as rural Ireland.

PropQueries wrote: »

Offer them houses at below €100k each and a significant number of families would move. Especially as they will all have proper broadband within the next 5 years. If a significant number of people move, the services follow.

Try WFH with no proper broadband for 5 years!!! I take it you have never lived in the country side where proper broadband is not available and you need to go to a town to connect to Wifi to download something from netflix.. Or where a pub is only open for one day a week and you can't get a taxi to take you there or back.

PropQueries

Timing belt wrote: »

There is a big difference between Carlow, Portlaoise, Mullingar and rural Ireland. The places you mention are all possible to commute from and I would not classify as rural Ireland.

Try WFH with no proper broadband for 5 years!!! I take it you have never lived in the country side where proper broadband is not available and you need to go to a town to connect to Wifi to download something from netflix..

But they will all most likely be connected within 5 years and they're already well along the way in connecting many rural areas of Ireland. And all those workers presently working in Abbott in Longford seem to manage.

Maybe that's the investment funds game plan. They most likely own the vast majority of these vacant units and as was previously shown with those houses in Co. Tipperary, they can refurbish them and place them on the market at c. €100k each and still walk away with a significant profit.

If people truly believe that standard three-bed semis in any part of South Dublin will be selling for in excess of €250k in 5 years time, I would believe they are deluding themselves. And, I still have that belief as an existing homeowner in Dublin. I really don't believe my property will be worth more than half its current market value in 5 years time.

As long as I'm not asked to pay for this fallout, I wouldn't really care about the value, but I have this feeling I'm going to have to pay either way.

hometruths

PropQueries wrote: »

What I would be concentrating on is the elephant in the room i.e. the c. 123,000 properties that were not placed under any category but also not categorised as either "Boarded up - habitable" or "Abandoned farm house".

That's a lot of properties that really can't be wished away by hoping the enumerators made wrong judgement calls at that time.

The elephant in the room is that in the highest demand area we have four times as many rental properties vacant as we do on the market in the midst of a housing crisis.

These cannot be wished away either. Or plausibly explained it would appear.