2021 Irish Property Market chat - *mod warnings post 1*

cnocbui

PropQueries wrote: »

Double glazed windows, a bed, couch, shower, oven, sink, a few presses and a heater is all single young renters are looking for. About €15k all in.

That will then allow the houses that are currently rented by the room to 20 year olds to be made available to actual families to buy or rent.

And €5000 a year on heating.

Villa05

Hubertj wrote:

No I wouldn’t agree and you can’t draw that conclusion from the article. To me, it points to a systemic failure of public services.

Is it the foot soldiers or managers/leadership that create the systems

PropQueries

fliball123 wrote: »

and then being on the hook when the 20 year old decides not to pay the rent and losing money on insurance and the like..thanks but no thanks too much of a risk better to use it to keep stock in.I could get stock in bigger bulk and get a better discount at absolutely zero risk

I would LOVE to see the statistics on the percentage of renters who don't pay their rent.

I would guess it's a lot lot lower than the percentage of investment property borrowers who don't meet their loan repayments.

But if an investment property owner defaults on his loans and keeps his investment property for the next ten years, people have no problem. But if a 22 year old losses his job and misses his rent people would like him to be turfed out the next day.

I love the hypocrisy in this country.

In either case, with HAP, the councils long-term lease agreements etc., the probability of a landlord not getting his rent money is the lowest it has been in the history of the state IMO

PropQueries

cnocbui wrote: »

And €5000 a year on heating.

You're really overestimating the cost of heating a home there. What energy rating are the majority of houses that were built pre 2010?

Are there really c. 2 million households in the country paying c. €5,000 a year on heating?

Experience_day

PropQueries wrote: »

I would LOVE to see the statistics on the percentage of renters who don't pay their rent.

I would guess it's a lot lot lower than the percentage of investment property borrowers who don't meet their loan repayments.

But if an investment property owner defaults on his loans and keeps his investment property for the next ten years, people have no problem. But if a 22 year old losses his job and misses his rent people would like him to be turfed out the next day.

I love the hypocrisy in this country.

In either case, with HAP, the councils long-term lease agreements etc., the probability of a landlord not getting his rent money is the lowest it has been in the history of the state IMO

And yet from what I read there has been an exodus of smaller landlords in favour of larger reits who can absorb such losses. I have left my own house be empty rather than take the risk of renting as its almost impossible to get someone out...

PropQueries

Experience_day wrote: »

And yet from what I read there has been an exodus of smaller landlords in favour of larger reits who can absorb such losses. I have left my own house be empty rather than take the risk of renting as its almost impossible to get someone out...

Landlords are leaving for primarily two reasons and primarily two reasons only:

1. They purchased their investment property during the celtic tiger years and the property has finally exited negative equity and their bank is forcing them to sell, or

2. They purchased the investment property between 2012 and 2014 to avail of the CGT tax reliefs that they can only avail of now.

And the percentage of landlords leaving the market over the past three years hasn't even been that large anyway.

JimmyVik

PropQueries wrote: »

Landlords are leaving for primarily two reasons and primarily two reasons only:

1. They purchased their investment property during the celtic tiger years and the property has finally exited negative equity and their bank is forcing them to sell, or

2. They purchased the investment property between 2012 and 2014 to avail of the CGT tax reliefs that they can only avail of now.

And the percentage of landlords leaving the market over the past three years hasn't even been that large anyway.

Everyone knows why landlords are leaving.
Legislation.

Graham

PropQueries wrote: »

Landlords are leaving for primarily two reasons and primarily two reasons only:

guessing?

cnocbui

PropQueries wrote: »

You're really overestimating the cost of heating a home there. What energy rating are the majority of houses that were built pre 2010?

Are there really c. 2 million households in the country paying c. €5,000 a year on heating?

I was talking about those wonderful spaces above shops, you seem so keen on. They will cost €5K a year to heat.

Browney7

https://m.independent.ie/news/risks-return-to-failed-housing-policies-of-the-celtic-tiger-era-housing-minister-urged-to-scrap-shared-equity-scheme-in-housing-plan-40119194.html

Politicians star in "playing politics" shocker but interesting to see nonetheless. No doubt it's just FG putting out a "you see, we said it wouldn't work, same old FF" without undermining at cabinet level so to speak. Still, hard to disagree with them

PropQueries

Browney7 wrote: »

https://m.independent.ie/news/risks-return-to-failed-housing-policies-of-the-celtic-tiger-era-housing-minister-urged-to-scrap-shared-equity-scheme-in-housing-plan-40119194.html

Politicians star in "playing politics" shocker but interesting to see nonetheless. No doubt it's just FG putting out a "you see, we said it wouldn't work, same old FF" without undermining at cabinet level so to speak. Still, hard to disagree with them

According to that article:

"The letter also gives an example of how the €75m could be repurposed, as there are currently 4,000 homes within Dublin City Council which have been earmarked for affordable purchase or rental."

So, given that I doubt DCC can be buying currently occupied properties, does that mean DCC has already identified and engaged with the owners of c. 4,000 empty homes in Dublin City alone?

Hubertj

Villa05 wrote: »

Is it the foot soldiers or managers/leadership that create the systems

Is it in the interests of trade unions for there to be a performance management process which could result in workers being disciplined or dismissed for poor performance? Have trade unions refused to engage in such discussion in the past? So the problems are 1. Poor / weak management. 2. Management with no power to take action.
3. Workers with poor managers
4. Poor workers with no incentive to try as there is no accountability.
Or is it all governments fault?

jill_valentine

Think people expressing doubts at the liveability of spaces over shops could do with a jaunt around the current state of Dublin rental market for a bit of a shock.

Here is a shed in Finglas with a plug in heater for nearly a thousand euros a month, and it's far from the worst -

https://www.daft.ie/for-rent/studio-apartment-cloonlara-finglas-dublin-11/2881942

And just for fun, here is a warning to tenants from Belgrave that your 1200 a month flat could fall apart if you exercise in it -

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tenants-told-that-workouts-could-make-flats-fall-apart-jngfgn8hk

hometruths

PropQueries wrote: »

According to that article:

"The letter also gives an example of how the €75m could be repurposed, as there are currently 4,000 homes within Dublin City Council which have been earmarked for affordable purchase or rental."

So, given that I doubt DCC can be buying currently occupied properties, does that mean DCC has already identified and engaged with the owners of c. 4,000 empty homes in Dublin City alone?

Good point, certainly sounds logical.

PropQueries

schmittel wrote: »

Good point, certainly sounds logical.

And given that they have now obviously identified at least c. 4,000 currently long-term vacant potential homes in the city and the owners are obviously interested in having their properties rented or purchased in the very near future, wouldn't it be far far cheaper for the taxpayer (i.e. me and you), to slap a 10% annual vacant tax on them until they rent them out or sell them rather than spending untold millions of euro of limited taxpayer funds buying or renting them.

The taxpayer wins. The renters win. The families looking to buy a home in the city win. That is, everybody wins.

cnocbui

Is there an annual NIMBY award? I have found this years winner. Congratulations Mrs K!

https://www.independent.ie/news/overturned-planning-permission-for-358-student-bed-spaces-in-leafy-south-dublin-40118129.html

HansKroenke

cnocbui wrote: »

Is there an annual NIMBY award? I have found this years winner. Congratulations Mrs K!

https://www.independent.ie/news/overturned-planning-permission-for-358-student-bed-spaces-in-leafy-south-dublin-40118129.html

She is up there with the Merrion and Sandymount Residents Association. It was a school and a cycle lane along the Strand they recently objected to in addition to co-living and houses on the RTE site. These people are the elite and the physical representatives for pulling up the ladder to shaft the younger generations. The planning process is just rotten to the core when local interests of the few outweigh the greater good of society.

donnaille

jill_valentine wrote: »

Think people expressing doubts at the liveability of spaces over shops could do with a jaunt around the current state of Dublin rental market for a bit of a shock.

Here is a shed in Finglas with a plug in heater for nearly a thousand euros a month, and it's far from the worst -

https://www.daft.ie/for-rent/studio-apartment-cloonlara-finglas-dublin-11/2881942

And just for fun, here is a warning to tenants from Belgrave that your 1200 a month flat could fall apart if you exercise in it -

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tenants-told-that-workouts-could-make-flats-fall-apart-jngfgn8hk

I'd take that shed over this 'stylish' DIY attic conversion. I guess the advantage with this one is that bills are covered - additional stove flue for extra warmth.
https://www.daft.ie/for-rent/studio-apartment-turners-cross-co-cork/2915262

zisdead

I lived over a shop for a year.

Here is is the Google maps link for the units.

https://www.google.com/maps/@53.3685106,-6.239514,3a,58.2y,110.29h,92.38t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1ss579l8QfX5rVTPkXattbGQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3Ds579l8QfX5rVTPkXattbGQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D180.2018%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

Was grand. Shop wasn't that busy, closed at 6pm every eve so was quiet when i got in from work and was the same to heat as any other apartment I ever lived in.

The guy saying it costs 5k to heat one of these needs his/her head examined.

Hubertj

zisdead wrote: »

I lived over a shop for a year.

Here is is the Google maps link for the units.

https://www.google.com/maps/@53.3685106,-6.239514,3a,58.2y,110.29h,92.38t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1ss579l8QfX5rVTPkXattbGQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3Ds579l8QfX5rVTPkXattbGQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D180.2018%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

Was grand. Shop wasn't that busy, closed at 6pm every eve so was quiet when i got in from work and was the same to heat as any other apartment I ever lived in.

The guy saying it costs 5k to heat one of these needs his/her head examined.

Did you get free satellite tv?

zisdead

Stopped watching TV in 2010 when I went to the US and looked at the cost of cable (believe it was comcast) throw in HBO so you actually have anything at all without ads and it was just Whoa!! So got used to early netFlix at the time.

I use NowTV to follow liverpool when I need to but that is it apart from netflix (think I still pay for it out of nostalgia) and the sites where I can watch the shows on Apple or Prime for free.

hometruths

PropQueries wrote: »

And given that they have now obviously identified at least c. 4,000 currently long-term vacant potential homes in the city and the owners are obviously interested in having their properties rented or purchased in the very near future, wouldn't it be far far cheaper for the taxpayer (i.e. me and you), to slap a 10% annual vacant tax on them until they rent them out or sell them rather than spending untold millions of euro of limited taxpayer funds buying or renting them.

The taxpayer wins. The renters win. The families looking to buy a home in the city win. That is, everybody wins.

It seems the carrot has worked rather than the stick in this case, assuming these properties were identified via the vacant homes scheme:

The aim of the scheme is to acquire and refurbish properties to a standard for rental accommodation; in return, making them available for social housing while improving cityscapes and reducing homelessness. Homeowners have the option to sell or lease their property to the City Council.

What is a bit odd is that government ministers and councillors recently were saying these properties did not exist. Many posters on here are still saying it!

jill_valentine

donnaille wrote: »

I'd take that shed over this 'stylish' DIY attic conversion. I guess the advantage with this one is that bills are covered - additional stove flue for extra warmth.
https://www.daft.ie/for-rent/studio-apartment-turners-cross-co-cork/2915262

I actually had to call my flatmate over to see this, I cannot stop laughing. I bow to your grim rental trump card.

cnocbui

zisdead wrote: »

I lived over a shop for a year.

Here is is the Google maps link for the units.

https://www.google.com/maps/@53.3685106,-6.239514,3a,58.2y,110.29h,92.38t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1ss579l8QfX5rVTPkXattbGQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3Ds579l8QfX5rVTPkXattbGQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D180.2018%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

Was grand. Shop wasn't that busy, closed at 6pm every eve so was quiet when i got in from work and was the same to heat as any other apartment I ever lived in.

The guy saying it costs 5k to heat one of these needs his/her head examined.

The reason you were able to rent and live in that is because it was liveable and therefore was made available. That is essentially a house with a shop tacked on at the bottom. In other words, it's built like a house in terms of accommodation and heating.

This is the sort of thing I am talking about:



Take note of the chimneys. These buildings have solid stone or block walls with no insulation whatsoever. The windows are single pane sash. I doubt they have central heating.

I have lived in a solid stone building with sash windows on the west coast from April onwards and it was very cold and draughty. Heating was via open fireplaces. Which were utterly incapable of heating the structure and provided more cheer than heat, and consumed a prodigious amount of timber I had to spend a considerable amount of time chopping and carrying.

Old stone or block structures such as these require dry-lining. I know a German orthopaedic surgeon who bought an old stone cottage in Connemara. The owner had built a modern house nearby with double glazing and all mod cons , rather than live as per the 1800's in the old family home.

This was in the 90's. Yer man spent IE£ 45,000 buying the house and another IE£ 35,000 getting it dry-lined and renovated. Lovely result - most of the upstairs was made a sitting room with two very large triangular windows either side of the stone chimney, giving lovely views over a bay to the Twelve Bens.

Now convert into 2021 money. This idea people have of taking a 2-3 storey uninsulated, stone or block, single glazed building, with open fireplaces, and turning it into a warm and comfortably habitable modern accommodation for €15,000 is fanciful rubbish

An old stone walled building is going to require a significant amount of renovation and insulation if you are aiming to get the heating costs reasonable.

PropQueries

schmittel wrote: »

It seems the carrot has worked rather than the stick in this case, assuming these properties were identified via the vacant homes scheme:



What is a bit odd is that government ministers and councillors recently were saying these properties did not exist. Many posters on here are still saying it!

And It’s just more of apparently limited taxpayer money being transferred to a few millionaires. And we will all be paying for this transfer of wealth through all sorts of tax increases and reduced local services in the very near future IMO

As David McWilliams said before:

“People who let good assets – like an old Victorian building – go bad are not too poor, they are too rich.

If they were poor, they would mind the asset, take care of it, make it work for them, generate a return and bring the asset into commercial use.

Only the truly wealthy can be truly wasteful.

If owners are not waking up in the middle of the night wondering “How will I make this property pay?” then the price of holding that asset is not too high, it is too low.“

hometruths

cnocbui wrote: »

The reason you were able to rent and live in that is because it was liveable and therefore was made available. That is essentially a house with a shop tacked on at the bottom. In other words, it's built like a house in terms of accommodation and heating.

This is the sort of thing I am talking about:



Take note of the chimneys. These buildings have solid stone or block walls with no insulation whatsoever. The windows are single pane sash. I doubt they have central heating.

I have lived in a solid stone building with sash windows on the west coast from April onwards and it was very cold and draughty. Heating was via open fireplaces. Which were utterly incapable of heating the structure and provided more cheer than heat, and consumed a prodigious amount of timber I had to spend a considerable amount of time chopping and carrying.

Old stone or block structures such as these require dry-lining. I know a German orthopaedic surgeon who bought an old stone cottage in Connemara. The owner had built a modern house nearby with double glazing and all mod cons , rather than live as per the 1800's in the old family home.

This was in the 90's. Yer man spent IE£ 45,000 buying the house and another IE£ 35,000 getting it dry-lined and renovated. Lovely result - most of the upstairs was made a sitting room with two very large triangular windows either side of the stone chimney, giving lovely views over a bay to the Twelve Bens.

Now convert into 2021 money. This idea people have of taking a 2-3 storey uninsulated, stone or block, single glazed building, with open fireplaces, and turning it into a warm and comfortably habitable modern accommodation for €15,000 is fanciful rubbish

An old stone walled building is going to require a significant amount of renovation and insulation if you are aiming to get the heating costs reasonable.

Would 60k do it?

zisdead

cnocbui wrote: »

The reason you were able to rent and live in that is because it was liveable and therefore was made available. That is essentially a house with a shop tacked on at the bottom. In other words, it's built like a house in terms of accommodation and heating.

This is the sort of thing I am talking about:



Take note of the chimneys. These buildings have solid stone or block walls with no insulation whatsoever. The windows are single pane sash. I doubt they have central heating.

I have lived in a solid stone building with sash windows on the west coast from April onwards and it was very cold and draughty. Heating was via open fireplaces. Which were utterly incapable of heating the structure and provided more cheer than heat, and consumed a prodigious amount of timber I had to spend a considerable amount of time chopping and carrying.

Old stone or block structures such as these require dry-lining. I know a German orthopaedic surgeon who bought an old stone cottage in Connemara. The owner had built a modern house nearby with double glazing and all mod cons , rather than live as per the 1800's in the old family home.

This was in the 90's. Yer man spent IE£ 45,000 buying the house and another IE£ 35,000 getting it dry-lined and renovated. Lovely result - most of the upstairs was made a sitting room with two very large triangular windows either side of the stone chimney, giving lovely views over a bay to the Twelve Bens.

Now convert into 2021 money. This idea people have of taking a 2-3 storey uninsulated, stone or block, single glazed building, with open fireplaces, and turning it into a warm and comfortably habitable modern accommodation for €15,000 is fanciful rubbish

An old stone walled building is going to require a significant amount of renovation and insulation if you are aiming to get the heating costs reasonable.

Never mentioned 15,000 or anything to do with habitability so stop with the Pollyanna stuff.

I said no accommodation over a shop will cost 5000 euro to heat. I stand by that.

I also provided a link to a very typical over a shop accommodation type in North Dublin. You showed yours. Does Not change my point one bit. It was comfortable and affordable.

cnocbui

PropQueries wrote: »

And It’s just more of apparently limited taxpayer money being transferred to a few millionaires. And we will all be paying for this transfer of wealth through all sorts of tax increases and reduced local services in the very near future IMO

As David McWilliams said before:

“People who let good assets – like an old Victorian building – go bad are not too poor, they are too rich.

If they were poor, they would mind the asset, take care of it, make it work for them, generate a return and bring the asset into commercial use.

Only the truly wealthy can be truly wasteful.

If owners are not waking up in the middle of the night wondering “How will I make this property pay?” then the price of holding that asset is not too high, it is too low.“

Ireland has the world's highest inheritance tax rate, something I am sure you would approve of wholeheartedly. One of the consequences of that is someone inheriting a substantial and old building might not be left with the finances required to maintain or renovate it.

This country is awash with socialists like McWilliams and yourself who have naive ideas about property ownership.

cnocbui

schmittel wrote: »

Would 60k do it?

Do what?

hometruths

cnocbui wrote: »

Do what?

Refurb accommodation into rentable/habitable standard. 60k buys a lot of glazing and insulation.