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

Irish Property Market chat II - *read mod note post #1 before posting*

1188189191193194914

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,271 ✭✭✭amacca


    I doesn't matter if you are sick of the mindset or not. Most people if they are paying and have a choice will want as few social housing units beside them as possible and will try to actively avoid social housing beside them at all. You getting upset about it is the equivalent of trying to hold back the tide, you are pissing into the wind imo

    It's also my opinion that if you had to scrimp and save for a deposit in order to get a mortgage to buy a house whic h you will work like a slave to pay back over the next 30 years you will try to avoid anything that would bring down the value of that house, make it look bad or make it difficult to live in.


    That's why there are good estates in every town and bad ones, good areas and bad ones.....you may try to spread out the issues but people will still find ways to get around it.....the reason the houses in the good areas command a premium is because there is more demand for them and less supply.....the non-assholes know there's no point fighting with the assholes and getting dragged down to their level and instead seek out more non-assholes they can live around and have some quality of life/privacy/peace..and people think there is a higher chance of assholes or asshole behaviour when people don't have to pay or pay much less for something than the going rate (I tend to believe that myself tbh...things given free/cheap seem to be abused/taken for granted/not respected, but if you have to earn something you tend to treat it with a lot more respect ..people thinking like that....not so crazy.....and it was ever thus imo.


    Let me ask you this hypothetical question, You've got 500k to spend

    You can buy a house in a nice mature area where there is very little crime or anti-social behaviour, the chances are when you go to sell, this house has a chance of making that money again or even more as this is a desirable area (even if its just due to snobbniness - that's where the demand is).....in the meantime there is also the least risk of crime, anti-social behaviour eye etc

    Or

    You can put your money where your opinion is and buy a cheaper house in an area with lots of social housing or a new estate with a high allocation of social housing .....where those allocated are paying a lot less and haven't had to work for it....and statistically there is more crime / anti-social activity happening.....theres a higher chance here you will get less than you paid here when you go to sell and regardless of what people think about forever homes you probably will sell at some stage....fair enough you might save yourself plenty for a good security set up and change for a savings account


    Now I know things aren't as black and white as those two stark options above but that's the thought process and it's not entirely devoid of logic or evidence to back it up (and we haven't even began talking about parents wanting a safe environmenr to bring up kids)

    Anyway if you had the option of either which would you choose?

    The answer to what the majority would choose is in my opinion evident in the gap in prices between "good" areas and "bad" areas in every part of the globe......

    Post edited by amacca on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,839 ✭✭✭mcsean2163


    My daughter was best friends with a social welfare recipient and we were very sad when they left. We're not on social welfare. There's an anecdote from you, can we move on from this crap?

    Any ideas on occupancy rates in formerly empty developments like Clancy quay? I'm baffled how everything is now more full than it was before WFH and in the absence of a lot of foreign students not coming to Ireland. Has there been an immigration boom during covid19? Have a lot of Irish returned home?

    Any ideas what is happening?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,271 ✭✭✭amacca


    1) Are pension funds/funds investing in property as the yield is better than bonds, stocks etc?


    2) Is that yield a function of rental prices/rates?

    (For commercial units as well)


    3) Is it true that said funds would rather leave units lying idle than accept lower rents, drop rates and realise a much lower ROI/yield


    If the answer to all 3 questions is yes then perhaps they are not full?


    Or there is a shortage and even with less foreign students etc there's not enough supply to satisfy demand? And it might be a more severe crisis if there was no covid even with building materials costing less than they do now etc?

    Maybe less people are leaving the country as well as people coming back as there's nowhere to go?....Its uncertain out there.....UK not the option it once was, no flights to states etc....id be nervous about leaving now if I had a family to support.



  • Posts: 19,178 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I currently have over 500K to spend on a house. My requirements are few. Location, by that I mean where in the city the house is located. Not the housing estate. Is it on public transport, is it a short commute to work, are there shops within walking distance, is there a park or somewhere else I can have a walk close by, is it not too far from college.

    A South or south/West rear facing garden and a back/side entrance are hopes. That's it really.

    If I had millions I wouldn't live in a house on Killiney hill. More likely to buy a rundown 3 storey along the NCR and do it up. I believe in getting value for my money. I don't care what anyone else pays or doesn't pay for their house and I feel sorry for you if that's the most important thing about your home.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,907 ✭✭✭Villa05


    Your wish list while not wholly extravagant is well beyond the reach of most working people. What's been paid for social housing is a major contributing factor to that affordability issue.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 19,178 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    No it is not! Houses in crumlin, drimnagh, cabra etc all fit the bill and are well within the reach of most working people. Which I am.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,367 ✭✭✭JimmyVik




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,633 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    Most working people do not have 500k to spend on a house!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,094 ✭✭✭✭javaboy


    You have 500k to spend on a house. That's well beyond what "most working people" can afford to spend on a house.

    Median income for a 2 adults with no kids household as per https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-silc/surveyonincomeandlivingconditionssilc2019/income/ was just €50,809 in 2019. That equates to a mortgage at 3.5 LTI of <180,000. Stick a healthy deposit of ~50k on top and you're still only looking at €230,000. How many 3 beds that tick your boxes does that actually get you in Dublin? Even in those areas you listed, it doesn't go far. Throw in an extra ~100k of inheritance for fun. Daft has 25 3 beds under €325k in total across Crumlin/Drimnagh/Cabra/Dolphin's Barn.

    What house can a household on that income afford to buy?

    vs

    What house can a social housing recipient live in?

    Can you not accept that a) the social housing strategy is playing a part in driving prices up and competing with FTBs? and b) it's unfair that the median working household cannot afford to buy as nice a house/area as those who aren't working or earn a lot less?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,313 ✭✭✭enricoh


    Grand big green for the kids to play (joyride) in too!

    Here's a dream location for a mere 70k. You're kids will go up fast here tho!

    https://www.daft.ie/for-sale/terraced-house-182-moneymore-drogheda-co-louth/3622611



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,357 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    It's not as expensive as you think. A couple buying a 500k house would have an above average deposit, where ever it came from we will assume 20% Inc GTB

    If they get a derogation they would have 4 times income so combined income of 100k.

    Repayments would be in the 1700 euro/months over 25 years or 1500/month over 30 years. They would have a household monthly income of 6200/month or 27% of income if the 25 year option is chosen.

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,367 ✭✭✭JimmyVik



    Added bonus is that your kids will get the snobbyness knocked out of them on a regular basis. They might even end up knocking the snobbyness out of other kids in a fews years,



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,633 ✭✭✭timmyntc



    Most working people do not have a combined income of 100k! - Certainly not most getting mortgages. Central bank has a breakdown of mortgage applicants each year, also includes Dublin specific stats also.

    Also keep in mind there is a bias here in that only people who actually get the mortgage and the house are recorded here, those who didnt earn enough wont be counted in the stats which skews them higher.



  • Posts: 19,178 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    No they don't, but they can afford houses in crumlin, drimnagh, cabra etc which is the point I was making.

    I dont intend to spend that btw.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,357 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    Average lending rate in Dublin is 3.3 time LTV, rest of the country is 3.0.

    In a so called heated market the metrics look ok.

    Except for Dublin average house prices are not approaching 500k.

    In midsized towns houses are around the 250-280k bracket largest urban centers 280-350k. In cities and in commuting area adjacent to Dublin about 250-400k is the go.

    Most trades people ate now on 50k/year, most MNC's are paying that and above. So. Is in Dublin first year out of college and on 35k/ year with pension and health insurance kicking in from the new year on.

    I really like to see figures for incomes excluding students who skew the overall figures. Those on single incomes of less than 35k in Dublin are entitled to HAP support and go on the housing list. The funny thing is most younger professionals don't apply for it even though they ate entitled to it

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Posts: 19,178 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I guess you're being funny 🙄 are you saying all social tenants joyride and burn out cars? Did you not claim to grow up in council housing? Maybe I have you mixed up. But you definitely sold a house to the council.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 318 ✭✭fago


    Like others I'm sure not coming to this forum as often but something I thought was interesting.

    The close correlation between daft asking and CSO PPR has played through from my post last March


    So what should we expect for Mar 2022 now (assuming a 6 month lag not my 1 year lag originally)

    Latest daft report https://ww1.daft.ie/report/2021-Q3-houseprice-daftreport.pdf?d_rd=1

    Asking prices dropped back between Aug and Sep (169.7 v's 168). Now asking prices same as June

    All things being equal should translate to the CSO numbers trending towards flat Mar 2022

    First time since 2013 that asking prices have dropped between these 2 months (fairly regular drop Oct -> Nov perhaps related to seasonality)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,337 ✭✭✭The Student


    The poster is not saying all social tenants joyride. Whether you want to accept the fact or not there is more of a risk of anti social issues in social housing estates than privately owned estates. The minority who destroy social housing areas are responsible for the reputation of social housing estates.

    Your experience of issues in social housing estates are rare in the main. if social housing areas are as you say why do we find houses in social housing estates boarded up? If you feel that there are little or no issues in traditionally working class areas and you feel that people paying extra to live in more desirable areas then work away in purchasing in the more traditional working class areas.

    As someone who has lived in one of the traditional working class areas you mentioned in a previous post I can tell you it is not all sweetness and light that you appear to think it is. Wait until you cross paths with one of those individuals/families who destroy areas and see how you get on.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,367 ✭✭✭JimmyVik


    If you stalked me properly you would have read that yes I did grow up in a council estate and that i alo said that 90% pf people were just lovely, but that a few scum families destroyed the whole estate and also destroyed the lives of a fair proportion of the other nice families living there.

    And I ended with saying I do not want to put my kids through that if I can help it at all.

    I will say too that not all social tenants steal burn out cars, but Im willing to bet most who steal and burn out cars are children of social tenants who grew up in social housing.



  • Posts: 19,178 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    So, we don't want large scale council estates.

    But we don't want social tenants living beside us.

    We don't want mixed estates because the value of our houses will go down.

    But we want houses to be cheaper so we can buy them.

    Mmmmmm, 🤔🤔



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 19,178 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I also grew up in more than one of those estates.

    There is no reason to presume that if you live in private housing, the social tenant next door is anymore likely to be antisocial, then the private tenant next door neighbour



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,367 ✭✭✭JimmyVik



    You are clearly not getting the points people are making here.

    Try to get past your inner SJW and look at it from buyers eyes.



  • Posts: 19,178 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I have been a.buyer twice in my life, and currently may be a buyer again.

    What's a sjw



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,367 ✭✭✭JimmyVik


    I give up.

    You just arent getting it are you.

    More concerned with virtue signalling than understanding peoples points.



  • Posts: 19,178 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    So which part of this is wrong?

    So long as people put so much emphasis on the value of their houses, instead of buying a home that suits their needs, there will be issues.

    Estates need a proper mix of housing and tenants and people need to worry less about what their neighbours are paying.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,619 ✭✭✭Timing belt


    no body is saying that everyone in social housing is antisocial. What they are saying is that there are higher chances of antisocial behaviour. That’s not snobbery that’s a fact of life.. whether the antisocial behaviour is due to not having the same opportunity or have problems at home, boredom or whatever you will find higher levels of antisocial behaviour in social housing and that’s a fact. If there were no issues then why do the government have DESH schools with social workers and supports in the school that you wouldn’t find in a regular school….



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,918 ✭✭✭✭Cyrus


    why do estates need a 'proper mix' and how do you define a 'proper' mix.



  • Posts: 19,178 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Deis schools?

    Almost Every national school in Leitrim, Cavan and Donegal is designated a deis school! What does that have to do with social housing?

    So, still no one wants social housing estates, but no one wants social housing mixed with private .......🤔



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,094 ✭✭✭✭javaboy


    I DO want mixed estates. I want people who buy a house for 500k to live next to other people who could afford a little less and get a boost.

    And people who could afford a 300k house to live next to other people who needed a little boost etc.

    What I can’t abide is a system that puts people paying nothing or very little next door to those paying 500k. It’s not fair. It doesn’t incentivise or reward hard work. It actually inflames the anti social housing sentiments.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,604 ✭✭✭Amadan Dubh


    Two interesting articles in the IT today which raise important issues; (1) the rock and a hard place position of the government who do not want house prices to fall at all but then claim to want to sort the housing crisis (which requires house prices and rents to drop significantly); and (2) the State has inflated the bubble.

    What is interesting about (1) is that it was written by a research director at BNP Paribas Real Estate - the wheels of the economy are coming to a grinding halt from this housing mess and when you have the likes of Dermot Desmond and this research director criticizing the lack of affordability, calling for prices to drop, then the game must be up. It occurred to me today that the exodus of small landlords the last few years, while bad for the rental market, was a stroke of genius and excellent timing for the small landlords as the direction of travel from here is extremely uncertain and "past performance is not a guide to future performance" is an apt warning.

    O'Broin being given a platform in the IT is giving real legitimacy to SF's housing policy and the penny must be starting to drop that whether people like it or not, SF are a mainstream, credible alternative party. For housing alone, I will vote for them but I am not affiliated to any political party, they just resonate with me.

    Wishing to be re-elected, the Government desperately wants to deliver more homes. But this presents a conflict, because it is equally fearful of doing something that would cause house prices to fall. There are four reasons for this. First, politicians know that 70 per cent of Irish households own their own homes, and they fear alienating these voters with policies which would erode housing wealth. Second, through painful experience, the Government has learned that falling house prices can quickly get out of control. Once prices start sliding, all that is needed for a self-fulfilling deflationary spiral is the expectation that this will continue. A third, and related, concern is the banking system. Banks typically lend to first-time-buyers at loan-to-value ratios of up to 90 per cent. This provides limited leeway for price slippage before the outstanding mortgage balances exceed the value of the assets that are securing them. Finally, house price deflation conflicts with the objective of delivering more homes. 


    Successive governments have taken a pragmatic approach to resolving this dilemma, by channelling increased public funding into schemes which subsidise occupiers. Interventions like Help-to-Buy, the Rebuilding Ireland Home Loan, the Housing Assistance Payment (HAP) and Social Leasing tick multiple boxes for politicians. First, they help people to secure accommodation that would otherwise be unaffordable. Second, because these schemes increase the amount that people can pay rather than reducing the housing costs that they face, they carry no deflation risk. On the contrary, by giving households – or State-sponsored agencies acting on their behalf – more money to procure housing solutions, they actually support prices, incentivising development.


    Aside from this inflationary impact, the elephant in the room is the sheer scale of State involvement on the demand side of the housing market. A total of 12,304 new homes were purchased last year. State bodies accounted for 2,873 of these. A further 6,202 buyers of new homes claimed Help-to-Buy subsidies of up to €30,000. And 7,292 additional HAP tenancies were created, through which private landlords receive rents directly from the State. Meanwhile, 1,400 homes were leased in the private market for social housing.

    Seventy-two per cent of the last government’s social housing targets were to come from the private rental sector. This has absorbed an enormous volume of private rental supply. Almost a third of all private rental tenancies are social housing tenants subsidised by a variety of Government schemes.

    While the new Government’s housing plan does not contain targets for new HAP tenancies to 2025, its low social housing targets make an increase in HAP tenancies inevitable. Meanwhile the number of available properties in the private market has been falling. Since 2017 there has been a net loss of about 20,000 rental properties.

    s single property landlords are leaving, new rental stock is being supplied by large institutional investors. Supported by excessive tax reliefs and retrograde changes to apartment design standards, much of the new stock is high-end, high-price and Dublin city centric.

    The speculative nature of much of these schemes has pushed up land and development costs, hardwiring viability and affordability problems into our private rental sector for years to come.

    Strangely, despite large volumes of planning permissions for such schemes being granted by the controversial Strategic Housing Development fast-track process, only a fraction has commenced construction.

    In response to these dynamics successive government ministers have, since 2014, promised direct State investment in affordable cost rental accommodation.

    The first cost rental homes were tenanted late this year, but October’s budget allocated only €70 million for next year. This means that cost rental output will be in the hundreds rather than the thousands of homes that are needed to meet demand.

    Last thing, a Central Bank economic letter published today touching on inflation and how current cost of living rises could lead to higher wages and then further cost of living squeezes and increased inflation expectations - no s**t! This, for me, is not a probably scenario but an almost certain scenario and it is deeply troubling to think our regulator does not use more definitive language about it. The central banks are stuck at this point; raising interest rates will hamper their "growth" indicators but there are no tools left in the toolkit to further continue along the path they are on as the rock bottom interest rates can't go lower and QE must be wound down given the pandemic is on its last legs.




Advertisement