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

Excellent article on how important small landlords are and how screwing them over hasn't worked

Options
17810121318

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 6,205 ✭✭✭Claw Hammer


    The tenant doesn't have to apply for it. It has been automatic since the RTB started.

    28.—(1) Where a person has, under a tenancy, been in occupation of a dwelling for a continuous period of 6 months then, if the condition specified in subsection (3) is satisfied, the following protection applies for the benefit of that person. (2) That protection is that, subject to Chapter 3, the tenancy mentioned in subsection (1) shall (if it would not or might not do so otherwise) continue in being— (a) unless paragraph (b) applies, for the period of F85[6 years] from— (i) the commencement of the tenancy, or (ii) the relevant date, whichever is the later, or (b) if a notice of termination under section 34(b) is served in respect of the tenancy giving a period of notice that expires after the period of F85[6 years] mentioned in paragraph (a), until the expiry of that period of notice. (3) The condition mentioned in subsection (1) is that no notice of termination (giving the required period of notice) has been served in respect of the tenancy before the expiry of the period of 6 months mentioned in that subsection. (4) Despite the fact that such a notice of termination has been so served, that condition shall be regarded as satisfied if the notice is subsequently withdrawn.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,766 ✭✭✭growleaves


    'There are lots of other investments out there'

    There aren't though, not of the same yield and ease of entry - hence the bitterness.

    Stock markets are down and tend to be jumpy anyway. Bond yields are held down by QE.

    How many of these boys will be starting manufacturing businesses? Do they have the specialist knowledge for targeted angel investing?

    If a person was indifferent to whether or not their business is 'a social service', why gloat when that (non-)service has been withdrawn?

    There is a gold rush in rental yields and the lion's share will now go to corporates.

    If you're being driven out of business anyway why not stick up for yourself a little bit.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,766 ✭✭✭growleaves


    'I know you don't care and probably think that more tax should be paid. '

    Talk about presumptuous. Where did I say I was in favour of higher taxes?

    Do you think anyone who criticises landlords for any reason is left-wing economically?

    'The people who take glee in extra tax and restriction on landlords thinking this improves the rental market are the problem. You seem to be part of this group'

    You're mistaken.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,897 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997



    Your post is complaining that LL only promote their own interests and also complains they don't lobby for the their own interests.

    Catch 22 or what.

    Pointing out the problems with a process or system is not being vindictive.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,766 ✭✭✭growleaves


    No I'm saying they are throwing in the towel when it comes to promoting their economic interest.

    To save face they try to make it look like a win over others or a hopeless cause, but that is just ego-protection.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 628 ✭✭✭MakersMark


    6 years tenancies are no more.

    All new tenancies will now be forever tenancies per FF legislation.

    When current 6 year tenancies end they will roll over to forever tenancies.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭The Student


    To have a reasonable chance of some progress both parties need to have a balance and some public support. So if we look at the property sector as an example. People know there is a housing crisis and most of it is due to the Govt's action or inaction.

    The majority of people accept that you should pay your rent/mortgage. However what has the Govt and the legislature decided. You don't pay your mortgage lets make it almost impossible to repossess the property. You don't pay your rent then lets drag out the process of evicting someone for as long as possible.

    This is my personal favourite one, "well you entered the business as a landlord and if you can't take it you should not be in". The icing on this particular cake is the fact that the balance of power is not level and never will be simply because the State has the power to change the rules of the game and the landlord can't.

    Two final points I would make in this post. Remember 85% (working from memory) of private landlords have two or less properties. These are you local trades person trying to have this as a pension. They are not your fatcat landlords of history living off the downtrodden tenant. Secondly what alot of people fail to realise is who benefits most from the current situation. The State gets people housed (that which it should be doing itself), the State has no risk of non payment of rent and the State recoups significant tax revenue from this sector.

    The landlord has and is being portrayed as the evil faceless landlord and people are falling for this narrative and not actually taking a step back and thinking about this in its entirety and realising who is benefiting the most out of this situation.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,897 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    I think that's your projection.

    Cashing out to go do something else or buy back in with REIT isn't giving up. It's just moving your capital too something with better yields, less risk or perhaps just into an activity you enjoy more.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,545 ✭✭✭Topgear on Dave


    Im just noticing reading all the different posts about the rental regulations.


    Most of the landlords I rented from over the years would not have a degree in law to be able to keep up with the changes and regulations.


    The laws should be clear and easy to follow for both sides.

    Every time someone mentions a rule here someone else comes along with a correction or an update. It's It's mess.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,897 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    The most recent change was only June. So not everyone will be aware of it especially if they aren't currently involved. Have recent new tenancies.

    There's a few quoting old posts that have already been corrected in the following posts.

    It's not that complicated. But the goal posts are constantly shifting. Makes it hard to plan ahead. That uncertainty isn't helping.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 18,374 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    I see we have a Warren Buffet here. I suppose you have a couple of million on different investments.

    You have not got a clue. The main thing with any investment is if risk increase's and you have a chance to get out at the top of the market then you have to consider it.

    My rental properties are low capital value, one is a farm house and the other a small two bed in a small town. There return is still around 10%. However if I was in a large urban area and the return was 6% or less I be running for the hills.

    Cash in now and there is always investment opportunities In a recession. Property is one of the hardest not easiest to invest in and it hard to exit as well. Costs to enter and exit are over 5% on average that is why historically most Investors stay put.

    It's not the most efficient pension investment but it had its advantages.

    I have a holiday home that I considered renting out for 6-8 months while we did not use it but that is definitely not going to happen now.

    The real losers are those renting and trying to rent. Not LL's we will manage away thank you very much. Your assumptions are idiotic at next. The truth is there is probably 50-60k vacant houses in this country that could be rented but there owners are scared sh!tless by the rules and regulations as well as the risk of the asking in the wrong tenant

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,265 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump



    Nope Ray. You are just being massively subsidized by the State. You don't like it being pointed out to you.

    You are entitled to get onto the hand-out bandwagon if you want. That is the system and you can play it if you want. Long-term unemployed can also play the system. Up the them. Up to you.

    It is ironic that you say that I add nothing. That is exactly what your small landlord does - add nothing. Don't produce anything, don't build anything. Just get your hands on an asset that someone else wants, outbid them on it, and make them pay you to use it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,265 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump



    Vacant property tax Bass. That is all that is needed. Vacant property tax and undeveloped site tax.

    You're hardly going to call people with long term vacant properties as "small landlords"?



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,374 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    Most of the houses I am talking about will be outside the vacant house tax. Just more rubbish posts by you.

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,265 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump


    Your own post is rubbish Bass.

    I'll let you in on a little secret - any new tax, or any modification to an existing tax, can be brought in by the legislature.

    You can challenge it if you have a constitutional basis for doing so, but I don't remember any Constitutional Article that said "Bass' house shall be outside any vacant property tax".

    How on earth can you counter the suggestion of a new and improved vacant property tax with "it won't apply to my house"?

    Do you consider people with vacant houses, who are afraid to rent them out, as "small landlords"?



  • Registered Users Posts: 231 ✭✭Roxxers




  • Registered Users Posts: 19,265 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump


    There are two f's in off


    How is it that you think the suggestion of a vacant property tax is trolling. It is a perfectly reasonable measure. Use it or lose it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 231 ✭✭Roxxers




  • Registered Users Posts: 19,265 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump




  • Registered Users Posts: 231 ✭✭Roxxers




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 19,265 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump




  • Registered Users Posts: 231 ✭✭Roxxers




  • Registered Users Posts: 231 ✭✭Roxxers


    can you suck your golden balls till they are raw



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,374 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    No not my house. Most of the houses I was referring to are those that are only vacant due to certain circumstances. Most are PPR's. PPR's will be exempt from any vacant property tax. Its the same as the present vacant site tax so many exemptions it has little or no real effect.

    There is absolutely no F@@KING way any government even the Shinners will impose a vacant house tax on houses of people that are in nursing homes, where the owners have gone to live temporary with relatives or where the owners are abroad. The majority owners of these houses are not or no longer willing to rent them under the present rules. But there is a load of idiots who think that making up different ways of trying to penalize LL's will solve the problems..

    There is another issue the vast majority of small LL's will find a way around the vacant property tax. An adult child can put there PPS down and stay there now and again. There will be so many get out of jail cards it too will be ineffective

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,897 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


     Vacant property and undeveloped sites .... Use it or lose it..

    No one believes this won't stop at just property and land, or that its solely about housing. Might not be about housing at all.



  • Registered Users Posts: 231 ✭✭Roxxers




  • Registered Users Posts: 19,265 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump


    Housing supply is restricted by the State. Whenever something is restricted by the State, particulary something which is oversubscribed, you need additional controls over it.

    If you buy land and get it rezoned, then you should be made to either build on it or sell to someone who will. If a REIT buys a block of apartments to rent out, then they should be made to rent them out or sell them on if they are leaving them vacant.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,842 ✭✭✭amacca


    Not everyone that rents wants to buy the house the landlord bought.....there are huge swathes of the market that used to rent are either locked out or paying a lot more than they would have before......all down to increasingly one sided (and frankly completely unfair populist) regulation


    My parents used to rent out bedsits....their tenants were people like truck drivers that lived down the country worked on international routes from Dublin, students(doctors/nurses) etc....most were short term that had no intention of ever buying in the area...there for a couple of years (at most) and the rents were reasonable paid weekly (nothing like the rates now) but the landlord had some recourse then he/she wasnt a state punchbag for morons, that's no longer available, every change the govt has made to squeeze landlords has contributed to the fuckwittery you see now in the rental market .......


    I sincerely doubt institutional landlords will solve anything in the line of affordability...they know how to charge and keep the rates high (theyre professionals after all)..more like take the state and its citizens for an expensive ride I'd say.


    Afaic there's no defending the rental/tenancy legislation.....its clearly gone off the rails and doesn't solve any problems.....just makes it worse on renters first and foremost....



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,265 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump


    Now Bass, nursing homes are irrelevant. The reason people who go into nursing home don't rent out their property is that, under the Fair Deal Scheme, most of any rental is taken back off them.

    A fella near me with valuable land and a house went into a home recently. He's not married and has no kids. He's not expected to live that long.

    But the relatives had his house sold in less than three months after he left it. Sentimentalism wasn't long getting kicked out the window when there was an inheritance to be maximised. Had he been in under the FDS, his house would be left. Nothing to do with tenant rules.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 7,766 ✭✭✭growleaves


    @Bass Reeves 'I see we have a Warren Buffet here.'

    Get lost you creep.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement