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

handlemaster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119330956#Comment_119330956

Very simplistic view. Its cheaper for private landlords to deal with social tenants than the government. The government has dumped social tenants on the private sector. With your opinion you want higher taxes to building more public housing.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119344260#Comment_119344260

Left wing? Lol

Efficiency and Market forces baby. It is the "small landlords" looking for State handouts and State protections. Losing their sh1t when I suggest that all State subventions should be pulled from the private market.

"small landlords" need to learn to manage their business or move aside for the professionals. It is no shame to admit you are not up to the task. Some on here don't seem to be able to cope. But plenty of others can as they aren't whinging. The State shouldn't be intervening to artificially make it viable for the latter at the expense of everyone else.

notAMember

Super idea. No handouts just treat all the suppliers the same.

Same tax rate, no matter who they are. Agreed. Sign me up.

Now, Are we going with the 3% that I pay as a corporate or the 42%? as an individual. Happy with either as long as it’s universal and not discriminatory.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119344184#Comment_119344184

What do you think would be more inefficient? Your suggestion of getting a renter with no assets to have a guarantor who does have assets, or having that tenant with no assets subsequently stop paying rent or trashing the place?

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119344841#Comment_119344841

Obviously know nothing about business. As stated above, I gather that is an issue across the "small landlords" who moan on these sites - they think that they should retain the same rights in respect of a property that they rent, in conflict with everyone else's' potential rights, as they would with their own personal residence. You don't. If you make the choice to become a landlord, then you are now a landlord providing a service. If you agree to let someone cross that threshold and live in your place then that is your choice. You have to manage potential risks associated with that.

Tow

Small landlords do not want any state handouts. They currently get less tax write offs than any other business. All landlords want is the ability to remove problem tennents in a efficient manner and increase rent to market rates on a new letting. The same as any other business. In the UK you can apply to the courts and sent the bailiffs in, for a couple of thousand pounds. It is a far cry from a kitchen fitter being out of pocket for a week on one job to having no income for two years and a trashed property.

Bass Reeves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119344811#Comment_119344811

Waffle

What you are suggesting is illegal you cannot refuse HAP. People with assets in general do not rent. The tenants you refer to are 0.01% of tenants

Just more waffle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119344811#Comment_119344811

More waffle. None of us have any problem with the government ceasing HAP. LL's will evict unpaying tenants and the government can house them. The Government can create a few ten cities arounfythr country.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119344875#Comment_119344875

More waffling, if you had a toaster you would feed a nation. You can only manage risk so much as the deck is stacked. You are obviously not playing with a full deck with the way you post.

Dav010

When you have to explain that State supports are there to support the tenant, you know that you are wasting your time.

fash

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119344846#Comment_119344846

Your question is meaningless. In the current system, both are inefficient: a system where a non paying tenant is kicked out extremely quickly reduces overall risk for the landlord and reduces the need for either.

And in a tight market, getting guarantors is always an extra risk reducing benefit for a landlord.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119344935#Comment_119344935

When you have to explain the effect of additional money being pumped into any market, then you are wasting your time.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119344920#Comment_119344920

Bass, if you think that you are obliged to rent to a person that you wouldn't otherwise have rented to, just because they have HAP, then you don't understand the rules and are a sitting duck for a scammer.

Or, as you like to say, you are waffling.

Wanderer78

its clearly obvious, the whole free market ideology is starting to collapse, and virtually for everyone now, its over, it has failed......

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119344978#Comment_119344978

Your last sentence is ambiguous. You could be saying

getting guarantors is always an extra "risk-reducing" benefit for a landlord

Or you could be saying

getting guarantors is always an extra risk - reducing benefit for a landlord

I think it's the former but I wanted to check.

Dav010

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119345079#Comment_119345079

Wishing it don’t make it so. As the saying goes, “capitalism is the the worst economic system, except for all the others”. It is worth looking up the Tragedy of the Commons to understand the outcome of individual users, who have open access to a resource unhampered by shared social structures or formal rules that govern access and use, has on an economy.

Wanderer78

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119345147#Comment_119345147

...and again, we result to childish statements....

yes, capitalism is flawed, we all know this! but it is truly time to move on from this highly destructive form of it, it hasnt worked, it has been a great failure, globally! it truly is time for us to grow up and accept this reality....

Dav010

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119345161#Comment_119345161

Tell us what your world would look like without capitalism.

Bass Reeves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119345056#Comment_119345056

Get out the toaster you are waffling again. Back in the 90's due to costs of maintenance the LA exited from social housing. They sold a large portion and reduced substantially there building programs.

There was a conscience decision to force LL's to take up this risk. Between 2016-2022 there was no increase in HAP. Rents we not because of government regulations and the reduction in the number of rental properties because LL's are exiting the sector.

So stop waffling

Wanderer78

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119345193#Comment_119345193

...again, what are you talking about!

im not questioning capitalism as a whole, but this particular form of it! im actually an advocate of capitalism, as it has clearly surpassed the abilities of all other ideologies, so far!

...again, what the hell are you talking about!

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119345215#Comment_119345215

Look Bass. At the end of the day, if you can't cope, there is an easy exit strategy. Either learn to manage or move aside. You can't be asking the State to keep bailing you guys out, either directly or indirectly with money, or by changing rules to artificially make if viable for you.

Wanderer78

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119345228#Comment_119345228

...particular state supports is the only way many markets still exist, this can also be clearly seen at the corporate level, which experience a very privileged existence due to such state and institutional protections

fash

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119345110#Comment_119345110

Yes, first - apologies for ambiguity

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119345257#Comment_119345257

The way you wrote it was perfectly correct, but given the context of the discussion, it appears some people would be arguing the latter so I wanted to check.

amacca

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119345228#Comment_119345228

You are conflating two issues

You keep harping on about private LLs wanting the state to bail them out

They don't, if the state would just **** off with their "help" and stop hamstringing private LLs

If I was thinking of becoming a LL I'd like to see fair play and the ability to get problem tenants to leave in a timely and efficient manner the state can stick its HAP and all its meddling up its hole.....look at what they have achieved so far....they've made an absolute dogs dinner of it.....every intervention more I'll advised than tye last....its hard to work out if they are lazy/incompetent or willfully negligent/corrupt....and to make matters worse SF seem to be even more committed to making a complete balls of it....anyone thinks they are going to rescue things needs to book an appointment with a psychologist imo

More private LLs would enter the market, more competition would be there, rents would come down and availability would increase for those that want to rent if they would just withdraw their "support" ..... and private LLs would have a tolerable/workable situation not a complete shitshow brought on by opportunist populism, quangos and sleeveens.....

The Student

Capitalism does work. The profits from capitalism like other income is levied with a tax to fund those aspects of society capitalism won't by its very nature.

Unfortunately what we have with the rental sector in Ireland is private landlords being forced to perform the obligations of others.

The State won't deal with delinquent tenants, the State via County Councils ceased the RAS service because of outstanding rent.

Some posters on this forum either are unwilling or unable to grasp this concept. They don't understand the basic laws of economics. They have this odd theory that the current status will improve despite the fact corporate landlords are increasing the average rents and the private landlord are leaving the market in their droves.

So in some posters thinking yeah keep giving more and more power to one side of the market and expect the other to just accept it.

This thread gives a snap shot of those who are not involved in the market but sit on the outside thinking they know the theory of the market but don't actually have any practical experience or "skin in the game ".

Tow

The only bale out I see from the government is for private property owners. HAP tenants should be houses by the local coco. From Mica to Builders taking short cuts. It is should not be the Tax Payers responsibly to pay for this bale out. There are names attached certificates of people who made a lot of money and have not paid a penny. For example, I was told by one of the architects about the issues with the balconies in the Sandyford Beacon Quarter before they were built. The builder refused to build to their original specifications, as he claimed it would cost too much. They were raging, but the higher ups in the company did not care.

notAMember

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119345228#Comment_119345228

Who is this troll?

Lols. easy way out?

Amoung my property I have commercial and residential properties, commercial is basically propping up the residential. The residential is loss making across the board, but also in neg equity due to the low rent. I’m not on the breadline by any means but am aware there is a very weak point that isn’t a large part of my investments.

If you think sucking up 100k of capital loss is an “easy way out” for anyone, you’re a complete idiot.

Tell me though, what are your credentials for pontification on this topic. You come across as completely clueless. What business do you actually run? What property do you manage?

And I note you stuck your fingers firmly in your ears about how Wonderful the market is for renters now, and how much improved it is in the last few years. The baying mob could do with listening to a few people who know what they’re talking about instead of systematically wiping out the suppliers and crying when they can’t get a service.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119349950#Comment_119349950

Man, if you have a residential property that is 100k in negative equity, you must have made seriously bad decisions. I'm not being smart. Given the rise in values over the last few years it's a pretty bad situation to have gotten yourself into.

What business do I run? Not one that had made a loss of 100k anyway. On a passive investment that is generally accepted to be very secure - "safe as houses".

listening to a few people who know what they’re talking about

No offence, but I was going to ask for advice from someone, it wouldn't be from the fella who is 100k underwater in a rising market.

Bass Reeves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119350091#Comment_119350091

Again you show your inability to understand even a basic post. He said it was 100k of capital loss. It may be over one or over multiple properties. There are still many holiday and tax driven urban cottages/houses carrying 100 k in losses.

You still have not indicated what line of business you are in. I think at this stage I am definitely right. You are only a waffler

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119350258#Comment_119350258

Right ok Bass. As you tried to call someone else earlier, you are the new Warren Buffet. A 100k capital loss, due to negative equity caused by what he calls "low rents", is now, according to New Warren, a sign of a good business decision.

Henceforth you shall be known as Waffler Buffet to distinguish you from the American one.

Negative equity also has to imply that he has also lost whatever equity/deposit he put in. That probably only serves to highlight the genius of the investment according to the new Waffler Buffet textbook.

Beigepaint

Isn’t it funny how landlords:

1. Buy a house
2. Rent it out
3. Pay the mortgage out of that monthly rent
4. Have change left over
5. Repeat for twenty years
6. Sell the house for 5x what they paid for it
7. Consider the proceeds to be a “loss”

I’m baffled.