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
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Govt to do 'everything' to prevent evictions - McEntee

  • 09-10-2022 6:53pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 103 ✭✭Richard571


    For background I am not a landlord and have rented in the past for many years.

    i feel the government is seriously overstepping the boundaries here. If someone has privately purchased a property and wish to evict someone through proper channels for either non payment of rent or for use of their own house who are the government to say no.

    if they don’t want to evict then the government can either build their own houses or compensate the landlord in full for any shortfall.

    If people know they don’t have to pay you’ll get the usual crowd taking advantage with property owners left holding the can.

    Its their own inane policies in other areas causing this - they would do well to focus on unfettered immigration and building costs than these knee jerk politics.

    https://www.rte.ie/news/politics/2022/1009/1328086-housing/



«13456714

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 53,028 ✭✭✭✭ButtersSuki


    McEntee will also be concerned with the pronouns the tenant uses to describe their house, and will drop whatever she’s doing if the tenant wants a pic with the Minister for her Instagram too.

    I cannot believe this twit has a Ministerial role, let alone a senior one.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,033 ✭✭✭griffin100


    What a country........don’t pay your mortgage for years and you’ve little chance of having the house repossessed.......now don’t pay your rent and suffer no consequences.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,439 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    i feel the government is seriously overstepping the boundaries here.

    How are the Government overstepping their boundaries when the article you linked to can be summed up as McEntee doing what politicians do and making promises they can’t deliver on in the hope it will boost their ratings in the polls? That’s why she’s having to ask the AG would it be possible to introduce an eviction ban during the winter months so that people who aren’t currently homeless can’t be evicted temporarily.

    That’s not Government overstepping their boundaries, it’s Government doing what they’re expected to do! Too little, too late, with SF nipping at their heels with their own bunch of promises they can’t deliver on increasing their popularity in the polls.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 103 ✭✭Richard571


    Of course the government will do what gets them re-elected. But banning evictions won’t work and they all need to stop appealing to the lowest common denominator - it will drive more small landlords out, net homelessness is likely not to improve; if someone is evicted, someone will move in and it undermines property rights.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,439 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    It won’t work, but people facing eviction during winter will probably be glad of a bit of temporary relief.

    It might drive smaller landlords out of the market, but being a landlord is a business in the first place - more regulation is naturally going to drive the smaller landlords out of the market because they can’t afford to stay in the market. That’s not appealing to the lowest common denominator either, it’s just the cost of doing business. I do agree it’s a fine balance the Government are trying to strike though because the bigger landlords will have no qualms about carrying out evictions if there’s no profit from the property for them.

    It’s true that with this particular measure being proposed, homeless figures aren’t likely to improve, but that’s not the point of the measure. The point is to try to make sure homeless figures don’t get any worse by at least preventing landlords from evicting tenants during the winter months.

    The proposed measures don’t have any impact on property rights, it would have an impact on anyone who’s a landlord that they cannot evict the tenants currently occupying the property. It increases protections for existing tenants, which are hardly the lowest common denominator - they may have difficulty meeting the rent, but that’s not an impediment on their ability to vote.

    As you suggested though in your opening post - there are many more reasons why tenants might be inclined to vote for other parties who they imagine will deliver on their promises.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 648 ✭✭✭MakersMark


    It's unbelievable that deadbeat tenants who break the law by overholding are going to get a free pass from this government .


    If the government insists on this then it must offer to buy the property from landlords .


    In my case, my overholding tenants can just laugh at me now, despite being legitimately being served notice to quit 13 months ago.


    I love to see tge flicking bleeding hearts on here go 13 months without a wage and still be forced to go to work.


    Changing the law when it suits without compensation is unconstitutional.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 648 ✭✭✭MakersMark


    No other business gets treated like the landlord business.


    Wheres the laws to give motorists free petrol and fine petrol stations who don't give it to them?

    Wheres the price caps on food, clothing, electricity, computers , cars etc etc?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    But you chose to live there, under the circumstances of the contract.

    You can't then complain about the obligations you had to meet.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Quite simply, some people deserve to be evicted and shouldn’t change



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 106 ✭✭questioner22


    The landlord has obligation to do repairs and replacements according to the contract.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Absolutely, and he mentioned that.

    But the terms of the contract are agreed to beforehand, including the obligations that both sides intend to meet.

    You cannot then complain about the contract that was agreed upon. It's having your cake and eating it, kind of thing.

    Not all landlords are multimillionaires, either. Not that this matters, of course.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,681 ✭✭✭✭NIMAN


    This isn't a new thing in the country.

    During the financial crash, and over many subsequent years, very few people were evicted from their homes when mortgages weren't being paid.

    Post edited by NIMAN on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 106 ✭✭questioner22


    I agree about things being agreed. It depends on people keeping agreements though I suppose.

    Most landlords and tenants are honest, some aren't.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,609 ✭✭✭Tonesjones


    In 2020 the AG forgot to disclose that he himself is a landlord. A landlord who collects close to 100k euro per year of rental income.

    Helen and Co have again gone to seek his advice on if an eviction freeze is legal.

    This country can be parody at times



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    She's opportunistic.

    She had no political talent at all. Her father died, and then she decided to take his seat - almost as if it were a hereditary seat.

    I don't know about you, but I don't like hereditary politics.

    As for her, I find her wooden and boring, bereft of originality. Stunted by a lack of charisma, and tortuously wedded to identity politics and what makes her look good in a selfie.

    I don't think she has been any good as a minister, and she has overseen some regressive legislation re: free speech (*hate speech*) and the whole woke agenda.

    Helen is truly dreadful.

    Maybe you see her as the next Taoiseach, but I seriously hope not.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,586 ✭✭✭Ginger83


    I knew her father and I believe that man is turning in his grave at the promises not met by her government.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 411 ✭✭Starfire20


    being a landlord isn't the same as working a regular job.

    it's passive income.

    nothing stopping the landlord from getting a job like everyone else.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,858 ✭✭✭Real Donald Trump




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 984 ✭✭✭Still stihl waters 3


    You'd want to be some ass to be a landlord in this country, if you met a troublesome tenant they would make your life a misery, I'd end up praying they'd die of carbon monoxide poisoning or a car crash just to get the bastards out, why would anyone to put themselves through that



  • Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 78,393 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    OK everyone - please discuss the policy and not the politician



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 411 ✭✭Starfire20


    nobody is forced to be a landlord. instead of looking for sympathy, they could always sell the property or get a job.

    a lot of bellyaching from the poor landlords who are forced into renting out properties...



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,609 ✭✭✭Tonesjones


    If everyone just bought a house we wouldn't need landlords.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,439 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    I’m not laughing at you, but I’m finding it incredibly difficult to take you seriously when you come out with wishful thinking like imagining that Government are going to purchase the properties of landlords because of the introduction of legislation to protect tenants from eviction on a temporary basis!

    Changing the law when it suits, without compensation to whom? It’s not unconstitutional in any case! The specifics of any new legislation might be unconstitutional, which is why the Government is seeking the advice of the AG on the matter.



    On the contrary - landlords aren’t treated any differently to any other business. They provide a service in accordance with Irish law, which is subject to change. I’m not a member of the bleeding hearts brigade so I don’t feel one ounce of sympathy for landlords who can’t manage their business and start cribbing because they’re not able to turn a profit. That’s business, and if they can’t run a business, they don’t deserve to be in business. I’ve said it recently and I’ll say it again here because the same thing applies - Government are not a charity, don’t expect them to act like one.

    The Government are expected to run the country, and the irony of the current Government is that they delivered on all the easy stuff in legislation, and they’re even more unpopular now than they were going into Government, having made it easy for people to vote SF! Be some sport if they get in, you’ll really want to brace yourself for the worst, because they’re not going to make it any easier on landlords 😂



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 984 ✭✭✭Still stihl waters 3


    You're right of course, the tenants should just get a better paying job and build or buy a house thus doing away with landlords altogether



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,439 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    Plenty of landlords have jobs and run other businesses and they know how to handle their business too so that they aren’t stuck with tenants over-holding or cribbing about measures to protect tenants from eviction during the winter months.

    Then there are the landlords who don’t have the first clue about being a landlord, and when they find themselves in trouble they want Government to bail them out while calling everyone else bleeding hearts 🙄



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,586 ✭✭✭Ginger83


    The only thing a ban on evictions will do is make up a lot of landlords minds to get out of the business leaving tenants both good and bad in a worse situation.

    Friends of ours have just left a property having been served notice. Their landlady is living in the UK and claimed that they needed to move back however a neighbour has informed us that she has been asked to keep an eye on the place. After years of renting excessive regulations convinced her to get out and to get around the vacant tax they'll just claim to live there.

    Another family home taken from the rental market. Well done government



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,408 ✭✭✭✭Kermit.de.frog


    Make an eviction ban only for those up to date with their payment (both private and council).

    I don't see why those who pay their way should be treated the same as those who don't.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 106 ✭✭questioner22


    Renting is the norm in Europe.

    People should be able to rent for life if they want to.

    In this country, it's made difficult.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,203 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    Not often I’d stick up for landlords but if a person is not meeting their obligations as part of a contract….

    unless she’s planning upping the rent supplements …. I can’t see how she can just say to landlords “ when they have it you’ll get it, you cannot evict, tough “…..

    Need to be a sensible deterrent for those not paying their way.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 411 ✭✭Starfire20


    so instead of abiding by the rental market regulations, they've exited the market and are lying to avoid paying the vacancy tax?

    sounds like tax dodging



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,439 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    It wasn’t your friends then who were served with an eviction notice who informed you that their neighbours were asked to keep an eye on the place, but the neighbours themselves?

    Apart from the whiff of BS off that anecdote, it’s not a case of well done Government at all. It’s your friends neighbours, neighbours landlord, who is deciding to get out of the landlord business, while hoping to pull a fast one, who you should be saying well done to, because Government haven’t taken the property off the market!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,381 ✭✭✭Yurt2


    I'm not exactly sure what these excessive regulations consist of. Registering with the RTB is not exactly onerous, but for some reason, a lot of landlords attempt to run a mile from it. One must wonder why that is. Prior to the RTB - if they were minded to - a hell of a lot of landlords got away with murder with witholding deposits willy-nilly, extremely tenous notices of eviction, and cash-in-hand arrangements were rampant.

    The system was a dodgy landlords' charter, and renters were relying on the character of their landlord not to be mistreated. Not a good place to be from a legal standpoint. I still think we're unpicking that culture and a lot of landlords are holdouts for that regime hoping it will magic itself back into existance if they moan loud enough.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 491 ✭✭SwimClub


    Well that's the whole point, they can't sell the property can they if there are tenants in it and there is a freeze on evicting them



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,609 ✭✭✭Tonesjones


    Agreed. There is too much government interference here.

    The market should set the price.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 491 ✭✭SwimClub


    You only have to be in a property 30 days to avoid the vacant property tax, so it's hardly a big motivation. A lot of people are in the same boat of worrying about their property being seized by the government in one way or another via tenancy laws and are either exiting or thinking about exiting. I spoke to someone the other day selling their rental and the family tenants have to find somewhere else, they feel terrible but can't afford the risk of paying two mortgages with rates going up and the risk of not receiving rent and not being able to evict.

    This is only going to accelerate as the next election approaches. The carrot would work way better than the stick there but politically they are all terrified about doing anything viewed as favorable to landlords so many families will be evicted over these property sales in the next couple of years.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,586 ✭✭✭Ginger83


    yes and a family left with very little options but how do you prove this. At least if there was an intention to sell there might be some hope of the property not selling and the landlord offering another tenancy



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,439 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    They can? There’s nothing to stop a landlord from selling a property with what’s called ‘tenants in situ’ -

    Mr Ó Broin said that a lot of evictions served in late summer/early autumn will be reaching the end of their notice period just ahead of Christmas and in the New Year, which he fears will result in more people becoming homeless.

    "We need a ban on eviction where a landlord is selling. If the landlord is selling let them sell, but with the tenants in situ, that increases the likelihood of property being bought by another landlord," said Mr Ó Broin. "Where a landlord is selling and the property is occupied by HAP, RAS or rent supplement tenants, the local authority should be allowed buy those properties, they are currently not allowed buy them," Mr Ó Broin said.

    https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40760160.html



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 411 ✭✭Starfire20


    they didn't have to be landlords in the first place i would have thought.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 106 ✭✭questioner22


    can't afford the risk of paying two mortgages with rates going up and the risk of not receiving rent and not being able to evict

    Someone having a mortgage and tenants paying the mortgage + profit, shouldn't be allowed I think.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,609 ✭✭✭Tonesjones


    Hes a great lad dictating what controls government should have over peoples private property.

    A taste of what's coming perhaps?

    House prices are sky high and the writing is on the wall for the next government. Sell now while it's in your favour .

    The International funds will hold all of the rental properties and that's the intention



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 491 ✭✭SwimClub


    So you're telling people who they can sell to now? Catching them in some regulations so they get screwed on sale price on only selling to some REIT that knows the regulations mean they can offer below market price?

    You can try that over the winter then sit back and watch everyone flocking for the exits in the spring and the associated evictions. It raises the question of whats going to be next? Ain't no-one going to hang around to find out.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,586 ✭✭✭Ginger83


    Nobody or very very few people want to buy a property with a tenant in it.

    No bank will approve a mortgage unless the property is vacant or it's a buy to let and this issue eliminates the majority of buyers.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,439 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    No I’m not telling landlords who they can sell to now. You made the point that landlords couldn’t sell a property if there are tenants in it and there’s a freeze on evicting tenants. They can!

    And SF, if they get their way, which it’s entirely likely they will if they’re able to form the next Government, that’ll be one of the first things they’ll make sure of - that landlords cannot evict tenants if they’re selling the property.

    There’s still nobody telling landlords who they can sell their properties to. I have no idea how you thought that’s what I was saying.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,439 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    So what? The point was being made that landlords can’t sell the property if there are tenants in situ. Whether anyone wants to buy it or not is another question entirely.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,121 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    Theres no legal restriction. But in practical terms it would make it very difficult and I expect lower the price considerably.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,381 ✭✭✭Yurt2


    In places like the Netherlands, a buyer of the property must honour the lease of tenants in-situ whatever length the lease is. The sky hasn't fallen in there last time I checked.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,752 ✭✭✭quokula


    It's really not another question entirely. Sure in that case you can make a law that they can only sell to people born before the year 1900. It's the owner's own fault if they can't find a buyer, the law isn't saying they can't sell.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 491 ✭✭SwimClub


    This is why the majority of small landlords are going to get out, everyone wants to get out before Sinn Fein gets in. But that is going to cause a lot of unnecessary evictions over the next couple of years.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,439 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    In any case that’s not the same as the point being made that it couldn’t be done. Now whether or not having tenants in situ has any impact on the value of the property is another matter entirely, but a far greater factor in the valuation of the property would be the location and condition of the property, not the fact there are tenants in situ. Another landlord is likely the most likely to buy the property, or someone looking for an investment property which they can have managed by an agent.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 491 ✭✭SwimClub


    Of course that could also be the Sinn Fein agenda, get them happening under the current government.



  • Advertisement
Advertisement