nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Record house prices "linked to more lax lending rules". Intent replaces negligence.

[Deleted User]

It just goes on, and on. Yet another report confirming that the house price bubble promoters are well and truly running the show in this republic in 2017. Once again house price rise is not just the obviously deliberate lack of supply that is the result of the state refusing to get back into building houses.

A major part of the current bubble is this government -with its solid support from Fianna Fáil and others keeping it in power, in case anybody wants to forget that - undermining Central Bank rules by making it easier for people to borrow more money than is wise and thus, with more money chasing even fewer houses, prices are only going up and the property developers and the like are back on the pig's back. And there's also that minor matter of building standards also being lowered by this government "to encourage builders to start building again". How utterly myopic can government policy become in so many ways? They aren't even looking two years down the road. Utterly astounding. Cowboys and crooks, gombeens and gobshítes, have formed Irish government housing policy. The ineffable shortsightedness of it all.

At this stage, Irish government housing policy is far, far beyond negligence. It is a deliberate policy designed to push house prices up, get heavily indebted builders to pay back their loans and pass new ridiculous levels of debt on to new purchasers who have increasingly very, very little choice but to buy (as the rental market is, again by design at this stage, a bastion of financial and home insecurity for any family). Meanwhile, just as they did in 2006, huge swathes of Dublin voters feel better because their property has gone up much more than they paid for it. So the distorted, stitch-up which qualifies as the property market will continue in this glorious "free market" that rightwingers love to contend exists.

This state will continue to hold future generations of house purchasers to ransom by maintaining, encouraging and Jesus Christ you couldn't invent it but actually giving tax incentives to people who build lower standard homes at higher prices than ever. In 2017. These people in Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil who have designed this malevolent government housing policy need to be outed for the threat to the stability of the Irish state that they, once again, are. No "mistakes" here, no "poor policy". Spare the euphemisms. Nothing but my complete contempt.

Average cost of three-bed semi in Dublin now above €400,000

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Wheeliebin30

Grandeeod wrote: »

Could they start with actually building social housing again? How about they stay out of interferring with the private purchase market? Both of these issues if addressed could go some way towards solving it. If you cannot afford to buy a house, you get a social house. If you can actually afford to buy a house, you buy a house. If you can afford to rent a nice house privately, then you do so. There was a time when it was like that - until the Government interferred a long time ago in a galaxy far far away.:rolleyes:

What if we all just decide we can't afford to buy a house?

Will we all get a social house?

who will pay for all these houses?

The goverment has realised that social houses cost a huge amount in the long run.

It's not just supplying the house it's the upkeep and maintenance for life they have to finance too.

**** that, we don't have a magic money tree.

Ulysses Gaze

BattleCorp wrote: »

How should the Government go about solving the housing crisis?

Serious question.

Rent controls and long term renting surety of tenure.

Grandeeod

BattleCorp wrote: »

How should the Government go about solving the housing crisis?

Serious question.

Could they start with actually building social housing again? How about they stay out of interferring with the private purchase market? Both of these issues if addressed could go some way towards solving it. If you cannot afford to buy a house, you get a social house. If you can actually afford to buy a house, you buy a house. If you can afford to rent a nice house privately, then you do so. There was a time when it was like that - until the Government interferred a long time ago in a galaxy far far away.:rolleyes:

Fr_Dougal

Zebra3 wrote: »

Rent controls for starters like they have in a lot of European countries.

All this gloating last year about 1916 and yet the country is still there for the benefit of the absentee landlord.

Rent controls won't work here. When I put up resistance to the last rent increase, the landlord said he was thinking about selling the house. He could easily have listed the house for sale and forced me out so that he could get a few hundred more each month in rent.

Landlords are creaming it at the moment, those rents are not sustainable.

Zebra3

BattleCorp wrote: »

How should the Government go about solving the housing crisis?

Serious question.

Rent controls for starters like they have in a lot of European countries.

All this gloating last year about 1916 and yet the country is still there for the benefit of the absentee landlord.

andekwarhola

McGaggs wrote: »

We've got the solution here folks, everyone will move to Finglas.

He's got a point though.

Irish people seem to have this persistent fantasy that it's only external malign forces that are preventing everybody being able to afford a house within a number of centrally-located, middle-class Dublin postcodes.

FutureGuy

osarusan wrote: »

I thought there were percentage limits on how much rent could be raised, and how often it could be raised also?

EDIT: Sorry, Limerick city centre is not one of the Rent Pressure Zones that applies to.

Yep, it's scandalous if I'm being honest. People are getting hit with 20%+increases in rent, and while you'll hear that they were cheap to begin with, it still impacts people.

osarusan

FutureGuy wrote: »

My rent went from 700 to 850 last year and is expected to be 950 at the very least next year (and if I was my landlord, I'd be asking for 1,000 per month given the property is a 15 seconds walk off from center of Limerick's main street).

I thought there were percentage limits on how much rent could be raised, and how often it could be raised also?

EDIT: Sorry, Limerick city centre is not one of the Rent Pressure Zones that applies to.

BattleCorp

Winterlong wrote: »

The responsibility to resolve the housing crisis is with the government - yes, of course.

How should the Government go about solving the housing crisis?

Serious question.

Winterlong

Yourself isit wrote: »

People are asking you what you think the alternative is. Rents are crazy. Insecure. Most mortgages are cheaper than Dublin rent.

The responsibility for this situation lies with the government.

The responsibility to resolve the housing crisis is with the government - yes, of course.
The responsibility for individual mortgages is with the person taking out that mortgage.

FutureGuy

My rent went from 700 to 850 last year and is expected to be 950 at the very least next year (and if I was my landlord, I'd be asking for 1,000 per month given the property is a 15 seconds walk off from center of Limerick's main street). Given just how fast Limerick is rising as a city and the complete lack of renal options, that could be 1200/month in a few years.

I have no security. They could sell the block and the new owners could jack up the rents.

So OP are you saying I shouldn't buy a house for similar money/month?

Yourself isit

Winterlong wrote: »

I am not sure why you are asking me that question. The point I was making is that if you are going to take out a mortgage then you need to accept responsibility for that mortgage, dont be blaming the banks and government.
The housing market is in shyte but that does not mean everyone should rush out to take mortgages they cannot afford. The last debt crisis must have taught us that.

People are asking you what you think the alternative is. Rents are crazy. Insecure. Most mortgages are cheaper than Dublin rent.

The responsibility for this situation lies with the government.

Winterlong

whoopsadoodles wrote: »

What do you suggest for families unable to find rental accommodation anywhere near where the parents work and the children attend school?

What would be their best option do you think?

I am not sure why you are asking me that question. The point I was making is that if you are going to take out a mortgage then you need to accept responsibility for that mortgage, dont be blaming the banks and government.
The housing market is in shyte but that does not mean everyone should rush out to take mortgages they cannot afford. The last debt crisis must have taught us that.

SEPT 23 1989

McGaggs wrote: »

We've got the solution here folks, everyone will move to Finglas.

Nothing wrong with the old part of Finglas

The J Stands for Jay

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

Don't forget a lot of these first time buyers want to live in relatively affluent areas too.

There are hundreds of 3 and 4 bed properties in Dublin for less than 300k.

We've got the solution here folks, everyone will move to Finglas.

dr.fuzzenstein

I find Boards and especially AH hilarious.
After god knows how many "move everyone out of the countryside and into Dublin city center(jaysis, dem people in de country are costen us a foooooortune!)" threads, actively encourage people to move out of Dublin.
And to suggest for people to move to Galway or Limerick and work in Dublin, why don't you do it if you think it's so great? That's beyond idiotic.
The Irish government only governs by Google. They see what other countries do and the implement that. No though goes into it. But make sure to hire my nephew as consultant and pay him a few hundred grand for sitting on his arse.
Just look at the approach. In 06 it was "build ALL the houses!", now it's" that didn't work, let's not build anything"
If anyone has any evidence that more thought goes into it, I'd like to hear it, because I think its unlikely.

punk_one82

Deleted User wrote: »

So, rather than focusing on building new houses, perhaps encourage people to move back into the countryside? It's only slightly above an hour drive from Galway to Dublin.... That's less time than it takes me to travel from home to work in my current city.

An hour drive from Galway to Dublin? Great, in that magical land where driving times are halved, throw in rush hour traffic in and around Dublin and then add in thousands more cars to deal with people who now live outside Dublin. What do you end up with?

Nobody should have to do a 400km round trip to work every day. Maybe if we focused on building up cities other than Dublin then your approach would work.

[Deleted User]

I'd love to sell my townhouse, and make even slightly a profit after all the expenses (mortgage, taxes, fees, maintainance, repairs, etc.) I originally got a mortgage for 165K back in the boom period.. when I could easily afford the payments. Didn't forsee losing my job though. I am renting out my place, but I've seen very little actual profit after all the expenses are counted up.

Not all of us bought houses in Dublin which seems to be where all the inflated pricing is happening... and there's plenty of people in the rest of the country, like myself, who would love to just get past the mistake they made, sell and buy something more manageable.

So, rather than focusing on building new houses, perhaps encourage people to move back into the countryside? It's only slightly above an hour drive from Galway to Dublin.... That's less time than it takes me to travel from home to work in my current city.

whoopsadoodles

Allinall wrote: »

I note the poster didn't respond.

Lol, the poster didn't respond because she uses boards for her own entertainment whenever she pleases. Not to sit around waiting to see if I'm quoted!!

As was pointed out, it was a general question in response to the suggestion that house prices are entirely the fault of house buyers.

The families could be anywhere right now, they could be living with parents, they could be in rented accommodation which has recently increased in price to a point they are crippled trying to pay it. They could be in an affordable sh*thole. They could have just been handed their notice to terminate in the home they've lived in for years.

I'm lucky enough not to be in any of the above scenarios. I bought during the boom (2006) but I also sold during the boom so I'm not in negative equity.

I'm also a landlord who hasn't fcuked her tenants over just because I could so I know rental prices and I know that there are shag all properties to rent where I live and the ones there are are prohibitively expensive. The average family cannot afford to rent here. I also know that the monthly repayments on a mortgage for a house in my area would be significantly less.

So again I'm asking, what do you suggest that families (or individuals for that matter) who are unable to find rental accommodation near their jobs and schools, but who have the option of getting a mortgage and buying a house, should do? What are their other options?

And apologies if I don't respond in a timely fashion, to suit your needs, or indeed at all if I don't feel like it

Yourself isit

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

Don't forget a lot of these first time buyers want to live in relatively affluent areas too.

There are hundreds of 3 and 4 bed properties in Dublin for less than 300k.

There are thousands of families looking for housing.

Yourself isit

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Do you mean the practices which were sensibly set by the Central Bank, like 3.5 times one's income and a 20% deposit, but undermined by the current government and its "exceptions" and 10% deposit so people now can not only can get substantially more money from banks but need substantially more money from banks entirely because the price of houses has gone up because there is now a greater supply of money chasing houses?

You clearly haven't a clue of how an increase in the money supply results in a rise in prices. Very basic economics. Or the basic insecurity of the current rental market for families that is in effect forcing many families to buy houses at these prices. Or indeed the role cheap, barely regulated lending from banks had in creating the last housing bubble. Only in your fantasy land of "savvy" operators is government policy not the key factor here.

Of course not. It's typical of small minds to think individually (that guy didnt have to buy his house) rather than in terms of macroeconomic theory.

What a charade. I own a house and bought post boom but this manipulation still sickens me.

Yourself isit

Allinall wrote: »

Sounds like you're a happy purchaser.

Obviously if I was to ask if you think you overpaid for your house, you would say yes.

However, you sound like you weighed up you're options and made your choice.

It's what most savvy people do.

He's no more or less savvy than anybody buying a house at the moment. It's cheaper than rent although Coveney has gone out of his way to increase house prices to "help the ftb" - code words for make developers richer.

Arcade_Tryer

Don't forget a lot of these first time buyers want to live in relatively affluent areas too.

There are hundreds of 3 and 4 bed properties in Dublin for less than 300k.

[Deleted User]

Allinall wrote: »

What about borrowing practices?

Do you mean the practices which were sensibly set by the Central Bank, like 3.5 times one's income and a 20% deposit, but undermined by the current government and its "exceptions" and 10% deposit so people now can not only can get substantially more money from banks but need substantially more money from banks entirely because the price of houses has gone up because there is now a greater supply of money chasing houses?

You clearly haven't a clue of how an increase in the money supply results in a rise in prices. Very basic economics. Or the basic insecurity of the current rental market for families that is in effect forcing many families to buy houses at these prices. Or indeed the role cheap, barely regulated lending from banks had in creating the last housing bubble. Only in your fantasy land of "savvy" operators is government policy not the key factor here.

Dravokivich

Allinall wrote: »

Sounds like you're a happy purchaser.

Obviously if I was to ask if you think you overpaid for your house, you would say yes.

However, you sound like you weighed up you're options and made your choice.

It's what most savvy people do.

Savvy has nothing to do with it. He had a means to access to money by deposit and mortgage approval (assuming it wasn't bought outright). Very few people are in a position to do that securely these days. I can't fathom what'll be needed to get a mortgage on a 400k property. I wouldn't be able to get one for the lowest price place where I am now.

Zebra3

Your Face wrote: »

Well I for one miss Labours years of administering their socialist utopia.

Ah, Labour.

Left wing in opposition, right wing in power.

stimpson wrote: »

The government gave been fiddling with the market for years like the boy with his thumb in the dyke. The only thing they haven't tried is the one thing that will moderate prices: get more houses built.

There is 10 years of pent up demand. An entire generation that have been patiently waiting to buy a home. Without a corresponding increase in supply prices are only going one way. This is first year economics stuff.

They weren't fiddling. It was policy. Screw the people forced on to the streets or paying over the odds, let "the markets" rule. We all know who profits from that. The usual suspects. And we all know who picks up the tab when it goes belly up.

:rolleyes:

Allinall

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

I bought a house this year. Had my rent increased 3 times in the previous 18 months. When I argued my point to the landlord he told me that he was going to sell the house. He could easily have listed it for sale on Daft, let me move out and then rent it out for a couple of hundred more than I was renting it for.

It got to the stage where it was cheaper for me to buy than to rent. Peace of mind too knowing that I now have a fixed cost for accommodation for a few years and that I won't be kicked out by a greedy landlord.

Sounds like you're a happy purchaser.

Obviously if I was to ask if you think you overpaid for your house, you would say yes.

However, you sound like you weighed up you're options and made your choice.

It's what most savvy people do.

Fr_Dougal

Allinall wrote: »

It's the people paying the inflated prices that are to blame.

No one else.

I bought a house this year. Had my rent increased 3 times in the previous 18 months. When I argued my point to the landlord he told me that he was going to sell the house. He could easily have listed it for sale on Daft, let me move out and then rent it out for a couple of hundred more than I was renting it for.

It got to the stage where it was cheaper for me to buy than to rent. Peace of mind too knowing that I now have a fixed cost for accommodation for a few years and that I won't be kicked out by a greedy landlord.

Allinall

Yourself isit wrote: »

You dont get general questions do you?

Why would I need to get "general" questions?

The scenario given is an overused cliched situation that doesn't bring anything constructive to the discussion.

I note the poster didn't respond.

begbysback

Should this not have been moved to property forum??

This is the kind of crap I try and avoid by looking in AH - now I won't sleep tonight