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

Air BnB to be effectively banned for non PPR

Options
1…5681011…17

Comments

  • Options
    #212
    gozunda
    Registered Users Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    Mr.H wrote: »
    Renting your house out is not supposed to gain profit. It is a long term investment allowing you to sell the house when you retire. Of course greedy landlords forget to think about the amount they sell for in the later years.
    Greed

    So why does the government demand tax on rent paid to the landlord? How is a landlord supposed to maintain a property. To pay insurance, tax etc etc etc.

    And what exactly happens if and when the property market crashes and the owner gets less than when they bought it?

    If a landlord only job is renting - How are they supposed to earn an income exactly? I could go on but I've never read such rubbish in my life.


  • Options
    #213
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 53,506 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    that profit would only be tied to inflation on the sale price. Making a monthly profit from renting is the done thing, especially since we don't allow landlords to operate as a proper business here and write off the full mortgage payment against profits.
    What? No.


  • Options
    #214
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    listermint wrote: »
    Prejudice no sorry mate I grew up in a council house.

    Your second part of your paragraph reinforces what I know you were angling at in your first post.


    Me too, well it was built by the council and sold to the MoD but I digress. Do I think people will not want social tenants living next door to them, yes. As I say I'm not one of them and there is no reason to be of that opinion. I genuinely think we need to mix social housing in and I've said so repeatedly on this forum. That includes neww developments in des. res. areas.


  • Options
    #215
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    Graham wrote: »
    That's not been the result in other markets where similar legislation has been introduced.


    That's not been the result in markets where the government have a track record of enforcing bugger all. We can't even get people to stop at red lights, let alone find a canny way around this legislation.


  • Options
    #216
    listermint
    Registered Users Posts: 33,788 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    gozunda wrote: »
    So why does the government demand tax on rent paid to the landlord? How is a landlord supposed to maintain a property. To pay insurance, tax etc etc etc.

    And what exactly happens if and when the property market crashes and the owner gets less than when they bought it?

    If a landlord only job is renting - How are they supposed to earn an income exactly? I could go on but I've never read such rubbish in my life.

    No one is owed a living. It would be up to that individual to go get a job themselves. Or invest in something else. After all aren't landlords just investors.... maximizing potential on their asset


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #217
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,282 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    arctictree wrote: »
    So what's the big problem? Just get planning permission for your property as a short term tourist let.

    if that was easy it wouldn't be a problem, but you can bet the government will reform that to slow it down or ban it in RPZ's too.


  • Options
    #218
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    Changing tack here and going for the hatrick, how long exactly did this take to come in. I'm not talking about the foreplay, the actual, we're doing this lads to it coming in, maybe a few weeks. What would also do the renatal secotr a world of good is being able to get rid of deadbeat tenants and rent to someone that actually will pay the rent and look after the place.


  • Options
    #219
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »
    Changing tack here and going for the hatrick, how long exactly did this take to come in. I'm not talking about the foreplay, the actual, we're doing this lads to it coming in, maybe a few weeks. What would also do the renatal secotr a world of good is being able to get rid of deadbeat tenants and rent to someone that actually will pay the rent and look after the place.

    No reason both can't happen.

    At least these proposals are one step in the right direction.


  • Options
    #220
    listermint
    Registered Users Posts: 33,788 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »
    Changing tack here and going for the hatrick, how long exactly did this take to come in. I'm not talking about the foreplay, the actual, we're doing this lads to it coming in, maybe a few weeks. What would also do the renatal secotr a world of good is being able to get rid of deadbeat tenants and rent to someone that actually will pay the rent and look after the place.

    100% I agree whole heartedly


  • Options
    #221
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    listermint wrote: »
    No one is owed a living. It would be up to that individual to go get a job themselves. Or invest in something else. After all aren't landlords just investors.... maximizing potential on their asset


    If the investment vehicle doesn;t do what the investor wants then they won't invest. We've seen that over and over again. What we're eventually going to see is the exit of the small time LL from the market and REITs take over. Now we'll see some property trickle into the owner occupier market sure, but the rental sector will be a room in someone's gaffe with no rights or €2500 a month for a one bed becuase it has a gym and a lad on tha gate.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #222
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 53,506 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »
    Changing tack here and going for the hatrick, how long exactly did this take to come in. I'm not talking about the foreplay, the actual, we're doing this lads to it coming in, maybe a few weeks. What would also do the renatal secotr a world of good is being able to get rid of deadbeat tenants and rent to someone that actually will pay the rent and look after the place.
    Yea they are not mutually exclusive things. We need to fix:

    1. Building more property
    2. Sorting out vacant properties
    3. Getting rid of crap tenants.

    Unfortunately, #3 can't happen until 1 and 2 are sorted. It's a zero-sum game.


  • Options
    #223
    listermint
    Registered Users Posts: 33,788 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »
    If the investment vehicle doesn;t do what the investor wants then they won't invest. We've seen that over and over again. What we're eventually going to see is the exit of the small time LL from the market and REITs take over. Now we'll see some property trickle into the owner occupier market sure, but the rental sector will be a room in someone's gaffe with no rights or €2500 a month for a one bed becuase it has a gym and a lad on tha gate.

    Where are you getting this guff from ?

    Because let's face it that's nonsense


  • Options
    #224
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    if that was easy it wouldn't be a problem, but you can bet the government will reform that to slow it down or ban it in RPZ's too.

    There would be no need to slow it down. Short term holiday lettings are rarely permitted in largely residential areas/developments.

    Something most people operating in the AirBnB market would be only too aware of.


  • Options
    #225
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    listermint wrote: »
    Where are you getting this guff from ?

    Because let's face it that's nonsense


    Really? We've not got a lack of rental supply at the moment?


    We're not seeing the rise of large REITs with similar rents to what I've just outlined?


    We're not seeing LL's exiting the market?


    Honest questions but I don't you can answer the in the negative with a stright face.


  • Options
    #226
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    awec wrote: »
    Yea they are not mutually exclusive things. We need to fix:

    1. Building more property
    2. Sorting out vacant properties
    3. Getting rid of crap tenants.

    Unfortunately, #3 can't happen until 1 and 2 are sorted. It's a zero-sum game.


    #3 can be sorted with legislation introduced and them forced to be homeless, while decent tenants who are willing to pay, be it with HAP, or throught the council are housed.


    We're not great on personal responsibility in this country.


  • Options
    #227
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »
    #3 can be sorted with legislation introduced and them forced to be homeless, while decent tenants who are willing to pay, be it with HAP, or throught the council are housed.


    We're not great on personal responsibility in this country.

    Are you deliberately trying to take the thread off-topic?


  • Options
    #228
    listermint
    Registered Users Posts: 33,788 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »
    Really? We've not got a lack of rental supply at the moment?


    We're not seeing the rise of large REITs with similar rents to what I've just outlined?


    We're not seeing LL's exiting the market?


    Honest questions but I don't you can answer the in the negative with a stright face.

    You said people would be sharing rooms at 2500 pm with no rights.


    Guff. You know it.i know it which is why you didn't mention it again in your response


  • Options
    #229
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,282 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »
    #3 can be sorted with legislation introduced and them forced to be homeless, while decent tenants who are willing to pay, be it with HAP, or throught the council are housed.


    We're not great on personal responsibility in this country.

    sadly the bad tenants are often the ones on HAP with kids, no work and a substance abuse problem, the exact kind that get really litigious or spur up socialist groups activism when they're on the streets. You'd sadly never end up in a position where the government would rightly be able to wash their hands of them.
    Graham wrote: »
    There would be no need to slow it down. Short term holiday lettings are rarely permitted in largely residential areas/developments.

    Something most people operating in the AirBnB market would be only too aware of.

    Well then we need to reform that to allow it in a lot more cases, the demand is clearly there for it and overall its a benefit to the city.


  • Options
    #230
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    Graham wrote: »
    There would be no need to slow it down. Short term holiday lettings are rarely permitted in largely residential areas/developments.

    Something most people operating in the AirBnB market would be only too aware of.


    Just on this. We've a very well run OMC I'm proud to be a director of. We have at least ten AirBnB units in a development of about 140 apartments and little to no bother with them. An asshat LL who is going to let to people having parties all the time is going to be that regardless and you're not going to be any happier with your new neighbours just becuase they're not AirBnBing.


  • Options
    #231
    listermint
    Registered Users Posts: 33,788 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    sadly the bad tenants are often the ones on HAP with kids, no work and a substance abuse problem, the exact kind that get really litigious or spur up socialist groups activism when they're on the streets. You'd sadly never end up in a position where the government would rightly be able to wash their hands of them.


    Well then we need to reform that to allow it in a lot more cases, the demand is clearly there for it and overall its a benefit to the city.

    Lovely.


    Absolutely lovely.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #232
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    listermint wrote: »
    You said people would be sharing rooms at 2500 pm with no rights.


    Guff. You know it.i know it which is why you didn't mention it again in your response


    You really need to read my post again if you're interested in what it actually said. I know my typing and spelling are shyte but they're not that bad.


  • Options
    #233
    listermint
    Registered Users Posts: 33,788 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »
    Just on this. We've a very well run OMC I'm proud to be a director of. We have at least ten AirBnB units in a development of about 140 apartments and little to no bother with them. An asshat LL who is going to let to people having parties all the time is going to be that regardless and you're not going to be any happier with your new neighbours just becuase they're not AirBnBing.

    There is no way in hell neighbours in that development are happy with the air bnbs.

    No way in hell. But as would obviously be the case you don't care your an owner not an occupier there which is why you can do what you like on the management company


  • Options
    #234
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    sadly the bad tenants are often the ones on HAP with kids, no work and a substance abuse problem, the exact kind that get really litigious or spur up socialist groups activism when they're on the streets. You'd sadly never end up in a position where the government would rightly be able to wash their hands of them.


    Well then we need to reform that to allow it in a lot more cases, the demand is clearly there for it and overall its a benefit to the city.


    Those people whould be no where near the private rental sector, they should be in treatment and housed (and looked after propely) by the state. HAP should be for people at least responsible enough to use a condom.


  • Options
    #235
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    listermint wrote: »
    There is no way in hell neighbours in that development are happy with the air bnbs.

    No way in hell. But as would obviously be the case you don't care your an owner not an occupier there which is why you can do what you like on the management company


    Did you ask them, becuase I did.


  • Options
    #236
    listermint
    Registered Users Posts: 33,788 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »
    Did you ask them, becuase I did.

    I'm sure . Il take your word for it


  • Options
    #237
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »
    Did you ask them, becuase I did.

    Can OMCs opt out of planning laws?


  • Options
    #238
    gozunda
    Registered Users Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    listermint wrote: »
    No one is owed a living. It would be up to that individual to go get a job themselves. Or invest in something else. After all aren't landlords just investors.... maximizing potential on their asset

    And to that point no one is denied a living either.
    So where someones principal or significant job and income is as a landlord - what do suggest ? Tell them to work in McDonald's or that his reward for renting out his property will be in Heaven? Who would invest in letting out property if your version of reality existed?

    Arn't all those that run businesses just investors? Are they not also attempting to maximise potential on their asset(s)

    I think you a mixing up someone who owns a house and those whose job is to refurbish and rent out houses privately.

    Or perhaps you are thinking of social housing or something because again nothing there make a any sense whatsover ...


  • Options
    #239
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    Graham wrote: »
    Are you deliberately trying to take the thread off-topic?


    Please clarify (as it was not in bold). In answer no, I'm simply pointing out that we can get emergency legislation through in weeks, but do nothing to stop LL's going to things like AirBnB in the first place.


    Was 10K in three months nice, yes it was. Would I rent at C. 4,500K over three months if I could be sure that my losses wouldn;y amount to tens of thousands if I got stung, yes I would. All I need the place to do is break even, I have an asset at the end of it.


  • Options
    #240
    c montgomery
    Registered Users Posts: 2,122 ✭✭✭c montgomery


    FFS

    What's next, compelling all taxi drivers to work Saturday night cause that's when it busy?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #241
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    Graham wrote: »
    Can OMCs opt out of planning laws?


    No and me and other AirBnBers were well aware of the breach of planning laws, oddly not our head leases though.



    You've dodged the point though that a bad LL is probably going to have bad tenants regardless of the type of let. At least with AirBnB you might get the odd weekend of partying rather than a long term bad tenant who will make life miserbale for months, if not years.


Advertisement