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

Do landlords in Ireland have it as tough as they think?

Options
1…1315171819

Comments

  • Options
    #422
    runawaybishop
    Registered Users Posts: 9,504 ✭✭✭runawaybishop


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    By gaining other employment? Like everyone else does? It seems the real problem is the expectation that landlords have that the renters should completely cover the costs of a mortgage while the landlord makes a profit. In this case maybe make more sensible investments.

    I think the expectation was that the government wouldn't interfere in the market and that the bad times could be handled by profits from the good times.

    And landlords are making sensible investments now, that's why there are less of them.


  • Options
    #423
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    runawaybishop wrote: »
    I think the expectation was that the government wouldn't interfere in the market and that the bad times could be handled by profits from the good times.

    And landlords are making sensible investments now, that's why there are less of them.


    What market do the government not regulate. They have to regulate a market which affects someone's home. Should we not also regulate healthcare and education?


  • Options
    #424
    runawaybishop
    Registered Users Posts: 9,504 ✭✭✭runawaybishop


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    What market do the government not regulate. They have to regulate a market which affects someone's home. Should we not also regulate healthcare and education?

    Did they regulate the market when rents fell through the floor? Do you think rent caps are actually helping the situation?


  • Options
    #425
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    runawaybishop wrote: »
    Except rent caps throw all that out the window. Landlords would have been hit hard 10 years ago and then rent caps stop them recovering fully. Why else do you think so many landlords are quitting the market?

    I wouldn't expect landlords to break even on rent/mortgage all the time but when there is reduced room to prepare for issues/reduced rental periods then people quickly realise their money is better spent in a different investment.


    But again in terms of an investment it's not a bad deal. As an asset you can pay off the cost of the asset loan (mortgage) and recover an asset that will likely increase in value in the current market.


  • Options
    #426
    runawaybishop
    Registered Users Posts: 9,504 ✭✭✭runawaybishop


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    But again in terms of an investment it's not a bad deal. As an asset you can pay off the cost of the asset loan (mortgage) and recover an asset that will likely increase in value in the current market.

    It could just as likely decrease and the business loan, which is what it is, does not operate like it does for all other businesses.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #427
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    runawaybishop wrote: »
    Did they regulate the market when rents fell through the floor? Do you think rent caps are actually helping the situation?


    I think the ability to remove non-paying tenants and recover losses from tenants that wreck the residence would help both landlords and tenants.

    Rent caps won't help the supply but they'll ensure that we wouldn't enter a situation where someone on a good salary would struggle to live in Ireland.


  • Options
    #428
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    runawaybishop wrote: »
    It could just as likely decrease and the business loan, which is what it is, does not operate like it does for all other businesses.


    Depends on when you buy. That's where investment acumen comes in. For example I think people who buy investment properties before Brexit are idiots.


  • Options
    #429
    4ensic15
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,691 ✭✭✭4ensic15


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    I think the ability to remove non-paying tenants and recover losses from tenants that wreck the residence would help both landlords and tenants.

    Rent caps won't help the supply but they'll ensure that we wouldn't enter a situation where someone on a good salary would struggle to live in Ireland.

    There is an ability to remove non paying tenants but it takes years. A way of getting rid of non-payers speedily is needed. That would reduce losses and curtail damage.


  • Options
    #430
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    4ensic15 wrote: »
    There is an ability to remove non paying tenants but it takes years. A way of getting rid of non-payers speedily is needed. That would reduce losses and curtail damage.

    Well I'm all for a reasonable cut off time.


  • Options
    #431
    4ensic15
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,691 ✭✭✭4ensic15


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    Well I'm all for a reasonable cut off time.

    The current situation is ludicrous.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #432
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    4ensic15 wrote: »
    The current situation is ludicrous.

    I completely agree.


  • Options
    #433
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    KyussB wrote: »
    A reminder to readers, in among all the wagon circling:
    Landlords here are quite literally saying, that if a rented property generates just enough income to pay for a properties mortgage + interest, causing the property to become fully owned by the landlord over the course of e.g. 10-15 years, when he did not own it before - that the landlord has not generated any profits in that time period, if the rent was just breaking even with the mortgage + interest.

    This is the shit they are trying to pull, here.

    Why is that so difficult to understand? If you buy a property and setup a shop there do you think paying off the mortgage on the premises is sufficient for the business to remain viable. Not in a million years is it viable, the place will close after a few months and go bust if there is no profit for at least the salary of the owner on top of covering the mortgage and expenses but for some reason you are placing LLs in some special place where they are treated differently to other businesses, mostly based on begrudgery and/or ignorance I would wager
    steddyeddy wrote: »
    Ah Nox, you're exhibit A, B and C here. You brag on several threads about renting houses you inherit, complain about tenants having too much rights, talk about wanting to walk into tenants houses whenever because it's your house, get your mother to wash your clothes when you return home, complain about working hard from inherited assets and then say landlords have it hard!

    People who work decent jobs, don't inherit assets and pay most of their wages for rent Nox have it hard man. I don't mean to be harsh man but a good dose of reality is needed for some people.

    This is total fantasy bar the bit about bringing washing home. That major chip on your shoulder is starting to blind you.
    steddyeddy wrote: »
    But you're not talking about a static market. You're talking about a market which sees relatively high increases in charges to customers. You're also talking about using an asset to pay for an asset. Like any business you'll run at a loss for a few years but it is possible to make it over the hump, invest in more property and make a large profit. Using an asset to pay off the cost of an asset also doesn't preclude a landlord actually working for a living too. Very few businesses allow for that.

    Any business who buys a premises is relying on that premises to pay for itself and make profit to pay for wages etc. Operating a rental business is no different, a person who rents out property should if they do it properly and in a functioning market make additional income every money after mortgage, tax and interest. This is the point of running a side business, to increase your monthly income.

    Never mind a person who is a full time LL, how do you expect a person who is a full time LL to make a living if they cannot cover all costs like mortgages etc and extract a salary from the business?


  • Options
    #434
    Zulu
    Registered Users Posts: 10,965 ✭✭✭✭Zulu


    KyussB wrote: »
    A reminder to readers, ...
    KyussB has no understanding of the value of risk.

    Clearly not an accountant


  • Options
    #435
    cordy1969
    Closed Accounts Posts: 129 ✭✭cordy1969


    The chip on people's shoulder is astounding. Maybe those contributors would be better off settling in Russia or China where the government will gladly give you a nice house and a job.

    Simple economics, the rental market is not going to improve or the housing crisis whilst you have people who believe they are entitled to something for free or a government handout.

    Fix the laws surrounding tenancy, like being able to remove a tenant after 90 days. Remove the rent caps and offer incentives to have individuals or companies invest into your market. By increasing those you will increase property availability and lower rents in the long term. To do otherwise is only going to worsen the current situation.

    Or go back to the old days and give everybody an allotment to grow your own potatoes to sell to the rich landlords.


  • Options
    #436
    Ray Palmer
    Registered Users Posts: 8,364 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    But again in terms of an investment it's not a bad deal. As an asset you can pay off the cost of the asset loan (mortgage) and recover an asset that will likely increase in value in the current market.

    It is really simple. Given the risk and effort the model you suggest isn't viable and nobody does it how you think it should. You can argue that is how you think it works but it simply doesn't.

    It really doesn't matter what you think because that isn't how it is done. Nobody would invest in property if it was. If you make it so your model is the only allowable way and investment will stop. Less properties to rent and it won't matter they are capped there won't be anywhere to rent.

    Do you think when costs go down a landlord should reduce rent?


  • Options
    #437
    handlemaster
    Registered Users Posts: 6,003 ✭✭✭handlemaster


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    By gaining other employment? Like everyone else does? It seems the real problem is the expectation that landlords have that the renters should completely cover the costs of a mortgage while the landlord makes a profit. In this case maybe make more sensible investments.

    who will provide the housing if not landlords?

    its a service so why wouldnt rents pay the market rate ? What other business do you say nkt im no going to pay the market rate . Youd be laughed at but for the rental market the charity begging begins


  • Options
    #438
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    handlemaster wrote: »
    who will provide the housing if not landlords?

    its a service so why wouldnt rents pay the market rate ? What other business do you say nkt im no going to pay the market rate . Youd be laughed at but for the rental market the charity begging begins

    I work in biotechnology so I can answer this quite easily. In the case of pharmaceuticals in no way do you pay the market rate for drugs. Healthcare wouldn't work if not completely subsidised. Even in America it's subsidised.

    In biotech industry we require huge (billions) government subsidy to make it worthwhile for healthcare providers to research orphan disease. That means diseases that are rare and therefore not profitable. For example cystic fibrosis. Relatively common in Ireland, but not worldwide. The pharm companies couldn't give a sh1t whether it's cured or not. It's not profitable so the governments of the world subsidise it hugely.

    If rents should demand the market rate and whatever landlords can charge do you likewise think the same should be true of medicine?


  • Options
    #439
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    As someone from academia I can tell you that Irish degree programs are heavily subsidised. Would you like to pay the full price for third level education?


  • Options
    #440
    Fol20
    Registered Users Posts: 3,624 ✭✭✭Fol20


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    I work in biotechnology so I can answer this quite easily. In the case of pharmaceuticals in no way do you pay the market rate for drugs. Healthcare wouldn't work if not completely subsidised. Even in America it's subsidised.

    In biotech industry we require huge (billions) government subsidy to make it worthwhile for healthcare providers to research orphan disease. That means diseases that are rare and therefore not profitable. For example cystic fibrosis. Relatively common in Ireland, but not worldwide. The pharm companies couldn't give a sh1t whether it's cured or not. It's not profitable so the governments of the world subsidise it hugely.

    If rents should demand the market rate and whatever landlords can charge do you likewise think the same should be true of medicine?

    In your own example you highlight the fact that the pharma industry is heavily subsidized or else its not profitable such as cystic fibrosis. Should the landlords then not be subsidized or it will also not be profitable?


  • Options
    #441
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    Fol20 wrote: »
    In your own example you highlight the fact that the pharma industry is heavily subsidized or else its not profitable such as cystic fibrosis. Should the landlords then not be subsidized or it will also not be profitable?

    To be honest it wouldn't be a bad idea but in that case the landlords couldn't charge whatever they wanted either and you could bet that rules would be further enforced. It's not something I would be against.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #442
    Fol20
    Registered Users Posts: 3,624 ✭✭✭Fol20


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    To be honest it wouldn't be a bad idea but in that case the landlords couldn't charge whatever they wanted either and you could bet that rules would be further enforced. It's not something I would be against.

    This would mean, the business being more profitable for a ll though so that they can stay in the business. This is something the government doesnt look like they want even though its necessary. You can even see some the news agencies spinning it as a landlord budget when they pushed forward the already proposed 100pc for interest on mortgages.


  • Options
    #443
    Ray Palmer
    Registered Users Posts: 8,364 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    As someone from academia I can tell you that Irish degree programs are heavily subsidised. Would you like to pay the full price for third level education?

    You seem to be mixing up the government subsidising stuff with landlords being stopped making a profit. You want landlords to subsidise tenants until the landlord owns the property. Landlords aren't the government nor a charity. They simply won't provide a service for free and pharma companies don't either hence they are subsidised by governments.

    Why don't you start giving some of your wages to homeless charities rather than expecting landlords to do it as a business plan that nobody in their right mind would start.


  • Options
    #444
    cordy1969
    Closed Accounts Posts: 129 ✭✭cordy1969


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    I work in biotechnology so I can answer this quite easily. In the case of pharmaceuticals in no way do you pay the market rate for drugs. Healthcare wouldn't work if not completely subsidised. Even in America it's subsidised.

    In biotech industry we require huge (billions) government subsidy to make it worthwhile for healthcare providers to research orphan disease. That means diseases that are rare and therefore not profitable. For example cystic fibrosis. Relatively common in Ireland, but not worldwide. The pharm companies couldn't give a sh1t whether it's cured or not. It's not profitable so the governments of the world subsidise it hugely.

    If rents should demand the market rate and whatever landlords can charge do you likewise think the same should be true of medicine?

    Excellent summary as most Pharma companies don't even contemplate taking a product to market unless it has at least 1500% GP and in most cases than number is more like 3000% and upwards. I would be all for having my investments rented out at 2000% gp on average.

    Can you let me know where I can sign my rental properties up for this outstanding deal that you have put forward.


  • Options
    #445
    handlemaster
    Registered Users Posts: 6,003 ✭✭✭handlemaster


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    handlemaster wrote: »
    who will provide the housing if not landlords?

    its a service so why wouldnt rents pay the market rate ? What other business do you say nkt im no going to pay the market rate . Youd be laughed at but for the rental market the charity begging begins

    I work in biotechnology so I can answer this quite easily. In the case of pharmaceuticals in no way do you pay the market rate for drugs. Healthcare wouldn't work if not completely subsidised. Even in America it's subsidised.

    In biotech industry we require huge (billions) government subsidy to make it worthwhile for healthcare providers to research orphan disease. That means diseases that are rare and therefore not profitable. For example cystic fibrosis. Relatively common in Ireland, but not worldwide. The pharm companies couldn't give a sh1t whether it's cured or not. It's not profitable so the governments of the world subsidise it hugely.

    If rents should demand the market rate and whatever landlords can charge do you likewise think the same should be true of medicine?

    So the companies still get their payment and make a profit just not directly. No issue with landlords working the same way.


  • Options
    #446
    handlemaster
    Registered Users Posts: 6,003 ✭✭✭handlemaster


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    handlemaster wrote: »
    who will provide the housing if not landlords?

    its a service so why wouldnt rents pay the market rate ? What other business do you say nkt im no going to pay the market rate . Youd be laughed at but for the rental market the charity begging begins

    I work in biotechnology so I can answer this quite easily. In the case of pharmaceuticals in no way do you pay the market rate for drugs. Healthcare wouldn't work if not completely subsidised. Even in America it's subsidised.

    In biotech industry we require huge (billions) government subsidy to make it worthwhile for healthcare providers to research orphan disease. That means diseases that are rare and therefore not profitable. For example cystic fibrosis. Relatively common in Ireland, but not worldwide. The pharm companies couldn't give a sh1t whether it's cured or not. It's not profitable so the governments of the world subsidise it hugely.

    If rents should demand the market rate and whatever landlords can charge do you likewise think the same should be true of medicine?

    So the companies still get their payment and make a profit just not directly. No issue with landlords working the same way.


  • Options
    #447
    handlemaster
    Registered Users Posts: 6,003 ✭✭✭handlemaster


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    As someone from academia I can tell you that Irish degree programs are heavily subsidised. Would you like to pay the full price for third level education?

    And the provide of that service gets full payment. No issue with LL getting paid like wise. There would also be a good side to this also payment guaranteed from the government no missed payments. Where do I sign up ?


  • Options
    #448
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    Ray Palmer wrote: »
    It really doesn't matter what you think because that isn't how it is done. Nobody would invest in property if it was. If you make it so your model is the only allowable way and investment will stop. Less properties to rent and it won't matter they are capped there won't be anywhere to rent.

    Fantastic, then the housing and construction market can be run by the state and non-profits as a service, not a business. Just like health, water, and other essential services in society. The way it should be.


  • Options
    #449
    Ray Palmer
    Registered Users Posts: 8,364 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    Fantastic, then the housing and construction market can be run by the state and non-profits as a service, not a business. Just like health, water, and other essential services in society. The way it should be.

    Can you tell us which countries do this at present? When do we take property off everyone that owns it and start distributing it via the state?

    Property rental is a business nothing is going to change that. The world economy relies on it. Every pension plan is some way relies on it as do the banks and governments.

    Construction now is not allowed be a profit making industry too according to you.

    It is never going to happen. Plainly stupid idea given the economic realities of the world. How do you plan to solve the devaluation of the entire world economy?


  • Options
    #450
    cordy1969
    Closed Accounts Posts: 129 ✭✭cordy1969


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    Fantastic, then the housing and construction market can be run by the state and non-profits as a service, not a business. Just like health, water, and other essential services in society. The way it should be.

    Excellent point again by another brainiac.

    After you finish saving the world with this outstanding economic policy, can you work on groceries and fuel next please. I find it absolutely abhorrent that companies are allowed to continually profit from my hunger and need to drive to work.

    Thanks.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #451
    cordy1969
    Closed Accounts Posts: 129 ✭✭cordy1969


    Ray Palmer wrote: »
    Can you tell us which countries do this at present? When do we take property off everyone that owns it and start distributing it via the state?

    North Korea comes to mind.


Advertisement