PropQueries wrote: » There was an article in 2018 in The Guardian about 30,000 empty properties in Dublin. Does anyone know what happened these properties? Did the state lease them or did they re-enter the market in some other way? The article is here: https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/nov/29/empty-dublin-housing-crisis-airbnb-homelessness-landlords
Marius34 wrote: » Those numbers are probably from 2016 census, which doesn't really tell if the house is actually permanently empty, but mainly that no habitant filled census on that particular address. It's rather used for the stats to identify trends in demography and etc. for further city infrastructure and social projects. Unfortunately those numbers are later misused as propaganda tool. Even worst people love to read this kind of propaganda.
PropQueries wrote: » My understanding is that the census enumerators, call back several times to an empty property and also ask neighbours etc. to make sure a property is actually empty before it's recorded as such, so I think the Census figures may be fairly accurate in general.
fliball123 wrote: » That is not true at all its like the gardai blowing into the breathalyzers bump the numbers, remember your dealing with people and in human nature will you go out to the same place 3/4/5 times or just do it once and then instead of going out a 2nd/3rd/4th time go for a pint or a walk or something to eat or meet billy for a sambo and just say "asked the neighbors and no one lives there" sure no one is going to be going back over your work and if they do then if it changes who is to know if someone moved in , bought or whatever there is way to many ways to feck with the numbers with the consensus.
PropQueries wrote: » The census enumerators really do go to out of their way to ensure the data is correct. They really have nothing to gain by manipulating the data.
PropQueries wrote: » Not at all. Also, a lot of the AirBnB properties in Dublin at that time were recorded as holiday homes (they actually asked us and another neighbour about the house next to us a few times which was an AirBnB) and since they are now banned, the true number of vacant properties was probably higher. The census enumerators really do go to out of their way to ensure the data is correct. They really have nothing to gain by manipulating the data.
fliball123 wrote: » Ah you will get some doing the job correctly as in the example above I am sure there were a lot of garda not blowing into the breathalyzers but if you have a good % not doing the job properly it can skew the figures and if the garda the people who we should have most trust in can do it then you can bet your life so can the lads going around taking the consensus. They do gain something they gain work time for their own.
PropQueries wrote: » The link to how they define a vacant property is here: https://www.cso.ie/en/census/census2016reports/census2016vacanthousingstatisticsfaqs/ They state: "Enumerators also looked for signs of vacancy such as post and junk mail building up, no lights on at night time, no cars in driveways, overgrown gardens and no windows open. If they observed any signs of occupancy, they could not record the home as vacant. They also checked with neighbours to enquire about the homes where they could not make contact. If neighbours told them that there were people living in these homes, the enumerator could not record them as vacant." As I said, their very thorough. A lot of people are surprised.
fliball123 wrote: » I am not doubting the report I am doubting the people gathering the info for the report. If I told you I had 2 cocks and put it in a report would you believe it? I have showed you an example of how human nature kicks in when given a mundane task of asking people to blow into a tube. Now your talking about having to knock on a door 3/4/5 times and then knocking into a neighbor. You can be pretty sure a good % of the info gatherers didnt know and just frigged it and had more time to hit pub. How often is the consensus taken?
cubatahavana wrote: » what kind of cocks? feathered? asking for a friend
PropQueries wrote: » I understand your skepticism but if you live in Dublin (maybe you do), you would notice a lot of empty houses and apartments and many of houses in the new build estates near me have been sitting there empty for the past 18 months and I have no idea what they're doing with them.
fliball123 wrote: » Ah no doubt there are empty houses but the manipulation will only bring numbers of empty property up as in if someone is in the house they will check house is being lived in. If there is no one there, they could call back, if no one is there again the could call back, If no one is there again or in the neighbors they could put a check beside empty and the house owners and neighbors could be on holidays. So the number in the report I would hazard a guess is a lot lower
Marius34 wrote: » I'm confident census report is not precise at all in the sense of "Empty" properties. I live in Balgrifin (Dublin 13) some areas are recorded 50% vacancy. Couple of main reasons: 1) Parkside Phase 1: many properties was in development/completed, that had address on it already. But houses were not completed, or people have not made a permanent move yet. Those are registered as vacant. 2) New Priory: an apartment buildings that due to fire issue was in no living conditions. It got almost complete rebuilt by now, and sells as new apartments. Those are registered as vacant. There are many other reasons. And definitely not all workers in census waste a time to find out if the property is really vacant.
myshirt wrote: » I think you are trying to undermine the integrity of the census, and I'm not having it. This isn't a survey for a new bingo night for the community hall. It's our census. It costs a shedload. It's a strong and robust process. Of course the information should be read in the right context, but by no means is it a bunch of enumerators not bothering their arse to do the job right. It's done right. I know you didn't raise it directly but to the poster challenging the other poster with his two cocks, whether there is or isn't evidence of illegal cock fights included in the report is a side bar issue.
myshirt wrote: » I think you are trying to undermine the integrity of the census, and I'm not having it. This isn't a survey for a new bingo night for the community hall. It's our census. It costs a shedload. It's a strong and robust process. Of course the information should be read in the right context, but by no means is it a bunch of enumerators not bothering their arse to do the job right. It's done right. Whether there is or isn't evidence of illegal cock fights included in the report is a side bar issue.
Marius34 wrote: » Don't get me wrong. I think the Census report is a great thing, and it provides lots of useful details. I think the numbers make sense, what i'm not happy, about misusing those number. The vacancy from their data doesn't mean that it has no permanent resident in it, and it is in livable conditions. It simply wrong to use those number as of vacant properties in supply side.
fliball123 wrote: » As has been pointed out if the garda can do it then anyone can but you go on living in that dream of yours where human nature doesn't exist.
myshirt wrote: » Your scenario only works where someone is marking their own homework. There's a whole governance process here. The plan isn't just thought up over a few jars such that some enumerator can simply not bother his arse and get away with it. I was paid by Willie O'Dea to hand out leaflets when I was young and I dumped them all in the bin rather than hand them out. Willie found out. And that was just a couple of leaflets. The census has a whole governance process.
Cyrus wrote: » this bemoaning of the 3.5x rule drives me mad, house prices would be a lot higher without it.
PropQueries wrote: » Everyone actually has good points here (even the two cocks analogy lol) and it's always good to hear other views either way. But, I think if the census figures on vacant units were way off, the various so-called vested interested e.g. estate agents etc. would have publicly debunked it. To my knowledge, they haven't so there must be some truth to the figures.
MacronvFrugals wrote: » O'Dea's a dangerous man
PropQueries wrote: » Good point but I don't think they include houses even 9/10ths complete. They would need to be complete and ready for occupancy so technically they were completed units and they were vacant.
Marius34 wrote: » It did count, once it has address on it.
