PropQueries wrote: » It was obviously you who said 0% interest rates would be enough to impact the property market. And I fully agree that my 1% was not near low enough how little interest rates need to rise to severely impact the markets. It was a good point you made IMO
PropQueries wrote: » And by that stage we will have another c. 20,000 new built a-rated units looking for occupants. The way the media appear to be spinning it is that construction just stopped last March and won't start up again until December 2021.
Timing belt wrote: » So will you admit you mis=quoted me in your post earlier and for the love of god stop putting spin on everything and stick to the facts. FYI- A housing crash would be least of our problems as governments, companies funds would all fail
Timing belt wrote: » I showed you the data the other day that shows that construction commencements have been heavily impact and will take a year or two to feed in. Yet again more spin and no facts
Timing belt wrote: » Tax needs to be implemented in a consistent and fair manner... I think 99% of the population would not have a problem with introducing a tax but all the points I mentioned above and more need to be considered and thought through. The following shows the difference between rental vacancy rates in Dublin and USA. To assume that it is 100% the same issue may be a mistake. Dublin City Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown Fingal South Dub Rental vacancy rate 1.21% 0.41% 0.41% 0.27%
PropQueries wrote: » Never mis-quoted you. But if you now believe interest rates rising to 0% won't impact the market, I'll take it back. But, I think your initial 0% argument was spot on.
Timing belt wrote: » Originally Posted by PropQueries View PostAs one poster recently made the point, once interest rates move up to zero, not 1%, 4% etc. but zero, the investors sitting on these vacant properties will start demanding some level of return i.e. they will have to/be forced to rent them out. I never said this so yes you mis-quoted me and you know it.... This is why no-one believes anything you say
PropQueries wrote: » I don't think comparing vacancy rates in Ireland with the united states makes much sense when we don't officially count them.
Timing belt wrote: » The census data is not officially counting vacant properties :rolleyes:
Browney7 wrote: » Not this vacant property counting debate again! Think it's been done to death on here as to whether it's accurate or not or if geodirectory, census or council figures are credible
schmittel wrote: » I presume your %s for Dublin are Geodirectory figures in which they strip out vacancies that they don't count as properly vacant - i.e those for sale/rent/renovation etc? Do the figures you're quoting for the US do the same - are you comparing apples and apples?
Timing belt wrote: » I am using CSO data from 2016 Census USA logic on vacant's is as follows: • A housing unit is vacant if no one is living in it at the time of the interview, unless its occupants are only temporarily absent. • In addition, a vacant unit may be one which is entirely occupied by persons who have a usual residence elsewhere. • Vacant units are excluded if they are exposed to the elements, that is, if the roof, walls, windows, or doors no longer protect the interior from the elements, or if there is positive evidence (such as a sign on the house or block) that the unit is to be demolished or is condemned. • New units not yet occupied are classified as vacant housing units if construction has reached a point where all exterior windows and doors are installed and final usable floors are in place. • Also excluded are quarters being used entirely for non-residential purposes, such as a store or an office, or quarters used for the storage of business supplies or inventory, machinery, or agricultural products. • Vacant sleeping rooms in lodging houses, transient accommodations, barracks, and other quarters not defined as housing units are not included in the statistics.
schmittel wrote: » Sorry my mistake, didn't spot label rental vacancy.
Dwarf.Shortage wrote: » On the shared equity scheme / developer subsidy. For a couple on €80k combined with €50k deposit you have total spending power: Before: (80*3.5 + 50 + 30) = 360k After: (80*3.5/0.7 + 50 + 30) = 480k Please tell me this isn't how it works because if it is prices of new builds are going to explode, it's a massive jump in budget and will be across the board.
Timing belt wrote: » I assume the 30 is HTB and i doubt you will get that as it is a separate scheme. So Max would be 450k. Government only have funding of 75m so that would be circa.750 properties. They are trying to get the banks to add another 75mhttps://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40208798.html
Dwarf.Shortage wrote: » You get the HTB as well, 100%
Timing belt wrote: » That is just Crazy!!!! Where did you hear that?
MacronvFrugals wrote: » I thought i read somewhere you can get Rebuilding Ireland 5/1 ratio mortgage, help to buy 30k and also avail of the shared equity scheme
MacronvFrugals wrote: » Councillors to Dig Deeper into Bills for Building Social Homes https://www.dublininquirer.com/2020/12/16/councillors-to-dig-deeper-into-bills-for-building-social-homes
fliball123 wrote: » 2 years they can stay there paying nothing and they can wreck the place as well. If someone has just gone through that I can guarantee you they will think twice about putting it up for rent again. Its not just rentals if this happened to any other service that was trying to make money it would simply stop.
mcsean2163 wrote: » Unpopular opinion but have to agree. Was in a similar position renting out our house but also renting elsewhere. Tenant decided they were due a rent reduction. When they left, sold the property. Couldn't believe how they could just Rob us and we could do nothing. Wiser now. So basically, smaller landlords that would've been nicer in general to tenants screwed over and funds do it instead without having to pay tax. What a world
PropQueries wrote: » I would believe the tracker mortgage scandal impacted BTL landlords by much much more than the very very small percentage of tenants who don't pay their rent. And, as I've stated before, the current rental yields achieved by BTL landlords more than compensate for the risk of a tenant not paying their rent. If BTL landlords are leaving the market (and the numbers aren't as significant as some make out), it's probably more to do with finally being able to sell to pay back their boom era BTL mortgages. And from what I remember, most of the BTL mortgages issued during the boom years would never have been paid back from the rental income achievable at that time and they invested in their BTL properties for capital gain purposes rather than rental income.
