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

2021 Irish Property Market chat - mod warnings post 1

hometruths

Happy new year to all.

2020 was the year of pent up demand. I think 2021 will be the year the pent up supply comes to market.

I think the pent up supply will exceed the pent up demand and prices will fall. By how much I have no idea!

edit: Mod Warnings

This thread is about the Irish Property Market, it is not about:
* Immigration
* Refugees
* Welfare recipients
* Welfare rates
* General Irish politics beyond its impact on property
* General Irish economy beyond its impact on property
* How wonderful Country X is to buy in

Additionally, the specific issue of Geodirectory vacancy figures has been done to death and is not to be discussed again.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Idbatterim

PropQueries wrote: »

I think it matters in the sense that people who are buying or renting are paying much much more for their homes due to the local councils or state outbidding them for both homes for sale or for rent and driving up the sales prices and rents for both.

The state will then give those same renters e.g. HAP or HTB (i.e. charity) and make out like they're some charity cases because they can't afford the rent or purchase price which is primarily due to the state using those same renters/buyers own taxes to outbid them and drive up the prices in the first place.

For example, Glenveagh has been trying to sell those apartments in Greystones for a while now with no success and would have had to reduce the prices significantly to sell them into the private market.

But now, a fund will buy them and more than likely lease them to the local council for rents that most private renters could never afford and thereby driving up the rents everywhere in the local area.

it is not just this, think of the income tax implications to fund this lunacy! Workers would be able to afford more and save more, if they werent forking out for the likes of this joke!

I suppose asking to people in this social housing to actually pay appropriate rents or pay rent at all, or a property tax, is asking too much! Solidarity! LOL!

Villa05

awec wrote:

I don't think very many people spend too much time thinking about what their neighbours are paying in mortgage or rent. Once you can afford your own, just get on with your life and enjoy it.

Not knowing you being robbed does help the perpetrator

Irish mortgage holders pay 2,000 euro per year more in interest as result of disparities in rates directly attributable to property market and bank mismanagement.
Many mortgage payers will have to earn 4,000 to cover it due to high taxes. High taxes need to be paid because what the government pay for 1 House could build 4 houses using a different approach.

Govt policy increases the price of housing meaning more and more need social or subsidised housing

The cycle continues resulting in a bubble. The bubble bursts, who pays for it? The taxpayer

And they all live happily ever after

Idbatterim

awec wrote: »

It's not that big a deal. We've social houses in our development and it doesn't bother me at all.

I don't think very many people spend too much time thinking about what their neighbours are paying in mortgage or rent. Once you can afford your own, just get on with your life and enjoy it.

35 years of paying 2k a month or more in mortgage, for what your neighbours are getting for free. After you likely saved and broke your balls for years for the deposit, to furnish it, maintain it etc. They get it for zero effort, dont need to work, you are paying for it all for them and yourself...

L1011

Idbatterim wrote: »

35 years of paying 2k a month or more in mortgage, for what your neighbours are getting for free. After you likely saved and broke your balls for years for the deposit, to furnish it, maintain it etc. They get it for zero effort, dont need to work, you are paying for it all for them and yourself...

Social housing is not free.

hometruths

PropQueries wrote: »

I think it matters in the sense that people who are buying or renting are paying much much more for their homes due to the local councils or state outbidding them for both homes for sale or for rent and driving up the sales prices and rents for both.

The state will then give those same renters e.g. HAP or HTB (i.e. charity) and make out like they're some charity cases because they can't afford the rent or purchase price which is primarily due to the state using those same renters/buyers own taxes to outbid them and drive up the prices in the first place.

For example, Glenveagh has been trying to sell those apartments in Greystones for a while now with no success and would have had to reduce the prices significantly to sell them into the private market.

But now, a fund will buy them and more than likely lease them to the local council for rents that most private renters could never afford and thereby driving up the rents everywhere in the local area.

Completely agree. I'd love to think that there is somebody in the council who would say "Hang on, the whole reason these were sold off in bulk is precisely because there were no takers to rent them at 2500 per month, so don't come knocking on our door telling us the market rent is 2500 per month."

Council should just refuse to pay these sort of rents, then they'll get offered back to private rental market and let at lower rents, freeing up other rental stock that might be more suitable and cheaper for social housing.

fliball123

SmokyMo wrote: »

You can buy at any time when you renting.. Dont get your point.

I do get a whiff of fear in this thread from homeowners knowing deep inside they overpaid for their property and afraid of any price fluctuations.

My point is for every month you pay rent your losing the money when your paying a mortgage at least some is coming off the amount you owe for the property. I think the trends are now that in a lot of areas you pay more for rent than a mortgage.

PropQueries

Idbatterim wrote: »

35 years of paying 2k a month or more in mortgage, for what your neighbours are getting for free. After you likely saved and broke your balls for years for the deposit, to furnish it, maintain it etc. They get it for zero effort, dont need to work, you are paying for it all for them and yourself...

I get where you're coming from, but I would direct my frustration at the staff in the councils and state who are agreeing to these terms. They could get much much better terms for both purchasing or leasing if they put a tiny bit of effort into the negotiations and understood that they're most likely the only buyer/renter in town willing to pay anything near what they're currently paying.

IMO, they're most likely agreeing to these terms as it doesn't impact them as the state is borrowing money to ensure their current salaries are mainly unaffected by the current economic environment. The PUP payments are primarily funded by the raiding of the surplus in the PRSI fund so not much borrowed money is going into those PUP payments.

If the state couldn't borrow and their salaries had to drop by e.g. 25%, their negotiation tactics would change fairly quickly IMO

Browney7

schmittel wrote: »

Completely agree. I'd love to think that there is somebody in the council who would say "Hang on, the whole reason these were sold off in bulk is precisely because there were no takers to rent them at 2500 per month, so don't come knocking on our door telling us the market rent is 2500 per month."

Council should just refuse to pay these sort of rents, then they'll get offered back to private rental market and let at lower rents, freeing up other rental stock that might be more suitable and cheaper for social housing.

The council will bite at 2250 and spin that it's "a 10% discount to prevailing market rents and we're allocating our resources to alleviate housing pressures" etc etc. Those that care don't know and those that know don't care.

awec

Idbatterim wrote: »

35 years of paying 2k a month or more in mortgage, for what your neighbours are getting for free. After you likely saved and broke your balls for years for the deposit, to furnish it, maintain it etc. They get it for zero effort, dont need to work, you are paying for it all for them and yourself...

1. It's not free
2. On any street in Ireland, it is likely that neighbours are all paying vastly different sums for almost identical properties. This is particularly true in older developments.
3. The reality is that the less fortunate in society do need to be housed, and we know from experience that building social ghettos is a policy guaranteed to fail.

Idbatterim

awec wrote: »

1. It's not free
2. On any street in Ireland, it is likely that neighbours are all paying vastly different sums for almost identical properties. This is particularly true in older developments.
3. The reality is that the less fortunate in society do need to be housed, and we know from experience that building social ghettos is a policy guaranteed to fail.

all of this applies in other countries too, you think they are getting these kind of properties for token gesture rents that are optional in other countries? LOL! do you think the working poor there are hit with a marginal rate over a pittance to pay for it? while they themselves cant afford to live in anything like that standard of accommodation?

Paid ridiculous taxes into the system over the year, I never have or never will benefit from this luxury free housing, medical card etc. Dublin has a third world transport system, I am hit by a fifty percent marginal rate. These endless black financial holes here, I should just accept or be delighted by it should I? some of you are very easy to please!

Sweet.Science

awec wrote: »

1. It's not free
2. On any street in Ireland, it is likely that neighbours are all paying vastly different sums for almost identical properties. This is particularly true in older developments.
3. The reality is that the less fortunate in society do need to be housed, and we know from experience that building social ghettos is a policy guaranteed to fail.

Its not free. However paying rent is optional .

Idbatterim

Sweet.Science wrote: »

Its not free. However paying rent is optional .

i dont respond to the its not free comments any more, we go around in circles. Everyone has their entrenched position.

Mine is, when its a token gesture rent, often paid with free money and it is indeed optional, it is free...

Its an insult to those paying market rent or mortgages financing the madness, to even acknowledge that they are somehow making a contribution. But you would have the same people here , saying that if they contributed 1c a month rent, sure isnt it a contribution, solidarity etc :rolleyes:

HansKroenke

Sweet.Science wrote: »

Its not free. However paying rent is optional .

On that;

PropQueries

HansKroenke wrote: »

On that;

So he's owed c. €18,000 in unpaid rent since last May, so 8 months rent.

The bigger scandal here is the c.€18,000 in rent being charged over 8 months IMO

If the council wasn't driving up rents in the local area, he'd probably be only owed €9,000. But at €9,000, he may have no rent arrears as the renters may have paid it. There's no point in the renters paying €9,000 if they still owe another €9,000 so they're better off not paying anything IMO. I'm actually on the renters side on this one

fliball123

PropQueries wrote: »

So he's owed c. €18,000 in unpaid rent since last May, so 8 months rent.

The bigger scandal here is the c.€18,000 in rent being charged over 8 months IMO

Hang on the tenant agreed to pay it. Its not like the landlord pulled a gun on him and said pay or else your dead. The tenant had the choice to live there or not to live there. This kind of argument is just stupid.

This countries main problem is lack of accountability and no repercussions for people who don't live up to what they have agreed to do. Its rampant from our politicians to people renting on both sides landlords and tenants and mortgage holders who expect to keep their gaff when they decide they dont want to pay

HansKroenke

PropQueries wrote: »

So he's owed c. €18,000 in unpaid rent since last May, so 8 months rent.

The bigger scandal here is the c.€18,000 in rent being charged over 8 months IMO

If the council wasn't driving up rents in the local area, he's probably be only owed €9,000. But at €9,000, he may have no rent arrears as the renters may have paid it. There's no point in the renters paying €9,000 if they still owe another €18,000 so they're better off not paying anything IMO. I'm actually on the renters side on this one

I think that's probably in line with the market (i.e. Dublin 2/4 since it is Owen Reilly) at 2300 per month.

The biggest scandal is that it is not possible to actually evict a tenant quickly for non-payment of rent. The process of giving a 14 day warning followed by a notice to terminate should enable the landlord to secure possession of the property after this time but, as we know, it can take months before a landlord secures possession. This is terribly unfair on landlords.

Granolite

fliball123 wrote: »

Hang on the tenant agreed to pay it. Its not like the landlord pulled a gun on him and said pay or else your dead. The tenant had the choice to live there or not to live there. This kind of argument is just stupid.

Not only that but there may be unpaid rent due from before May last year. Just because it's stated that zero rent has been paid over the 8 intervening months does not mean there is not unpaid rent from the preceding period.

Cyrus

PropQueries wrote: »

The bigger scandal here is the c.€18,000 in rent being charged over 8 months IMO

it's really not.

hometruths

HansKroenke wrote: »

On that;

So the last time rent was paid was in April last year, coincidentally around the time COVID eviction bans were introduced.

I suspect there is an enormous amount of this going on, and likely to be a bloodbath of evictions when things get back to normal.

Will the government try and stop it? Difficult to see how they could.

PropQueries

HansKroenke wrote: »

I think that's probably in line with the market (i.e. Dublin 2/4 since it is Owen Reilly) at 2300 per month.

The biggest scandal is that it is not possible to actually evict a tenant quickly for non-payment of rent. The process of giving a 14 day warning followed by a notice to terminate should enable the landlord to secure possession of the property after this time but, as we know, it can take months before a landlord secures possession. This is terribly unfair on landlords.

Well if a big corporate like Boots can play the system and stop paying their rent due to Covid etc., I have absolutely no problem with tenants who lost their jobs or their income being substantially reduced playing the system either.

"Boots stops paying some landlords as it seeks post-Covid rent deals"

Link to Irish Times article here: https://www.irishtimes.com/business/retail-and-services/boots-stops-paying-some-landlords-as-it-seeks-post-covid-rent-deals-1.4331618

Idbatterim

totally ridiculous, but is it not more ridiculous that his neighbours are getting it free. I mean seriously, there is outrage that he hasnt paid the rent, and yes the system here with regards evictions is a joke, always the victim, never to blame!

I find it hilarious here the way the media wont touch issues like this with a bargepole, its why pretty much the entire population here is conditioned to think that this lunatic asylum, is actually normal.

I really foresee massive issues here coming down the line, they just take ridiculously long to manifest! way longer than you would expect...

beauf

PropQueries wrote: »

Well if a big corporate like Boots can play the system and stop paying their rent due to Covid etc., I have absolutely no problem with tenants who lost their jobs or their income being substantially reduced playing the system either.

"Boots stops paying some landlords as it seeks post-Covid rent deals"

Link to Irish Times article here: https://www.irishtimes.com/business/retail-and-services/boots-stops-paying-some-landlords-as-it-seeks-post-covid-rent-deals-1.4331618

Guess LL should do the same regarding any of their costs, also. Stop paying for RTB, all other taxes, mortgage if they have one, repairs etc. Everyone just stop paying for everything.

Sweet.Science

Idbatterim wrote: »

totally ridiculous, but is it not more ridiculous that his neighbours are getting it free. I mean seriously, there is outrage that he hasnt paid the rent, and yes the system here with regards evictions is a joke, always the victim, never to blame!

I find it hilarious here the way the media wont touch issues like this with a bargepole, its why pretty much the entire population here is conditioned to think that this lunatic asylum, is actually normal.

I really foresee massive issues here coming down the line, they just take ridiculously long to manifest! way longer than you would expect...

The vulnerable dont have to pay rent

The elite dont have to pay their mortgage

TheSheriff

SmokyMo wrote: »

I am sympathetic to people who bought recently as everyone situation is different.

I remember this comment being made multiple times now on this thread, probably two years back. I don't feel sorry or sympathetic for those people who bought: I feel sympathetic for those caught in never ending rent, which is likely to continue.

PropQueries

beauf wrote: »

Guess LL should do the same regarding any of their costs, also. Stop paying for RTB, all other taxes, mortgage if they have one, repairs etc. Everyone just stop paying for everything.

If I remember correctly, just after the last bust, many suppliers to the councils, state etc. found it very difficult to get paid for services provided.

So not only do big companies engage in these tactics, so does the state.

The banks were the same with the tracker mortgage scandal when they were broke etc. etc.

Landlords in Ireland actually get very lucky given how the vast vast majority of tenants continue to pay their rent even through bad times.

beauf

Idbatterim wrote: »

....
I really foresee massive issues here coming down the line, they just take ridiculously long to manifest! way longer than you would expect...

There already are. People couldn't get a place to rent if they were in any support payments. So the law was changed. High risk tenants couldn't find any places to rent, the law was changed. Etc. Some of these rules banning evictions etc, are to protect tenants, but they are also to stop LL from leaving the market.

Banks aren't willing to risk lending to builders, builders aren't willing to build property with low margin profit, or high risk. Especially at the low end. End result shortage of supply at the low end especially. Covid makes this worse, some getting poorer some getting richer. They will build to the market that can pay them.

Idbatterim

TheSheriff wrote: »

I remember this comment being made multiple times now on this thread, probably two years back. I don't feel sorry or sympathetic for those people who bought: I feel sympathetic for those caught in never ending rent, which is likely to continue.

and would it be fair to say, that those caught in the rent trap are total victims of taxation reducing their spending power, to finance their own homes and idiotic housing policies?

we have a political set up of FFG, as a generalisation, they would get no votes from the social housing brigate, YET , YET the "middle" they claim to represent, are becoming worse off and hammered, to finance the absolute pisstaking as you correctly point out, that goes on at the top and "bottom"... "bottom"... :rolleyes:

I've been saying that for years...

Idbatterim

beauf wrote: »

There already are. People couldn't get a place to rent if they were in any support payments. So the law was changed. High risk tenants couldn't find any places to rent, the law was changed. Etc. Some of these rules banning evictions etc, are to protect tenants, but they are also to stop LL from leaving the market.

Banks aren't willing to risk lending to builders, builders are willing to build property with margin profit, or risk. Especially at the low end. End result shortage of supply at the low end especially. Covid makes this worse, some getting poorer some getting richer. They will build to the market that can pay them.

oh I totally agree, there has been change. I mean serious change though. SF winning most seats, potential economic carnage, due to them or FFG current ridiculous economic mismanagement. If this pup payment has to be paid out for many months after the expected current march deadline...

the insane housing policies. Zero appetite to change course on policies and practices they know are insane and indefensible... Maybe we do need another economic bust, they have learned NOTHING!

all of this, we need to house the poor and vulnerable! coming from many people, who cant even afford to house themselves. How many could afford to rent their own place in dublin! Jesus the irony is off the charts! Thats what the conditioning of RTE and social media will do for you!

beauf

PropQueries wrote: »

If I remember correctly, just after the last bust, many suppliers to the councils, state etc. found it very difficult to get paid for services provided.

So not only do big companies engage in these tactics, so does the state.

The banks were the same with the tracker mortgage scandal when they were broke etc. etc.

Landlords in Ireland actually get very lucky given how the vast vast majority of tenants continue to pay their rent even through bad times.

In the context of Covid interventions. Pretty much all the groups mentioned above got some sort of intervention with the exception of LLs. All they can do is take one or two mortgage holidays, which you end up paying more for in terms of a higher interest payment. I'm open to correction but they may be the only group in that list, that had specific laws passed for that group only that negatively impacted that group only.

How many other business are forced in law to stay opening running up massive debts. Which will be largely unrecoverable.

Sweet.Science

beauf wrote: »

There already are. People couldn't get a place to rent if they were in any support payments. So the law was changed. High risk tenants couldn't find any places to rent, the law was changed. Etc. Some of these rules banning evictions etc, are to protect tenants, but they are also to stop LL from leaving the market.

Banks aren't willing to risk lending to builders, builders are willing to build property with margin profit, or risk. Especially at the low end. End result shortage of supply at the low end especially. Covid makes this worse, some getting poorer some getting richer. They will build to the market that can pay them.

But is there risk at the moment for builders at the low end . Councils seem to have to appetite to purchase these en masse at the moment . Especially outside of Dublin