EddieN75 wrote: » Empty words. You'd swear he is only after waking up after a 10 years in a coma. He like the rest of us have heard about investment and various other funds buying up properties. Last year funds bought up 95% of all new build apartments. How did MM not hear of this before? He is talking ****e.https://www.irishtimes.com/business/construction/just-8-000-houses-built-last-year-offered-for-sale-on-open-market-says-cif-1.4177876 An absolute scandal
DataDude wrote: » “We do not want institutional investors competing with first-time buyers,” Mr Martin said. “Our priority is first-time buyers.” [/url]
DataDude wrote: » A couple of noteworthy comments from Michael Martin today after the Mullen Park debacle. Will be interesting to see if anything is actually done about it. If I was CEO of one of these funds, I think I'd be taking a breather from these deals for a few weeks in the hopes the fuss blows over! "The purchase by institutional investors of completed housing estates is unacceptable and will be examined, Taoiseach Micheál Martin has insisted as the row intensified over the purchase by investment funds of the majority of homes in developments in north Dublin and Co Kildare. “We do not want institutional investors competing with first-time buyers,” Mr Martin said. “Our priority is first-time buyers.” He said that institutional investment was brought in “to add supply, not to displace supply, and that is the critical differential point”. They had to “distinguish between good capital and bad capital”.Mr Martin also warned that local authorities should not be engaging in long-term leases with these investment funds.https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/investors-buying-up-housing-estates-unacceptable-taoiseach-1.4556135
standardg60 wrote: » Lol. So is is now Government policy to let these houses rot because the investment funds are not playing fair?
Cyrus wrote: » lovely location here but the fact they have taken half the site to build a nice new build and left this house with a rubbish garden would put me off on a point on principal!https://www.myhome.ie/residential/brochure/17-burrow-road-sutton-dublin-13/4339419 the People here have done it twice btw! this house is built in the garden of their old gaff and they are now building a new build at the entrance to this onehttps://www.sherryfitz.ie/buy/house/dublin/dalkey/bartra-cove-harbour-road-dalkey-co-dublin-691229
Marius34 wrote: » Why rot? They have still an option to rent to private individuals or sell it.
DataDude wrote: » It's not the amount of money though, it's the principle. My parents thought "higher house prices = higher family wealth = good for my kids". Which seems to be the same view you have. It's taken years, but my parents are finally realizing it's only good for them. But it's actually terrible for their kids. There's a misguided notion that passing on more money is the be all and end all of success. In reality, I've never seen inheritance cause anything but trouble in families. You might have rationalized it that you don't mind your kids living with you indefinitely and that somehow higher house prices will be good for them (eventually). But I absolutely promise you your kids would prefer to make their own way in life rather than living in your shadow waiting for you to die or until they can pack you up into a nursing home. Financial planning your future around inheritance is incredibly toxic for all involved.
standardg60 wrote: » Do you think there's a market of private individuals here willing to sign 20/25 year leases? I also doubt these funds would be interested in becoming directly responsible for maintenance etc., hence why they agreeing leases with councils whereby the council manages the properties.
Wanderer78 wrote: » i suspect these pension fund investors are actually using credit for the process, i.e. theyre borrowing the money, as rates are so low, but i could be wrong there
yer man! wrote: » The next election will be a burn the house down moment, I never considered Sinn Fein before, I cannot believe I am now contemplating them.
Wanderer78 wrote: » there has been countless respected advisors telling the government what to do, and more importantly, what not to do, over the years, they are not listening ronan lyons yesterday: 'Five years ago, I appeared before the Oireachtas Committee on Housing, on how to implement 'A Right to a Home for All'. Unfortunately, it is as relevant today as then - perhaps unsurprisingly so, given its three key recommendations remain untouched'https://data.oireachtas.ie/ie/oireachtas/committee/dail/32/committee_on_housing_and_homelessness/submissions/2016/2016-05-03_submission-dr-ronan-lyons-tcd_en.pdf
EddieN75 wrote: » Empty words. You'd swear he is only after waking up after a 10 years in a coma. He like the rest of us have heard about investment and various other funds buying up properties. Last year funds bought up 95% of all new build apartments. How did MM not hear of this before? He is talking ****e.
standardg60 wrote: » I also doubt these funds would be interested in becoming directly responsible for maintenance etc., hence why they agreeing leases with councils whereby the council manages the properties.
Cyrus wrote: » lovely location here but the fact they have taken half the site to build a nice new build and left this house with a rubbish garden would put me off on a point on principal!https://www.myhome.ie/residential/brochure/17-burrow-road-sutton-dublin-13/4339419
C14N wrote: » Honestly as frustrated as I am, I can't say the same. Sinn Fein always seem like a perpetual opposition party. They can moan and groan about the problems but I have never seen them propose an actual solution that would be effective, and they are openly against all property taxes, which doesn't bode well for them wanting to make the hard decisions of having existing homeowners shoulder some of the burden. I haven't seen anything from them that makes me think they'd do anything but make it worse
Marcusm wrote: » Depends on the fund; being responsible for maintenance was a key attraction in The Alloance, Gasworks with Kennedy Wilson. Their Clancy Quay properties rely on a similar approach. I had a washing machine problem on a Thursday, replaced on Monday. I had a pump problem on Friday afternoon, fixed that evening. 100 or more properties in a site allow for a good maintenance team. Not for every property etc but they have a role in the market. I find the 3 bed semi estate unusual.
standardg60 wrote: » I can certainly understand them providing maintenance to responsible private tenants in city centre apts., where there is naturally going to be demand for short term rental. Maybe i'm wrong but i don't see the same market for semi d's in Maynooth. I'd imagine some sort of deal with the LA is already in the pipeline in spite of MM's view, time will tell.
antimatterx wrote: » 1 beds where I live in Dublin have been going for around 220K and 230K over the last year or so. Not bad, but not great eitheir. There's one that has just gone up today to €270K. That's absolute madness and I really hope it doesn't sell.
Parliamentary party meeting hears calls for buyers to be limited to one property each
Mr Lahart also supported a call from Dublin Bay South TD Jim O’Callaghan to consider amending the affordable housing bill so that buyers of homes could only purchase a single property each.
MacronvFrugals wrote: » Fianna Fáil really starting to panic if this IT article is anything to go byhttps://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/fianna-f%C3%A1il-is-drowning-in-shadows-of-fine-gael-housing-policy-party-told-1.4556407?mode=amp
fliball123 wrote: » The problem is that for all your ideals someone has to pay for them and the well of people being asked are already paying through the nose in taxation. Also we are more Animal Farm when it comes to our leftist ideals as in some animals are more equal than others. (public sector take a bow) Way too many vested interests both right and left learning sucking at the public purse. These issues need to be tackled. There is no way of tackling the issue of people not being able to afford houses without throwing up moral hazard and unforeseen consequences.
So while we have champagne communistic ideas everyone is equal no matter who pays for it and the capitalism cannot fail no matter the costs attitudes in this country coming from both sides. I dont see why I should help anyone else get a house. I am already paying my taxes into the 23 Billion paid out in social protection.
Why do you or others think that its on current home owners to house everyone? Do you all think that as a home owner or a group of home owner we can all get together and say lets half our property price for the greater good?
Beigepaint wrote: » Probably another ten years to go. Until then, the older people 60+ will be taken care of at the expense of my generation.
tommyombomb wrote: » God as a potential first time buyer in 12 months time, i am getting excited by the prospect of something finally happening. Annoyed with government big time saying something needs to be done. They are the gov ffs. Need to sort their **** out or else we will have SF driving the bus fairly soon
Beigepaint wrote: » You are living in a rage fantasy and it is the responsibility of sensible people like me who comment in this thread to challenge you. You understand that lots of people from all over the political spectrum read this thread eg. TD's staff, radio station researchers, interested citizens with money to invest and thousands of couples who wonder if they will afford to both buy a house AND have kids. When you post things like this you are really flagging yourself as totally out of touch. We have never had a left government in this country and we have very few lefty policies. This is why our housing crisis is international news. New York Times Link. The small number of NEETs in this country is not something you should be in a lather about. Some people will never work. It's the same in every country. There are not that many people like that. Get over it. Stop worrying about it. Move on. Politicians watch the demographics and they know that eventually the people in my generation who are locked out of property will reach a critical mass and then they will start pandering to us. Probably another ten years to go. Until then, the older people 60+ will be taken care of at the expense of my generation. My dream is that non rich people will once again be able to afford to get married, have kids and buy houses before they are 30. I'm 32, so I missed out on that, but I would like my younger sister who is 20, and my younger work colleagues to have the opportunities that my parents had in the 80s.
Ursabear wrote: » What happens after the 25 year leases are up for the people on HAP if they are still in need of assistance and if the country cannot to pay the high rents that they have agreed to anymore ( if prices and rents keep rising). That's when I think the pension timebomb also explodes?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w5.vanillicon.com/v2/5029bac657ae68f2ca4b7fa18994db0d.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w2.vanillicon.com/v2/23af546224513cf852af4d456d68d01c.svg)
