If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
Hello All, This is just a friendly reminder to read the Forum Charter where you wish to post before posting in it. :)

LL to be allowed hike capped rents


  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 62,234 Mod ✭✭✭✭ L1011

    "What about LL who sold a capped rental property below market will they be compensated?"

    Not a hope.

  • Registered Users Posts: 12,063 ✭✭✭✭ Varik

    Don't think this will have any positive supply effect. Only change is the increases are now compounding rather than just additive compared to the pre inflation link method, and the pure inflation link system was already inherently taking longer rent review times into account.

    Only reason this has to be done is due to the 2% limit, 2 LL with one having their property not having an increase in years could both be limited to the same 2% increase when they do finally review it.

  • Registered Users Posts: 13,913 ✭✭✭✭ Cuddlesworth

    "For example, landlords who have not made rent increases on homes in the past five years would be able to hike rents by up to 5.9pc under the new legislation"

    This is worse than pre July 2021 for Landlords. How would this possibly help increase supply?

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,302 ✭✭✭ sk8board

    The headline is a bit incendiary too. This isn’t some sort of pro-landlord change, the landlord will simply lose less than previously thought. It’s a 2% pa cap, in a world with 4-6%+ CPI inflation for the next few years.

  • Registered Users Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭ JimmyVik

    Looking closer at this, I dont see how this is any help to landlords at all. What a joke.

    Sure if a landlord couldnt catch up to market rent with 4% per annum hes hardly going to catchup with this. Hes worse off.

  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 32,260 Mod ✭✭✭✭ The_Conductor

    Its quite remarkable how its being portrayed by the media- this is quite staggering on the part of the Indo.

  • Registered Users Posts: 4,300 ✭✭✭ Topgear on Dave

  • Registered Users Posts: 4,300 ✭✭✭ Topgear on Dave

    “If somebody hasn’t raised it in the preceding five years because they were being sound, they could raise it all in one go,” Ms Moynihan said.

    There's a lesson there for landlords to learn.

  • Registered Users Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭ JimmyVik

    Yeah last year that landlord, having not increased for 4 years could have increased it 16%.

    This year the same landlord, having not increased it for 5 years now can increase it 5.9%.

    He sure got rewarded for being sound.

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,540 ✭✭✭ dennyk

    That has always been the rule since the introduction of the RPZ; the cap on rent increases was always annualised, so if you hadn't increased the rent in a few years, you'd be permitted to increase it by 4% per year under the old system. The only difference now is that annualised cap will be limited to the higher of HICP or 2% per year instead of 4%.

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,728 ✭✭✭ 3DataModem

    So many Indo articles seem to read like the journalist just realised something the rest of the world has known, and they just can't help themselves write it down.

    I remember a similar article "Employers under new rules are able to fire staff for being sick" when they could do it under old rules, but the author of the article clearly thought they'd unearthed the 4the secret of fatima.

  • Registered Users Posts: 920 ✭✭✭ rightmove

    article in the indo starts with "The number of landlords cashing in"

    They have to go virtue signalling before the meat of the issue is discussed like as if they just discovered the issue