Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Fair Deal changes might actually happen but...

Options
1246789

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 11,749 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    The Govt need to go do their job and build housing for all these people they want to house for free.

    Instead of trying to fob off stuff to other people.



  • Registered Users Posts: 516 ✭✭✭BattleCorp1


    And if the resident only lives a year, do the HSE refund the other 15%? And who do they refund this money to? How do the HSE know the will/succession arrangements?



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,673 ✭✭✭whippet


    renting out my mams house would actually cost her money ...

    Simple numbers:

    Income - Rent €1000

    Outgoings - Tax €480 approx

    Outgoings - 80% contribution to Fair Deal €800

    Net loss of €280 per month.

    This does not include all the other expenses / risks of being a landlord. So even if I could rent her house out for her I'd be doing a disservice to her.



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,172 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump



    If someone thinks that being a landlord is such a struggle then maybe it's not for them.



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,278 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    clearly you are trolling so i'll leave you to it.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 19,172 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump



    Yes. Same as the HSE now - you are only charged for the years in care if less than 3. It is simply held as collateral. A standard mechanism. If the person dies, the balance is returned.



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,172 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump



    What I proposed was simple.

    50% of the market income to the HSE whether received or not.

    The other 50% to the owner tax free. I stated that at the outset.



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,278 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    the property lien is only for the first 3 years. the 80% of income that is taken is for the lifetime of the person in care.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,673 ✭✭✭whippet


    I was that gobshite a few years back - as single property landlord is a mugs game. If you get the perfect tenant it is fine but when things go pear shaped you have zero protection … as i said I was in the hole for about 10k worth of damages and 6 months of lost rent when I had a tenant wreck my house. but of course if I threw them out I’d be the one paying them compensation. They walked off in to the sunset when suited them and I had zero recourse for compensation …. So I sold and got out of the game.

    there is no way in the world i would enter that business again



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,749 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 7,673 ✭✭✭whippet


    So a money grab from the state?

    As I am at pains to tell you over and over - my mother’s contributions are paying for her care ….. but no .. that’s not enough - you want her to pay more due to the governments incompetence in suppling social housing



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,749 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    Many many people have to do this when parent become suddenly unwell and after to go into care.

    Its why these properties end up in legal limbo for years. Another thing you haven't considered.



  • Registered Users Posts: 516 ✭✭✭BattleCorp1


    Who does the work when it comes to renting it out? Who collects the rent? Who does maintenance/repairs? Who pays for those repairs/maintenance when they have to be paid for on the spot? Who launches legal proceedings when tennants don't pay? The home owner can't do it. They are a resident in a nursing home and may not have the capacity to make any sort of decisions like that.

    Are you expecting family members to do all that work and receive no benefit from it? As things stand, small-time landlords don't even want to do that for their own property as can be evidenced from so many of them leaving the market.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,749 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997



    I can heartily recommend you try it. You'll have that Ferrari, you keep mentioning, in no time.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,749 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997



    Ever try talking to the council about HAP, or RA, they won't talk to you either you're a third party, even though they are paying you. Imagine try to deal with them in an no payment of rent or eviction scenario. lol, thanks but no thanks.



  • Registered Users Posts: 516 ✭✭✭BattleCorp1


    It has to be said too that a great many of these houses are in a poor state of repair.

    In the small street where my Mother lives, there are two houses empty because their owners are in nursing homes. I'm going to be honest here, I wouldn't fancy living in either of them. They are in very poor order. Not fit to be rented out 'as is'.

    What happens those types of houses?



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,172 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump


    Next time then don't quote another random post when you are delivering your irrelevant philosophical monologues so



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,787 ✭✭✭Deeec


    In theory renting out empty homes of elderly people in nursing homes sounds like a great idea but there are several flaws to this plan:

    • Rental income - the rent will now form part of the owners income for the fair deal scheme thus its a win for the HSE as they will receive more of a cut. Also I assume this income will be taxable for the elderly person.
    • Owners capacity - Does the owner have the capacity to agree to the property being rented. Do they have an appointed person authorised to do this for them. Alot of elderly dont have the legal structures in place. Who will the tenants point of contact be?
    • Housing standards - My uncle is in a nursing home at the moment and his home is empty. His house was built in the 1940's/1950's and virtually no work done on it since. Basic kitchen, old bathroom, dated worn furniture, no proper heating system, no insulation etc. There is no way it would meet standards for renting so who pays to update the house and refurnish it? My uncle doesnt have the capacity ( or the money) to understand this or arrange for the work. We dont know who is going to inherit the property so nobody is going to fork out their own cash to modernise it.
    • I can see some tenants taking advantage of the situation knowing their landlord is in a nursing home.

    It could suit some people but for alot they wont be able to overcome the problems above.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,749 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    It wasn't random. There was a lag between my post appearing and others posting. So they went out of order.



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,172 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump


    Yes. Why wouldn't it be?

    What I proposed was the lien to remain at 3 years at a lower rate than currently and the market rental component to run for as long as the property is vacant.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 19,172 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump


    You quoted my post where I mentioned the 50%. It was a reasonable assumption that you were replying to me


    Here it was https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118823443/#Comment_118823443



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,278 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    you're back to penalising people who don't rent out their homes after going into a nursing home. what a humanitarian.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,749 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997



    Say 40-60k for plumbing and electrics. Then if you look at energy efficiency and the minimum standards these old house you could be looking at 100K+. This is another reason these properties (and Landlords) are leaving the Rental sector and these houses are going into private ownership.

    If we bring this back to the refugees its likely to be something along the lines of council schemes. People would also prefer to sell up than do that. So Govt buy these properties and bring them up to your own standards. Same with anyone else who thinks they know better how to manage someone else properties. Buy them and them back up your convictions with your own wallet.



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,172 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump



    If you read what I said, your mother would be better off as she'd now have an income of 50% of the rent.

    You and your fellow future beneficiares would also be better off as the lien would be less. And maybe your mother's bank account would have additional surplus cash from the rent.

    The State would be better off as it would be receiving an income over the longer term. 50% of something rather than 80% of nothing, although it would give up a bit on the lien.

    The renter would also get access to an otherwise wasted property.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,749 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997



    Who manages all this. Runs the rental business.



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,172 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump



    You see your problem is that you see everything from the perspective of the expectant beneficiary, fretting that their juicy inheritance might be eroded and thinking the State should subsidise you.

    The owner of the house is not being penalised. The rental charge can be capitalised in with their lien if they don't want to pay it. 22.5% is the current ceiling. There is no fundamental reason why that is the number. It is not a law of physics. It is an arbitrary number agreed as fair. Under my proposal, that number would be less (e.g. 18%) for those who rent their property and accrued at 50% of market rent where they don't. Either way, the person who owns the house is not penalised. The ones rubbing their hands who are only concerned that the elderly relative won't feckin hurry up and pop their clogs might feel penalised.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,673 ✭✭✭whippet


    Not correct.

    There would be an outlay of approx €20-30k to get the house in to a compliant state to rent out. This is the home of a elderly lady who didn't modernise like most people of her generation. Electrics, plumbing, heating and insulation.

    Storage costs for her assets that we can't claim or dispose of. Purchase of new furniture suitable for a house being rented out.

    Landscaping and garden maintenance - its about 3-4 hours min a week during the summer to keep the grass down, along with maintenance of hedges, trees etc ... this is the landlords responsibility.

    the couple of hundred quid a month would be absorbed very quickly by ongoing maintenance to adhere to the strict requirements for landlords, there would also be the commission that is paid to a rental agency to keep on top of the administration and legal requirements and to ensure that her best interests are catered for.

    So it isn't beneficial to my mother in any aspect



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,278 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    you are penalising people who don't rent out their homes. don't bother replying. I ran out in interest in your **** a good while ago.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,749 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    Why doesn't the Govt buy all these properties, rent them out. Fund it using Govt Investment scheme that people can invest in, but don't have to manage.

    I'll tell you why. They don't want the associated risk or the expense.

    All people want it a return on investment, as extra pension. Most Landlords have one property. Thats around 20k gross income a year. Net after all expenses its perhaps 12k a year. 1k a month. (assume no no tenants of course) 250 a week extra for a pension. Could the Govt not do that instead of these half baked schemes. if they won't why not.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 19,172 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump



    That's up to individuals. If a child etc wants to manage it for their parent then they can. If they don't feel up to the task of managing a property then there can either be a scheme set up with the council or it can go under an existing scheme where it is taken over for a fixed period of time for a guaranteed rent and guaranteed return. Some of those professional rental companies could do that. HSE get 50%, management company 30% and owner 20%. It's still 20% that the owner isn't getting now.


    It's not rocket science. Some people might struggle with managing a property but that's probably a sign that maybe it's not for them. If someone's job is to arrange files in the filing cabinet in alphabetical order and it is a struggle for them, then maybe they should try something else.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement