2% max rental increase allowed inflation 7% plus

Actually you don't need to enforce a judgement mortgage. You can just renew same every 6 yrs by going before a judge and earn 8% simple interest on the debt until the ownership of the property changes either through a sale or the death of the party the judgement mortgage is registered against.

Renters rarely if ever have assets of sufficient value to discharge a debt for non payment of rent.

I asked for examples of business who keep supplying a service/product knowing they will not get paid for but are forced to do by legislation.

I suggest you review your references for ending a tenancy.

So I will ask the question again. Can you provide an example where good/service must be provided for in the private sector by law where the provider of that good/service knows they will not receive payment for?

You know very little in reality. As I implied without explicitly saying it, your misspelling of "judgment" shows you aren't too familiar with the law. Your spellchecker will say "judgement", however the spelling of the word in legal use does not have an "e". Your "judgment mortgage" may indeed accrue (2% btw) but it cannot be enforced and when/if that person dies, the other joint tenant will own the property and owe you a big fat zero.

You come across with a very "public sector" view of what you consider "the real world". Would it be fair to say that you are a public servant?

There is no obligation to renew a residential tenancy agreement if you don't want to, and you follow proper process. I sincerely hope you are not a landlord when you don't understand the law in relation to the basics.

"The Student" rents out a property to Jim who stops paying. "The Student" then goes through the steps to evict him which will take time. That is technically a different issue. Jim has possession and you are trying to get him out. Nobody is making you rent it to him during that period as you aren't renting it to him. You just can't get him out and regain possession.

Pat does some work for John. He builds an extension. Pat does not get paid. They are all his materials. He cannot get them back. John has the use of them and Pat cannot regain possession. They are his possessions. He is still "supplying" them to John the same way that "The Student" is supplying a house to his non-paying tenant.

It happens in many businesses. You are not as unique and special as you might think. It is more a manifestation of limited experience of the real world.

This might help

You happy about planning regulations and restriction?

The value of your house and your rental income might be a lot less if the government stayed the **** out of private business and let anyone with a spare few fields throw up whatever houses they wanted.

Your rental income would also plummet if the government pulled all rental supports. Pull those few billion from the market and lets see how fast she sinks.

Be careful what you wish for..................

Look no denying you have a point and a good one at that but at the same time it completely goes against the grain with me that they should be setting any prices for what to me is a product....I'm paying the repayments, I cover the repairs etc, I have to deal with the risk/reality and loss of earnings that some tenants that wont pay and destroy the place wont be shifted for ages..... because the powers that be cant and wont impose law and order/fair play (something Govt should be taking responsibility for)...if landlords are leaving the market reducing supply its no wonder imo

everything they have done to date has reduced supply and driven prices higher or contributed to this outcome afaic and now they are trying to fix it (I dont believe they really are btw) by resorting to this populist bullshit which probaby just leads to more private landlords leaving the market and then the imaginary boogeyman will be replaced by a much less forgiving landlord Reits/property companies...that really know how to charge/squeeze/turn the screw no?

I mean to my untrained eye admittedly... it looks like they have made such a balls of this thing to date brown envelopes must be flying around the place like confetti at wedding or else they really are incompetent buffoons......another problem is subsidising a permanent social welfare class at the expense of the working poor....but nobody wants to take that on.....they shouldn't have to imo because it should never have been let develop in the first place and that happened imo as a vote buying exercise....everytime these people meddle it exacerbates the problem as far as I can see, maybe they should take a break and stop pretending to fix it for votes and actually fix it or maybe the system should reward them for making decisions for the majority of working families in the country.

These threads consistently come up. Always the same consistent complainers

Odd that have yet to see the same complainers get out of the game considering it's basically them now operating as a charity for tenants.

Must be alot of charitable landlords on boards.. funny that.

That skirting around the issue. I could get a 10,000 references from credible sources and the tenant could still turn around and stop paying rent.

Then I'm stuck. I've to continue to provide a very expensive service 24/7 for months and months with no way to have the cops remove them.

If you went into a bar. Ran up a tab and refused to pay. They would throw you out there and then. They wouldn't continue to serve you pints.

If you add up Income Tax, PRSI and USC, the marginal rate of tax on many people is 52%. Thats true of Rental income as well as a bonus you receive in work, or income from a sideline business.

Its not quite correct to say rental income is taxed the same as any other income though. There are important differences on income recognition and loss relief etc., and some expenses like LPT, pre-letting and post-letting expenses etc. which are not allowable for tax as they would be for other "businesses".

The 52% is a discouragement to making an effort to earn extra money in any way. Is it worth doing overtime for €100 when you will only get €48 into your hand? Its the same for the effort and financial risk in becoming a landlord - it acts as a discouragement when we need more rental properties in the market.

Just to say, I dont think rental income should be taxed differently to any other business. Its a red herring in my view, with the real issues around tenant rights, RPZ and mad legislation being the real problem in the market

If your summary is correct I would not have sold my rented property and my LL would not have sold his. Some ppl have the benefit of both sides of the coin.

Left with the prospect of not able to find another property to rent and kids in school etc etc is not nice.

Left with your major asset housing a family who wont pay rent (min 30% below market) with 15 months to get them out was nice either.

Both issues happened to the same person/family so all the anti LL stuff is just perfect in the virtue signaling world but not the real one.

I blame coveney, murphy etc for all of this mess.

That's the point. The bar can throw you out. The landlord can't.

This is a new rule introduced after the landlord got into the business.

You can't say things like "you got into it with your eyes open" when the legislation for rent increases and evictions didn't exist when they got into the business.

You are still enjoying the bars property when they throw you out. The drink is still inside you. The contract was that they supply drink and you give them money. You have the drink, and retain the benefit of it, and they can't get it back!

When your tenant stops paying you, you serve your notices and he is is effectively no longer your tenant. He becomes somewhat akin to a squatter to which you still have obligations by virtue of your obligations towards the property.

There were always regulations related to housing and the provision thereof. There were also always regulations related to real property and possession thereof. You might have learned of them the hard way but that is on you. You should have done your research. Regulations also change over time. Again, if you learned that the hard way, that is unfortunate for you but try to see the positive and look on it as a learning experience.

risk<-->reward. If you want the reward and take the risk then suck it up if it is realised.

The law will assist you in regaining possession of your property. You just have to go through the steps. You can wish for there to be no law so that you can try to retake it by force, but bear in mind that if there is no law, the person can also take it from you by force. So your wish would be fairly shortsighted. With no law governing ownership and possession of property, you might be a little upset to wake up in the morning to find a group of 10 families after breaking into your nice rental property and parking their caravans on your front garden.

The PRSI & USC rate is the same as other self employed people.

Just curious but if rental income is treated the same as self-employment, does that mean landlords who didn't receive rent during covid were entitled to the income supports the same as self-employed?

Why are landlords selling? They might be expecting this to be the top of the market and want to cash out.

Anytime you buy, there will always be a seller. Any landlord who is selling, is also selling to a buyer!!!

I sold for lack of security of the property and being gimped under market.

Ppl were selling up way before prices went mad also. RTB figures show this.