I agree it's far from a panacea for all the ills of the rental market but it would buy time to address primarily the supply issue but also the other aspects you mention.
People in emergency accommodation don't acquire tenancy rights either.
Families who have been made homeless would be better off in house than in a hotel room given that the rights would be the same.
The issue is will the State evict the tenants after 5 years? The state is renting to tenants effectively subletting. Remember a tenants right are not going to disappear because the state/CoCo are involved. So what law governs the contract? Is it commercial leasing regulations or residential or a mix. You would need a solicitor to review every aspect of the deal.
It still doesn't get rid of the political and regulatory risk that is pushing landlords out of the residential market. In fact renting to the local authority may just increase them even further.
The contract I proposed was between the landlord and the State ie. local authority.
At the moment a 5 year residential lease contract is unenforceable in Ireland. You cannot contract away rights you are entitled to under the law. So at the moment after 6 months a tenant can only be evicted under limited circumstances. That fact a tenant agreed to leave after 4/5/6 etc years in a contract is irrelevant. The law overrides the contract and that is not one of the reasons landlords can currently evict. The issue is with current regulations is that neither side have any certainty. From a tenants point of view they can be evicted at any time if a landlord chooses to sell. However from a landlords perspective its very hard for them to regain control of their property and that's before the whole mess with the eviction ban. The current laws are unsatisfactory for both landlords and tenants.
Personally I'd agree we probably should move to a situation where we have legally enforceable fixed term residential leases similar to the commercial market. But that would require a sea change on how renting is viewed in Ireland on all sides.
In any industry you have political and regulatory risk. Both are very high in the Irish rental market. Tax breaks for landlords resolve none of this. Tax breaks are an easy option compared to reforming rental regulations.
OK I give up.
Apparently giving financial security to landlords and residential security to tenants for five years is a bad idea.
I'll leave you with a reminder that a legally enforceable contract does what it says on the tin.
Not sure what link you want? It is well known that hap was reduced. It is a fact HAP was reduced when there was a price crash on property if you are not aware of it while talking about agreements that would be your issue.
They did tell HAP tenants to break leases and get reduced rent. You claimed the state wouldn't/couldn't break agreements. I am pointing out the de facto did. You don't get to form an opinion based on somebody spoon feeding you reality. Your claim is the couldn't do it when they did in spirit while claiming superior knowledge on the subject.
The government have certainly moved the goal posts on landlords with no place for discussion with the providers. At best you are naive but very sure you are right on a subject.
It's regulation that's causing mass exit
Media won't touch this reason, but its reality
The deliberate complicated long notice termination/rent increase is not matched any where else in the world gives us the present supply problem
Exactly what he said. ^
All of this is nice but it’s going nowhere -it’s not tax at all.
There is no getting away from it, renting from a private LL should only ever be done because it’s convenient and not a necessity. It should be something you do in your 20’s then you buy and settle down. There should be plentiful social housing for those that need it. Private ownership should be attainable.
Instead the government have sold nearly all their social housing and not replaced it. They have passed laws to require private LL’s to provide social housing. They have heaped more laws and passed bad ad hock laws because of position pressure, for example if it wasn’t for opposition pressure there never would have been an eviction ban.
Landlords aren’t selling because of tax. It’s a good time to sell, prices are high but so are rent returns. What’s happened is the risk v reward has swung to far towards risk
If you have a “won’t pay tenant” then it takes 2 to 3 years to get them out. – They are hurting ordinary tenants and shouldn’t be tolerated.
When a tenant moves you can’t adjust the rent to the market rate. If you allowed the rent to fall behind then you a badly stung.
If they introduce indefinite tenancies the value of rental property is badly affected. No investor will want to buy it and a owner occupier is precluded form buying it. Even if they were allowed to take back the property no bank will lend without vacant possession so it would be cash only buyers
It has become toxic, look at the threads here about going traveling and renting out their house, it’s always a NO too much risk.
https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058289992/considering-renting-for-6-8-months-while-working-abroad-ukrainian-refugees-easiest-option/p1
Also if you have an indefinite tenancy you will more or less be locked into it. If your circumstances change for example getting married having kids, well nobody is going to move out of their existing indefinite tenancy so there will be no recirculation of property.
Any LL’s exiting or dying won’t be replaced, you can’t get a commercial mortgage if the bank can never repossess the property in the event of default. We are in for a frozen market.
There is an easy way around an indefinite tenancy. Slavery is banned – the LL says they are stopping renting but not selling – just stopping renting. Keep it empty for 18 months then sell it. By the time is changed hands two years will have lapped and it can be re-rented at the market rate.
This government have no clue and I don’t think SF of SD’s are any better
Take this https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/politics/arid-41104216.html
On paper a good idea, except now in the short term we will see fewer houses built. Let's' say you are a developer about to build 300 houses. Let's say this was announced 3 months before you are about to start, would you go back to planning looking for 360 houses or 20% more profit from the same piece of land? That’s going to delay things by a year but so what.
Sorry for any confusion but I thought you were suggesting that the State breached a contract during the property crash.
If you could link to the matter you were referring to I could give an opinion.
If you got the impression that I'm an expert I'd like to put you right by pointing out that I'm not and never claimed to be.
I thought it was quite clear I was speaking from a general view and asking you to explain how at least in spirit an agreement was breached? You are the expert not me.
What do you think happens....
A clause would be inserted to cover this bearing in mind that there will be a normal level of wear and tear in any residential property.
What happens at the end of the 5 years. Does the local authority return the house the landlord in the state it was handed over in.
I would appreciate if you could link to where the State was in breach of contract.
In the meantime my proposal is simple.
The Government through the local authority signs a contract to rent the property from the landlord for a period of 5 years tax free.
I think you should look up what happened during the property crash. The government reduced HAP and told the tenants to quit their leases and insist on reduced rent. That to me seems like the state unilaterally broke multiple contracts. Can you explain how it wasn't?
Ever notice the minute the Govt. (any Govt) sticks their size 14s in the Property/Accommodation market, they tend to make things worse. Rarely do they improve the situation. Each measure they take leads to unforeseen consequences, which in turn forces them to announce another measure to undo the damage just done. This inevitably leads to further confusion and more unforeseen consequences, and so the merry go round spins 'n spins.
and they wonder why LLs are leaving in droves ...
Yep, its a race to the bottom and all these measures are making things worse for the Renter, not better.
Yeah that makes sense.
QED
Ah come on. What do you think the eviction ban was?
Private lessors are leaving the market in droves, despite record rent levels. That says everything we need to know.
They've circumvented evictions twice now. So thats a bust.
If its not a catastrophe then let just LL leave. Why keep blocking them from leaving.
Any criticism of "solutions" is shot down. So they implement the solution unilaterally. How is that working out?
A contract between the State and a landlord cannot be unilaterally broken.
All three of you seem to be determined to catastrophise the current situation.
Any proposed solutions will be dismissed.
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it"
Your proposal is utterly flawed. It addresses none of the issues causing LL to leave the market. In addition it assumes they will draft a contract completely differently than they have done for years. There is no evidence that they will do this. None. You're looking a leopard to change it spots.
Lets just say that if you are well versed with cointracts you should uinderstand why contracts for landlords are not worth the paper they are written on, and can and do get changed by legislation often. So can you see how that might be a problem? I thought you would have known that though and i wouldnt have to spell it out for you.
It doesn't matter how legally sound you or anyone thinks it is. The fundamental issue is that small, private lessors have totally lost confidence in the government's handling of the rental market and won't trust them to protect property rights.
It's nearly impossible to restore that confidence in the required timeframe - it's going to take an awful long time.
If you are reduced to inferring that I am a liar you must realise you are on shaky ground.
The opposition are even more anti-landlord so I'd be running for the exits too.
