The eviction ban

If you want to rent out a place you have to do it with a mindset is going to be permanent rented for a very long time..

I wouldn't do it. But all the signs are we will copy Europe but without the same protection for LS..

This right here is the dream. However, a properly resourced body to expedite dispute resolution will not be seen as a positive move for tenants by activist groups as they refuse to look more than a month into the future.

A properly resourced body allows landlords to have more agency over their property, and as we have seen this is a critical motivating factor for LLs to stay in the market. But, a properly resourced body means tenants won't be able to get a few extra months in the LLs property by appealing NoTs with the backlog currently in the RTB, so opposition parties and activists will not go for it at all.

Short-sighted housing activists don't care about crashing the market into the ground over the next 12-24 months, because they think it will further their goal of state-owned cost rental housing being the only solution if the situation gets worse. But an undersupplied sector with growing demand needs a consistent measure of investment to keep up, and everything they are calling for (eviction bans, advocating overholding, vilifying landlords) is detrimental to that investment.

While I do agree that the govt need to build social housing, it is not realistic to expect that to be the silver bullet that people think it is. If the govt start spending the housing budget on buying houses with council tenants in situ to bolster the social housing supply, it will not build a single house. Other than loosening restrictions for new builds or tax exempting new builds who rent different categories of properties below certain thresholds I don't have a solution for that.

What we do need is an incentive for landlords to stay in the market that also benefits tenants and boosts the benefits for investment in new housing developments. As all properties must now be registered with the RTB, I would put in place a tax relief for LLs who lower their rent, so that the tenant pays a decent amount less, and the LL takes home a bit more.

Forgive the ballpark nature of the below figures as an example:

A LL has a property that is rented out for €2,000pm currently (€24,000pa), taxable at the higher rate of 40%, the LL pays €9,600 tax taking home €13,400pa. If said LL avails of a scheme verified through their RTB registration information where they lower the rent on that property by 20%, dropping it to €1,600pm (€19,600pa), that income can be taxed at the lower band of 20%, so the LL would pay €3,920pa of tax leaving €15,680pa for them to take home.

The tenant gets a 20% reduction in rent, the landlord gets a 15% rise in net income and hopefully is incentivised to avail of the scheme, drop the rent, and stay in the market, and that could help in fighting private LL attrition.

Of course, the exchequer won't be too pleased at losing €5,080pa a pop, so this might not be a runner, but it's a better strategy than another eviction ban...

I think most landlords would be happy to be able to just choose to bypass the RTB and go straight to the courts. The whole RTB mess is the problem. Its like a swamp to stop you getting a move on with whatever issues need to be sorted between tenants and landlords.

Any other body would just be another RTB. And landlord would be paying for that body too on top of the RTB.

More schemes and rules and regulations. If you want to put a tax break for landlords then just do it.

Across the entire sector. Make it exactly the same as the rent a room scheme. Just adjust for the amount of rooms in the property.

Earn €14,000 before tax for 1 bed apartment.

€18,000 for a 2 bed

€24,000 for a 3 bed

and so on.

No extra red tape or rules or forms or applications or registrations. Make it simple. Easy to understand.

Even that would probably not be enough to keep landlords in but at least its a simple start.

Being able to bypass the RTB would be fixing it. Its a disaster, and a big part of the reason no landlords want to stay in the business.

I know couple of people that would be only too delighted to be able to go straight to the courts at this point. Both over 4 years now trying to get tenants out. Things only actually started moving recently for one of them when they got to go to court. The other is still waiting on the RTB to finish up their lazy part in the fiasco.

In fairness, 4 years is not the timeline that it normally takes to get things through the RTB in the normal course of things. Something must have gone wrong on the LL side of things (which happens) in terms of an RTB decision or invalidation in some part of an initial process. With everything done properly, it takes roughly 18 months to get to a district court hearing, from notice given, adjudication, tribunal, and binding determination, then waiting for a district court hearing. I know this because it's the exact situation I am in right now, and although it has felt like 4 years, it hasn't taken quite that long even with considerable time between each stage of the process despite us carrying out the steps at the earliest possible points. 18 months is still a ridiculous amount of time to get something sorted, but I have a feeling that your examples may be missing some information to account for that time.

Lets say a landlord wanted to sell up and handed hos notice in today. How long do you think the RTB are going to add to the process to sell the house if the tenant decides they are not leaving?

Hint : It wouldnt be measured in months.

Mine was.

Well it should be more expensive. Its worth it for the better, quicker service. The cost would also concentrate the minds of all involved (landlord and tenant) if they all had something to lose should they be in the wrong.

Maybe not. Ive only been in it for the guts of 20 years.

I cant believe anyone thinks that the RTB works tbh. And worse that someone actually suggested adding in another quango on top to make things better.

Deposits are the least of the problems with tenancies. Its vexatious actions that are the problem that needs to be solved. This costs one side an absolute fortune, while the other side gets off totally free. There is no downside to a tenant for a vexatious action they take. RTB is a pointless waste of time and money in the vast majority of cases.

Its simple enough. Ask anyone who has had to deal with the RTB to get a tenant to move out and ask them how much fun it was.

I think we will agree to disagree here. Im just not going to get into an argument of how efficient the RTB are. Waste of my time tbh.