Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Irish Property Market chat II - *read mod note post #1 before posting*

1673674676678679943

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,679 ✭✭✭Viscount Aggro


    Who wants to live in Clay Farm... not me.

    Either its a view of a noisy substation, or the local dump.



  • Registered Users, Subscribers, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,803 ✭✭✭hometruths


    IMO the failure to deal with major problem and market dynamic of 10 years ago is seriously impacting the market dynamic of 2023.

    As we've discussed before one the biggest problems in current market is the lack of turnover of existing stock. It clogs everything up, and because there is nothing to buy those who ordinarily might trade up/down/sideways just stay put. And the more people who just stay put compound the problem, and it gets worse and worse over time.

    I don't think there's any disagreement that this dynamic is happening in the market today and is having a huge impact on the supply of second hand stock.

    The root cause of todays problem goes back 10 years and is compounded every year.

    In a normal market a big part of that turnover supply is from people who, for whatever reason, can no longer afford the mortgage on their current house, and have to downsize.

    In Ireland during the last crash these people stopped paying and stayed in the house. The net result of that is that we have approx 90k houses that are effectively totally removed from the game of musical chairs. They are stuck. They have no choice but to stay put.

    And obviously this has the knock on effect that makes it harder for other people to move, so they stay put and so on and so forth.

    The stock of second homes for sale is at record lows, and has been for some time. The turnover of existing stock has been half of the long term average for about a decade.

    If the above is incorrect as a major factor in this, then what is the most likely explanation for these record lows?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,777 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    The record lows are due to close to a decade of not building houses due to prices being perceived as "too low". Ironically if those in mortgage arrears had been repossessed and resold, prices would have been even lower in the post crash era, and it would have taken even longer for new house building to start up again.

    We have a housing shortage - we need more houses built or vacant dwellings renovated. Houses that are occupied already be they rental, mortgage or mortgage arrears are of no use to solving this crisis, either from a social perspective or a market one.



  • Registered Users, Subscribers, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,803 ✭✭✭hometruths


    It often seems like the answer to every ill is simply more new builds, but this is quite a stretch.

    I must admit to struggling to understand how the very low % of existing stock changing hands can be explained by a lack of new builds.

    Can you talk me through the logic?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,917 ✭✭✭DataDude


    You’ve said 90k multiple times now. It’s a gross exaggeration of the issue. Restructured loans are indeed captured in the arrears data as I expected and cannot be added to arrears like you are doing.

    https://www.centralbank.ie/statistics/statistical-publications/behind-the-data/understanding-long-term-mortgage-arrears-in-ireland#:~:text=Long%2Dterm%20arrears%20are%20defined,720%20days%20(two%20years).

    This detailed data clearly shows that almost everyone under 2 years in arrears is making payments and engaging with their lenders (c.99%). Is the issue really with people who’ve hit hard times and are working to catch up on payments and engaging with their bank to do so? Or is it the blatant cases of no mortgage payments for years and no intention to do so that we all have issue with? I assume it’s the latter. This study identifies 2 years as the point at which accounts are significantly more likely to be no longer engaging.

    There are 27k cases over two years in arrears in this study. Of those 27k cases, only 33% have made no payment in the previous 6 months, 9000 loans. The number of cases that could have been legitimately chased for eviction back in 2020 between 9k and 27k

    These figures are from 2020, from which time overall arrears have dropped a further 25%. So between 7k and and 20k.

    You’ve massively overestimated the current issue by many multiples unless you want to start chasing genuine cases who have a chance to make good if appropriate arrangements are put in place for them. You would get close to no support for chasing those people.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Subscribers, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,803 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Maybe I could have been clearer - I am talking about the legacy impact of these 90k on today's market.

    I'm saying the fact that these accounts were not dealt with in a normal fashion as per the terms of the mortgage contract is a huge contributor to the problems in today's market.

    I'm not saying that these people should be repoed if they are meeting the terms of their restructuring. The mistake is they were offered the restructuring in the first place, but that is in the past.

    The fact remains that these properties, which would ordinarily have been the most reliable source of turnover supply, have now been removed completely as potential pool of turnover supply.

    I get that not everybody agrees with the idea that they should have been repoed in the first place rather than restructured, that's a slightly different debate.

    The point I am trying to make is it is important to realise how big an impact not repoing them is having on today's market.

    Sure you can look at today's figures and say that is all totally fine, we don't have a problem with arrears, nothing to see here, but for a slightly different perspective take at look at the link below which describes what was actually happening at the height of the problem and consider whether or not this has had a lasting impact.

    For a flavour:

    In the last few years, a staggering number of Irish homeowners have simply stopped making mortgage payments. The Irish central bank says that at the end of December 2012, 11.9% of Ireland’s mortgages were late by more than 90 days, up from September’s 11.5%.

    And the truth is probably even worse. The chart above, which was produced by Deutsche Bank using Moody’s data, pegs the percentage of Irish mortgages that are three months late somewhere closer to 16% in September. S&P analysts argue that 25% of Ireland’s home loans are in some kind of trouble, either behind on payments, or in foreclosure, or in forbearance, which is when the bank just isn’t collecting payments. (We’ll get to why later.)

    Why? To be sure, things are tough in Ireland. The recession has driven unemployment from less than 5% at the end of 2007 to more than 14%. Incomes have crumbled.

    But Greece is in an even worse economic crunch. Unemployment is at 27%. The economy has shrunk by 25% since the end of 2007. Newly impoverished people are turning to firewood because they can’t afford heating oil. And even so, the amount of Greek mortgages in late-stage arrears was only 5.1% in November, according to Fitch Ratings.

    Screenshot 2023-09-09 at 20.53.17.png

    As with so many things, we're quite the outlier. In fact Ireland is the ony country in the world that managed to see mortgage arrears rising whilst the employment rate was also rising. Normally those two things are inversely correlated.

    And it is important that at least there is a threat of repossession for the 27k who are still in arrears over two years (in other countries you wouldn't get to two years in arrears as you'd already be repoed) or else the same thing will happen all over again then the next time there is even a whiff of a downturn, and the problem is compounded further and further.

    .




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,777 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    The game of musical chairs in housing only works so long as there is sufficient stock to allow people to sell, buy, move.

    Once stock levels fall below a certain threshold the secondary market stops functioning. The solution is more property "injected" into the market, I.e through new builds. It is not unlike the role of QE in markets in this regard, QE injects liquidity to keep things turning over and changing hands. People sitting on cash is bad for economy, hence QE. People sitting on proeprty is bad for housing market, hence more new builds.



  • Registered Users, Subscribers, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,803 ✭✭✭hometruths


    The turnover of existing stock has been at record lows for more than a decade. See GeoDirectory report 2014:

    Screenshot 2023-09-10 at 08.12.15.png

    If the root cause of low turnover today is lack of new build supply, what was the cause of it 2013/4 when nobody was saying we needed new build supply?



  • Posts: 14,768 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Having just gone through a recession during which values plummeted, I can think of three reasons off the top of my head, lack of confidence in both the housing and job market, many of those who bought houses prior to 2007 were in negative equity, and banks may not have been enthusiastic lenders.



  • Registered Users, Subscribers, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,803 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Yep, I'd agree with all that. So when the problem started it was nothing to do with lack of new build supply. The bit I am struggling with is when and how the low turnover rate began to be caused by a lack of new build supply.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 14,768 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Lack of supply may be one of the headline contributing factors today, but there were other important factors in 2014. Our country has changed considerably in the last 10 years, increases in population and high paying job mean the the surplus of homes available at the end of the recession are a distant memory.



  • Registered Users, Subscribers, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,803 ✭✭✭hometruths


    I get that a lot of changes have happened in both the economy and population since 2014, it's totally different now.

    But one of the things that remains the same is that the % of second hand houses changing hands is at a very low rate compared to the long term averages.

    What is the explanation for that? Of course it is because there is a lack of second hand houses being placed on the market, but why is that?



  • Posts: 14,768 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Maybe it’s because there aren’t enough houses in the market for current owners to move in to.



  • Registered Users, Subscribers, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,803 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Yes, exactly, but that's just a different way of saying "it is because there is a lack of second hand houses being placed on the market".

    It's a catch 22. We need to reverse that trend somehow, and we can only do it by addressing the causes of the problem.

    Blaming the low % of second houses changing hands on a lack of new builds is simply sticking our heads in the sand.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,366 ✭✭✭ionapaul


    That's a bit unfair on poor old Clay Farm! :) I don't live there, but not far off, up the road in Stepaside, and walk along the side of the Clay Farm development very often on their Greenway to the Luas. There is no view of a dump; the old dump there was covered over years ago and is now simply rolling green hills and soon-to-be public parks. There is a recycling park further down the Ballyogan Road alright, that you can't see from Clay Farm I wager. The substation is noisy for sure, but I bet any of those homes close enough to see or hear it would grow accustomed to it very quickly. The 'eco park' within Clay Farm is really, really nice, something that would be exceptional in other large-scale developments and many times nicer than the boring square playing greens within old-school housing estates.

    Someone mentioned the biggest drawback by far of Clay Farm; the other side of the Ballyogan Road and all that comes with a large concentration of council housing. But the development is not grim, not by a long shot. I'd be far more worried about Cherrywood, but you know what; I drove with my family to the new Tully Park and Playground there on Friday for the first time, and it is the nicest playground I've seen in Ireland! The kids growing up within a walk of there are so lucky!

    The Green Luas means that the likes of Clay Farm and Cherrywood are actually better connected to the city centre than many, many established areas within the M50, and that's the primary reason for the homes' popularity. I definitely think a new home in Clay Farm offers great relative value to most 2nd hand homes in places like Rathfarnham, Churchtown, Terenure, Ballinteer.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,037 ✭✭✭Villa05


    One person's rent is a giants income.

    FG's slogan for the next election wonder if the FG's press secretary position is still vacant

    Post edited by Boards.ie: Mike on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 435 ✭✭jiminho


    ECB rates up again today. How long do people reckon before the banks start raising rates again?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,619 ✭✭✭Timing belt


    Tomorrow morning or Monday unless they need to write to give x amount of days notice based on T&C’s



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,037 ✭✭✭Villa05


    Very rural Co Limerick former 1 off 70's built council bungalow, with basic renovation, would need one of those dishes to get patchy Internet

    My partner a little shocked by the asking price.

    Sold in 4 days at 15% above asking



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 645 ✭✭✭J_1980


    Clay Farm and Woodbrook both sold out in a day at top prices.

    No slowdown happening.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,325 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump



    Investors are probably confident that the government will keep them propped up and bailed out even if things hit a speedbump


    Or it might even be public money getting fired in



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 52 ✭✭ARJn


    I was at viewing and maybe 1-5% were investors , mostly families(with kids) either FTB or Upgrading . WHy woul dinvestor buy a 700k property at these interest rates



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,777 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    If you could buy the house in cash, in theory prices should increase a lot once rates inevitably fall



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,325 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump



    Not only that. You are likely to benefit from some inflation protection over the medium term at least.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,037 ✭✭✭Villa05


    People forget that current mortgage rates are very close to historic lows and one could argue far too low for an economy like Ireland.

    Our mortgage rates should be closer to, if not ahead of the USA



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,100 ✭✭✭Browney7


    https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/budget-plan-to-help-first-time-buyers-purchase-second-hand-homes-amid-pressure-to-extend-schemes-beyond-new-builds/a45804983.html let's pour more funny money into the dysfunctional market, yes, that will solve it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,161 ✭✭✭wassie


    More demand side policy interventions being considered by the Govt to further distort the market. Minister O'Brien considering extending to shared equity scheme to help buyers purchase a decreasing supply of 2nd hand homes.




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 625 ✭✭✭Cal4567


    I think we can expect FFG to continue finding avenues to support home ownership and make a grab at the same time for the young vote. There must be an election to think about!!



  • Posts: 14,768 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Considering most peoples wealth, and spending is tied up with their most valuable asset, and so many young people want to acquire a home, this should hardly come as a surprise. Neither should anyone be surprised when SF are asked the hard questions, the specifics of how they are going to lower the cost/value of voters homes, therefore their wealth and possibly push recent buyers into negative equity in the process, that their support starts to faulter when it matters most. It happened the last election when in a televised debate Pearse Doherty was asked how he would pay for the 40Bn worth of promises they were making, eventually he had to say it was by raising taxes, that did not go down well.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,037 ✭✭✭Villa05


    If your wealth is tied up in one asset, you'd want that market managed well not in a continuous boom/bust cycle

    If most young people want/need a home, the solution is supply not making the existing supply more expensive

    Building sufficient affordable rentals should not affect the value of existing homes greatly. Rental and purchasing are 2 seperate markets

    SF don't need to raise taxes, the money/land is there. Builders are citing planning as the main issue, they say workers can be got and is not a major issue

    SF were the big winners in the last election, so much so that they did not have enough candidates to soak up the demand



Advertisement
Advertisement