Landlords selling 2026

Private landlords shouldnt be (forced) into subsidsed social housing provision. Thats the responsibility of local authorities.

Local authorities should be banned from buying, leasing or renting private housing stock.

I don't think private landlords are forced into social housing provision and I certainly am not arguing for that.

On your second point that local authorities should be banned from buying, leasing, renting private housing stock, can I ask you why you think this?

If it is cheaper to buy "off-the-peg" housing from developers, provided the proper price is paid, where is the problem? Are you also against HAP or rent allowance being paid?

The first point is not true. Some private renters don't qualify for social housing, but very long waiting lists mean that many that do qualify for social housing, rent from private landlords because there's not enough social housing to go around.

No, I'm not saying there should be no private rental stock, but probably a larger proportion of the overall housing stock should be social or cost-basis housing. Like I said, long waiting lists are evidence of a shortage of social housing.

Yes, there should be both types. There should also be a supply for purchase. For the private rental side, I would see a move towards larger (> 3) landlords being better for the country under the new rules.

The new rules on the rtb site seem to say that there is no 2% cap on annual rent rises for new apartments and the rent rise can track CPI.

I thought that the 2% cap still applied even if CPI was above 2%.

Had a quick search for the area where my niece is renting. Of the 10 properties in the results, the lowest was 1090 and highest 2800. How does that help a landlord to set a new rent? Does he take the 3 highest or an average of all 10. The RTB website doesn’t say.
My niece is house sharing with two friends for about five years now and when they got their last rent increase, the landlord sent them printouts of photos from daft. Three similar houses, terraced, approx the same size, same types of area regarding transport links and facilities, same side of the city, same distance to town centre, they could see the gardens, decor, furnishings etc. My niece and her housemates could see what other similar places were costing, they actually have a low rent.

Not sure how this new system is better.

shocking stuff, who would have predicted

Yes and landlords will have to get things right or be fined by the rtb. The minister says all the new rules are better for tenants but if a person is looking to rent somewhere, or if they get a rent increase, they want to see as much information as possible about other rentals in the area. The size and BER doesn’t really cut it.

Awful situation for any tenant and no doubt we’ll hear of more notices on the way. Just another mess for anyone who’s affected by even more changes. You’d have to wonder what goes on in ministers’ heads at times.

Expecting fireworks in the Dail next week 🤯🤯. And two by-elections on the way. 🤦‍♀️ 🤦‍♀️

There are clearly all rent locked properties being chosen here. They are not actually market rents coming back at all.

They shouldnt be in there then as they are not open market prices for them. The list is not market prices at all. So whats the point of it at all.

OK, we're complaining that local authorities are buying up or building the majority of housing. But given the the topic of the thread "landlords selling 2026", is what is being provided by social housing not better than what would otherwise have been provided by private landlords?

Why is it a great tragedy for society that social homes are now being provided, offering security and reasonable rents, instead of what private landlords want to supply: sky high rents and next to no security?

I disagree that most people don't and wont qualify for social or cost-rental housing. I already gave figures that show that the cut-off for a single person for social housing is pretty close to the median income, and that for cost-rental housing it is about 95% of incomes.

The main problem is long waiting lists. But long waiting lists are indicative of not enough social and cost-rental units being purchased/built, not too many as people are suggesting here. It is also evidence that, while not absolutely everyone will qualify, there's no shortage of those that do qualify.

How is the quantity of social housing provided by local authorities, AHBs, housing charities relevant to landlords selling up? Those bodies can build and supply as many social houses as they like for people unable to provide their own accommodation. The rules for social housing may be better for those tenants, the properties may be newer, they might have security of tenure for life. Nobody is disagreeing with any of that.

But landlords are not providers of social housing. The lines between private and state provided accommodation are blurred now because people who should be in social housing are in the private market and being subsidised by the taxpayer.
Private landlords were never in the long term social housing space in the past, their target market was people who wanted to rent for short periods or longer term renters who didn’t want to buy. They agreed contracts and both sides knew where they stood.

Landlords are selling because the rental market has changed and is not suitable for their needs any longer. They have needs just like tenants, financial, family, etc. They are entitled to enter and exit any business sector in the state as long as they comply with the rules. The rental sector is no different.

Your suggestion is the one thing that would fix the whole rental market, yet its the most politically impossible thing to implement.

No one is saying that landlords should provide social housing, although some essentially do via the RAS scheme. In fact, I have suggested in this thread that there might be too many small landlords in Ireland for the good of society. A reduction may be welcome if alternatives in the form of social housing, greater availability of houses to purchase, or better regulated private rentals become available.

The point I was addressing is the idea that increased purchasing and building of social housing was a bad thing instead of encouraging small landlords to buy more properties. As a poster said, "Local authorities should be banned from buying, leasing or renting private housing stock". I am merely pointing out that this does not make a huge amount of sense.

No one is suggesting they are all money grabbers, but the problem with having tenants on below market rents but with little security is that when the landlord does retake possession of the property, the tenants will find it difficult to find alternative accommodation and may end up in homeless services putting a burden on the State through no fault of their own.

I think with regard to councils selling off social housing to tenants, this is only a problem if the discount is too deep. But if councils can get a reasonable price, then they can use that money towards new builds/purchases for new tenants off the housing list.