Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

'No Rent Supplement' to be outlawed

Options
«134567…11

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Ken.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,898 ✭✭✭✭Ken.


    Is this a good thing or bad thing. I think it'll only work as long as the government don't keep reducing the rent allowance.

    http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/government-moves-to-prohibit-refusal-of-rent-supplement-662940.html

    The Government is expected to shortly enact a measure that would prohibit denying rental accommodation to tenants who get rent supplement.
    It is common practice for rental adverts to say that rent supplement is not accepted, but the Coalition is seeking to prohibit that practice.

    The Amendments to the Employment Equality (Amendment) (No 2) Bil is before the Seanad and is due to be published in the current parliamentary term “and the Bill enacted shortly”, Minister of State for equality Aodhán Ó Ríordáin has said.


  • Options
    #3
    Stheno
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 51,687 Mod ✭✭✭✭Stheno


    Surely landlords will just give a different reason not to rent to those on rs?


  • Options
    #4
    MrMorooka
    Registered Users Posts: 710 ✭✭✭MrMorooka


    Sigh. This does nothing to help people in the 'middle', the ones who earn enough that they don't qualify for rent allowance but not enough that they can buy, etc. Once again, it just squeezes them by causing further rent increases as LLs try to cover the costs of dealing with possible issues arising out of this move.


  • Options
    #5
    snubbleste
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 31,117 ✭✭✭✭snubbleste


    Rent increases all round then :cool:


  • Options
    #6
    The_Morrigan
    Moderators Posts: 9,368 ✭✭✭The_Morrigan


    Just merged the threads there guys & gals.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Goldigga
    Registered Users Posts: 179 ✭✭Goldigga


    What are the unintended consequences of this move?

    I can't see how this will actually change anything. If a landlord doesn't want to rent to someone with Rent supplement, they won't. This simply stops them advertising the fact in the advertisement!


  • Options
    #8
    MrMorooka
    Registered Users Posts: 710 ✭✭✭MrMorooka


    Maybe a better option would have been to find out why so many LLs don't accept RA, and then see what can be changed to address those concerns.

    Or to build more social housing so that local government can directly address housing needs instead of pushing it onto private LLs.

    Or more macro moves to decrease cost of living/reduce rental market pressures and make accommodation more affordable.

    No, let's just blunder in with an ill-advised move for equality that seems completely uninformed of the situation on the ground.


  • Options
    #9
    snubbleste
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 31,117 ✭✭✭✭snubbleste


    Goldigga wrote: »
    I can't see how this will actually change anything. If a landlord doesn't want to rent to someone with Rent supplement, they won't. This simply stops them advertising the fact in the advertisement!
    It is not just the advertisement, they won't be able to refuse a rent supplement applicant under equality legislation


  • Options
    #10
    jjbrien
    Registered Users Posts: 2,678 ✭✭✭jjbrien


    There is a way landlords will use not to accept rent allowance. They will now say working professionals only in their adverts


  • Options
    #11
    MrMorooka
    Registered Users Posts: 710 ✭✭✭MrMorooka


    Goldigga wrote: »
    I can't see how this will actually change anything. If a landlord doesn't want to rent to someone with Rent supplement, they won't. This simply stops them advertising the fact in the advertisement!

    Well no one will be able to talk about RA at viewings etc- the tenant act normal and sign the lease, then a week later the LL will get the RA form and won't be able to refuse.

    Of course, just insisting on seeing bank records and payslips(to see a genuine ability to pay the rent) before choosing a tenant will most likely defeat this 9 times out of 10.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Aircraft Freak
    Closed Accounts Posts: 133 ✭✭Aircraft Freak


    snubbleste wrote: »
    Dun dun dun! http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/government-moving-to-end-rent-supplement-tenant-discrimination-1.2109650
    Who saw this coming?
    Under equality legislation, landlords will not be able to discriminate against tenants dependent on state assistance payments.

    What are the unintended consequences of this move?

    Unless they're dodging paying tax on rental income, how do you police that?

    I would also like to see rent supplement paid directly to landlords, one landlord I know will not take social welfare recipients because he has had experience with the tennent cashing the cheque and not paying the rent, you'd be surprised how much this happens, it then makes it hard for genuine folk to get into rented accommodation, everyone gets tarred with the same brush.


  • Options
    #13
    Grandpa Hassan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,945 ✭✭✭Grandpa Hassan


    But LL will still choose tenants on the basis of job / income etc. Just arent allowed to say "no rent supplement" on the advert. For many, it will be an irrelevance, as rent supplement would not stretch to cover the advertised rent anyway, but I imagine that LLs on the margins of what is affordable to those on rent supplement will put their rents up when they come to re-let.

    Which, as MMorroka said, will screw everyone


  • Options
    #14
    snubbleste
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 31,117 ✭✭✭✭snubbleste


    Aircraft Freak wrote: »
    Unless they're dodging paying tax on rental income, how do you police that?
    The tenant will take a case to the equality status authority or something.


  • Options
    #15
    Aircraft Freak
    Closed Accounts Posts: 133 ✭✭Aircraft Freak


    snubbleste wrote: »
    The tenant will take a case to the equality status authority or something.

    I think this is a pre election stunt, they have to appear to be doing something to tackle the issue, when they're not actually doing anything.


  • Options
    #16
    stevedublin
    Registered Users Posts: 979 ✭✭✭stevedublin


    MrMorooka wrote: »
    Or to build more social housing so that local government can directly address housing needs instead of pushing it onto private LLs.

    And the money to build said housing comes from....?


  • Options
    #17
    Wabbit Ears
    Registered Users Posts: 3,043 ✭✭✭Wabbit Ears


    Until they address the reasons why landlords refuse Social welfare recipients this law is grossly unfair to landlords.


  • Options
    #18
    Gatling
    Registered Users Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Rent increases under the guise of covering iw related charges and so on, they could easily increase deposits aswell completely pushing rs tenants out all together
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • Options
    #19
    OldNotWIse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,468 ✭✭✭✭OldNotWIse


    How will they enforce it?

    Also, unless they increase rent allowance to keep up with ever increasing rent, or make it permissible to make up the shortfall yourself, how will it even work?


  • Options
    #20
    Grandpa Hassan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,945 ✭✭✭Grandpa Hassan


    snubbleste wrote: »
    The tenant will take a case to the equality status authority or something.

    I dont ever see that succeeding. The LL would just come up with another reason as to why they chose a different one of probably many hopefuls.

    "well, judge, I got the feeling that me and mr X would have a really good LL / tenant relationship so I rented the place to him. I have no problems with RA at all". Mr X of course happens to work a professional job and not be on RA.

    How is discrimiation supposed to be proven unless a really stupid LL writes in a rejection email "I didnt rent it to you cause youre on RA". In which case they deserve what they get on the basis of their stupidity

    This is just a case of the government not wanting acknowledge the actual cause of the problem. Like addressing housing needs. Sure, its all the LLs fault


  • Options
    #21
    MrMorooka
    Registered Users Posts: 710 ✭✭✭MrMorooka


    Grandpa Hassan wrote: »
    writes in a rejection email

    That's not even how it works, what happens these days is usually you go the open viewing with 50 other people, you all put your name down, then through some completely opaque process someone will be chosen the next day or whatever. You only know you didn't get it because the ad on Daft has gone down.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    ted1
    Registered Users Posts: 23,427 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    They need to pay the rent directly to the landlord bypassing the tenant. The tenant needs to pay the balance to the DSP.

    They DSP will need to stop asking for reductions. They keep pushing for reductions once the tensnt moves in. I've had to sign and send numerous letters to tenants that the rent is as per lease and will continue to be for the duration of the lease. Failure to pay agreed amount will lead to eviction.


  • Options
    #23
    Miaireland
    Registered Users Posts: 4,063 ✭✭✭Miaireland


    I am guessing this will make very little difference to things. Landlords will probably have different reasons to refuse like requesting things like references from current employers etc.


  • Options
    #24
    jobbridge4life
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    snubbleste wrote: »
    It is not just the advertisement, they won't be able to refuse a rent supplement applicant under equality legislation

    Not quite. Legally they are prohibited from refusing a person because they are in receipt of rent supplement. They can refuse them for any other legal reason they choose and in today's market they won't be short on alternative tenants.

    This is all irrelevant anyway because it is simple they the old 'rent allowance not accepted' will be replaced with the 'employer references required'. Done and done.


  • Options
    #25
    snubbleste
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 31,117 ✭✭✭✭snubbleste


    Miaireland wrote: »
    I am guessing this will make very little difference to things. Landlords will probably have different reasons to refuse like requesting things like references from current employers etc.
    That would be viewed as discriminatory as someone who is on state payments would not be working


  • Options
    #26
    Daith
    Registered Users Posts: 4,946 ✭✭✭Daith


    snubbleste wrote: »
    That would be viewed as discriminatory as someone who is on state payments would not be working

    Huh, sure that happens all the time. Work references essential and so on.


  • Options
    #27
    Big Davey
    Registered Users Posts: 778 ✭✭✭Big Davey


    The reason why people don't want RA people is because of the higher level of scumbags on RA and the fact that the people in social welfare don't care how they behave.
    If someone has a job and trashes your house you can drop up to their workplace to have a chat with them maybe embarrass them a bit etc
    I had a toe rag in one of my houses on RA and would think hard before taking another RA person.
    I let what seemed to be a nice polite single mother into a very nice house she was all smiles and watching what she said seemed like she was well brought up
    THEN I met the boyfriend who was in the background and I have to say I have scraped nicer things off my shoe he was pure filth had I of seen him I would not have let them near the house.
    Fast forward 6 months he is officially living there as they have been caught with the single mother scam.
    Fast forward another 12 months and they are months behind on rent they have spent the RA and trashed the house
    Social welfare enform me I will get my part of the RA in time, their part of the RA is nothing to do with welfare, the fact that I had proof with bank statements and other proof that the tenants were drinking and gambling most of their money and their part of the RA was nothing to do with welfare the thousands of euro of vandalism and damage was nothing to do with welfare !
    If welfare are not going to stand over these people and give some guarantee I don't see why anyone should be forced to take RA
    I would rather some decent person with a job and self respect and maybe something to loose by behaving such a way.






    MrMorooka wrote: »
    Maybe a better option would have been to find out why so many LLs don't accept RA, and then see what can be changed to address those concerns.

    Or to build more social housing so that local government can directly address housing needs instead of pushing it onto private LLs.

    Or more macro moves to decrease cost of living/reduce rental market pressures and make accommodation more affordable.

    No, let's just blunder in with an ill-advised move for equality that seems completely uninformed of the situation on the ground.


  • Options
    #28
    The_Morrigan
    Moderators Posts: 9,368 ✭✭✭The_Morrigan


    Big Davey wrote: »
    The reason why people don't want RA people is because of the higher level of scumbags on RA and the fact that the people in social welfare don't care how they behave.
    If someone has a job and trashes your house you can drop up to their workplace to have a chat with them maybe embarrass them a bit etc
    I had a toe rag in one of my houses on RA and would think hard before taking another RA person.
    I let what seemed to be a nice polite single mother into a very nice house she was all smiles and watching what she said seemed like she was well brought up
    THEN I met the boyfriend who was in the background and I have to say I have scraped nicer things off my shoe he was pure filth had I of seen him I would not have let them near the house.
    Fast forward 6 months he is officially living there as they have been caught with the single mother scam.
    Fast forward another 12 months and they are months behind on rent they have spent the RA and trashed the house
    Social welfare enform me I will get my part of the RA in time, their part of the RA is nothing to do with welfare, the fact that I had proof with bank statements and other proof that the tenants were drinking and gambling most of their money and their part of the RA was nothing to do with welfare the thousands of euro of vandalism and damage was nothing to do with welfare !
    If welfare are not going to stand over these people and give some guarantee I don't see why anyone should be forced to take RA
    I would rather some decent person with a job and self respect and maybe something to loose by behaving such a way.


    Less of the derogatory statements and gross generalisations please.


  • Options
    #29
    hdowney
    Registered Users Posts: 12,921 ✭✭✭✭hdowney


    quite simply rents will increase. anyone who was letting a property on the borderline for RA and was a 'No RA Accepted' advertiser will increase to above the threshold and therefore cannot accept RA tenants for the simple reason that RA tenants must get a property with rent within the limits set by the Gov't


  • Options
    #30
    jobbridge4life
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    hdowney wrote: »
    quite simply rents will increase. anyone who was letting a property on the borderline for RA and was a 'No RA Accepted' advertiser will increase to above the threshold and therefore cannot accept RA tenants for the simple reason that RA tenants must get a property with rent within the limits set by the Gov't

    In most areas of high demand there are virtually no properties below the limit as is.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    LifesgoodwithLG
    Registered Users Posts: 126 ✭✭LifesgoodwithLG


    I would rather some decent person with a job and self respect and maybe something to loose by behaving such a way.[/QUOTE]

    Yikes , you got well and truly shafted by your current tenants and you have my total sympathy. Here's the deal a scum bag is a scum bag regardless if they are receive RA or not. I am just about to apply for RA, I have lived in rented accommodation in Dublin for 15 years and have references from every single landlord or lady I have ever lived in. I have never once ( not even for a day ) paid late never mind avoided paying. The difference between me and your current tenants, I was raised with the attitude of always paying your way. I would rather eat Weetabix for a year than to owe money to anyone and that's the truth.

    I totally appreciate that your rental property is your investment and you have to do everything to protect it. After 14 years working I was made redundant, I have just applied to do an unpaid internship to get more experience in the area I would like to work in. I am finishing a post grad in a well skilled area and have just been accepted for another postgrad as well as also doing voluntary work.

    I am not working , HOWEVER I have self respect and I am working my ass off so that this time next year I will be in a really good position and shall be paying $$$$$$ in tax. You have been really shafted and I can understand your frustration however please don't tar us all with the one brush that's like saying that all landlords are greedy B's jumping on the current bandwagon. ( ps my landlord wants to increase my rent by 33 % )

    pps I hope that you get your situation sorted in your favour.


Advertisement