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
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Apollo house mk2 - 35 Summerhill Parade?

«134

Comments

  • #2
    johnnyskeleton
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 14,463 Mod ✭✭✭✭johnnyskeleton


    Brazilian Left Front? I thought we were called the Peoples Front of Brazillia?

    Seriously though, in terms of the Gardai, there is an offence of unlawful occupation of a dwelling:

    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1971/act/25/enacted/en/print.html

    Also criminal damage, theft of a service etc. However, these provisions are rarely enforced by the gardai, who will often say first off that they cant act without a complaint and second off that its a civil matter.

    So the private landlord is likely to have to spend 25 grand getting an emergency high court injunction or the likes.


  • #3
    garhjw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,424 ✭✭✭garhjw


    johnnyskeleton wrote: »
    Brazilian Left Front? I thought we were called the Peoples Front of Brazillia?

    Seriously though, in terms of the Gardai, there is an offence of unlawful occupation of a dwelling:

    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1971/act/25/enacted/en/print.html

    Also criminal damage, theft of a service etc. However, these provisions are rarely enforced by the gardai, who will often say first off that they cant act without a complaint and second off that its a civil matter.

    So the private landlord is likely to have to spend 25 grand getting an emergency high court injunction or the likes.

    Disgraceful people are allowed to do this to someone's property and not get arrested. I feel sorry for the landlord having to deal with these type of people in their property.


  • #4
    zl1whqvjs75cdy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,042 ✭✭✭zl1whqvjs75cdy


    Ethnic minorities for reproductive justice? Catchy title.


  • #5
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    garhjw wrote: »
    Disgraceful people are allowed to do this to someone's property and not get arrested. I feel sorry for the landlord having to deal with these type of people in their property.


    It's not a LL but a developer who is holding on to a number of vacant properties in the area in the middle of a housing crisis. If you do that you run the risk of squatters.


  • #6
    garhjw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,424 ✭✭✭garhjw


    Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »
    It's not a LL but a developer who is holding on to a number of vacant properties in the area in the middle of a housing crisis. If you do that you run the risk of squatters.

    True but it doesn’t excuse criminal behaviour.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Gatling
    Registered Users Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    I see paul Murphy is the first political cheerleader on scene
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • #8
    Edgware
    Registered Users Posts: 5,875 ✭✭✭Edgware


    Gatling wrote: »
    I see paul Murphy is the first political cheerleader on scene

    Maybe someone should go up and occupy his place


  • #9
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,283 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »
    It's not a LL but a developer who is holding on to a number of vacant properties in the area in the middle of a housing crisis. If you do that you run the risk of squatters.

    the risk of squatters , making them sound like rats, which is a fair comparison.
    I think the same rules should apply for removal


  • #10
    rossmores
    Registered Users Posts: 118 ✭✭rossmores


    It’s wrong that so many people that don’t want to work are allowed live and ghettoize the north city center while those who do and could make it better are forced to commute.
    [font=Calibri", "sans-serif]Get a job ye parasites and clean the litter you leave behind ye.[/font]


  • #11
    AlekSmart
    Registered Users Posts: 14,005 ✭✭✭✭AlekSmart


    I wonder if any of the folks involved in this action have any of the €200,000+ that remains unaccounted for after the Apollo House gig...?

    It's not only Developers that follow the money.....:rolleyes:


    Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.

    Charles Mackay (1812-1889)



  • Advertisement
  • #12
    The_Conductor
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 32,278 Mod ✭✭✭✭The_Conductor


    I heard one of them being interviewed on RTE radio yesterday evening on the way home- it went along the lines of:

    The house has been left to rack and ruin since May- and is in a very poor state. Its full of dust. Some of us are going to go get our hoovers from home- and we'll do it up nicely- one of the guys knows how to hook up the electricity- and make it habitable. Its a beautiful Georgian house with high ceilings- it deserves to have people live in it. If we don't occupy it- the owner will probably do it up and airbnb it.........

    I'm against property being left vacant as much as the next person- however, what do actions like this mean for property rights- and surely a more appropriate manner of dealing with it- would be a vacant property/site tax in the first instance- followed by CPO by the local authority?

    Apparently the developer is trying to get vacant possession of a group of the properties in a row and do them up (no idea whether they intend to let them or flog them- but given the location- I doubt they'd get top dollar for them).

    We have a very vocal group of people- who seem to imagine that property rights are tenuous and nebulous- and don't really mean anything.

    As a total aside- the properties were vacated in May- for a long list of breaches of fire safety regulations. Who is liable if the current shower go and hook up dodgy electricity connections- and there is an inferno? Of course- they'll blame the owner- yet- its barely been vacant for 10 weeks and he/she hasn't had an opportunity to get remedial work done (if this is indeed what they plan to do).

    We have a housing crisis. This type of 'direct action' may make journalists salivate and generate lots of coverage for newspapers- but ultimately- all it does is give the Minister a smokescreen to hide behind- he can wax lyrically on the relative rights and wrongs of the case- instead of what he is planning to do that will actually make a difference for those who either don't have accommodation- or just as importantly- are being priced out of accommodation.

    We need solutions- this 'direct action'- is not a solution- its a distraction.


  • #13
    Xterminator
    Registered Users Posts: 4,716 ✭✭✭Xterminator


    They occupiers are alleging that the developer illegally evicted the tenants that were there. Allegation made in public, so they could be sued for libel if this were untrue.

    irish times reports
    In May 20 foreign nationals were evicted with only 24 hours notice from the property, after an inspection by Dublin Fire Brigade found fire safety concerns.

    The property owner has 'forgotten' to register their name since the property was purchased in 2016.

    And their demand is that the council use the powers they already have to purchase the vacant property and use it to house some of the people on the housing list. not an unreasonable demand.

    source irishtimes.
    On Tuesday night two men in a black SUV, believed to be associates of the owner of the building, parked outside the home for several hours, before leaving. When asked if they were connected to the owner of the property by The Irish Times, they declined to comment."

    In all honesty it could be a property purchased with the proceeds of crime, etc. But even its its just someone who doesn't give a **** about their tenants and has legitimately purchased the building, it doesnt matter. homeowners have rights but obligations too.

    We live in a society and there is a housing crisis. I fully agree DCC should use its CPO powers to buy and rent out vacant/derelict properties. And their not doing it enough, and they don't have access to funds to purchase enough property to make a dent in the housing list. Whats missing is the political will. If the protestors make enough headlines, the powers that be will take action that otherwise would not be taken.


  • #14
    Topgear on Dave
    Registered Users Posts: 4,519 ✭✭✭Topgear on Dave


    The DCC has revenue raising powers through the property tax where they could raise funds to CPO vacant property and house homeless.

    However I fear this would bring people to the streets to fight it. :pac: :pac:

    The Brazilian left front need to understand their opponent here.

    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/dublin-city-council-rejects-plan-to-increase-local-property-tax-1.3227075


  • #15
    Lux23
    Registered Users Posts: 7,134 ✭✭✭Lux23


    garhjw wrote: »
    Disgraceful people are allowed to do this to someone's property and not get arrested. I feel sorry for the landlord having to deal with these type of people in their property.

    Do you think they care about the state of their property?


  • #16
    garhjw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,424 ✭✭✭garhjw


    Lux23 wrote: »
    Do you think they care about the state of their property?

    It has been vacant for a couple of months. I presume the OWNER is preparing a planning application to renovate the property. Besides that, it is their property to do with as they wish. The OWNER is not responsible for the provision of social housing.

    What next - the commies invade my holiday home in Wexford because it is only used a month a year?


  • #17
    johnnyskeleton
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 14,463 Mod ✭✭✭✭johnnyskeleton


    The_Conductor wrote: »
    I heard one of them being interviewed on RTE radio yesterday evening on the way home- it went along the lines of:

    The house has been left to rack and ruin since May- and is in a very poor state. Its full of dust. Some of us are going to go get our hoovers from home- and we'll do it up nicely- one of the guys knows how to hook up the electricity- and make it habitable. Its a beautiful Georgian house with high ceilings- it deserves to have people live in it. If we don't occupy it- the owner will probably do it up and airbnb it.........

    The ESB know how to hook up the electricity. Presumably this guy knows how to do it without having to pay for it or demonstrate legal occupation of the premises!
    I'm against property being left vacant as much as the next person- however, what do actions like this mean for property rights- and surely a more appropriate manner of dealing with it- would be a vacant property/site tax in the first instance- followed by CPO by the local authority?

    Apparently the developer is trying to get vacant possession of a group of the properties in a row and do them up (no idea whether they intend to let them or flog them- but given the location- I doubt they'd get top dollar for them).

    Yup. Who would want to buy the house off him if it will come with a potential squatter problem?
    We have a very vocal group of people- who seem to imagine that property rights are tenuous and nebulous- and don't really mean anything.

    In a way, what these people are doing is far worse than say stealing someone's bag or wallet in a nightclub. In the latter case, it is inconvenient for a night or two, annoying to happen and costs a few hundred to replace. But stealing someone's property goes on for weeks and will leave them with a legal and repairs bill well into 5 figures.

    So yeah, I'd be in favour of them being prosecuted for theft, criminal damage etc. The civil consequences of line up in the High Court, put in a mealy mouthed affidavit and then agree to vacate the premises after a few weeks and a meaningless order to pay the costs just won't cut it really.
    As a total aside- the properties were vacated in May- for a long list of breaches of fire safety regulations. Who is liable if the current shower go and hook up dodgy electricity connections- and there is an inferno? Of course- they'll blame the owner- yet- its barely been vacant for 10 weeks and he/she hasn't had an opportunity to get remedial work done (if this is indeed what they plan to do).

    If it's a dodgy electricity connection, the person who does the connection and the people who encourage others to live there could potentially be prosecuted for endangerment or manslaughter.
    We have a housing crisis. This type of 'direct action' may make journalists salivate and generate lots of coverage for newspapers- but ultimately- all it does is give the Minister a smokescreen to hide behind- he can wax lyrically on the relative rights and wrongs of the case- instead of what he is planning to do that will actually make a difference for those who either don't have accommodation- or just as importantly- are being priced out of accommodation.

    And also not to be forgotten is that if professional landlords feel that they are constantly under attack, they might decide not to bother renting out their properties anymore. Renters don't benefit long term from this type of carryon.

    The only people who benefit are the political agitators. Ironically I've heard them being criticised by other socialists for making it so high profile and demanding that the government step in, when they should simply have appropriated the property for themselves and told the evil government to eff off!


  • #18
    garhjw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,424 ✭✭✭garhjw


    Does anyone know if this is still going on or did they get the offenders out of the house?


  • #19
    The_Conductor
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 32,278 Mod ✭✭✭✭The_Conductor


    garhjw wrote: »
    Does anyone know if this is still going on or did they get the offenders out of the house?

    No- they're still there- and they're actively seeking donations of furniture, food and anything else people are willing to bring the occupants.

    Sigh.........

    Meanwhile the usual politicians are gunning them on- the most recent being Ciaran Cuffe of the Green Party- who is calling for a 'right to occupy any residential property that has been vacant for a period of a year'. (this current property was only vacant since the third week in May- which seems to have been missed by him- however, why let inconvenient facts stand in the way of a good political soundbite).

    Apparently they expect to be in there for the long haul- and are in the process of identifying other properties owned by the same owners ( Pat and PJ O'Donnell of the POD fame) in the area- and they intend on invading them in a similar manner.


  • #20
    garhjw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,424 ✭✭✭garhjw


    It's a disgrace that such criminality is allowed to continue without consequences. And for some "politicians" to support it.... what type of people vote for them.
    This sets a dangerous precedent. I hope that people defend their property to the full extent the law allows.


  • #21
    garhjw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,424 ✭✭✭garhjw


    It's a disgrace that such criminality is allowed to continue without consequences. And for some "politicians" to support it.... what type of people vote for them.
    This sets a dangerous precedent. I hope that people defend their property to the full extent the law allows.


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    GGTrek
    Registered Users Posts: 834 ✭✭✭GGTrek


    Check the facebook group Dublin Central Housing group. They took the initiative for the illegal occupation. They are a hard left group that will only understand violence and expecting houses for all for free in central Dublin!


  • #23
    garhjw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,424 ✭✭✭garhjw


    And so it starts.... although not sure how they can pursue wasters for costs if they d9nt habe anything in the first place


    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/notice-to-quit-served-on-activists-occupying-dublin-property-1.3596008?mode=amp


  • #24
    Topgear on Dave
    Registered Users Posts: 4,519 ✭✭✭Topgear on Dave


    I presume we are going to have a dramatic scene of them getting dragged out by the cops in front of the Irish Times cameras?


    Tuesdays Irish Times property section: "Priced out of Summerhill, try Mountjoy" :pac:


  • #25
    tintin67
    Registered Users Posts: 313 ✭✭tintin67


    Does anyone know if they want this and other properties in the area to be occupied entirely by dozens of young Brazilians again or will they allow the odd Irish person to live there? There needs to be a serious crackdown on giving student visas to South Americans supposedly studying English unless they can prove they have adequate resources to pay for decent accommodation for the length of their stay.


  • #26
    Mrs OBumble
    Registered Users Posts: 25,656 ✭✭✭✭Mrs OBumble


    tintin67 wrote: »
    There needs to be a serious crackdown on giving student visas to South Americans supposedly studying English unless they can prove they have adequate resources to pay for decent accommodation for the length of their stay.

    Define decent though.

    May students will happily live in hostel typw accommodation because their stay is only temporary. And realistically it's appropriate for tbeir age and life stage.


  • #27
    tintin67
    Registered Users Posts: 313 ✭✭tintin67


    Mrs OBumble wrote: »
    Define decent though.

    May students will happily live in hostel typw accommodation because their stay is only temporary. And realistically it's appropriate for tbeir age and life stage.

    I would suggest a minimum of around €8000 for each year's stay.This would be about half the cost of 2 people sharing a one-bed apartment in Dublin. Every case of extreme overcrowding in the last couple of years in Dublin that I have come across involves Brazilian students. There obviously is insufficient accommodation for the amount of visas being issued so a requirement to have something like this amount in their bank account should discourage those who really only want to come here to work and are happy to live in slum conditions.

    I know it would be tough on genuine poorer students but it is only a matter of time before there is a massive loss of life in one of these doss houses packed with foreign nationals.


  • #28
    Edgware
    Registered Users Posts: 5,875 ✭✭✭Edgware


    tintin67 wrote: »
    I would suggest a minimum of around €8000 for each year's stay.This would be about half the cost of 2 people sharing a one-bed apartment in Dublin. Every case of extreme overcrowding in the last couple of years in Dublin that I have come across involves Brazilian students. There obviously is insufficient accommodation for the amount of visas being issued so a requirement to have something like this amount in their bank account should discourage those who really only want to come here to work and are happy to live in slum conditions.

    I know it would be tough on genuine poorer students but it is only a matter of time before there is a massive loss of life in one of these doss houses packed with foreign nationals.
    If they don't come who will serve your Latte every morning?


  • #29
    tintin67
    Registered Users Posts: 313 ✭✭tintin67


    Edgware wrote: »
    If they don't come who will serve your Latte every morning?

    If the only way a business can survive is by having a constant pool of cheap exploitable labour living in slum conditions then I'd rather that business didn't exist. I'm sure Dublin could cope with fewer coffee shops, burger joints etc.


  • #30
    Arcade_Tryer
    Registered Users Posts: 2,021 ✭✭✭Arcade_Tryer


    The_Conductor wrote: »
    Meanwhile the usual politicians are gunning them on- the most recent being Ciaran Cuffe of the Green Party- who is calling for a 'right to occupy any residential property that has been vacant for a period of a year'. (this current property was only vacant since the third week in May- which seems to have been missed by him- however, why let inconvenient facts stand in the way of a good political soundbite).
    To be fair, this type of behaviour is a result of bad policy and potential negligence on behalf of politicians; Dublin desperately needs a range of property taxes including a land value tax and a vacant property tax. Capital acquisitions tax thresholds also need to be lowered significantly.
    tintin67 wrote: »
    Does anyone know if they want this and other properties in the area to be occupied entirely by dozens of young Brazilians again or will they allow the odd Irish person to live there? There needs to be a serious crackdown on giving student visas to South Americans supposedly studying English unless they can prove they have adequate resources to pay for decent accommodation for the length of their stay.
    That didn't take long.


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    Topgear on Dave
    Registered Users Posts: 4,519 ✭✭✭Topgear on Dave


    Arcade_Tryer wrote: »
    To be fair, this type of behaviour is a result of bad policy and potential negligence on behalf of politicians; Dublin desperately needs a range of property taxes including a land value tax and a vacant property tax. Capital acquisitions tax thresholds also need to be lowered significantly.
    That didn't take long.

    Absolutely. We have a minority of people getting rode with rents and a majority of voting homeowners dont care so theres little incentive to fix the situation.


Advertisement