Another bright idea from government

sk8board · 13-09-2017 12:00pm

JaMarcusHustle wrote: »

Part of me thinks there is a concerted effort to make remaining a landlord in this country unprofitable, unfeasible, a massive pain in the arse or all of the above, just so landlords sell up and increase the housing supply.

I think removing those LL's would be a good thing to professionalise the market far more than it is. As a LL, all I hear is stories of incompetent/accidental LL's, which the market would be better off without.

That said, I think they are already making it easy for those guys to leave - my rental tax % across 3 places for my 2016 returns last week is 59%, as follows:
52% income tax (40%+4%+8%), with the other 7% coming from:
+ 3 LPT's
+ 25% of mortgage interest
+ the post-tax maintenance/repairs/cap-allowances/accountant etc

that 7% is a very good year too. Its been higher.

So I keep 41% of my rent, and the Government gets the other 59%. Yep, LL's are really profiteering.

My budget request: make the LPT tax deductible (as they said they would a few years ago), and also allow LL's to form companies.

Regulations professionalise the industry, but theres no financial reason for a LL to be professional.

LuckyLloyd · 13-09-2017 12:01pm

I expect AirBnB regulations to be next. Then a ramping up of the CPO schemes.

So you won't be able to short term let easily; and won't be able to leave a property idle. Sell it or rent it out under the tenancy legislation. If they also start stimulating building of new homes it could sort out the housing crisis within a couple of years.

Hopefully we will also see legislation to address overholding once the crisis eases.

Mrs Shuttleworth · 13-09-2017 12:06pm

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I expect AirBnB regulations to be next. Then a ramping up of the CPO schemes.

So you won't be able to short term let easily; and won't be able to leave a property idle. Sell it or rent it out under the tenancy legislation. If they also start stimulating building of new homes it could sort out the housing crisis within a couple of years.

No one seems to realise that these policies are going to lead to a sharp contraction in bank lending, leaving the property market largely dominated by cash buyers and far less of an incentive to potential developers of starter homes.

ted1 · 13-09-2017 12:15pm

Why can't the government tackle the interest rates set by banks ? Surely that's s huge issue with both tenants and home owners

Stephen Hawkins football boots · 13-09-2017 12:18pm

ted1 wrote: »

What about vulnerable landlords? I will certainly never again let to someone who may be considered to be vulnerable, only to someone with a solid job

All tenants are vunerable solid job or not.Landlords saying family members moving in, refurbishment etc.I have a solid job, but when I'm asked to leave my property, there is nothing I can afford, if i was to have any quality of life.I know 'LL have it tough too, but tenants are shafted

Markcheese · 13-09-2017 1:24pm

Will there be an equivalent letter for tenants and landlords, before a tenancy is signed advising them of the others record... Ie. John and Mary want to lease your house, but John has had issues in the past with the PRTB, with over holding, or damage or not paying the final month's rent...
. . . Or, dear Mary and John your potential new land lord has has issues with not returning deposits, or what ever..

ted1 · 13-09-2017 2:29pm

Stephen Hawkins football boots wrote: »

ted1 wrote: »

What about vulnerable landlords? I will certainly never again let to someone who may be considered to be vulnerable, only to someone with a solid job

All tenants are vunerable solid job or not.Landlords saying family members moving in, refurbishment etc.I have a solid job, but when I'm asked to leave my property, there is nothing I can afford, if i was to have any quality of life.I know 'LL have it tough too, but tenants are shafted

You being asked to leave is an issue for you and that's the difference between renting and being an owner. It's the states duty and not a private landlords to provide you with a roof.

Tenants not paying rent or thrashing apartments is a serious serious and landlords should be able to protect themselves.

Sad Professor · 13-09-2017 3:19pm

I used to be very opposed to double deposits but I've decided they are the least of the problems with our rental market. I'd rather the govt leave them be (since landlords will find some way of extracting more money from tenants anyway) and focus instead on making renting more attractive and long-term, i.e. make private renting worth the ridiculous money we're paying for it. A deposit protection scheme, long-term leases, sitting tenancies, regular improvements to the property, etc. Private tenants who pay their rent and take care of the property should be able to live there for many years without worrying about being evicted. If that means accelerated evictions for private tenants who don't pay their rent or that landlords have to sell to other landlords, then so be it. This along with more favourable tax treatment will attract the kind of investors we need while pushing out the ones we don't.

The barrier to this is that social housing was effectively privatised during the boom years - at the expense of the taxpayer and to the benefit of private landlords who now want to evict same tenants into homelessness. I don't blame landlords, though, social tenants are the state's responsibility and this is what you get when you rely on the private market. But it means private tenants will probably continue to be screwed while the govt and their electorate trashes out the various ideological issues they have re: social housing.

13-09-2017 3:19pm

Stephen Hawkins football boots wrote: »

All tenants are vunerable solid job or not.Landlords saying family members moving in, refurbishment etc.I have a solid job, but when I'm asked to leave my property, there is nothing I can afford, if i was to have any quality of life.I know 'LL have it tough too, but tenants are shafted

That's because you are renting, you don't own the property and thus you will not and should not have total control over it.

If you want total control buy your own place.

_Kaiser_ · 13-09-2017 4:03pm

Kassandra White Telegraph wrote: »

That's because you are renting, you don't own the property and thus you will not and should not have total control over it.

If you want total control buy your own place.

Easy to say.. not so easy to do when, aside from supply issues forcing prices up, tenants are struggling to keep the roof they have, never mind save for another.

These measures will only impact those landlords who are trying to game the system by claiming "refurbishments" to evict tenants and then reletting at higher prices. For a genuine landlord I don't see the issue.

As for the complaints about deposit limits.. it's not supposed to be used as pocket money for the LL, and if indeed there is significant damage to a property then 2/3k probably wouldn't be much use anyway (and there are legal means to recoup that - or if those fail then there probably wasn't a hope in the first place),.. but it will stop the auction-letting that seems to be going on, and given the problems we see here all time that tenants have in getting deposits back, until the deposits are held in trust by a 3rd party, limiting their exposure to loss (people who generally can afford it far less) is no bad thing.

But no-one is forcing this upon landlords. The market is up, supply is tight which improves selling prices.. so sell. It seems to me that a lot of the landlords complaining are those who've been exploiting the loopholes and expecting to just "collect the cash" each month.

Well those days are coming to an end and while there's still a lot to do to address the problems like overholding and damage, it'd be nice to see these steps are the first stages in establishing renting as a professional and viable alternative to the "must get on the property ladder" nonsense that causes so many problems in this country in the first place.

13-09-2017 4:26pm

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Easy to say.. not so easy to do when, aside from supply issues forcing prices up, tenants are struggling to keep the roof they have, never mind save for another.

These measures will only impact those landlords who are trying to game the system by claiming "refurbishments" to evict tenants and then reletting at higher prices. For a genuine landlord I don't see the issue.

The issue is that most LLs who use the refurbishment or own use or selling reasons for ending a tenancy are genuinely doing one of them but yet you have people calling for these reasons for ending a tenancy to be removed.

My point is that there should always be a way for a property owner to gain back possession of their property, they own the property and that has to trump a tenants rights in certain circumstances.

Issues caused by tenants such as over holding are far more common than LLs pretending to move in so that they can evict tenants yet there are no measures being introduced to help out LL in these situations. A serious dose of cop on is needed for those making policies on tenancies etc.

4ensic15 · 13-09-2017 6:54pm

Living in leased accommodation and not paying the rent is theft. Thieves should be charged and be put in jail if they don't have a very good excuse.

Spanish Eyes · 13-09-2017 8:07pm

Being the cynic that I am, and the snail's pace of RTB interraction regarding disputes, I would expect the letter to tenant on termination notice will be received within 24hours of notification by landlord to RTB.

Ha Ha.

Anyway, a one month deposit rule will (as someone else said) only affect certain renters.

Yes those with good refs from good companies. Sorted.

And the day will come when certain or many companies will lease the property instead of the tenant. Soon to come your way. Brilliant.

Where does that leave everyone else?

Mrs Shuttleworth · 13-09-2017 8:09pm

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

These measures will only impact those landlords who are trying to game the system by claiming "refurbishments" to evict tenants and then reletting at higher prices. For a genuine landlord I don't see the issue.

That is completely incorrect. I have a tenant leaving next week of his own volition and he's paying €500 a month less than market rate. Strictly speaking I'm not allowed raise the rent to match other rents in the development and have to give a new tenant a statement of the old rent the outgoing tenant was paying. The property needs refurbishment which I'll be doing. But when that's complete I'll be renting out for corporate short lets or holiday lets solely.

subrosa · 13-09-2017 8:42pm

4ensic15 wrote: »

Living in leased accommodation and not paying the rent is theft. Thieves should be charged and be put in jail if they don't have a very good excuse.

Deposit retention is theft. Thieves should be charged and be put in jail if they don't have a very good excuse

robp · 13-09-2017 9:29pm

Im Germany and Italy the norm is two months rent for the deposit.

LuckyLloyd · 13-09-2017 9:30pm

Kassandra White Telegraph wrote: »

Another joke of a move. Some serious discrimination against LLs going on with all these new measures. Why is no one getting in the media to fight the corner for LLs, making points like the higher deposit is needed to cover potential damage or lost rental on the property worth hundreds of thousands rented to tenants who have far too much rights over the property and thus could costs the LL 10's of thousands.

That article is full of digs at LLs and then you have threashold in there too, a total rouge entity.

This is going one way in the media because people are dying in the streets, families are living miserable uncertain existences in temporary accommodation and couples earning good wages are struggling to buy homes. Remember that an important strand of the Irish Independence movement stemmed from an attempt to end landlordism. There is a small part of the national psyche that distrusts landlords.

As this forum attests to, landlords are attempting to use fake termination notices to get around RPZ rules. They are looking to use leverage in the market to push for higher deposits. They are withholding deposits at the end of tenancies for spurious reasons. And there is an undercurrent of how to work around or avoid the tenancy legislation as currently constructed.

Of course, most Landlords are getting on with it and most people can find accomodation that is workable. But in a non functioning market that is causing real consequences, if you truly ask Irish society whether they come down on the side of the few who cannot get a roof over their head or the few who suffer a lessor return on their property investment it should be clear to you which side is likely to win the argument.

The government are aware of this, and have embarked down a path on the problem. The logical conclusion of that path is legislating away the loopholes and gaps that Landlords can hide within, and they seem determined to reach that point.

TheShow · 13-09-2017 9:49pm

if the govt got off their asses and built affordable housing available to everyone, i.e. not just social housing, t a level to quell the demand, then we wouldn't have this problem. But they are refusing to do so and instead are putting more and more ridiculous outlandish demands on landlords.
Yes tenants need rights and certainty, but should landlords not be afforded the same? its now at the stage where you have no control who rents the property, you cant charge market rates, and you cant ask someone to leave, and on top of all that you get screwed on tax. Where is the benefit for owning an investment property. that's why i'm selling mine.

13-09-2017 10:09pm

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The government are aware of this, and have embarked down a path on the problem. The logical conclusion of that path is legislating away the loopholes and gaps that Landlords can hide within, and they seem determined to reach that point.

The reason LLs are looking for loopholes is because the government keep introducing idiotic rules. A LLs job is to make money that why he rents property and any LL is a fool not to try and maximise this profit at the lowest risk. Reversing the rules they have brought in and reducing tenants power to hold a LL to randsom in their property would do far more good than introducing more and more rules which are just going to make things worse.

As long as you have anti-constitutional (were they challenged) rent controls, a crowd in charge of tenancies who are crazily biased in favour of tenants (the RTB), tenants who can over hold with no punishment for years, no real mechanism for LLs to chase former tenants for rent or repair money owed etc etc etc they will continue to find alternaitves to long term letting and fair play to them I say. They are looking after themselves and their family as no one else will.

_Kaiser_ · 13-09-2017 10:37pm

Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »

That is completely incorrect. I have a tenant leaving next week of his own volition and he's paying €500 a month less than market rate. Strictly speaking I'm not allowed raise the rent to match other rents in the development and have to give a new tenant a statement of the old rent the outgoing tenant was paying. The property needs refurbishment which I'll be doing. But when that's complete I'll be renting out for corporate short lets or holiday lets solely.

I have a feeling that holiday/AirBnB lets will be next to be clamped down on - I've already seen reports of management companies banning it - and that's no bad thing. Commercial letting to corporates will similarly no doubt also be looked at if it takes off. It's a business-to-business transaction, with no doubt different taxation and zoning rules.

The bottom line is that yes, there aren't enough properties being built, yes some of these new rules are knee-jerk and go too far ... but people are struggling to keep a roof over their heads, many have lost it and are living in hotel rooms, and the problem is only getting worse and spreading further out.. both geographically and in terms of those affected.

LuckyLloyd sums it up... if it comes down to people being out on the streets, or landlords making less profit until the core supply issues are addressed.. well that's only going to end one way really.

Graham · 13-09-2017 10:41pm

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

LuckyLloyd sums it up... if it comes down to people being out on the streets, or landlords making less profit until the core supply issues are addressed.. well that's only going to end one way really.

Landlords leaving the market?

_Kaiser_ · 13-09-2017 10:44pm

Graham wrote: »

Landlords leaving the market?

And what happens then? They sell up, someone buys and probably vacates a rental in many cases. or maybe the new owner rents it themselves.

Or they try to sit on it and ride it out.. but the Government is already talking about forcing vacant property into use or be CPO'd.

Either way, landlords will have to play ball, like it or not.

Graham · 13-09-2017 11:19pm

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

And what happens then? They sell up, someone buys and probably vacates a rental in many cases. or maybe the new owner rents it themselves.

Or they try to sit on it and ride it out.. but the Government is already talking about forcing vacant property into use or be CPO'd.

Either way, landlords will have to play ball, like it or not.

I'm not remotely convinced large-scale CPOs are realistic or likely but that's another thread.

fash · 14-09-2017 7:59am

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Graham wrote: »

Landlords leaving the market?

And what happens then? They sell up, someone buys and probably vacates a rental in many cases. or maybe the new owner rents it themselves.

Or they try to sit on it and ride it out.. but the Government is already talking about forcing vacant property into use or be CPO'd.

Either way, landlords will have to play ball, like it or not.

That's fine for existing properties- however it reduces demand for the purchase of future properties constricting rental supply and forcing up rents until the rents are so high purchasing becomes attractive. Considering that rents to landlords are taxed at such a high rate however, the increase in rent required is extremely high. Thus this scenario results in higher rents and fewer rental properties of poorer quality.

murphaph · 14-09-2017 8:49am

robp wrote: »

Im Germany and Italy the norm is two months rent for the deposit.

In Germany it's three months.

Topgear on Dave · 14-09-2017 9:42am

murphaph wrote: »

In Germany it's three months.

And this is the European style renting I hear some politicians go on about on the radio. :rolleyes:

They only see the advantages and of course not the disadvantages.

Sad Professor · 14-09-2017 11:06am

They do a lot of other things in German and European rental markets that Irish landlords wouldn't be so mad about. I remember reading about a UK landlord who bought a property in Berlin without doing any research. They were shocked to discover their many obligations and the fact that the tenant (who came with the property) was almost impossible to evict as long as they paid their rent.

fash · 14-09-2017 11:09am

Sad Professor wrote: »

They do a lot of other things in German and European rental markets that Irish landlords wouldn't be so mad about. I remember reading about a UK landlord who bought a property in Berlin without doing any research. They were shocked to discover their many obligations and the fact that the tenant (who came with the property) was almost impossible to evict as long as they paid their rent.

Sounds like Ireland (certainly from a UK landlord perspective).

pwurple · 14-09-2017 11:10am

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

And what happens then? They sell up, someone buys and probably vacates a rental in many cases. or maybe the new owner rents it themselves.

Or they try to sit on it and ride it out.. but the Government is already talking about forcing vacant property into use or be CPO'd.

Either way, landlords will have to play ball, like it or not.

We are converting most of our residential units to commercial. It's too unsettled.

So, I'm taking my ball home.

Fian · 14-09-2017 11:42am

There is a cumulative effect from the drip feed of legal restrictions on Landlord's capability to deal with their asset as they choose. This is discouraging new entrants to the buy to let market and is therefore discouraging construction of appartments designed for investors. Which in turn is reducing supply, putting upward pressure on rents and reinforcing the feedback loop of further regulation.

There is a significant number of landlords who bought in the window where they pay no CGT on sale if they hold for 7 years. Those investors remain in place for the moment but I expect we will see significant numbers exiting when they can do so CGT free, further reducing rental supply.

I have two investment properties, one is a four bed house in galway city centre. When my 7 years are up i will certainly sell that, likely that a single family will buy it, since investors will be discouraged as mentioned above. One family will take up a house that is currently let to a greater number of people. More people will find themselves chasing a reducing rental supply. I guess Galway is not so bad, they will find accomodation outside the city but not at an impossible distance, though i guess public transport links will not be great. In dublin it would be worse.

The other is a one bed appartment in Dundrum, Dublin. I may retain that, will consider at the time. Will depend in large part on how much capital gains are there, I guess prices will be reduced somewhat since it is more suitable for BTL than for someone who intends to live in it, in any case a one bed appartment is likely to be filled with a couple regardless of whether it is being rented or not.

Another bright idea from government

Comments