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! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Is it possible to buy house and rent it to previous owner under HAP etc?

2»

Comments

  • #52
    Thoie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,344 ✭✭✭Thoie


    OP, as the future potential landlord, have you read the landlord's guide to HAP leaflet? That sets out a lot of the things that must happen - including what the landlord needs to do to be compliant.

    The question of the suitability of the property that a few others have brought up is not negligible. Even though the person may have been living in the house fine for years, the fact that it will now be a rented property means that there are minimum requirements that must be met. For example, window restrictors fitted on windows above a certain height. You might need to add smoke/carbon monoxide alarms. If the house is generally in good repair, none of these should be very expensive. However, you can't say "sure, person A has lived there for years without a smoke alarm, he's not fussed about having one".

    This page sets out the tenant's obligations.


  • #53
    Donald Trump
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,254 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump


    Thoie wrote: »
    OP, as the future potential landlord, have you read the landlord's guide to HAP leaflet? That sets out a lot of the things that must happen - including what the landlord needs to do to be compliant.

    The question of the suitability of the property that a few others have brought up is not negligible. Even though the person may have been living in the house fine for years, the fact that it will now be a rented property means that there are minimum requirements that must be met. For example, window restrictors fitted on windows above a certain height. You might need to add smoke/carbon monoxide alarms. If the house is generally in good repair, none of these should be very expensive. However, you can't say "sure, person A has lived there for years without a smoke alarm, he's not fussed about having one".

    This page sets out the tenant's obligations.

    No, thanks for that but I will explain why I am not focusing on that for now.

    The reason I am not worried or asking about standards is that that could be sorted later and not a show stopper. As I tried to say to another poster earlier, once it is not an inherent characteristic of the property - such as being in the wrong location - then it is secondary. If it is just bringing it to standards then if it can be done it will be.

    If it needs a carbon monoxide alarm and there isn't one there now I am not concerned because it is a relatively easy fix. Not because I think it can be ignored should the "suggested plan" actually materialize. The person who would buy the house is doing it to help the ill person. And those standards are there for a reason. So if it's something that makes the place more comfortable or safer, it would be done.


    I'm getting an awful lot of snarky replies (not yours). I don't understand it. I fail to see how it could be perceived as somehow playing the system or a scam. The only real winners under my scenario are the state and other unsecured creditors who get repaid. The big loser financially is the person who purchases the house and rents it back at HAP rates. The ill person will have to be accommodated at the states expense in any case, although it might be nicer for their dignity to stay where they are and don't have to publicly suffer the embarrassment of being turfed out of their home.


  • #54
    sunnysoutheast
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,072 ✭✭✭sunnysoutheast


    Donald Trump wrote: »
    No, thanks for that but I will explain why I am not focusing on that for now.

    The reason I am not worried or asking about standards is that that could be sorted later and not a show stopper. As I tried to say to another poster earlier, once it is not an inherent characteristic of the property - such as being in the wrong location - then it is secondary. If it is just bringing it to standards then if it can be done it will be.

    If it needs a carbon monoxide alarm and there isn't one there now I am not concerned because it is a relatively easy fix. Not because I think it can be ignored should the "suggested plan" actually materialize. The person who would buy the house is doing it to help the ill person. And those standards are there for a reason. So if it's something that makes the place more comfortable or safer, it would be done.


    I'm getting an awful lot of snarky replies (not yours). I don't understand it. I fail to see how it could be perceived as somehow playing the system or a scam. The only real winners under my scenario are the state and other unsecured creditors who get repaid. The big loser financially is the person who purchases the house and rents it back at HAP rates. The ill person will have to be accommodated at the states expense in any case, although it might be nicer for their dignity to stay where they are and don't have to publicly suffer the embarrassment of being turfed out of their home.

    Person A might be able to establish their eligibility to join the housing list, and hence qualify for HAP, on the basis that the mortgage is unsustainable, prior to any potential sale of their house.

    If it was me I would investigate that option and get it answered before making any decisions regarding any sale, however noble the intentions might be.


Advertisement