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
Do landlords in Ireland have it as tough as they think?
Options
Comments
-
andekwarhola wrote: »If you want to really blame somebody for the atrocious mismanagement of affordable rental properties in this country, look to the people that most of you no doubt voted into power in order to get a few quid extra in your pay packet every week.
Here's the thing NO ONE in the country seems to get...
Q: If you want a Council House or HAP, who do you go to?
A: Your local council.
So why in the Hell are people blaming the likes of FG for housing issues when the reality is they should be blaming their Local Councils?
Dún Laoghaire–Rathdown County Council - FG control this council, there is no housing issues here, it's a wealthy area.
South Dublin County Council - SF control this council, housing is in seriously short supply.
Fingal County Council - SF & FF control this council, another area where housing is in seriously short supply despite that fact there is a huge amount of green space to build on.
Dublin City Council - SF control this council, and there is no doubt that it's this area that has the biggest problem with housing in the country.
So what do we see from the above?
Sinn Fein have Majority in 3 of the 4 councils in the Dublin. The three they control are the most strapped for housing.
Yet it's Sinn Fein that bang on in the Dail about nothing being done.
It's their f**king job to build houses if people want them!!!!
Why are people blaming Fine Gael!?0 -
It's completely unprofitable to Rent a house that has a recently drawn down mortgage on it.
The only way you can make a living on being a Landlord is if you inherit a property.
This.
I'd hazard a guess that an awful lot of landlords in this country are probably just covering a mortgage, if at all.0 -
Here's the thing NO ONE in the country seems to get...
Q: If you want a Council House or HAP, who do you go to?
A: Your local council.
So why in the Hell are people blaming the likes of FG for housing issues when the reality is they should be blaming their Local Councils?
Dún Laoghaire–Rathdown County Council - FG control this council, there is no housing issues here, it's a wealthy area.
South Dublin County Council - SF control this council, housing is in seriously short supply.
Fingal County Council - SF & FF control this council, another area where housing is in seriously short supply despite that fact there is a huge amount of green space to build on.
Dublin City Council - SF control this council, and there is no doubt that it's this area that has the biggest problem with housing in the country.
So what do we see from the above?
Sinn Fein have Majority in 3 of the 4 councils in the Dublin. The three they control are the most strapped for housing.
Yet it's Sinn Fein that bang on in the Dail about nothing being done.
It's their f**king job to build houses if people want them!!!!
Why are people blaming Fine Gael!?
Fair point.
A lot of local authorities fudged the issue of social housing by telling developers to provide a percentage of integrated social housing units but then allowed them to pay a levy in lieu of the obligation (while not building replacement social housing) so now you have huge strain on the private rental sector with councils housing tenants there.0 -
My best landlord by far was the woman I first moved in with when I moved to England. I stayed in touch after moving out and I'm even going to the christening of her first child.
Did everything by the book and more importantly was a tenant herself in a previous life. I'm sorry but I'm more suspicious of a landlord who never had to rent himself.0 -
andekwarhola wrote: »This.
I'd hazard a guess that an awful lot of landlords in this country are probably just covering a mortgage, if at all.
It does have to be pointed out (again) that even if they're not, they are still in profit but it's tied up in equity in the property. The cash flow is a minus which is a problem when they're expected to deal with a non-paying tenant for a year or more.0 -
Advertisement
-
Landlords definitely play the poor mouth a bit, but equally non-landlords have an inflated sense of how wealthy landlords become. The landlord takes home about half after tax if paying at the high rate, and has to pay a mortgage out of that. I don't think that's bad though because even if you pay all the rental income on the mortgage you're acquiring a huge asset.
The number of unscrupulous landlords (yes, there are many) means that the law has to be completely in favour of the tenant. This can be an absolute nightmare and I've seen cases where people are paying sizable mortgages but end up without rent for months on end if a tenant won't pay or vacate. Add court costs and legal costs on top and the landlord is thousands out of pocket, all the while knowing there isn't a hope of recouping from the tenant so it's a large bill just to get back what's rightfully your own.
I saw here that a poster said Irish landlords are the worst they've seen. Definitely disagree. In Sydney where I lived for a while both landlords I dealt with were extremely dodgy, would never fix anything, and it cost a king's ransom in rent. The second place I lived a number of tenants had to leave because the landlord had made four bedrooms by putting up partitions in what used to be a sitting room. The council called and it had to be taken down only. This was shocking enough but then one day I returned home and there are five people working in an office which had been put up in its place literally overnight. Was definitely the worst and most precarious living experience I've had.0 -
andekwarhola wrote: »A lot of local authorities fudged the issue of social housing by telling developers to provide a percentage of integrated social housing units but then allowed them to pay a levy in lieu of the obligation (while not building replacement social housing) so now you have huge strain on the private rental sector with councils housing tenants there.
AND to add to that, they allowed long term social housing tenants to buy the houses they were renting off the council for a fraction of the cost of what they were worth.
There is lots of social housing close to me that was sold to tenants about 3 or 4 years ago. Dublin 5 area, average price a to buy is around €60,000 after living in them for 15 years. Council organises the loan and all, little or no interest on it.
Each time this happens the, council has a loses a Unit of housing AND loses a fortune.
It's a mental setup.0 -
AND to add to that, they allowed long term social housing tenants to buy the houses they were renting off the council for a fraction of the cost of what they were worth.
There is lots of social housing close to me that was sold to tenants about 3 or 4 years ago. Dublin 5 area, average price a to buy is around €60,000 after living in them for 15 years. Council organises the loan and all, little or no interest on it.
Each time this happens the, council has a loses a Unit of housing AND loses a fortune.
It's a mental setup.
You'll probably disagree, but I do think allowing a proportion of long term residents to buy there does have positive social effects in areas and makes them more stable.
That said, doing it in a vacuum of no meaningful levels of replacement social housing construction (for decades now) is mental, I agree.0 -
The number of unscrupulous landlords (yes, there are many) means that the law has to be completely in favour of the tenant. This can be an absolute nightmare and I've seen cases where people are paying sizable mortgages but end up without rent for months on end if a tenant won't pay or vacate. Add court costs and legal costs on top and the landlord is thousands out of pocket, all the while knowing there isn't a hope of recouping from the tenant so it's a large bill just to get back what's rightfully your own.
The law shouldn't and need not completely favour the tenant (or the landlord for that matter), it should favour the wronged party whether that be the tenant or the landlord.
Currently it seems that if anything goes wrong it's a long drawn out process for both with huge gaps in enforcement that makes a lot of the legislation completely ineffectual.
Tenant stops paying, 18 months to get them out.
New tenant being charged more than legally allowed, no database of existing rents so how would they know.
etc
etc0 -
Why should the taxpayer subsidise your accidental/bad investment?
They don't. But that question should be redirected to ask why should the taxpayer be subsidising bad tenants. I see a lot of issues on boards of rents paid as part of social welfare not being used to pay rent.
How is that behaviour not nipped in the bud and rents paid directly? There will always be some scammers trying to ride the system. There are also good tennants and good landlords.0 -
Advertisement
-
andekwarhola wrote: »You'll probably disagree, but I do think allowing a proportion of long term residents to buy there does have positive social effects in areas and makes them more stable.
That said, doing it in a vacuum of no meaningful levels of replacement social housing construction (for decades now) is mental, I agree.
In fairness your point is made nowhere more than Dublin 5 which has seen some areas go from virtual no go areas to lovely places to live.0 -
Heh. It's a complicated issue because people are sh1t, really.They don't. But that question should be redirected to ask why should the taxpayer be subsidising bad tenants. I see a lot of issues on boards of rents paid as part of social welfare not being used to pay rent.
How is that behaviour not nipped in the bud and rents paid directly? There will always be some scammers trying to ride the system. There are also good tennants and good landlords.
Reasons not to pay it directly to landlords included scams that landlords might run to continue claiming HAP after a resident has been evicted, or to extract more rent from a tenant because it gave the landlord "control" over the payment. If the tenant gets the money, they control the payment of the rent. The requirement of a landlord to provide bank details also makes it easier to discriminate against HAP recipients.
Reasons not to pay it to tenants include similar scams of underpaying or not paying landlords.
So striking a balance is difficult.0 -
Why should there be mortgage interest relief? I always thought it was a solid piece of advice to never borrow money to make an investment so why encourage it for one-off or small-scale landlords?0
-
steddyeddy wrote: »I think some landlords in Ireland have a tendency to play the poor mouth. In receipt of the biggest rents in the history of the state, yet they're very vocal about how they're mistreated by the government ect. I get that there needs to be more protection against bad tenants but anyone who has rented has encountered their own share of dodgy landlords too.
I think it grates on people that they're moaning about life during a housing crisis which ultimately benefits them and makes it harder for tenants even on a decent wage. I lived and rented in other countries and currently live in the UK and I have to say the standard of service is far higher in other places. One thing that Irish landlords never seemed to get is the fact that once they rent a property out it's someone else's residence. You don't get to turn up unannounced and walk around.
So to sum up the cool story bro I think that Irish landlords really shouldn't feel like the victims in the housing crisis. Yes some things could work better but as a group they could be doing a lot worse.
This. In my renting days you'd always get this. In one building this nosey busybody creep of a woman was the supervisor and she used to enter peoples rooms when they were out and poke around, she had the keys for them all.0 -
^^^ This ^^^
is ALOT of people.
It's completely unprofitable to Rent a house that has a recently drawn down mortgage on it.
The only way you can make a living on being a Landlord is if you inherit a property.
The other option is Air B&B. Short term lets are 0 hassle and quite profitable.
But the government don't want this now*, and could be planning to make a move against it.
I think it's a bad idea, interfering with the Free Market always makes things worse.
This times 100!!
By my reckoning if you are going to borrow on a buy-to-let you need to be buying at least 3 and preferably 5 properties (in Dublin) to give you adequate turnover and enough contingency.
I don't know how people who have one property and/or who are accidental landlords manage.
We were lucky in the sense we inherited a 50% share in a property and managed to buy out the other share at a very reasonable price (wife and brother-in-law inherited and we bought out his interest in the property and sold her interest in another property to him!!).
The intention was to have it for the kids if they went to uni in Dublin (they didn't!!), so we set it.
We'd love nothing better than a decent tenant (i.e. one who treats the property reasonably and pays the rent generally when agreed) but after the last experience (which effectively wiped out our contingency fund) we've opted for Air BnB and short-term executive lets through an agency. We simply couldn't or wouldn't take the chance of another bad tenant while we've no contingency.0 -
Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »In fairness your point is made nowhere more than Dublin 5 which has seen some areas go from virtual no go areas to lovely places to live.andekwarhola wrote: »You'll probably disagree, but I do think allowing a proportion of long term residents to buy there does have positive social effects in areas and makes them more stable.
That said, doing it in a vacuum of no meaningful levels of replacement social housing construction (for decades now) is mental, I agree.
I'd agree with you both, but it depends on who's buying.
My point it that it's very unfair. In Kilbarrack alone there's be 14 properties sold well below (1/3) of their value.
21/05/2010 €63,750.00 21 Mount Olive Park, Kilbarrack, Dublin
08/12/2011 €55,000.00 ** 93 Briarfield Road, Kilbarrack, Dublin 5, Dublin 5, Dublin
17/10/2012 €67,975.00 ** 38 Greendale Road, Kilbarrack, Dublin 5
01/05/2012 €88,275.00 ** 9 Briarfield Walk, Kilbarrack, Dublin 5, Dublin
03/10/2013 €59,125.00 ** 64 Mount Olive Grove, Kilbarrack, Dublin 5
17/07/2013 €70,685.00 ** 41 Mount Olive Grove, Kilbarrack, Dublin 5
10/07/2013 €64,790.00 ** 95 Mount Olive Grove, Kilbarrack, Dublin 5
15/07/2014 €92,500.00 ** 66 BRIARFIELD RD, KILBARRACK, DUBLIN 5, Dublin 5
10/04/2015 €116,528.14 ** 48 THORNVILLE AVE, KILBARRACK, DUBLIN 5, Dublin 5
27/10/2015 €21,000.00 ** 15 BRIARFIELD RD KILBARRACK, DUBLIN 5, DUBLIN, Dublin 5
14/12/2016 €98,413.43 ** 66 BRIARFIELD RD, KILBARRACK, DUBLIN 5, Dublin 5
05/10/2017 €114,000.00 ** 53, SAINT BERACHS PLACE, KILBARRACK DUBLIN 5, Dublin 5
06/07/2017 €92,500.00 ** 12 THORNVILLE PARK, KILBARRACK, DUBLIN 5, Dublin 5
29/05/2018 €105,000.00 ** 20, MOUNT OLIVE ROAD, KILBARRACK DUBLIN 5, Dublin 5
14 units gone with no replacement units built. Mind you 66 BRIARFIELD RD was sold twice for below market value, wonder what that's about.
Those are all council estate houses that have been sol to their tenants in the last 8 years.
I'd have bought a house in Thornville if I was able to get it for €100,000. It's not bad around there, but that's not open to me.0 -
Heh. It's a complicated issue because people are sh1t, really.
Reasons not to pay it directly to landlords included scams that landlords might run to continue claiming HAP after a resident has been evicted, or to extract more rent from a tenant because it gave the landlord "control" over the payment. If the tenant gets the money, they control the payment of the rent. The requirement of a landlord to provide bank details also makes it easier to discriminate against HAP recipients.
Reasons not to pay it to tenants include similar scams of underpaying or not paying landlords.
So striking a balance is difficult.
It is illegal to withhold rent afaik. If the tennant thinks that there is a problem - they have the right of redress or report problems via the relevant authorities.
In that situation the tennant is getting social payment to pay rent. It is not their private money to hold onto because they feel like it.0 -
Landlords definitely play the poor mouth a bit, but equally non-landlords have an inflated sense of how wealthy landlords become. The landlord takes home about half after tax if paying at the high rate, and has to pay a mortgage out of that. I don't think that's bad though because even if you pay all the rental income on the mortgage you're acquiring a huge asset.
The number of unscrupulous landlords (yes, there are many) means that the law has to be completely in favour of the tenant. This can be an absolute nightmare and I've seen cases where people are paying sizable mortgages but end up without rent for months on end if a tenant won't pay or vacate. Add court costs and legal costs on top and the landlord is thousands out of pocket, all the while knowing there isn't a hope of recouping from the tenant so it's a large bill just to get back what's rightfully your own.
I saw here that a poster said Irish landlords are the worst they've seen. Definitely disagree. In Sydney where I lived for a while both landlords I dealt with were extremely dodgy, would never fix anything, and it cost a king's ransom in rent. The second place I lived a number of tenants had to leave because the landlord had made four bedrooms by putting up partitions in what used to be a sitting room. The council called and it had to be taken down only. This was shocking enough but then one day I returned home and there are five people working in an office which had been put up in its place literally overnight. Was definitely the worst and most precarious living experience I've had.
Landlords aren't all or even mostly wealthy. They have however exemption from renting their own place. That's one of the most expensive elements in Irish society and a huge privilege to have. Furthermore you also get to use your house as an asset as a revenue generator.0 -
To be fair, the mortgage interest relief change is simply normalising the situation for landlords as business owners.Deleted User wrote: »Why should there be mortgage interest relief? I always thought it was a solid piece of advice to never borrow money to make an investment so why encourage it for one-off or small-scale landlords?
Anyone running any other business can claim 100% tax relief on the interest on their business loan. So in this regard landlords aren't being "rewarded" such much as equalised.
Odd numbers in the register usually mean that VAT was charged on the sale - the register doesn't include the VAT.Mind you 66 BRIARFIELD RD was sold twice for below market value, wonder what that's about.
If you look at street view, that house was significantly upgraded, so a builder may have bought it, gutted it and then sold it on again, having done enough work to merit the charging of VAT on it.0 -
I'd agree with you both, but it depends on who's buying.
My point it that it's very unfair. In Kilbarrack alone there's be 14 properties sold well below (1/3) of their value.
21/05/2010 €63,750.00 21 Mount Olive Park, Kilbarrack, Dublin
08/12/2011 €55,000.00 ** 93 Briarfield Road, Kilbarrack, Dublin 5, Dublin 5, Dublin
17/10/2012 €67,975.00 ** 38 Greendale Road, Kilbarrack, Dublin 5
01/05/2012 €88,275.00 ** 9 Briarfield Walk, Kilbarrack, Dublin 5, Dublin
03/10/2013 €59,125.00 ** 64 Mount Olive Grove, Kilbarrack, Dublin 5
17/07/2013 €70,685.00 ** 41 Mount Olive Grove, Kilbarrack, Dublin 5
10/07/2013 €64,790.00 ** 95 Mount Olive Grove, Kilbarrack, Dublin 5
15/07/2014 €92,500.00 ** 66 BRIARFIELD RD, KILBARRACK, DUBLIN 5, Dublin 5
10/04/2015 €116,528.14 ** 48 THORNVILLE AVE, KILBARRACK, DUBLIN 5, Dublin 5
27/10/2015 €21,000.00 ** 15 BRIARFIELD RD KILBARRACK, DUBLIN 5, DUBLIN, Dublin 5
14/12/2016 €98,413.43 ** 66 BRIARFIELD RD, KILBARRACK, DUBLIN 5, Dublin 5
05/10/2017 €114,000.00 ** 53, SAINT BERACHS PLACE, KILBARRACK DUBLIN 5, Dublin 5
06/07/2017 €92,500.00 ** 12 THORNVILLE PARK, KILBARRACK, DUBLIN 5, Dublin 5
29/05/2018 €105,000.00 ** 20, MOUNT OLIVE ROAD, KILBARRACK DUBLIN 5, Dublin 5
14 units gone with no replacement units built. Mind you 66 BRIARFIELD RD was sold twice for below market value, wonder what that's about.
Those are all council estate houses that have been sol to their tenants in the last 8 years.
I'd have bought a house in Thornville if I was able to get it for €100,000. It's not bad around there, but that's not open to me.
You missed my gaffe :pac:0 -
Advertisement
-
There isnt any available. Instead we have vast sums of taxpayer's money being transferred into the hands of private landlords via rent allowance while rent is also inflated massively for everyone else in the cities thus allowing landlords to make a fortune.
Coincidentally the government which allows this to happen is ideologically allergic to state housing despite it being badly needed, and lo and behold, the same government has a massive percentage of people who are also landlords.
plenty of left wing talking points there , il try and address some of them .
first of all the likes of HAP suits both the government ( especially the local authorities ) and the tax payer as number one its a lot cheaper than building houses , HAP is paid to the landlord but he or she ends up paying half of that rent back in income taxes so if say a grand each month is paid out in HAP , the NET cost to the state is only 500 .
secondly and more importantly , the local authorities do not want to be in the business of either spending money maintaining houses or collecting rent , there is a chronic number of local authority tenants who dont pay their rent at all despite the rent being a fraction of what private renters pay , due to politics , its impossible to evict these non payers .
much better to shift the task and risk on to the landlords and as mentioned earlier , half the rent the landlord manages to collect is paid back in income taxes anyway .
you mentioned ideology , the only ideology which prevails right now is that of the left wing media and left wing politicans who oppose the idea of private property earning income full stop , we are swamped with left wing ideology in this country on a daily basis and it has created a truly toxic and false narrative when it comes to the issue of landlords , tenants and property in general .0 -
If landlords have a problem there’s a simple solution.
Sell up and invest your money elsewhere.
Not interested in your whinging.
If tenants have a problem there's a simple solution.
Save up and buy a house or declare homeless and live in a hotel at states expense.
Not interested in your whinging
Simple statements like the 2 above help nobody and should be avoided.0 -
So Fine Gael are a party with a left wing ideology?roger_rabbit wrote: »you mentioned ideology , the only ideology which prevails right now is that of the left wing media and left wing politicans who oppose the idea of private property earning income full stop , we are swamped with left wing ideology in this country on a daily basis and it has created a truly toxic and false narrative when it comes to the issue of landlords , tenants and property in general .
Delusional.
The bolded part is simple. Why should parasitic non working passive income be encouraged?0 -
andekwarhola wrote: »You'll probably disagree, but I do think allowing a proportion of long term residents to buy there does have positive social effects in areas and makes them more stable.
That said, doing it in a vacuum of no meaningful levels of replacement social housing construction (for decades now) is mental, I agree.
Makes complete sense to allow tenants to buy. As long as you building some feckin houses to balance it! You’re bang on. It’s absolutely nuts not to.they/them/theirs
And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek
0 -
marieholmfan wrote: »The bolded part is simple. Why should parasitic non working passive income be encouraged?
Landlords didn't just get their property for free.
It take generations of hard work and planning to accumulate enough wealth that you can afford live off it.
I myself am in this chain.
My Grandparents had nothing, but they planned their families (well one side did).
This means when they pass on their wealth it will go to just 2 offspring instead of say 6 (which would have been common at the time). My parents in turn both worked and only had 2. I've only had one (and won't be having anymore)
I'll never be a position where I could live off property accumulated through inheritance, but my kids kid might. That is if my kid doesn't **** up the chain and have 4 or 5 kids.
Genuinely I'd love to be able to pass on wealth to my kids kids such to the extent that they could live off it. They'd be able to do something meaningful with their life instead of working on a building site or in a Bank.Makes complete sense to allow tenants to buy. As long as you building some feckin houses to balance it! You’re bang on. It’s absolutely nuts not to.
Do you not think it's unfair?
Person A: rents off the council for 15 years at around €500 a month, after the 15 years they are given the option to buy for €60,000
Person B: rents off a private land lord for 15 years at around €1500 a month, after the 15 years if they want to buy the house they have to pay full market price IE €350,000 approx
How is this fair?0 -
Landlords didn't just get their property for free.
It take generations of hard work and planning to accumulate enough wealth that you can afford live off it.
I myself am in this chain.
My Grandparents had nothing, but they planned their families (well one side did).
This means when they pass on their wealth it will go to just 2 offspring instead of say 6 (which would have been common at the time). My parents in turn both worked and only had 2. I've only had one (and won't be having anymore)
I'll never be a position where I could live off property accumulated through inheritance, but my kids kid might. That is if my kid doesn't **** up the chain and have 4 or 5 kids.
Genuinely I'd love to be able to pass on wealth to my kids kids such to the extent that they could live off it. They'd be able to do something meaningful with their life instead of working on a building site or in a Bank.
Plenty of people do something meaningful with their lives while paying a mortgage. That’s a weird outlook.they/them/theirs
And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek
0 -
Here's the thing NO ONE in the country seems to get...
Q: If you want a Council House or HAP, who do you go to?
A: Your local council.
So why in the Hell are people blaming the likes of FG for housing issues when the reality is they should be blaming their Local Councils?
Dún Laoghaire–Rathdown County Council - FG control this council, there is no housing issues here, it's a wealthy area.
South Dublin County Council - SF control this council, housing is in seriously short supply.
Fingal County Council - SF & FF control this council, another area where housing is in seriously short supply despite that fact there is a huge amount of green space to build on.
Dublin City Council - SF control this council, and there is no doubt that it's this area that has the biggest problem with housing in the country.
So what do we see from the above?
Sinn Fein have Majority in 3 of the 4 councils in the Dublin. The three they control are the most strapped for housing.
Yet it's Sinn Fein that bang on in the Dail about nothing being done.
It's their f**king job to build houses if people want them!!!!
Why are people blaming Fine Gael!?
Because ShinnernomicsFirst they came for the socialists...
0 -
Landlords didn't just get their property for free.
It take generations of hard work and planning to accumulate enough wealth that you can afford live off it.
I myself am in this chain.
My Grandparents had nothing, but they planned their families (well one side did).
This means when they pass on their wealth it will go to just 2 offspring instead of say 6 (which would have been common at the time). My parents in turn both worked and only had 2. I've only had one (and won't be having anymore)
I'll never be a position where I could live off property accumulated through inheritance, but my kids kid might. That is if my kid doesn't **** up the chain and have 4 or 5 kids.
Genuinely I'd love to be able to pass on wealth to my kids kids such to the extent that they could live off it. They'd be able to do something meaningful with their life instead of working on a building site or in a Bank.
Do you not think it's unfair?
Person A: rents off the council for 15 years at around €500 a month, after the 15 years they are given the option to buy for €60,000
Person B: rents off a private land lord for 15 years at around €1500 a month, after the 15 years if they want to buy the house they have to pay full market price IE €350,000 approx
How is this fair?
Fair? That’s subjective. I don’t really know one way or other.
Does it make sense to allow long term tenants to buy? Subjective again, but I believe it does. It means a more stable community can grow and eliminates a lot of social issues in an area that can come from a constantly changing demographic.
Have you ever lived in a social housing scheme? I grew up in one.they/them/theirs
And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek
0 -
No, they do not.0
-
Advertisement
-
Fair? That’s subjective. I don’t really know one way or other.
Does it make sense to allow long term tenants to buy? Subjective again, but I believe it does. It means a more stable community can grow and eliminates a lot of social issues in an area that can come from a constantly changing demographic.
Have you ever lived in a social housing scheme? I grew up in one.
It makes sense to sell the asset if it's not performing.
If people are paying rent then the income stream can be re-cycled to generate capital to build more houses.
The problem with social housing is that the discount against the market rent is waaaaaaaay too generous and the amount of tenants not paying is too high.
People get a property that suits their needs and their ability to pay, but then that's never reviewed. There should be more frequent reviews (of need and affordability) and more energetic management of the social housing stock.......so we can have more of it.0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement