Landlords to be responsible for ASBO tenants

The_Conductor wrote: »

There is a perception that there is additional profit to be made in letting furnished units- which quite simply is not the case. Tenants hate the furniture in rented units- it tends to be the cheapest tat that landlords can get hold of. Landlords hate supplying the cheap tat- because inevitably it has a limited span and needs to be replaced. The whole unit is subject to wear and tear- which the landlord is not allowed to enumerate- however, which is mitigated against on the continent. Tenants feel constrained by the landlords choice of colours, their furniture- and their inability to put their own stamp on a unit.........

Honestly I think that unfurnished units are a win-win for both tenants and landlords- there are very few downsides, other than the fact that tenants will have to factor the cost of their furniture into the equation, and if they are renting a furnished unit they will have to either store or dispose of their pre-existing furniture.

I think we should do a thorough overhaul of the sector and let everything unfurnished.

You summed this up perfectly. I wish the government would put into legislation that properties have to be rented unfurnished as this is the only way this will come into place.

Have any other countries had a similar issue to this. The initial hurdle of getting rid of all the existing furniture would cost the ll dearly unless there was some added incentive.

Del2005 wrote: »

People renting unfurnished would still need furniture, so there will be a market for some of the furniture. Just like when people buy a new home they sometimes start with 2nd hand stuff till they can afford what they want.

This will cost the ll a lot of money. Furniture is worthless after its used. If a ll spent 1k on a new couch 3 years before this comes in, they would be luck to get 200e back.

Pkiernan wrote: »

So, far left policies means that landlords cannot evict dirtbag ASBO tenants, but the same lefties want landlords fines when their ASBO tenants misbehave!

How have we ended up I this upside down world?

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/bad-neighbours-landlords-to-face-fines-if-they-fail-to-tackle-antisocial-behaviour-38244353.html

OP, instead of relying on sold out Irish media, I prefer to go directly to see what the jokers Irish politicians are proposing. This is the actual proposal to the Oireachtas with the usual double-speak title: "Residential Tenancies (Complaints of Anti-Social Behaviour and Neglect of Dwelling Exteriors) (Amendment) Bill 2019":
https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/bills/bill/2019/36/


It was presented to the Dáil as a private member bill by FF (little chance to be approved unless the govvie takes it in the next brutal amendment of the RTA coming next year), this was how it was presented on First Stage:


"This Bill will amend the Residential Tenancies Act 2004 in respect of third-party complaints. This is an important issue, as the Minister for Housing, Planning and Local Government and others are aware. The Bill aims to tackle directly antisocial behaviour in housing estates. It forms part of a broader suite of measures Fianna Fáil has put forward, such as boosting the number of gardaí, expanding antisocial behaviour orders, and putting residential support workers in place in social housing estates. Too many communities throughout Ireland are being intimidated by a handful of households. From outright antisocial behaviour to letting their properties fall into disrepair, which casts a shadow on the entire estate, a small minority is damaging the quality of life for the majority. This Bill will allow any third party to complain about antisocial behaviour to avoid specific neighbours being intimidated. In addition and importantly, it sets out standards for the exterior of a property that must be maintained, such as cleaning up rubbish and maintaining gardens, and it expands the powers of the Residential Tenancies Board, RTB, to terminate a tenancy in extreme cases. Many of us are able to spot the properties in housing estates that are rented, particularly at this time when we are canvassing with candidates and councillors throughout the country. Much of this is due to landlords not taking responsibility for the external upkeep of those properties. When complaints are made by neighbours of the affected properties, the RTB will not step in and log them as formal complaints. This can have a detrimental effect on the quality of life in the estate and also on the appearance of the estate.
This is an important issue. The Bill would give additional powers to the RTB. It would mean that I as a Deputy for Dublin Fingal could lodge a complaint on behalf of a resident in an estate. It would also mean that the landlord would have the responsibility of ensuring the property externally is kept up to standard. Currently, if litter and rubbish is being left in front or back gardens, the local authority will only get involved if it is deemed that there is an environmental health risk to neighbours or people living in the estate. I am introducing this Bill today and I intend to use Private Members' time in the coming weeks to move it forward on Second Stage. It will amend the Residential Tenancies Act 2004 to give these additional powers to the RTB and to expand the definition of affected parties, thereby giving neighbours in an estate the ability to lodge complaints about antisocial behaviour carried out by tenants, or indeed complaints about landlords who do not take responsibility to keep dwellings up to standard, which happens regularly in residential housing estates."



The part in red is absolutely false since the only thing that the bill is proposing to do is as usual: "screw the landlord" with fines that could be dealt with directly by the RTB officers "prosecuting" (again) the landlord and imposing big fines.



The joke of the bill (I would suggest reading the two pages of amendments) is that it does not increase at all the power of the landlord to kick out quickly an anti-social tenant, it is the usual hypocrite bill from an hypocrite Irish politician that is out to get more votes!


Landlords should be very worried about the next Amendment to the RTA coming from the govvie (probably to be approved before next election for maximum political gain), because the amount of brutal anti-landlord amendments will sky-rocket (this anti-landlord proposal will be probably included since Murphy at the Housing Committee debates on the last RTA amendments discussions said that he was willing to include it in the next RTA amendment bill), in addition to indefinite tenancies, some crazy rights to buy for "long" term tenants on the property they are renting was discussed plus other massive restrictions on eviction grounds.


The Irish politicians want to go back to the 60s Rent Restriction Act (a nice piece of socialist legislation that totally destroyed the private rental market in Ireland until the Supreme Court decided that it was uncostitutional in 1981), I would suggest a reading of it (historical errors are always repeated by populist/socialist politicians in search of easy votes on the skin of others):
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1960/act/42/enacted/en/html


BTW, the residential tenancie Act 2004-2019 has reached the considerable size of 217 pages of ultra-complicated sections referencing each other and other acts. If it continues like this it will become as big as a civil code and only a few specialized solicitors will understand it.

dermo888 wrote: »

Quite simple. There's a way of dealing with this and it was how General Gerald Templer defeated the Communists in Malaysia.

You'll have black zones - which are unsafe, and white zones which are safe.

Curfews imposed, power cuts, water cuts, until such time as the names of those causing trouble are given. To to this, and eliminate the scourge of skangerism we need a proper secret police, with extra judicial powers of a physical nature.

Do you think we'd have any international investors, multinationals or basically any capital left if Ireland looks like that? My guess - you'd soon have only black zones, as the white zones would turn black in no time due to lack of funds, unemployment, capital run away.

the_syco wrote: »

We need more European 60 floor apartment buildings, so that everyone can live "in Dublin". Also, the "European long term renting model" doesn't include furniture.
.

The furniture is not really an issue.

What we need is more of a nonprofit, or regulated profit, presence within the housing sector. In particular in renting. That means rapid incentives to Co-operative Housing*, along with public and affordable house building.

This will increase the renting percentage, reducing risks to the economy and reducing inequality. As a side adjunct, reducing antisocial behaviour.

* ( what Denmark and elsewhere in the continent did in the 60s with cohousing ( not coliving! )

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cohousing
"..Cohousing facilitates interaction among neighbors and thereby provides social, practical, economic, and environmental benefits.[2][.." )

The initial period something like this is introduced, it seems that ll will loose out as their furniture will be worthless to sell even though it might have another few years of life in it.

After the initial jump is over, it would be better for both ll and tenants I believe.

I would be ok to take a hit if ll weren’t already taking hits every year.

Pkiernan wrote: »

What does furniture have to do with ASBO tenants?

Someone mentioned the European models of rental and that then started discussion on furnished v unfurnished....

The_Conductor wrote: »

This is what people wanted- well, as the old Yiddish proverb goes, be careful what you wish for, you just might get it............

Honestly, Ireland could do with some corporate-owned apartment blocks. Actually, we could probably do with a *lot* of corporate-owned apartment blocks, given the current situation. Not saying that driving small landlords out of the market with onerous regulations is the way to get there, mind (it'd be better to actively incentivise the development and operation of those sort of apartment blocks somehow), but corporate-owned apartments would definitely offer more stability to tenants in the long term.