Investment Firms Buying Estates

At the moment homelessness and the housing crisis is a hot topic and no one is going to put their neck out and say anything that might make put their re-election at risk.
I personally emailed and called TD's in my own area. Some had the nerve to say they didnt know anything. Others didnt reply and the ones that did basically shrugged their shoulders. There was a couple who were up in arms but only because the development was on their door step. Even at that the council didnt care. Their response was that a persons right to be housed trumps any concern any local may have, if they have the opportunity to get someone off their list and into a house then they are going to jump at it.

Bottom line they dont care. They have failed in their responsibility to build social homes on public land and this way they get to pass the buck to someone else. People who actually get off their arse and work are being screwed over in this country. They now are in competition with investments funds, housing agencies and local authority in order to be able to buy a home.

Looks like FF have seen which way the wind is blowing and are changing course.

Even the Strategic Housing Developments (SHD) framework is under review.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/fianna-f%C3%A1il-is-drowning-in-shadows-of-fine-gael-housing-policy-party-told-1.4556407

Is there anything to be said for the government lending developers money at 2% rather than the c. 17% that they pay banks/venture capital funds? Didn't ACC and ICC do similar in the past?

Might bring down the cost of building somewhat?

_ZeeK_ wrote: »

I’m renting in an estate with some social housing. It’s very hard to tell which houses are social and which are not. So, with that in mind, I don’t have a big issue with some allocation of social housing (along the lines of Part V)

Where I do have an issue is an estate full of renters. A temporary population knowing they don’t have a permanent stake in the community. I for instance, will take care of my home when I own it but, my current rented residence? I do the bare minimum to ensure it doesn’t go deteriorate beyond ‘reasonable wear and tear’. Social housing? It’s their home. They’re not moving. It will be home as much for them as it is for me.

Now, that’s why I started this post. Seeing REITs buying estates wholesale or portions of estates has me concerned. I think it would be a nightmare to own a home in an area where a large majority of the properties are rented out.

Just had to comment on this. Same thing happened to me in Cork, Citysquare Apartments. Moved in 2014 as a tenant. Surrounded by young working families with kids.

The kids played all together in the courtyard of the apartments always lively no late parties despite one or two tenants being dealt with for noise

2016 comes along, all of the buildings passed to Grand Thorton. October comes along house inspection from Grand Thorton, week later, rents raised 300€, 400€ over what people where paying I went from 850€ a month to 1200€ a month. On the rent increase letter they used the properties they had raised the rent too just down the road called Granary Court apartments. So they where practically monopolizing the rent increases themselves.

Tenants went to the radio, to Treshold, to RTB and the first ones got their rent increase reduced to the previous rate others where informed that the landlord (GT) had informed their apartments where being sold. This never happened, was just to take RTB off their backs basically...

Slowly the families started to leave. early 2017 I was the only tenant in my block of six apartments, all of the others apartments left empty for months. Noticed other blocks same thing happening. This while you hear about homelessness every day on the news...

2018 the apartments start filling with students and "young workers" I had underneath me and next to me house parties every week, the guys underneath me smoked heavily, making a BBQ at 3 AM shouting at each other. Some of these tenancies would last 6 months only, or a year tops. Not to mention they where putting 6, sometimes 8 people in 2 bed apartments.
Since the landlords never checked, I'm pretty sure the tenants where just subletting themselves as their rents where now close to 1600-1700 a month

Multiple times the managing company was called for this behavior, nothing was done, we even started ringing the Garda but it just becomes a "you can't beat them might as well move out"

We're talking parties, smoking,. noise coming from the apts. and at one point there was even someone vacuuming their apartment at 2 AM!

In 2018 the whole lot sold to a company in Cyprus called Lascara Limited. Everything just went into disarray.

The underground parking gate was broken for more than year, there where cars being burglarized and drug addicts going in there. There where then two companies involved to "maintain" the complex, Aramark to take care of the premises and Synergy for the security.

Synergy was hired to be there only 8 hours during the day, one guy for the whole complex... And Aramark was a joke completely... in late 2019 me and my partners cars where burglarized, central heating started to collapse completely with major leaks we could see on the underground parking. They also mentioned the CCTV cameras where old and did not work properly

Answer only through Aramark, because we never where able to contact the landlord in Cyprus ""any repairs possible are dependent on the landlords funds being available to do so"

In other words the landlord didn't care at all.

Some of the tenants tried to get together through a solicitor to put the landlord company in court, the solicitor simply said it was impossible because of it being a company in Cyprus.

Left in early 2020, by then there was only one family with kids resisting all of this behavior and this was after they increased my rent to 1260 a month which is not even the reason for me replying to this thread! If it was just the raise of the rent that wouldn't be a major issue as I could still afford it and in all honesty they where really good apartments. But literally leaving impressively good apartments left to be derelict and destroyed by a rotation of temporary tenants with zero care for where they live meant that every time a tenant left the apartments had to be fully refurbished. It was beyond ridiculous...

When I left the heating was still broken, as well as the front gate that was open 24/7 was still broken and the CCTV was still broken...

The funny part is that after I moved out I ended up being neighbors by pure chance with whom used to be the caretaker manager until 2015 of the whole complex!

This person got shocked at when I told them about all of this and explained to me how everything used to be run before being taken over by Grand Thorton.

Anyway, just mentioning the other side of the story...

hmmm wrote: »

Banning these funds is great and all, but you have to ask just who is going to fund the building new housing? Developers don't have the cash to be building apartment blocks and estates on spec, and they'll end up building 5 or 6 houses, selling them, building 5 or 6 houses, selling them etc. Private landlords aren't getting into renting any more, that again has been made uneconomic. I think most people don't want the SF solution of huge council estates.

There has to be a middle ground here, and something with a bit more nuance than what is being proposed. Unfortunately the politicians are being forced to take populist actions which they know will reduce supply which is desperately needed.

Perhaps something along the lines of a Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac like in the US? Or the government itself taking on the role of providing finance to developers?

I agree too with the posters above that people who are trying to buy a home getting outbid for social housing is just wrong.

I dont buy that the developers dont have funds. They have been building and selling for the last few years and plenty of developments have been sold privately. This is nothing more than a quick and easy buck for the developer. He gets to sell in bulk and get his money in bulk and move on. There are some developers that are building the initial phase, maybe 30 houses and when they sell they release more. So they are only building as they are selling. Its safer for them but time consuming and draws out the overall build.

The local authority also hold bonds over the developer so when they close a site they get that bond back.

I think there is a place in the market for rental buildings and this is where the investment funds could be beneficial. Ive lived abroad where whole apartments buildings were for rental only. Great managements, every apt has the exact same spec. These companies owned numerous buildings.

The semi D housing estates need to be left alone

Is the only way councils can get houses built now

Investment fund buys from developer en masse . Council leases above market rate for 30 years . Win win for developer and investment fund . No risk at all just profit

Is this sustainable ?