# Government interference with Daft and My home - rent allowance



## Bronte (12 May 2014)

What business is it of the dept of social welfare to tell a private company what they should do in relation to how they run their business, as per the following link where the two companies have been asked to no longer give landlords the option of declaring whether they take rent allowance tenants or not:

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/soci...f-rent-allowance-filter-on-searches-1.1791523

Landlords are free agents and do not have to accept rent allowance tenants. It would be better if government concentrated on the following:

1. Increasing the rent allowance instead of putting families into hotels
2. Monitoring the standard of accommodation (in all my years in business no state agency has ever inspected the accommodation I offer)
3. Start building houses in the greater Dublin area for those on the waiting list, or how about this radical suggestion, buying up the vast amounts of properties that people cannot sell and using that as social housing, it would then give a nice spread rather than creating ghettos
4. If they won't do 3, then encourage developers and banks to start building in the great Dublin area
5. Sort out the mess that is rent allowance, pay it directly to landlords, with a new system where by a landlord will not be left on the hook for weeks on end while the Dept gets it's paperwork in order, or the riduculouos situation whereby the tenant pockets the rent and tells the landlord where to go. With pre inspected properties so these tenants can go into suitable properties, not the worst properties as is currently the case.
6. Sort out a reasonable system for eviction of non paying tenants, and sort out the PRTB.

And Threashold, instead of 'inferring' to tenants it's ok to stay in a place and not pay rent etc, how about lobbying for a change to the rules on eviction for bad tenants.  You know the ones that are playing the system and have no intention of paying rent and destroy the house as a parting gift.


----------



## delgirl (12 May 2014)

+1  Great post Bronte.  Would be great if the powers that be would listen, but I doubt it.


----------



## Bronte (12 May 2014)

And you know what Delgirl, we'll hear the usual nonsense that landlords are being overpaid by the government when the truth is that in Dublin the market is dictating that rents are higher than social welfare levels.  

Forgot to add the following:

When social welfare reduce their ceilings, they dictate this to the tenant and cut the rent, tenant is then supposed to 'negotiate' with landlord, but in effect they have to serve notice to quit (unless a landlord is like me and reduces - as I prefer long term tenants over short term gain of eviction and all the hassle).  Meanwhile tenant doesn't now have the correct rent.  But if a tenant has signed a lease, as in stability, which is what the Dept, Threshold want, all of suddent the rug is pulled out from everybody, landlord and tenant.   No joined up thinking.


----------



## Butter (12 May 2014)

Threshold & Focus would be better to lobby government to get rent allowance upped to cover the cost of renting in the private sector adequately. 

If the state will not/can not provide enough social housing then it should be prepared to meet the cost of accommodation in the private sector. 

I have seen posters in Dublin arguing for rent control because of landlords "profiteering" now that rents have finally started to rise again. I saw no mention of rent control when rents were falling. 

I agree with your points Bronte. Many of them would create a fairer system for both tenant & landlord. 

Ultimately a private landlord can & should stipulate exactly the type of tenant they want to hand their asset over to.


----------



## Trustmeh (12 May 2014)

I agree with you that the current "no RA accepted" is simply a factor of the market - and asking daft to change their filter is laughable.



Bronte said:


> 5. Sort out the mess that is rent allowance, pay it directly to landlords,



I disagree with this proposed solution. I think it would be more fair on all sides if the tenant no longer needed to disclose that they are RAS to the LL in the first place.  Give back the tenants some dignity, and remove the fear of LL's prejudice based solely on source of income. (I suspect that many RAS tenants would still get the cold shoulder from a LL that can spot trouble signs) 

Hear me out. I would like to see a system, like the PRTB, that was useful. It could manage registrations, it could deal with deposits, it could handle meditations, and hold a proper true record of a tenant/LL references. (Not the PRTB tho, outsource this sucker)

If we had a tenants/landlords "LinkedIN/Facebook" where everything was neatly tracked, finding the bad apples on both sides would be much easier to find.  This would have the potential to improve communities as there would be a real incentive for both sides to keep up their behavior.


----------



## Dermot (12 May 2014)

I'm with you on this Bronte. I am a landlord and having be burned by the RA system as have others I think it is a silly proposal by the Gov. to filter out the RA not accepted in the adds.
I and most experienced landlords/letting agents will figure out the source of income within minutes of meeting them. You will have a fair idea of who is likely to cause anti social behaviour (otherwise PRTB will hold Landlord responsible for tenants anti social behaviour).  The "RA not accepted" is saving these people the time of looking at property they are most likely not going to get.  I accept RA in certain situations.  The next thing labour will be suggesting is that Landlords will have to take a quota of RA tenants and if that works they might wish us to have a quota with convictions for Anti Social Behaviur.


----------



## Delboy (12 May 2014)

'Increase rent allowance'!!!! A radical proposal from and supported by landlords! A race to the top if you will.
It's right up there with Jack O'Connor's call for higher wages to stimulate the economy. Or Joan Burton's assertion that cutting welfare rates is bad for the economy!

Can't wait to hear the calls for the return of the first time buyer's grant. That was a great success in 'helping' young folk get on the ladder back in the glory days.

Increased rent allowance only leads to increased rents, esp in a heated market like this currently is in Dublin


----------



## Dermot (12 May 2014)

As regards rents in Dublin are expensive and costing the Gov. quite a lot of money in RA and rents are going to continue to increase in the larger urban areas and this is going to cause problems for both private and RA customers.  Points 3 and 4 by Bronte or a combination of both need to be considered by Gov.  
The Gov. for whatever reason seem to continue to allocate money for Social Housing to Local Authorities without much logic.  There are quite a number of local Authority Areas which have a surplus of private rented accommodation available at quite low prices which in real terms is being rented at uneconomic rents but the Gov keeps allocating more money for social housing which does not make sense to me.
The point that I am making is that while resources are limited that the Gov. should be making more money available to places like Dublin and cutting back the scarce resources in other areas until things improve.

I would make one other point that there should be some severe form of punishment for those who vandalise either public or private property. There seems to be a great tolerance of this in this country.  The evidence is there for all to see and there is an enormous cost to this.  This cost never  appears to be reflected in the cost of providing social housing.
It is time that this small percentage of people are dealt with severely.


----------



## Gerard123 (12 May 2014)

Great post Bronte, well said.

In no ones interest, least of all a proper and fair landlord, to have a wildly fluctuating rent. I didn't hear much demand for rent controls when rents were falling 30 and 40 per cent and tenants were phoning seeking lower rents.  At same time don't want to see rents go too far the other way as it will draw people in for a quick buck.  

Far better all around to have a proper rental market, where there is reasonable security for tenants, landlords are allowed make a reasonable market return, proper standards apply and are enforced by a proper agency, and rents are not allowed to fluctuate wildly either way, generally, though responsive to long term market needs and conditions.  Win win all around. 

Also the sector is treated ridiculously in terms of tax treatment. Ridiculous for politicians to be seeking rent caps while disallowing a quarter of the interest charge, imposing local taxes for services onto landlords, etc.  

As far as I can see one of the biggest single contributors to a mess in the market is constant govt changing of the rules and interference.  Need Long term planning, not short term opportunism or populist policies for short term gain to win elections.  

Proper and fair policies for tenants will also lead to an approach that works for landlords I believe.


----------



## Dermot (12 May 2014)

Agreed Gerard123.

PRTB and Threshold need to readjust their prejudices as well as elements in Government.   Agencies like this show no acknowledgement that the vast majority of Landlords are good.

There are a lot of good Landlords as well as good Tenants out there.


----------



## Bronte (13 May 2014)

Trustmeh said:


> Hear me out. I would like to see a system, like the PRTB, that was useful. It could manage registrations, it could deal with deposits, it could handle meditations, and hold a proper true record of a tenant/LL references. (Not the PRTB tho, outsource this sucker)
> 
> .


 
I agree with you on a register of good and bad landlords and tenants.  Perhaps a scale and a scale on quality of accommodation too.  

In relation to the PRTB, they are absolutely useless.  Last week I had a look at my online registrations as I had to re register a 4 year tenancy, and you know what I cannot figure out at all the way they have it, with old tenancies there etc.  It's a total mess, if they cannot make that user friendly etc.  And then I looked for a phone number, none. Argh.  I'll try again today as I decided to wait a few days until I calm down.  

Landlords have to fill out a social welfare form for the tenants, and they also nowadays have to prove they are the landlord (insurance or NPPR does this) so I don't see how landlrods would not know a tenant was receiving RA..

What I do not know and cannot ever get confirmed, are RA tenants worse than normal tenants.  Not in my experience.  Or it is true that in certain particular areas there are issues with RA tenants.  Let's say inner city Dublin, parts of Limerick, I don't know.


----------



## Bronte (13 May 2014)

Delboy said:


> 'Increase rent allowance'!!!! A radical proposal from and supported by landlords! A race to the top if you will.
> 
> Can't wait to hear the calls for the return of the first time buyer's grant. That was a great success in 'helping' young folk get on the ladder back in the glory days.


 
Funny you should state the second paragraph, we now have a new hairbrained scheme for first time buyers (ie for developers, not first time buyers) I haven't figured it out yet, but I guarantee you it will not help first time buyers, as the grant never did anything only increase the purchase price, it was a total nonsense. 

I'm not advocating rent increases for landlords, you miss my point, I couldn't care less personally, but something has to be done in Dublin about families going into hotels. (I am not in the Dublin market) So the only solution I can think of is that the rent ceiling has to be increased. 

It's easy for you to complain, but have you a better solution? I'd like to hear it. Maybe they should build a new Ballymun. 

I cannot believe that we are in such a mess again, a property bubble in Dublin, families in hotels, and a new stimulus for buyers (read developers)


----------



## Bronte (13 May 2014)

Dermot said:


> . I am a landlord and having be burned by the RA system as have others I think it is a silly proposal by the Gov. to filter out the RA not accepted in the adds.
> .


 
I do know that on occasion social welfare are so desparate to house people they will ring up landlords to beg for accommodation and even provide the deposits. 

Dermot what would be an actual solution, let's go against rent being paid directly to landlord, how about SW informing the landlord, not of the tenants business, but if the rent will be granted in the first place, and giving notice when it will be cut off, so a landlord can prepare.  

I cannot understand how it takes them 3 months to review things.  It's surely simply a matter of putting figures into a computer, you're either eligible or not.  And if they suddently are not eligible, they shouldn't just stop the rent, there should be a time lag so both landlord and tenant can sort it out.  

It's this 3 month gaps that cause the most problems and that's why landlords won't take RA.  Instead of solving that the department is run by nincompoops telling Daft, a private organisation, what to do.


----------



## Bronte (13 May 2014)

Great post Gerald123.  This wildly fluctuating rent in the Dublin market is not good for anybody, might seem great to some landlords but it's just creating a crazy market and unfairness to tenants.  

Cashier, I dread to think what this latest social experiment will result in.  The fact you mention there is now massive arrears speaks volumes.  People should be taught money management in schools.  

In Ireland it's my agent who has to explain the social welfare rules to tenants, they never seem to get it.  Don't understand why that is.  But it's cropped up time and time again over the years.  I had one last year wanting me to declare a higher rent on the form so they would effectively pay zero rent.  Threatened to leave etc, well no way am I falsifying forms, he's still there though, apparently I have good wifi.  Though I suspect the rising rents around me helped.


----------



## Delboy (13 May 2014)

Bronte said:


> I agree with you on a register of good and bad landlords and tenants.  Perhaps a scale and a scale on quality of accommodation too.



Best of luck with that register...I can see that happening alright!!! I could say so much on this but would probably get yet another slap on the wrists from the powers that be, so I'll let this go.

So we have a new FTB guarantee scheme about to be announced this AM by the cabinet (when supply is the issue, not credit) based on models in Canada, UK and Australia which have their own serious problems so hardly good examples.
And a couple of weeks ago, the Govt announced they were looking at funding Developers to get them building again!!!

Has the world gone mad! Did we learn absolutely nothing in the past few years. This is another disaster unfolding before our eyes


----------



## Bronte (13 May 2014)

Not sure what you mean by slap on the wrist, as long as you're not rude or insulting post away.  I'm waiting with baited breath for your solution on RA.  

When we get details of the new aid to developers we can do a full thread on it.  How many times has the Irish government interfered in the market to mess it all up.


----------



## Knuttell (15 May 2014)

Reminds me of Reagans quote:



> "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help."



Its just shows the thinking that goes into these suggestions...by removing the filter did they some how expect that a Landlord would then change his mind about taking S/W tenants,that this filter removal would change their negative view of both the Dept and S/W tenants that most LLs have?

So now the S/W tenant has to waste God knows how much ringing round to be told that,no,they will not accept S/W tenants and the Landlord now has to field hundreds of calls form people he has no intention of ever letting the property to.

You really couldn't make up this level of muppetry,you really honestly couldn't


----------



## amethyst (28 Jun 2014)

>> Its just shows the thinking that goes into these suggestions...by removing the filter did they some how expect that a Landlord would then change his mind about taking S/W tenants,that this filter removal would change their negative view of both the Dept and S/W tenants that most LLs have?

I don't think they're actually that stupid -- I see it as more a lack of ba_lls and morality.  They know they are not solving anything, and are quite willing to do things that actually makes the problem worse, provided they get to push the blame from themselves in the process.  It's the craven, political, govermental bureaucratic mentality.


----------

