# Why are landlords rushing for the exits while rents are so high?



## Leper (29 Dec 2021)

(Extracted from a post in another thread - Brendan)

The bottom line approaching 2022 is that landlords are happy to get out of the business and tenants are paying higher rent. Did we lose our direction somewhere along the way? We are now in a classic lose/lose situation and it appears things are going to get worse.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (29 Dec 2021)

A very interesting question.

It makes sense for some institutions to enter the market now if they buy new properties or properties which have not been let before. They can charge as high a rent as they like and increase it after that by inflation. Any future limitations on their rights to sell won't affect them that much.

But decent  individual landlords who didn't maximise the rent over the past few years are now stuck with a below market rent and massively increased limits on what they can do. They can sell their property now but they might not be able to sell it in a few years given the increasing restrictions.

They are right to get out now while they can. 

So it probably suits profit-maxing institutions who are in it for the long-term. But it does not suit decent individuals who might buy one property with a view to  having it available for their kids in college.

Brendan


----------



## PebbleBeach2020 (29 Dec 2021)

Absolutely Brendan. And in my experience, small individual landlords tend to have properties priced much lower than the corporate landlords. The reason we are seeing annual rent increases of say 6 or 7% (far ahead of the previous 4% permitted increase and now 2% increases) is that the new properties coming to the rental sector from corporate landlords are charging far in excess of the properties that are leaving the rental sector. The vast majority of landlords adhered to the legislation of 4% increases, but there's also a small number of rogue landlords who don't adhere to any rules no matter what.

I would expect to continue seeing 6-7% rental increases annually for the next number of years.


----------



## PebbleBeach2020 (29 Dec 2021)

Brendan Burgess said:


> But decent  individual landlords who didn't maximise the rent over the past few years are now stuck with a below market rent and massively increased limits on what they can do. They can sell their property now but they might not be able to sell it in a few years given the increasing restrictions.


This is the crucial aspect for small landlords and their biggest concern. They don't care about 2% increases, they never charged market rent previously because they are not trying to maximise the achieveable rent. They were happy in the past with lower rents as they had a good tenant who probably didn't cause them much trouble etc. Now permits that tenant has moved and because the landlords was good to the last tenant, they are stuck in a situation whereby they must be equally good and nice to the next tenant. 

Government should be asking themselves the question, as a time of the highest rents ever and insatiable demand for rental properties, why are landlords leaving the sector hand over fist??????? The government cannot increase the number of properties available to rent quickly enough, because they cannot even replace the properties that are leaving the rental sector.


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (29 Dec 2021)

Because yields after tax are not worth the risk of a dud tenant, particularly given very expensive BTL finance, CGT @33%, and pretty heavy rent controls.


----------



## Thirsty (29 Dec 2021)

Rent control distorts the market; endless case studies and research is available to show how it creates a worse market for tenants, and we have exactly that situation unfolding right now.

Rent control however is politically popular and is relatively easy to implement; so instead of long term housing solutions we get short term, populist policy.

Tenure isn't a major issue, a good quality tenant paying the rent on the dot and keeping the property clean will have as long a tenure for as long as the owner remains in business.

When there is plenty of supply tenants will simply vote with their feet; owners who don't keep their property  in good repair will have voids/non-payment.

Rent controls, for all that it is self-defeating exercise, won't put me out of business.
BTL finance rates won't put me out of business.
CGT, since it arises on sale, won't put me out of business.

_But a non-rent paying overholding tenant, who likely will trash the property and will take c. 2 years to remove *will *put me out of business._

That in my view is the no. 1 reason property owners are ceasing to rent out their properties, in spite of the profits to be made.  

Larger entities can subsume the losses into new rents (much as supermarkets make allowances for 'shrinkage' aka shoplifting); smaller non-corporate owners cannot.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (29 Dec 2021)

fistophobia said:


> One was bought at auction, without being able to view - he found tenants in the basement. I wont go into the gory details.



Presumably the price he paid reflected that? 

These can be good buys for people who are rough enough to deal with them.

Brendan


----------



## Nicklesilver (29 Dec 2021)

_my main issue is that it is impossible to pay down debt with a marginal tax rate of 55%. Institutional investors have a market advantage through government policy. _


----------



## ATC110 (29 Dec 2021)

One reason being the following example: 

A landlord bought a house with tenant in-situ and the tenant arbitrarily decided to stop paying the rent. 

The landlord negotiated with tenant to find an alternative property and the tenant demanded the rent arrears to be written-off and a lump-sum be paid to her to leave.

The tenant was a single mother and was implying she would report the landlord for harassment and intimidation throughout the process, despite there being none.

On moving day the tenant had her belongings in a horse box, with the rear door open and a team at the ready to move the said belongings back in if she didn't get the four-figure cash payment to leave.


----------



## Zebedee (29 Dec 2021)

I think corporate landlords (eg so called “cuckoos”) don’t know what they are getting into. Many institutions stayed away from residential properties for years for good reason but now they are attractive due to low yields elsewhere. 

The main problem is politics. While a landlord with one or two properties might get a hearing, these corporate/absentee landlords will be pilloried for putting up rent or management charges and evictions. There will be politicians harking back to the famine era. Imagine a Sinn Fein government reaction. 

I think the corporate landlords are taking on a huge political risk.


----------



## noproblem (29 Dec 2021)

ATC110 said:


> One reason being the following example:
> 
> A landlord bought a house with tenant in-situ and the tenant arbitrarily decided to stop paying the rent.
> 
> ...


There's plenty of  landlords that would be well able to deal with said tenant, and have done so a lot more regularly than you might imagine.


----------



## landlord (30 Dec 2021)

I believe the rent inflation figures are grossly over estimated!!!
I keep track of the number of rental properties for Swords North County Dublin on the Daft website. A few years ago there were over 200 properties for rent. The last few months The number of properties is averaging less than 20. In fact as of this morning it’s less than 10!! 
So the sample daft are using to provide this rental inflation percentage is minute. 
Also this sample is potentially made up of first time landlords who can charge the highest rents and those landlords re-letting who are likely also to charge the highest rents as they know no Government body is actively policing the rent pressure zone rules. 
I have many rental properties and from my experience and those of my friends who are also multi unit landlords average rents are far lower than the headline numbers!!  A current 2% cap  on rent increases it’s not even nearly keeping up with current inflation. 
Landlords are exiting the market NOT despite high rents but because of often low rents (and also partly because of a lack of Government protection from bad tenants).


----------



## The Horseman (30 Dec 2021)

Zebedee said:


> I think corporate landlords (eg so called “cuckoos”) don’t know what they are getting into. Many institutions stayed away from residential properties for years for good reason but now they are attractive due to low yields elsewhere.
> 
> The main problem is politics. While a landlord with one or two properties might get a hearing, these corporate/absentee landlords will be pilloried for putting up rent or management charges and evictions. There will be politicians harking back to the famine era. Imagine a Sinn Fein government reaction.
> 
> I think the corporate landlords are taking on a huge political risk.


I don't think they are. Institutional landlords have the wherewithal to take on the State. 

The State want Institutional landlords and appear to want to drive the small landlord out. Eventually what will happen is that the Institutional landlord will control the supply in the market. They will yield the power and will dictate policy. 

Rather than encourage small landlords to remain the govt are doing everything to almost force them out. Be it rent controls, low rents that the next tenant can avail of, almost impossible evictions or indefinite tenancies. 

It looks like those parties on the left may form the next govt and they may be in for a nasty surprise when they try enforce their plans and the corporate landlord then uses their resources.  

At which time the small landlords will have departed the market despite the warnings they have  been giving to the govts current policies.


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (30 Dec 2021)

landlord said:


> I have many rental properties and from my experience and those of my friends who are also multi unit landlords average rents are far lower than the headline numbers!!


I agree that yields in practice are materially less than the yields you see on Daft. 

But a new landlord can achieve market rents and there are precious few of them joining either.


----------



## ATC110 (30 Dec 2021)

noproblem said:


> There's plenty of  landlords that would be well able to deal with said tenant, and have done so a lot more regularly than you might imagine.


I've no idea what that means. 

The landlord was "well able" to deal with the tenant. 

There are plenty of landlords who've resorted to what I've described above due to getting nowhere with the RTB. 

I don't imagine anything - this is what is happening regularly.


----------



## noproblem (30 Dec 2021)

ATC110 said:


> I've no idea what that means.
> 
> The landlord was "well able" to deal with the tenant.
> 
> ...


I'm not advocating it, but some landlords would use strong arm contacts, and ignore completely the RTB after a tenant becomes a complete nuisance in situations similar to what you described. Hope that helps explain a bit better what you have "no idea" about.


----------



## ATC110 (30 Dec 2021)

noproblem said:


> I'm not advocating it, but some landlords would use strong arm contacts, and ignore completely the RTB after a tenant becomes a complete nuisance in situations similar to what you described. Hope that helps explain a bit better what you have "no idea" about.


Yeah ok


----------



## johnfenit (1 Jan 2022)

I know a friend of mine who sold one of his properties (bought in 2014) on tax advice. Evidently if property held for 7 years, no CGT tax. This would explain some of the landlords exiting.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (1 Jan 2022)

Hi John

Good point. But they keep the CGT relief if they hold onto the building. So I don't see it as a motivation to sell.

Property acquired between 7 December 2011 and 31 December 2014​If you dispose of land or buildings you acquired between 7 December 2011 and 31 December 2014, you can get relief from CGT in certain cases.

If the property is held for more than 7 years, relief will be given for the first 7 years.

For example, if the property was bought in January 2012 and sold in January 2022, the property would have been held for 10 years, so 7/10 of any gain will be relieved from CGT and 3/10 is taxable.


----------



## muinteoir (1 Jan 2022)

johnfenit said:


> I know a friend of mine who sold one of his properties (bought in 2014) on tax advice. Evidently if property held for 7 years, no CGT tax. This would explain some of the landlords exiting.


Does this apply if you buy the property to let and it is not the PPR before and after the tenants move out?


----------



## landlord (2 Jan 2022)

Brendan Burgess said:


> If the property is held for more than 7 years, relief will be given for the first 7 years.


This was changed to “if the property was held for more than 4 years and less than 7 years”
So potentially a significant number of landlords ran for the exits earlier on?


----------



## AlbacoreA (2 Jan 2022)

I'm not sure why people think someone would take on a property perhaps with a mortgage of 20+yrs then sell it within 7yrs

Most LLs are not flipping properties. That's a different business. 

As others have said they've made it a low yield high risk business.


----------



## galway_blow_in (2 Jan 2022)

AlbacoreA said:


> I'm not sure why people think someone would take on a property perhaps with a mortgage of 20+yrs then sell it within 7yrs
> 
> Most LLs are not flipping properties. That's a different business.
> 
> As others have said they've made it a low yield high risk business.


Because the gains during those years were enormous, they may not have planned to exit after seven years when they took out a mortgage


----------



## AlbacoreA (2 Jan 2022)

Assuming they made enough to pay back the mortgage and interest and a profit in 7yrs. Which I think unlikely. The numbers managing to do it would not match those leaving the market. 

But why get out. It's pure profit from this point on. Even if the market falls which isn't likely in the short term. Property in the long term will still gain. They are likely to understood that if they got into it in the first place.


----------



## galway_blow_in (11 Jan 2022)

AlbacoreA said:


> Assuming they made enough to pay back the mortgage and interest and a profit in 7yrs. Which I think unlikely. The numbers managing to do it would not match those leaving the market.
> 
> But why get out. It's pure profit from this point on. Even if the market falls which isn't likely in the short term. Property in the long term will still gain. They are likely to understood that if they got into it in the first place.


how is it unlikely ?

prices have doubled since the beginning of 2013


----------



## aam514 (11 Jan 2022)

> Why are landlords rushing for the exits while rents are so high?​





> Government should be asking themselves the question, as a time of the highest rents ever and insatiable demand for rental properties, why are landlords leaving the sector hand over fist???????



How do we know this for sure? Are there any objective reports that back up the assumption that is contained in the question i.e. that landlords are indeed leaving the market.


----------



## AlbacoreA (11 Jan 2022)

galway_blow_in said:


> how is it unlikely ?
> 
> prices have doubled since the beginning of 2013



What would be the point of selling and breaking even.


----------



## AlbacoreA (11 Jan 2022)

aam514 said:


> How do we know this for sure? Are there any objective reports that back up the assumption that is contained in the question i.e. that landlords are indeed leaving the market.



There's been quite a few "objective" reports saying this.

Personally I've always felt the RTB reports are selective in what information they release. They seem to play down problems and give a rose tinted viewpoint that doesn't reflect the market experience. Maybe I'm wrong.


----------



## galway_blow_in (11 Jan 2022)

AlbacoreA said:


> What would be the point of selling and breaking even.


because legislation is so anti landlord and getting worse


----------



## AlbacoreA (11 Jan 2022)

galway_blow_in said:


> because legislation is so anti landlord and getting worse



I thought your suggestion was capital appreciation (well breaking even)  was causing them to leave the market.

If however its just the issues of being a LL thats quite different.


----------



## PebbleBeach2020 (11 Jan 2022)

aam514 said:


> How do we know this for sure? Are there any objective reports that back up the assumption that is contained in the question i.e. that landlords are indeed leaving the market.


RTB reported last year that 2 landlord are leaving the market for every new one coming in. The number of landlords with 1 or 2 properties is falling at a much faster rate as you have the corporate landlords coming in purchasing apartments blocks.

Over the last five years since 2016, I believe the number of properties for rent has falls from 320,000 approximately to around 265,000, so that's a drop of over 17%. That's massive in such a short period of time and it's more likely to have continued in 2021 and into the next few years. You are more likely to see the figure of 265,000 properties fall before you see it rise.


----------



## PebbleBeach2020 (11 Jan 2022)

AlbacoreA said:


> What would be the point of selling and breaking even.


Some of the landlords in Ireland with one property are accidental landlords. They never wanted to become landlords but their time of purchase, the subsequent financial crash and making starting a family (kids arrived etc) forced their hand.

They now have the chance, even if it's just breaking even to get out and have less hassle in their lives. 

Important to remember, that they might be breaking even, but cash flow wise, the property/rental could in all likelihood have been a drain on their cash flow. A property with a mortgage of say €1200 a month and it was rented for say €1,600 a month. That €1,600 a month might have €300 expenses a month between insurance, property tax, management fees etc. The tax man at 50% would be taking say another €600-€650 a month, so the landlord/family owning the property are getting €650-€700 into their hand but paying out €1200 a month on the mortgage. So keeping the property/rental is "costing" them €500 a month.

Yes, I know people will say they are paying down capital and will be left with an asset, but these people never wanted to be landlords in many instances to begin with, so they would rather have the extra €500 in their pockets each month at a time in their lives when they may have childcare expenses, holidays, enjoying life with kids etc.


----------



## PebbleBeach2020 (11 Jan 2022)

AlbacoreA said:


> Personally I've always felt the RTB reports are selective in what information they release. They seem to play down problems and give a rose tinted viewpoint that doesn't reflect the market experience. Maybe I'm wrong.


If that's the case, then the figures I've quoted above maybe understating the number of landlords leaving the market and the situation is even worse again for renters. The government need to look at the taxation of small/individual landlords imo to try and halt the slide of properties leaving the rental sector. That and looking maybe to reduce CGT, it used to be 20% and was pushed upto 33% 5-7 years ago. This would encourage landlords who use to live in the property as a PPR to keep it perhaps for rental. Finally, the uncertain and annual changing of the environment in which landlords operate needs to stop. Nothing is worse than uncertainty in any market. The proposals by SF about landlords not being allowed to sell their property with vacant possession means that landlords are giving notice now and selling immediately, as it's very hard to see SF not being in government by February 2025 or earlier. 

SF's proposal is actually making things way worse for the rental market and current and future renters. This in turn is a bad reflection on the current government. So even though SF are making the situation worse, they are actually get kudos and praise and votes for doing so. How perverse is that?!!!!!

Finally, the issues of tenancies such with significantly below market rents is a big issue that is being ignored. Landlords maybe didn't bother increasing the rent for years because they had a good tenant and now that tenant has moved out they are stuck renting out at a much lower price. Rather than do this, they are selling up and the entry and exiting costs are so high in the property market, they are not returning. Exit costs are €2500 say for solicitor and 1.5% of sale price plus VAT @ 23% for estate agent. Then entry costs are 1% of purchase price for stamp duty, €1,000 for engineers survey plus VAT @ 23% and solicitor fees for €2,500 again. So to sell a €300,000 house that's 25% below market value rent and rebuy a house for €300,000 would cost the person nearly €15,000. They are not going to do that, instead, they leave a rental market that they otherwise have no reason or motivation to leave.


----------



## noproblem (11 Jan 2022)

AlbacoreA said:


> I thought your suggestion was capital appreciation (well breaking even)  was causing them to leave the market.
> 
> If however its just the issues of being a LL thats quite different.


My suggestion to you AlbacoreA would be to get out there, and delve into the market. If you've got  €3 to €400,000.00, or the facility to borrow the equivalent, buy a property, and start from there. Come back to us in around 14 months and let us know how you're getting on. I've no doubt your story will be slightly different from others, but not by a lot. The end result will be very similar. You'll also see why there's no one off answer to the question of why people with property to let are leaving the market. A bit like learning to play poker? You need to sit into a game and hey presto? You'll learn fierce fast.


----------



## Marco 1972 (11 Jan 2022)

Does the Housing for all document not have as an objective a commitment to review landlord issues, via the dept of finance...


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (11 Jan 2022)

There are two types of landlords leaving the market:

1) bought between 2004 and 2009, maybe accidental, usually on a tracker. Was in negative equity for a decade or more. Often after-tax profits are less than mortgage repayments. Now house prices have recovered to at or near purchase price, mortgage is paid down, landlord can sell up and walk away. 
2) Bought 2011 to 2014 possibly because of Noonan's seven-year CGT exemption. Has seen capital gain of anything of 50% to 100% and once held for seven years there is zero CGT. What people forget is that these landlords start to accumulate a CGT bill for holding on to the property even if house prices do nothing as less of the uplift is sheltered. Say someone who bought in 2014 for €400k and sold in 2021 for €600k. They pocket the €200k uplift tax free. If they sell for €600k in 2023 then only 7/9 of the gain is sheltered so there is a CGT bill of 2/9*€200k*33%=€15k (approx).This is a huge incentive to sell up and start again in another type of investment.


Add to this very little incentive for punter landlords to enter the market. 4% - 5% BTL rates, tax often at 50%, CGT on the gain of 33%, rents fixed in real terms. Where is the upside? Sure the changing rules around tenancy law haven't helped but this is in so many ways a *tax, tax, tax*, story.


----------



## PebbleBeach2020 (11 Jan 2022)

NoRegretsCoyote said:


> Add to this very little incentive for punter landlords to enter the market. 4% - 5% BTL rates, tax often at 50%, CGT on the gain of 33%, rents fixed in real terms. Where is the upside? Sure the changing rules around tenancy law haven't helped but this is in so many ways a *tax, tax, tax*, story.


The yields on Irish property are struggling to get 5% ROI by and large. I know an apartment in Limerick or Waterford or somewhere might get higher but by an large that's the max. Compare that to UK and you would get twice that with less regulation and more favourable tax treatment and certainty for landlords.

You are right, is it about tax and leveling the field somewhat between mom and pop landlords and institutional investor landlords but I don't see a budget in October 2022 being favourable to landlords. Sinn Fein would hammer FFG as a result. 

Like I said, SF proposals are making the situation worse for renters but it's actually also bad news for the government but makes SF more popular though making the problem worse. That's how fooked up the situation is in this county.


----------



## aam514 (11 Jan 2022)

aam514 said:


> How do we know this for sure? Are there any objective reports that back up the assumption that is contained in the question i.e. that landlords are indeed leaving the market.





AlbacoreA said:


> There's been quite a few "objective" reports saying this.
> 
> Personally I've always felt the RTB reports are selective in what information they release. They seem to play down problems and give a rose tinted viewpoint that doesn't reflect the market experience. Maybe I'm wrong.



So having read through the RTB report here: https://www.rtb.ie/images/uploads/Comms and Research/RTB_Small_Landlord_Report_July_2021.pdf

Page 105:

_Future Intentions Overall, the proportion of landlords likely to sell property in the next one to five years is small – 26% of landlords said they were ‘likely/very likely’ to sell a property within the next five years. This suggests that small landlords are unlikely to exit the sector in large numbers in the short to medium term. Amongst landlords that are ‘likely/very likely’ to sell a property, the main reason given was that they ‘no longer wish to be a landlord’ (45%). Other reasons relate to profitability – ‘being a landlord is not profitable for me’ (30%) and tax - ‘taxation is too high on rental income’ (25%). One in five (19%) landlords said ‘I am retiring and my properties are my pension’ and 13% mentioned ‘the regulatory environment for landlords’. Amongst landlords that are ‘likely/very likely’ to sell a property, fewer than one in four (23%) have taken any action with regard to selling their properties. The proportion of small landlords likely to purchase another property with the intention of letting it out in the next one to five years is very small – 6% of landlords said they were ‘likely/very likely’ to purchase another property within the next five years. This suggests that only a small proportion of these landlords are likely to expand their property portfolio in the short to medium term. The expansion of the sector is therefore unlikely to be facilitated by existing small landlords. The threat of landlords reclaiming rental property is a recurring worry for tenants. Fortunately, the proportion of landlords likely to reclaim a rental property in the next one to five years for use by themselves or their family is small – 19% of properties are ‘likely/very likely’ to be reclaimed within the next five years._

My interpretation of this is the vast majority (74%) of small landlords are *not* rushing to exit the market


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (11 Jan 2022)

PebbleBeach2020 said:


> The yields on Irish property are struggling to get 5% ROI by and large.


That's just not true. Look at the daft report. Yields on one-beds range from 5.6% in Dublin 4 to 13% in Dublin 17. On 3-bed houses from 4.1% to 8.7% across the country.

A landlord can easily find 8% gross yield on apartments without scraping the bottom of the barrel. To me this kind of yield is worth the risk, probably less after tax has cut it in half.



aam514 said:


> 26% of landlords said they were ‘likely/very likely’ to sell a property within the next five years



Yes, losing one landlord in twenty every year isn't a big deal. It's a problem when there are no new landlords coming to replace them, and that seems to be the issue now. BPFI data show that lending to landlords is 2% to 4% of all mortgage lending, with about a thousand mortgages every year. That's a drop in the ocean of a stock of approx 300k rented properties.


----------



## PebbleBeach2020 (11 Jan 2022)

aam514 said:


> My interpretation of this is the vast majority (74%) of small landlords are *not* rushing to exit the market


I would consider 26% of small landlords intending to leave the market within the next five years as frightening. If you consider that to be small, consider that this represents over 50,000 rental properties. 

If lending is showing about a 1000 landlords buying property each year, in five years time there'll be 45,000 less rental properties available.

I just hope those tenants in these 45,000 properties buy property on the next five years and there is no other persons hoping to rent a property in the next five years. Once that happens, there's nothing to worry about.


----------



## AlbacoreA (12 Jan 2022)

PebbleBeach2020 said:


> Some of the landlords in Ireland with one property are accidental landlords. They never wanted to become landlords but their time of purchase, the subsequent financial crash and making starting a family (kids arrived etc) forced their hand.
> 
> They now have the chance, even if it's just breaking even to get out and have less hassle in their lives.
> 
> ...



The conversation you're replying to was LL having doubled the value of the property are getting out.  There would be no mortgage, and the value of the property is still rising. There would be no cashflow issue.


----------



## AlbacoreA (12 Jan 2022)

PebbleBeach2020 said:


> I would consider 26% of small landlords intending to leave the market within the next five years as frightening. If you consider that to be small, consider that this represents over 50,000 rental properties.
> 
> If lending is showing about a 1000 landlords buying property each year, in five years time there'll be 45,000 less rental properties available.
> 
> I just hope those tenants in these 45,000 properties buy property on the next five years and there is no other persons hoping to rent a property in the next five years. Once that happens, there's nothing to worry about.



We have no idea if the rental stock has increased or decreased. Available to rent is a different thing entirely. We keep getting these figures piecemeal (like how many LLS  have left) and without context, in the bigger picture. For are those coming in have multiple properties, or do they mostly have one.


----------



## AlbacoreA (12 Jan 2022)

aam514 said:


> So having read through the RTB report here: https://www.rtb.ie/images/uploads/Comms and Research/RTB_Small_Landlord_Report_July_2021.pdf
> 
> Page 105:
> 
> ...



I have no idea if those figures are representative of the market. I have no idea what the normal churn of the market is. I have no context for these figures as how it relates to the available properties to rent. It could be stock is hoovered up by returning emigrants, staff working in Tech and Finance etc. Who knows. The RTB seems to be implying there isn't a shortage due to LLs leaving. 

Their systems are chaotic. Half the time they can't find my records, or payments. I should trust their stats? Hardly.


----------



## PebbleBeach2020 (12 Jan 2022)

Did you read the methodology the report is based on? Did you read the report? I'm assuming by your postings that you did neither.


----------



## AlbacoreA (12 Jan 2022)

noproblem said:


> My suggestion to you AlbacoreA would be to get out there, and delve into the market. If you've got  €3 to €400,000.00, or the facility to borrow the equivalent, buy a property, and start from there. Come back to us in around 14 months and let us know how you're getting on. I've no doubt your story will be slightly different from others, but not by a lot. The end result will be very similar. You'll also see why there's no one off answer to the question of why people with property to let are leaving the market. A bit like learning to play poker? You need to sit into a game and hey presto? You'll learn fierce fast.



Since I've just got out after many years in the market, that would seem a retrograde step.


----------



## AlbacoreA (12 Jan 2022)

PebbleBeach2020 said:


> Did you read the methodology the report is based on? Did you read the report? I'm assuming by your postings that you did neither.



No its massive. Maybe you could point me where it shows the relationship between total rental stock, stock available to rent and how it related to LL leaving and churn.

From a quick glance it seems negative experiences are a tiny % and the tny numbers of leaving are because they just want to. 



> This section of the report presents the findings from seventy-four (74) short telephone interviews that were conducted with landlords who left the private rental sector and were no longer operating as landlords. The purpose of these interviews was to identify the reasons that these landlords ceased to operate as landlords in the sector. The majority (80%) of these former landlords let out one property. A small proportion (8%) rented out two or more properties and 12% said they didn’t know how many properties they previously rented out





> When asked what would have made them consider not selling their properties, the majority (57%) of landlords said ‘nothing – wanted to sell for personal reasons’. However, a smaller proportion of landlords mentioned ‘greater profit’ (13%), ‘less taxation’ (11%) and ‘less unfavourable regulation’ (8%) (Figure 2.74).



Would you say this report reflects the opinions of this thread or disagrees with it.


----------



## Brian C (12 Jan 2022)

I would suggest that one of the main reasons for a landlord cashing in now is the high prices achievable for properties. So for a landlord who bought a property in the early 2000's he/she would have paid quite a high price for the property. Following the bank collapse not only did rents collapse but so did property values. This left many landlords staring into a financial abyss for a number of years. Now after slowly building up the rental income they have seen their property's value shoot up. After all the pain they see this as an appropriate time to cash in. The chances are that they will have lost a small fortune over the years but at least with property prices going up they will have done substantially better than a handful of years ago.


----------



## ashambles (12 Jan 2022)

If you've a few hundred thousand sitting in a bank account and you're not investing it in a rental - then your reasons for doing that might be similar to landlords exiting.

With my savings it's cash and warily trickling it into the stock market or maxing my pension.

In theory buying property, earning maybe 3% after tax from rent, as well as capital appreciation should be attractive but it's not. For me it's less attractive that earning 0% and losing money to inflation.

 My reasons would be in order of importance
    - stories of nightmare tenants
    - constant landlord vilification by media
    - incoming government likely to make ham-fisted populist changes


----------



## AlbacoreA (12 Jan 2022)

Prices have gone up in the last couple of years though and are likely to keep going up. If you wanted to make money on capital increases as the sole reason for getting into renting, then it's not a good time to sell up. 

I thought I saw how long LLs have owned a property in that report. Can't find it this morning. Anyone else find it.


----------



## Leo (12 Jan 2022)

AlbacoreA said:


> We have no idea if the rental stock has increased or decreased


Decreasing levels of rental stock has made headlines a number of times over the past few years, example.


----------



## AlbacoreA (12 Jan 2022)

Is that stock or just available to rent.


----------



## AlbacoreA (12 Jan 2022)

What's the trend for total number of tenancies. Not just new registrations.


----------



## Lockup (12 Jan 2022)

Brian C said:


> I would suggest that one of the main reasons for a landlord cashing in now is the high prices achievable for properties. So for a landlord who bought a property in the early 2000's he/she would have paid quite a high price for the property. Following the bank collapse not only did rents collapse but so did property values. This left many landlords staring into a financial abyss for a number of years. Now after slowly building up the rental income they have seen their property's value shoot up. After all the pain they see this as an appropriate time to cash in. The chances are that they will have lost a small fortune over the years but at least with property prices going up they will have done substantially better than a handful of years ago.


Accidental LL. Sold 2 years ago. Main Reason, not being able to get my property back if I needed it i.e. overholding.

It should be noted although accidental I would happily have stayed as a LL if the government hadnt locked me into below market rates and most importantly my rights as a property owner and my ability to get an overholding tenant out in a timely fashion were respected. 
Note: while my property was rented, I was also renting. Anti LL legislation is bad for tenants also as I found out from the other side when my LL sold up.


----------



## PebbleBeach2020 (12 Jan 2022)

AlbacoreA said:


> What's the trend for total number of tenancies. Not just new registrations.





AlbacoreA said:


> Is that stock or just available to rent.





AlbacoreA said:


> Prices have gone up in the last couple of years though and are likely to keep going up. If you wanted to make money on capital increases as the sole reason for getting into renting, then it's not a good time to sell up.
> 
> I thought I saw how long LLs have owned a property in that report. Can't find it this morning. Anyone else find it.





AlbacoreA said:


> No its massive. Maybe you could point me where it shows the relationship between total rental stock, stock available to rent and how it related to LL leaving and churn.


Read the report, it's interesting and judging by the number of posts you have put in this thread, it's subject matter is something that you feel strongly about. I read the report and found it very insightful. The methodology explains the number of participants which is very representative of landlord populations from all the information provided. The 26% of landlords selling up in the next five years is an estimate based on feedback from the surveyed sample. This could go up or down, but I'd say the margin is probably 22 - 30% of landlords selling up with 4% margin of error allowed.


----------



## noproblem (12 Jan 2022)

ashambles said:


> In theory buying property, earning maybe 3% after tax from rent, as well as capital appreciation should be attractive but it's not. For me it's less attractive that earning 0% and losing money to inflation.


"In theory", being the appropriate words.


----------



## AlbacoreA (12 Jan 2022)

PebbleBeach2020 said:


> Read the report, it's interesting and judging by the number of posts you have put in this thread, it's subject matter is something that you feel strongly about. I read the report and found it very insightful. The methodology explains the number of participants which is very representative of landlord populations from all the information provided. The 26% of landlords selling up in the next five years is an estimate based on feedback from the surveyed sample. This could go up or down, but I'd say the margin is probably 22 - 30% of landlords selling up with 4% margin of error allowed.



I've been browsing it. 

I'm open to correction but for me. It describes a functioning market with a normal LL churn of about 20%. Only LLs leaving are overly negative about the market. Which I suppose it's why they are leaving.


----------



## PebbleBeach2020 (12 Jan 2022)

AlbacoreA said:


> I'm open to correction but for me. It describes a functioning market with a normal LL churn of about 20%. Only LLs leaving are overly negative about the market. Which I suppose it's why they are leaving.


I don't think any rental market is functioning normal as you describe it if the churn rate is 20 - 30% over a five year period. All the more so when the new entrant rate is 1/10th of the exit rate (i.e. 50,000 landlords leaving within five years and 5,000 new landlords coming into the rental sector).


----------



## AlbacoreA (12 Jan 2022)

My point is that the impression you get from the RTB.

Depends if the new LL have more properties or rooms than the ones leaving and if the demand is the same or increasing/decreasing.


----------



## LS400 (12 Jan 2022)

Why are landlords rushing for the exits while rents are so high?​
I have just closed on a 2 bed in a reasonably nice area of Dublin.

There's not a chance in hell I would have borrowed to acquire the property. To me, those days are well and truly over, which, is not a good story, although some will see it as a victory for struggling home buyers. Its very short sighted, and the big firms, which breezed in to the rental market saw a massive opening, and that's not a good story. 

There is a lot of money out there, and a so long as your not going into debt for it, I still think its a good return, even with the horrendous way good property owners who rent their place, are treated by bad tenants, who, have no fear of reprisals.  

Unfortunately, I don't think this will get better any time soon. I would recommend selling up in this dysfunctional market, which has been pillaged by political interference, to anyone even close to their origional purchase value.


----------



## PebbleBeach2020 (12 Jan 2022)

LS400 said:


> Why are landlords rushing for the exits while rents are so high?​
> I have just closed on a 2 bed in a reasonably nice area of Dublin.
> 
> There's not a chance in hell I would have borrowed to acquire the property. To me, those days are well and truly over, which, is not a good story, although some will see it as a victory for struggling home buyers. Its very short sighted, and the big firms, which breezed in to the rental market saw a massive opening, and that's not a good story.
> ...


Did you sell or buy? I'm assuming you sold as you are advising people to sell up and exit the market.


----------



## LS400 (12 Jan 2022)

I bought, 

I’ve been in this game awhile. For this property, I didn’t borrow and I know the tenants who will be moving in. Money was in the bank, I know nothing about shares and investing in the stock market and so for me, this was the right move.

I’m not naive about the likelihood of ending up with rouge tenants at some stage, and if that’s the case, sickening as it will be, I can handle the loss.

The recommendation to sell was more regarding the accidental LLs who fell into this game through different circumstances.


----------



## PebbleBeach2020 (13 Jan 2022)

It would be interesting picking your brain about the sector, your experiences, advice, guidance etc.


----------



## Lockup (13 Jan 2022)

ashambles said:


> If you've a few hundred thousand sitting in a bank account and you're not investing it in a rental - then your reasons for doing that might be similar to landlords exiting.
> 
> With my savings it's cash and warily trickling it into the stock market or maxing my pension.
> 
> ...


How are you going about translating the savings into the stock market. If you want to start new thread it would be interesting discussion. i.e. what to do with savings after selling rented property


----------



## tomdublin (13 Jan 2022)

PebbleBeach2020 said:


> they are stuck in a situation whereby they must be equally good and nice to the next tenant.


What would be wrong with that?


----------



## PebbleBeach2020 (13 Jan 2022)

tomdublin said:


> What would be wrong with that?


Its penalising them. By all means the landlord can do it and fair play if they do, but they should be given the freedom and autonomy to do so and decide what they do themselves.

I think people leaving properties vacant in years to come is highly likely to increase significantly, given what is proposed by SF in relation to owners not getting their properties back with vacant position provided they give the required notice etc. And that an owner is proposed to be restricted in who they can sell their property too if its rented out.

The risk in terms of sale prices are too great for owners to risk or bear. Hence, why selling up now or leaving properties vacant is going to become a more common theme than it otherwise would. Proposals and policies being suggested or threatened now, are actually resuling in hurting current renters and future renters.


----------



## tomdublin (14 Jan 2022)

PebbleBeach2020 said:


> I think people leaving properties vacant in years to come is highly likely to increase significantly


Leaving properties vacant during a housing crisis is the kind of selfishness that gives capitalism a bad name (and I'm a capitalist).  There should be crippling tax penalties to discourage that kind of behaviour.


----------



## odyssey06 (14 Jan 2022)

tomdublin said:


> Leaving properties vacant during a housing crisis is the kind of selfishness that gives capitalism a bad name (and I'm a capitalist).  There should be crippling tax penalties to discourage that kind of behaviour.


Capitalism doesn't come into it. They are leaving them empty in response to government market interference which is creating distorted incentives, which you seem to want to double down on.


----------



## newirishman (14 Jan 2022)

odyssey06 said:


> Capitalism doesn't come into it. They are leaving them empty in response to government market interference which is creating distorted incentives, which you seem to want to double down on.


IDK, limiting rent increases to CPI isn't a market interference or distorting incentive but appropriate in my opinion. Heck, even the 4% rule for RPZ is extremely generous already! 

Reviewing the tenancy laws however is overdue. For example, encouraging unfurnished lettings (e.g. that stupid "must have a microwave" rule) would be a good thing. Looking at the rules in Austria or Germany would be a good start.


----------



## Leo (14 Jan 2022)

tomdublin said:


> Leaving properties vacant during a housing crisis is the kind of selfishness that gives capitalism a bad name (and I'm a capitalist).  There should be crippling tax penalties to discourage that kind of behaviour.


Investments need to be treated as such, and not looked upon like some kind of public service. Just because the local authorities are doing their best to get out of the social housing business, does not mean that private landlords take on any responsibility to act as if they were a charity.


----------



## PebbleBeach2020 (14 Jan 2022)

tomdublin said:


> Leaving properties vacant during a housing crisis is the kind of selfishness that gives capitalism a bad name (and I'm a capitalist).  There should be crippling tax penalties to discourage that kind of behaviour.


Should the same penalties be applied to people living in nursing homes for years and years and their houses left empty??? People who emigrate for 12 months or 2 years say, should they be penalised?

My point is, the threat to a landlords ability to get vacant possession back of their property is terrifying to people and causing them to err now on the side of caution; sell up and not take any chances. It's actually putting any solution that's found on the back foot immediately.

People in nursing homes or emigrating for work for a year or 2 are not going to rent out their property for fear of not be able to get it back (potentially forever or until the tenant decides to move out - if SF had they way). They simply won't take the risk and the property will be left vacant.

They have a property and there's a very real threat from SF that if that rent it out and subsequently decide or need to (due to financial difficulties) sell, they would be forced to sell to another investor or landlord. That's restricting their potential purchasers to maybe 5% (probably less!) of the market. That is frightening, terrifying, brutal and absolutely unfair on people.


----------



## odyssey06 (14 Jan 2022)

newirishman said:


> IDK, limiting rent increases to CPI isn't a market interference or distorting incentive but appropriate in my opinion. Heck, even the 4% rule for RPZ is extremely generous already!
> 
> Reviewing the tenancy laws however is overdue. For example, encouraging unfurnished lettings (e.g. that stupid "must have a microwave" rule) would be a good thing. Looking at the rules in Austria or Germany would be a good start.


Setting the baseline without regard to below market rate discounts which may have been applied to long situated reliable tenants is the issue here though, not the %. It'd be like saying insurance companies couldn't offer no claims discounts.


----------



## tomdublin (14 Jan 2022)

odyssey06 said:


> They are leaving them empty in response to government market interference which is creating distorted incentives, which you seem to want to double down on.


No, the main objective should be to lift artificial constraints on supply by loosening height restrictions, cracking down on nimby objections, tackling anti-competitive practices in the building industry,  abandoning useless vanity projects that consume scarce construction resources( e.g. Dublin metro, new motorways and train lines to nowhere in Donegal) slapping compulsory purchase orders on golf courses in Dublin city, etc, etc.  Most other countries manage to build enough housing for their population, is Ireland really that uniquely incompetent?


----------



## The Horseman (14 Jan 2022)

tomdublin said:


> Leaving properties vacant during a housing crisis is the kind of selfishness that gives capitalism a bad name (and I'm a capitalist).  There should be crippling tax penalties to discourage that kind of behaviour.


Capitalism is not just based on short term income but on the overall situation. Introducing "crippling tax" will result in the capitalist finding other ways to avoid/minimise the impact of tax (thats what capitalists do we either find ways to increase income and asset value or decrease loss in value of asset or costs associated with holding the asset).


----------



## The Horseman (14 Jan 2022)

tomdublin said:


> No, the main objective should be to lift artificial constraints on supply by loosening height restrictions, cracking down on nimby objections, tackling anti-competitive practices in the building industry,  abandoning useless vanity projects that consume scarce construction resources( e.g. Dublin metro, new motorways and train lines to nowhere in Donegal) slapping compulsory purchase orders on golf courses in Dublin city, etc, etc.  Most other countries manage to build enough housing for their population, is Ireland really that uniquely incompetent?


Yes Ireland is unique as politicians want to pander to the electorate in the short term just for re-election. We the Irish don't do accountability well through every facet of life be it professionally or personally. 

It is an Irish obsession to "beat the system" and in some circles is seen as a "badge of honour". How many people are in arrears in mortgage payments, how many people are in rent arrears in both public and private housing? How many people are evicted for being in arrears? How long does it take to get an eviction?

We are a small country with a limited skill pool of construction workers and have competing demands (correctly or not) on these resources. Local politicians get capital projects in their locality to ensure re-election. Michael Lowry springs to mind as an example. 

I often look at the UK and look at their social housing policy. They will offer you accommodation (not necessarily where you want) this may seem unfair but is that not exactly what the majority of people who have to purchase their own properties have to do?


----------



## Leo (14 Jan 2022)

tomdublin said:


> Most other countries manage to build enough housing for their population, is Ireland really that uniquely incompetent?


On what are you basing your opinion that most other countries don't have similar housing issues?


----------



## Leper (14 Jan 2022)

Right folks, we know the problems as well articulated on this thread. Has anybody just solutions?


----------



## jpd (14 Jan 2022)

The Horseman said:


> Yes Ireland is unique as politicians want to pander to the electorate in the short term just for re-election



Unique? I would say that that is exactly what politicians do everywhere and all the time


----------



## valery (14 Jan 2022)

newirishman said:


> IDK, limiting rent increases to CPI isn't a market interference or distorting incentive but appropriate in my opinion. Heck, even the 4% rule for RPZ is extremely generous already!
> 
> Reviewing the tenancy laws however is overdue. For example, encouraging unfurnished lettings (e.g. that stupid "must have a microwave" rule) would be a good thing. Looking at the rules in Austria or Germany would be a good start.



Rent increases in RPZ are limited to CPI or 2% whichever is lower.  
Look at the rules in other European countries but also look at the tax treatment of rental income.  France for instance treats rental income much more favourably than Ireland.


----------



## tomdublin (14 Jan 2022)

Leo said:


> On what are you basing your opinion that most other countries don't have similar housing issues?


Because in Dublin-sized cities all over the Continent someone on minimum wage is able to rent a clean, hygienic and well-heated apartment for a couple of hundred Euro a month.  In Dublin, people on minimum wage typically pay over 50% of their income to share mouldy, squalid dwellings (and sometimes even a bedroom) with multiple strangers.


----------



## cremeegg (14 Jan 2022)

tomdublin said:


> Because in Dublin-sized cities all over the Continent someone on minimum wage is able to rent a clean, hygienic and well-heated apartment for a couple of hundred Euro a month.


I don't think that is true. And if we add one extra condition, cities where work is freely available, and well paid work freely available to the suitably qualified I doubt there are any cities where this is true.


----------



## Baby boomer (14 Jan 2022)

tomdublin said:


> Because in Dublin-sized cities all over the Continent someone on minimum wage is able to rent a clean, hygienic and well-heated apartment for a couple of hundred Euro a month.  In Dublin, people on minimum wage typically pay over 50% of their income to share mouldy, squalid dwellings (and sometimes even a bedroom) with multiple strangers.


A couple of hundred Euro?  I very much doubt that!


----------



## tomdublin (14 Jan 2022)

Baby boomer said:


> A couple of hundred Euro? I very much doubt that


Then check out rental websites for cities such as Lyon, Düsseldorf, Krakow, Stockholm, Helsinki, Vienna and Turin (or Google it).  Even in the most expensive Dublin-sized Continental cities such as Copenhagen you can rent a one-bedroom apartment for around 1000 Euro a month on the open market.  For those on low wages whose rents are subsidized or who rent from housing cooperatives it's significantly cheaper.


----------



## Baby boomer (14 Jan 2022)

tomdublin said:


> Then check out rental websites for cities such as Lyon, Düsseldorf, Krakow, Stockholm, Helsinki, Vienna and Turin (or Google it).  Even in the most expensive Dublin-sized Continental cities such as Copenhagen you can rent a one-bedroom apartment for around 1000 Euro a month on the open market.  For those on low wages whose rents are subsidized or who rent from housing cooperatives it's significantly cheaper.


Right, so the "couple of hundred euro" pm apartment  is subsidized!  Not open market prices.   Or rent controlled with a decades long waiting list like Stockholm.  You can get subsidized homes from housing associations or local authorities here too for a few hundred euro.  But there's not a lot of them available.  Just like most cities.


----------



## tomdublin (14 Jan 2022)

Baby boomer said:


> Right, so the "couple of hundred euro" pm apartment  is subsidized!  Not open market prices.   Or rent controlled with a decades long waiting list like Stockholm.  You can get subsidized homes from housing associations or local authorities here too for a few hundred euro.  But there's not a lot of them available.  Just like most cities.


No, the couple of hundred Euro (e.g. in Stockholm, Helsinki and Düsseldorf) is open market.  It's at the lower end of the price scale but readily available to anyone without any means testing.  You can easily verify this yourself.


----------



## cremeegg (14 Jan 2022)

tomdublin said:


> No, the couple of hundred Euro (e.g. in Stockholm, Helsinki and Düsseldorf) is open market.  It's at the lower end of the price scale but readily available to anyone without any means testing.  You can easily verify this yourself.


I looked at Helsinki and you are right there are 1 bed apartments available for €750 - €800 per month. These are typically 22 sq m.

According to this if it is still current








						New guidelines to allow for smaller apartments
					

Smaller apartments are to be permitted under new planning guidelines published by the Department of the Environment.




					www.rte.ie
				



The smallest apartment size in Ireland is 40 sq m for a studio. Maybe we should have more of those.

I wonder what the employment situation in Helsinki is.


----------



## Baby boomer (15 Jan 2022)

Fair enough @cremeegg but €750 is still a long way off the "couple of hundred euro" touted by @tomdublin.  And 22sqm isn't really an apartment; it's a studio.  And a tiny one at that.

I lived in Rathmines bedsits that were bigger than that back in the day.


----------



## tomdublin (15 Jan 2022)

The 22 sqm average one-bedroom apartment is a myth.   Continental apartments tend to be bigger & better built than Irish ones and 750 is still a lot less than the 1800 demanded for the dingiest "compact" apartment in Dublin.  Why are so many here so much in denial regarding the grimness of the situation?


----------



## cremeegg (15 Jan 2022)

tomdublin said:


> The 22 sqm average one-bedroom apartment is a myth.



Excuse me. 

You suggested that


tomdublin said:


> Because in Dublin-sized cities all over the Continent someone on minimum wage is able to rent a clean, hygienic and well-heated apartment for a couple of hundred Euro a month.  In Dublin, people on minimum wage typically pay over 50% of their income to share mouldy, squalid dwellings (and sometimes even a bedroom) with multiple strangers.


Now I like most others on here thought this unlikely. However instead of accusing you of pedalling 'myths'. I looked into Helsinki, one of the cities you mentioned. The cheapest apartments I could find there were from €750 to €800 and were 22 sq m. 

So I do not appreciate you coming back telling me its a myth.


----------



## tomdublin (15 Jan 2022)

They exist but it's not the average size for this price.  Scroll down a couple of listings on the same portal you seem to have checked and there are plenty of entries for available apartments over 30 sqm and below 800 a month. 
Also check https://asunnot.oikotie.fi (their version of daft) which lists hundreds such places.


----------



## Thirsty (15 Jan 2022)

And a search today on myhome.ie shows 230 properties ( 2-bed or more) for €250k or less in the Dublin area.

€250k is not, I believe, an insurmountable purchase price.


----------



## Marco 1972 (15 Jan 2022)

Thirsty said:


> And a search today on myhome.ie shows 230 properties ( 2-bed or more) for €250k or less in the Dublin area.
> 
> €250k is not, I believe, an insurmountable purchase price.


True but guess they are located in social housing ghettos... affordable really means a nice place in a good area


----------



## Thirsty (15 Jan 2022)

Marco 1972 said:


> affordable


affordable means what you can afford!  the other remark I'll put down to snobbery.


----------



## tomdublin (16 Jan 2022)

Thirsty said:


> affordable means what you can afford!  the other remark I'll put down to snobbery.


It's partially snobbery but also in part a reflection of the fact that a small minority of social housing tenants are  deeply antisocial and vicious.   Local authorities have shown zero willingness to evict them no matter how much they terrorize their neighbours and that reinforces a general stigma against social housing.


----------



## Leo (17 Jan 2022)

tomdublin said:


> Because in Dublin-sized cities all over the Continent someone on minimum wage is able to rent a clean, hygienic and well-heated apartment for a couple of hundred Euro a month.  In Dublin, people on minimum wage typically pay over 50% of their income to share mouldy, squalid dwellings (and sometimes even a bedroom) with multiple strangers.


Really? Can you provide links to a 'clean, hygienic and well-heated apartment' for rent in Paris, Berlin or Brussels for a couple of hundred Euro?

I presume you really know your claim is complete nonsense though, pretty much all countries in Europe experiencing growth are also in the midst of an accommodation crisis.


----------



## tomdublin (17 Jan 2022)

Leo said:


> Really? Can you provide links to a 'clean, hygienic and well-heated apartment' for rent in Paris, Berlin or Brussels for a couple of hundred Euro?
> 
> I presume you really know your claim is complete nonsense though, pretty much all countries in Europe experiencing growth are also in the midst of an accommodation crisis.


Paris and Berlin are not Dublin-size cities.  As for Brussels I'm no expert but a quick online search showed that there are lots of nice one-bedroom apartments available for around 650 a month.  Before you dismiss someone's claims as "complete nonsense" you might want to do a few minutes of research yourself.


----------



## Leo (17 Jan 2022)

tomdublin said:


> Paris and Berlin are not Dublin-size cities.  As for Brussels I'm no expert but a quick online search showed that there are lots of nice one-bedroom apartments available for around 650 a month.  Before you dismiss someone's claims as "complete nonsense" you might want to do a few minutes of research yourself.


Do you think the OECD did no research? Or the EU themselves who have acknowledged there is an EU wide accommodation crisis? 

You can find 1-bed studios in Brussels, but of course they'd be illegal here as the Irish public demanded that bedsits be banished to the history books. Yet you claim European apartments are bigger than Irish ones. 

RPZ legislation here has reduced supply which always pushes up prices. 

You've also claimed that rental accommodation here is typically squalid and mouldy. Can you back that up? Why is it that Irish tenants put up with that when all it takes is a call to the RTB who will then arrange for the inspection of the property?


----------



## tomdublin (17 Jan 2022)

Leo said:


> Do you think the OECD did no research? Or the EU themselves who have acknowledged there is an EU wide accommodation crisis?
> 
> You can find 1-bed studios in Brussels, but of course they'd be illegal here as the Irish public demanded that bedsits be banished to the history books. Yet you claim European apartments are bigger than Irish ones.
> 
> ...


Property prices have gone up in many places and there are supply issues but apart from very large cities such as Paris and London the rental situation in Dublin is pretty much uniquely awful in terms of security of tenure, rent levels and availability.

The places in Brussels I was referring to aren't bedsits.  I agree that outlawing bedsits in Ireland was a stupid move. 

I never said all rentals in Dublin are squalid, but it's typical for those someone on minimum wage can afford.  I have seen some of them myself and the standards are pretty shocking.  

One reason many tenants in squalid housing don't complain is that they fear being made homeless if their accomodation is closed down.


----------



## Leo (18 Jan 2022)

tomdublin said:


> Property prices have gone up in many places and there are supply issues but apart from very large cities such as Paris and London the rental situation in Dublin is pretty much uniquely awful in terms of security of tenure, rent levels and availability.


Dublin hasn't been called out as uniquely bad in the OECD or EU reviews, there are issues yes, but they are far from unique.

Security of tenure is significantly less of an issues that it was. Indeed the main challenge there at the moment is increased regulation of the rental market driving landlords out of the business. It's pretty much the case that increasing regulation and rent controls always results in a worse situation for tenants.



tomdublin said:


> I never said all rentals in Dublin are squalid,


You said:



tomdublin said:


> In Dublin, people on minimum wage typically pay over 50% of their income to share mouldy, squalid dwellings





tomdublin said:


> One reason many tenants in squalid housing don't complain is that they fear being made homeless if their accomodation is closed down.


That's not how the system works! The landlord is ordered to resolve issues within a pretty tight timeframe, they are not entitled to end the tenancy in order to effect any repairs. This can be quite difficult for landlords of older properties, as they are expected to meet modern building standards.


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (18 Jan 2022)

Leo said:


> he Irish public demanded that bedsits be banished to the history books.


I think it was more a bunch of housing and heritage NGOs that pushed this.

It was and still is a bizarre policy.  There is huge growth in the number of single-person households and the expansion in "co-living" developments is a way around this prohibition on small studios.

Some people want and even need to live alone. For them 25sqm on their own is much better than 100sqm shared with someone else.


----------



## Leo (18 Jan 2022)

NoRegretsCoyote said:


> I think it was more a bunch of housing and heritage NGOs that pushed this.


No doubt they were heavily involved, but there was also those like Tom who believed the awful examples that made the papers were typical of the whole market and contributed to them getting a reputation they didn't deserve.


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (18 Jan 2022)

Some of the bedsits in D6 were pretty grotty but they suited the tenants' needs in many way.

Even if you weren't banning them, it was a mistake to make it illegal to build new small, one-person dwellings.

I think part of the motivation was to stop six people living in 25 sqm and the associated headlines.


----------



## Lone Star (18 Jan 2022)

I've the option to be a (small time) landlord, currently have a friend staying free for a few months in my house, free oil and esb so far, followed by a very reduced rent - that is still awaited! The deal was keep the house clean, so far I've had to have the brand new oven professionally cleaned, my regular cleaner comes in weekly and still the house is grubby!! For the sake of circa 8K after tax I could not be bothered with the waste of time and effort, and then especially with the difficulty getting a house back with official tenants.


----------



## Leo (18 Jan 2022)

NoRegretsCoyote said:


> I think part of the motivation was to stop six people living in 25 sqm and the associated headlines.



Exactly, and that's a significant factor in the problems we now have, policy made in response to sensationalist headlines in a media competing for clicks at the expense of proper journalism. I can only imagine that the policy makers know these policies at best won't work, but their focus is short term and they need to be seen doing something.


----------



## PebbleBeach2020 (18 Jan 2022)

Lone Star said:


> I've the option to be a (small time) landlord, currently have a friend staying free for a few months in my house, free oil and esb so far, followed by a very reduced rent - that is still awaited! The deal was keep the house clean, so far I've had to have the brand new oven professionally cleaned, my regular cleaner comes in weekly and still the house is grubby!! For the sake of circa 8K after tax I could not be bothered with the waste of time and effort, and then especially with the difficulty getting a house back with official tenants.


You will not be alone in thinking like that in years ahead I believe. A lot of people who don't want to sell property, will use it sparingly themselves or leave it idle before letting it out full-time. The risk will simply not be worth it.


----------



## Lone Star (19 Jan 2022)

PebbleBeach2020 said:


> You will not be alone in thinking like that in years ahead I believe. A lot of people who don't want to sell property, will use it sparingly themselves or leave it idle before letting it out full-time. The risk will simply not be worth it.


Absolutely! We actually like staying there from time to time, handy for storage and in a way a relationship breather as it gives a bit of space when needed.


----------

