Government to Introduce Rent Caps in Dublin & Cork

It seems to me there are two aspects to this.

Firstly, the merits of rent control which has been well debated here already.

The other is the government's handling of this. My sense is that the government in general and Coveney in particular have made a complete liathróidí in managing this. Surely, the smart thing to have done (if you really wanted to implement ths measure) was to seek agreement with FF and then announce - rather than announce and then seek agreement - and with Cowen, of all people.

The impact of Coveney's hapless handling of this is that he has made the situation worse for the people he is purporting to help.
 
Totally agree Dan that Coveney has made it worse. Unbelievable it was not agreed with FF in advance.
 
Bronte said:
Of all times to introduce rent caps, when the market is surely at it's peak, is the worst. It should have been done 10 years ago and linked to the rate of inflation.
Click to expand...
The effect of that would have been to keep residential rents at Celtic Tiger levels long after the economic crash.
 
Tommy I don't remember rents being higher than now. That's my point. It's sticking plaster as another poster said, after the event.
 
Bronte said:
Tommy I don't remember rents being higher than now. That's my point. It's sticking plaster as another poster said, after the event.
Click to expand...
My observation stands. There is a single reason why rents have now spiralled: government policy.
 

They've actually now forced the hand of LL who were beneath the market rate to increase rent. Because they will be locked into it.
 
What's to stop a LL who was beneath the market rate - but with a tenant they want to keep - from jacking up the 'nominal' price right now by a huge amount.
But, verbally with the tenant say just keep paying what you are paying right now and I will 'write off' the difference between the nominal and actual rent?
That way the LL is covered into the future?
 

Why would a tenant agree to that?
 
Is there any way to see the draft legislation? I heard on the news this morning that they have closed off an error that would have allowed landlords increase the rent by 8%. Depending on the wording in the legislation they could lock rents that are below market value into maximum 4% increases. Or will they allow increases up to market + 4% ?
 
Brendan Burgess said:
Why would a tenant agree to that?
Click to expand...

I' thinking to avoid a situation where the landlord in advance of the legislation puts the rent up to 'market levels' which is higher than their current rent and they can't afford it?
Some landlords may feel they need to resynch their rates with the market because of this legislation or be locked in forever on the 4% limit.
 


Sure. But you've not answered the question. Tenant has no reason to help with this.
 

the landlord would probably have to pay tax on the higher amount.
 
AlbacoreA said:
Sure. But you've not answered the question. Tenant has no reason to help with this.
Click to expand...

If the LL puts the actual rent up today by 20%, and the tenant can't afford the rent next month, won't they end up on the streets?

There are reports of LLs putting up rents purely as a defensive measure in response to this proposal, because of the effect of limiting what rent they can charge in future. The LL seems ok with the current rent.

What I proposed was a way for LLs to 'defend' themselves against this measure without any adverse impact on the tenant. Otherwise, there will be LLs who put up the price, and tenants who end up on the streets because of it.

I'm not au fait with the tax implications, that might shoot it down. But let's say at the moment, if a tenant misses a rental payment, wouldn't the LL only declare received income?
 
OK, I have a tenant paying €1,500 a month and the market rate is €2,000.

I write to him formally putting up the rent to €2,000 (assuming that the timing allows me to do that.)

The tenant tells me that he can't afford it. I nod and wink at him. "Keep paying me the €1,500".

I might not pursue the arrears, but then he could later claim that we had agreed that the "real" rent was €1,500.

Worse still, if he leaves, the next tenant could claim it was €1,500. They might not succeed but they could waste a lot of my time down in the PRTB.

Brendan
 
Why would he or she claim that though?

Where there's a good relationship between landlord and tenant, simply agree it along those lines.

Even better, get them to pay you €2,000 and rebate them the €500.
 
cremeegg says - the landlord would probably have to pay tax on the higher amount.
GG says - No they wouldn't.

So the landlord tells the tenant I'm only putting 2k on the RTB form but still only charging you 1.5k. So when he fills in the tax form and puts rent in at 18k for the year mr revenue will say but you got 24k. While it's a big IF whether Mr rev and Mr RTB actually talk to each other, let alone notice anything amiss, I would think an audit may result in Mr rev claiming you got the 24k.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register