HAP tenants less respectful of houses

galway_blow_in said:
Take a drive through a council estate some day and compare to a private one

And that journal.ie piece has little to do with the point here
Click to expand...

I live in a council estate. There is no neglect here. But less than two minutes drive there is block of apartments, privately owned with no occupants, that have been allowed to go to rack and ruin.
 
Folsom said:
I live in a council estate. There is no neglect here. But less than two minutes drive there is block of apartments, privately owned with no occupants, that have been allowed to go to rack and ruin.
Click to expand...

Well on average council estates are more run down
 
galway_blow_in said:
Well on average council estates are more run down
Click to expand...

They are not. The evidence suggests that private ownership of property is more likely to result in a property being neglected or run down than a council property.
Step out of affluent capital centres and take a look at the neglect of private estates under the control of property management companies. No different, or if so, in worse condition than council run estates. Properties, in general, benefit from occupancy. Non-occupancy, and subsequently, neglect, is far more predominant in privately owned properties.
 
galway_blow_in said:
Well on average council estates are more run down
Click to expand...

Not really. Where I grew up most (but not all) council estates were well maintained. Tenants were there for life so had a stake in the place and cared about it.

Estates and apartments blocks with a big transient rental population are as likely to appear run down in my experience.
 
This is an interesting thread. There are many types of "house".

Occupied or unoccupied. Privately owned, privately rented, privately rented via social welfare. Occupier managed, management company managed, private landlord managed. We can look at individual units or at estates or apartment blocks.

A friend of mine purchased a house in a managed estate just over 10 years ago. At the time this was a new concept in Ireland, a mix of apartments, duplexes and houses, with all the common areas under a management company. I thought it was a recipe for disaster, I was wrong. The managing agent (the company that collects the money cuts the grass etc.as opposed to the company that owns the common areas) does an excellent job. The common areas are well kept, and I understand that if any particular property begins to look run down, the managing agent pressures the owners to maintain it.

The nearby council estate (many now privately owned) has a real mix of picture book houses and gardens, interspersed with a few places where old furniture and electrical goods and cars are piled high in the garden.
 
I have the opposite experience.
Im living in a council estate for the moment. It is well established, well kept and very few instances of obvious neglect.
As mentioned earlier, a nearby privately owned block of apartments has been left to fall into disarray.
Similarly, in another estate nearby that is privately owned and under private management ownership, there is (albeit anecdotal) incidents of non-payment of fees by some residents causing acrimony between neighbors. The estate overall looks ok, but its clear that alot of properties need painting.
In the end, evidential material still suggests that privately owned properties are more likely to be neglected than council or state owned properties.
 
The crux of it is really your stake in your home. It is a more ill-defined concept than ownership but it is truer to the lived experience. It is about the mental value you assign property you have charge of. What you value more, you protect more, you care more for, you emotionally, physically and financially invest more in. Home and house are not synonyms, they are different things converging on a location.

Ownership gives people a large stake in a property but it may be a property they own that is not actually one they make a home in. If it is an investment property, although you own it, your stake it in is reduced, with the best will in the world, you care that little bit less about it because you are removed from it. There is an additional loss of stake by the owner when renting and not all of that stake will be taken up by any putative renter. Renting long-term gives you a larger stake in your home than short term rental. Owning an apartment or a building in a managed estate also reduces your stake, in an apartment, you own inside the walls, you own the walls in company with the other owners, shared ownership though, reduces individual stake. There are ways you can mitigate that, engagement with the ownership and management structures is usually the best approach. The effort put in is evidence to you of the value and that virtuous circle preserves your stake.

Fundamentally HAP tenants are no more likely to be poor homekeepers than owners, in fact many of them may be far more strongly incentivised to retain their stake in their home than non-HAP tenants as replacing it is fraught with difficulty for them. Their stake in their home, their value of it is increased by their circumstances.
 
so-crates said:
The crux of it is really your stake in your home. It is a more ill-defined concept than ownership but it is truer to the lived experience. It is about the mental value you assign property you have charge of. What you value more, you protect more, you care more for, you emotionally, physically and financially invest more in. Home and house are not synonyms, they are different things converging on a location.

Ownership gives people a large stake in a property but it may be a property they own that is not actually one they make a home in. If it is an investment property, although you own it, your stake it in is reduced, with the best will in the world, you care that little bit less about it because you are removed from it. There is an additional loss of stake by the owner when renting and not all of that stake will be taken up by any putative renter. Renting long-term gives you a larger stake in your home than short term rental. Owning an apartment or a building in a managed estate also reduces your stake, in an apartment, you own inside the walls, you own the walls in company with the other owners, shared ownership though, reduces individual stake. There are ways you can mitigate that, engagement with the ownership and management structures is usually the best approach. The effort put in is evidence to you of the value and that virtuous circle preserves your stake.

Fundamentally HAP tenants are no more likely to be poor homekeepers than owners, in fact many of them may be far more strongly incentivised to retain their stake in their home than non-HAP tenants as replacing it is fraught with difficulty for them. Their stake in their home, their value of it is increased by their circumstances.
Click to expand...
so-crates said:
The crux of it is really your stake in your home. It is a more ill-defined concept than ownership but it is truer to the lived experience. It is about the mental value you assign property you have charge of. What you value more, you protect more, you care more for, you emotionally, physically and financially invest more in. Home and house are not synonyms, they are different things converging on a location.

Ownership gives people a large stake in a property but it may be a property they own that is not actually one they make a home in. If it is an investment property, although you own it, your stake it in is reduced, with the best will in the world, you care that little bit less about it because you are removed from it. There is an additional loss of stake by the owner when renting and not all of that stake will be taken up by any putative renter. Renting long-term gives you a larger stake in your home than short term rental. Owning an apartment or a building in a managed estate also reduces your stake, in an apartment, you own inside the walls, you own the walls in company with the other owners, shared ownership though, reduces individual stake. There are ways you can mitigate that, engagement with the ownership and management structures is usually the best approach. The effort put in is evidence to you of the value and that virtuous circle preserves your stake.

Fundamentally HAP tenants are no more likely to be poor homekeepers than owners, in fact many of them may be far more strongly incentivised to retain their stake in their home than non-HAP tenants as replacing it is fraught with difficulty for them. Their stake in their home, their value of it is increased by their circumstances.
Click to expand...

How is it more " fraught with difficulty"?

The council don't evict and a little known fact is the council go out of their way to find homes for problem tenants, they want them out of their hair, the long term lease schemes the council are encouraging people to sign up to is a prime example
 
You appear to be mixing up HAP and council tenancy. HAP tenants are renting privately with support, they are not renting from the council.
 
so-crates said:
You appear to be mixing up HAP and council tenancy. HAP tenants are renting privately with support, they are not renting from the council.
Click to expand...

Yes I probably should not have brought up the council long term leasing scheme

However, in a HAP situation, should the tenant go rogue and the council pull their contribution, the tenant can sit pretty for two years and face no consequences from anyone
 
The difference is that private estates/ developments are maintained by the residents whereas council estates are maintained by the State. My house would look wonderful if someone else was paying for all the upkeep. As it is my landlord and I do what we can to keep an old house looking okay.

I work with a guy who lives in a council house with his partner and kids (it's in his partners name so they pay no rent despite his €50,000 income). One of his kids broke the window and he was giving out that it took the council almost a week to come out and fix it. It is utterly disgraceful that the council don't charge the householder for that kind of repair.
Other people I work with buy a house and then rent it to their partner. The owner lives with his family but officially he's still living with his parents. The partner claims HAPS and the State effectively pays the mortgage of the home owner. In that case the home owner is liable for fixing the property he rents to his partner and their children.
 
In my experience as a reluctant boom time buyer landlord. I have had Tenants who work and pay the rent themselves, tenants on Hap assistance where a Parent is working but they need help with rent, and also tenants who are long term unemployed couples with kids or single "proud stay at home Mummys" who's career is having Children to various ex partners who leave the tax payer to feed their Children. In all instances the employed tenant claiming Hap or not always cares for the property during tenancy, and in all instances they're is several €000s worth of repairs and cleaning to be done after an unemployed person leaves. Maybe I have just been unlucky, but I've come to the conclusion if you've never had to work for anything, nothing you have holds any value.
 
Maz2408 said:
In my experience as a reluctant boom time buyer landlord. I have had Tenants who work and pay the rent themselves, tenants on Hap assistance where a Parent is working but they need help with rent, and also tenants who are long term unemployed couples with kids or single "proud stay at home Mummys" who's career is having Children to various ex partners who leave the tax payer to feed their Children. In all instances the employed tenant claiming Hap or not always cares for the property during tenancy, and in all instances they're is several €000s worth of repairs and cleaning to be done after an unemployed person leaves. Maybe I have just been unlucky, but I've come to the conclusion if you've never had to work for anything, nothing you have holds any value.
Click to expand...

"Idle hands" and all that !
 
You have probably been unlucky. Most people work when there is opportunity. Unemployment tends to be temporary.
There is a small cohort of people that have never worked, nor intend too (who would offer them a job?).
That in the instances you have mentioned, you ended up with people who never work is remarkably unlucky.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top