RonnieShinbal88
Registered User
- Messages
- 251
We've had the cuckoo funds, next up are the cuckoo tenants. It's all about security of tenure, once you are in the place is yours.
I entirely understand why this arrangements would be attractive to tenants, the problem is that it isn't attractive to many landlords who bought properties to rent in the expectation that they would be able to sell when they wished to and now see this option withdrawn. This is a commercial service and landlords are under no obligation to provide it if the terms are not attractive to them. For many small landlords who are leaving the sector these terms clearly have become too unattractive and the supply of rented property is declining as a result.Interesting discussion from landlords, who seem to believe that government housing policy should prioritise their profit and their requirements.
But that's not supposed to be the government's policy. It is supposed to govern for the common good, rather than a, relatively, small, though vociferous priveleged minority.
Security of tenancy is a real game changer, in terms of quality of life, for many, many people. Especially, when starting a family, putting down roots in a community and trying to establish stable lifestyle. Irish law rarely reflects this crucial need, instead allowing tenants to be ditched out, at very short notice, on the whim of the private landlord.
Whether its Sinn Fein, or Fine Gael, this needs to change. Its grossly unfair.
If higher rents and fewer rental properties are in the common good then they're certainly going about it in the right way. Let's face it, foisting the social housing supply to the private sector, and then continually meddling with the rules of engagement does absolutely nothing positive for the vast majority.It is supposed to govern for the common good, rather than a, relatively, small, though vociferous priveleged minority.
The government has , absoloutely, neglected its responsiblities in this area.If higher rents and fewer rental properties are in the common good then they're certainly going about it in the right way. Let's face it, foisting the social housing supply to the private sector, and then continually meddling with the rules of engagement does absolutely nothing positive for the vast majority.
I don't think anyone could claim that small landlords are a vociferous group, quite the opposite in fact. Perhaps if they were more organised their side of this story might get some coverage in the media.
They were and they certainly server their communities well, giving the occupants the option to purchase as their circumstances improved, allowing them stay in the communities they were raised in. Rising costs of development and maintenance challenged that model but the real problems came when many in those communities decided they wouldn't pay their means tested rent. Evictions never happened, so why would you pay? Authorities couldn't sustain that and so schemes like HAP were introduced to shuffle the problem to the private rental sector.n my experience, growing up on an inner city council estate, they were vibrant and supportive communities. Nurses, teachers, taxi drivers, factory workers, shop workers, plumbers, electricians, all living together in houses which offered secure tenancy, maintenance, repair and regular modernisation. Rents were fair, with support for those whose wages were low, or who were receiving social welfare.
No, it should really be up to the government to deliver adequate social housing. The only thing the government taking more control of the private rental sector will do is increase rents, reduce supply, or most likely both. It was widely predicted that the RPZ regime would achieve just that, how could anyone think that further restrictions will reverse it?I don't blame landlords for rinsing their tenants and charging 3k a month for some tip in Drumcondra. Its up to the govt to take control and start to roll back the rampant exploitation and reversion to Rackman times, which is all around us.
And here we go with the landlord bashing again.landlords for rinsing their tenants and charging 3k a month for some tip in Drumcondra
Actually, the sale of council houses was a disaster. The estate I grew up in was sold off in the 80's. Sure the tenants, at the time, did very well and they sold off for nice money, before moving somewhere else. But these days, my old family home is, virtually, the only one left as a council home.They were and they certainly server their communities well, giving the occupants the option to purchase as their circumstances improved, allowing them stay in the communities they were raised in.
But if the landlords sell , then the houses will be bought by people who actually want to live in them.Small landlords have traditionally delivered a diverse range of properties to the market here that the larger investment vehicles never will. Chasing them out of the game will be a disaster for people who want to live in a community rather than in high-density developments full of renters.
Mainly because there was nothing to replace them. Mixed neighbourhoods have much better outcomes for children raised there than areas of concentrated social housing.Actually, the sale of council houses was a disaster.
Yes, exacerbating the problems of people who can't afford to buy. People starting families will be forced to move away from family supports, those whose marriages break down will likewise be forced to move away with significant disruption for any children. Will they all end up in high-density developments managed by an investment fund? Is that really what we think is best?But if the landlords sell , then the houses will be bought by people who actually want to live in them.
Again you clearly know little about the legislation in regards to tenancies; nor the RTB requirements for registration of tenants.Rented for thousands per month, on 12 month contracts....crammed in 5 or 6 to a house.
Given the nature of HAP, it would be difficult to qualify except in limited circumstances if you work, so most HAP tenants are unlikely to have paid work.I’d have thought those on HAP are most exposed to job losses in hospitality etc, and once the HAP tenant cannot pay the Council stop too. What’s your thinking on it?
Congratulations on your current good fortune. However does history repeat itself?I'm relatively new to the landlord game. I have 7 properties currently with sale agreed on 2 more bringing it to nine. I spent a lot of time recently wondering whether I should get into the property game, I even came here for some advice at the start of the year. I'm 36, I done quite well out of the sale of a family business recently which gave me the ability to be able to purchase these properties without any borrowings. I realise that I'm very fortunate and not everyone is in that position.
I've been over it in my head a hundred times, but to me, there's no other investment out there that can get me that kind of ROI. At the moment my average ROI is 11%. After I set aside a little into a fund for annual expenses it's still 9.3%. I vet the tenants myself and build a relationship with them before allowing them in. The purpose of investing in property is to create a passive (as passive as possible) revenue stream that I will use as a salary so I don't need a 09:00 - 17:00. With that in mind, I don't intend to sell the house, so I'm not too worried about the market crashing or potentially unfriendly laws. I also don't care if a tenant has a right to the property for life, in fact, the longer the tenant stays the better. As long as they are paying the bills and keeping the place tidy, I want them to stay forever. I generally won't buy in a RPZ so that's not an issue for me. I advise all my tenants before moving in, I'm not a hands on landlord, if something breaks in the place I expect the tenant to call the repair man and have it fixed, then they can subtract it from the monthly rent. This approach has worked for me so far.
I would estimate that with 9 properties, I spend on average an hour or two a week dedicated to landlord responsibilities. All the while, I have a steady revenue stream and assets that are appreciating in value. For the moment anyway, but if they fall it doesn't bother me as I don't plan to sell and they will eventually come back around and continue to increase, as they always have throughout history.
So that's why I'm staying in and not selling. ROI of over 10% along with a good asset behind it. I'm also diversifying my investments between stocks and buying equity in a business.
Sorry but that has gone over my head, I read the article but I'm unsure of the point your making. Don't take that as confrontational, I have just genuinely missed what your implying there.Congratulations on your current good fortune. However does history repeat itself?
A short history of renting in Ireland
From 19th-century tenements to the crisis of 2015 – 200 years of landlord v tenantwww.irishtimes.com
Double-digit yields are out there mainly in apartments outside core urban areas. I think that's a good risk-adjusted return. The fact that this is not your sole income means your average tax bill on rental income will be less than 52%. For a lot of people with a day job the average tax rate on their rental income is their marginal person tax rate which just makes the whole thing less attractive.I've been over it in my head a hundred times, but to me, there's no other investment out there that can get me that kind of ROI. At the moment my average ROI is 11%.
I think long-run that is a bit optimistic. A landlord often has to do nothing for months at a time but refurbishment has to happen eventually. Re-letting a property always involves work as well and this can suck up time.I would estimate that with 9 properties, I spend on average an hour or two a week dedicated to landlord responsibilities.
Hi, My point is that historically it was not always profitable to be a landlord and the rules have changed many times through the years.Sorry but that has gone over my head, I read the article but I'm unsure of the point your making. Don't take that as confrontational, I have just genuinely missed what your implying there.
Hi, The point is nothing remains static. The return you are currently getting will not be the same in ten years time or has had happened previously from 1918 - 1960. These laws were only challenged in 1980. Tenants were able to transfer the property to their children at the same rates. It was a lifetime for some landlords.Sorry but that has gone over my head, I read the article but I'm unsure of the point your making. Don't take that as confrontational, I have just genuinely missed what your implying there.
Double-digit yields are out there mainly in apartments outside core urban areas. I think that's a good risk-adjusted return. The fact that this is not your sole income means your average tax bill on rental income will be less than 52%. For a lot of people with a day job the average tax rate on their rental income is their marginal person tax rate which just makes the whole thing less attractive.
@Always Learning - did you ever consider BTL finance on some of portfolio? You could increase your gross rents with a large portfolio and reduce tax bill.
I think long-run that is a bit optimistic. A landlord often has to do nothing for months at a time but refurbishment has to happen eventually. Re-letting a property always involves work as well and this can suck up time.
On average I think you will do more work than this with nine properties, but it's still not a bad lifestyle. Good luck with it!
Hi, My point is that historically it was not always profitable to be a landlord and the rules have changed many times through the years.
Hi, The point is nothing remains static. The return you are currently getting will not be the same in ten years time or has had happened previously from 1918 - 1960. These laws were only challenged in 1980. Tenants were able to transfer the property to their children at the same rates. It was a lifetime for some landlords.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?