Legal issue: Long Term Lease with Council

If you think about it, in most cases roughly half the rent paid by the council goes straight back into government coffers via taxation.

It brought a lot of properties into the social housing system for a minimal outlay at a time the local authorities couldn't get close to meeting demand.

We also need to root out the profiteering is bad nonsense. If there was no profit to be made, the private sector wouldn't be propping up a the social housing system and those depending on it would be worse off.
 
Making a profit and profiteering aren't the same thing. The present crisis in the housing market allows many (not all) property owners to make profits very far above average market returns, due to the (I think deliberate) decision by various FG-led governments to strangle housing supply in order to drive up prices. Those who lobbied for that policy are now reaping the rewards.
 
Making a profit and profiteering aren't the same thing.
I assumed incorrectly that you were referring to private landlords simply making profit.

The constraints of the scheme mean profiteering is simply not possible, landlords must agree to a discount on the market rate.

due to the (I think deliberate) decision by various FG-led governments to strangle housing supply in order to drive up prices.
What decisions or legislation are you referring to here?
 
Continued draconian height & density restrictions; no tax penalties for vacant properties; no effective tax on land hoarding, no effort to get derelict buildings renovated, zero affordable houses & cost rentals last year (and a derisory number this year), no compulsory purchase orders for golf courses and huge bus garages in the centre of Dublin etc etc etc... Not building houses is as much a political decision as building them.
 
Last edited:
Continued draconian height & density restrictions;
A large section of the public are against increased height and density, look at all the objections to any development of scale.

no effort to get derelict buildings renovated,
Derelict Sites Act is more than most countries are doing. We're doing way better in that regard than many of our European neighbours.

zero affordable houses & cost rentals last year
During the pandemic building was shut largely shut down, then Sinn Fein seem to be systematically objecting to any proposed affordable developments.

no compulsory purchase orders for golf courses
That would be an awful policy! I'm not sure there are a lot of gold courses in the areas with greatest social housing need, but the last thing they should be doing is removing what little green space there is left.

huge bus garages in the centre of Dublin
They take up relatively little space and allow for a much more efficient bus service. Moving these out would cause far more problems for the sake of a small number of units.
 
Continued draconian height & density restrictions;

like previous poster said, large portions of the general public object to this. In the correct area and concentrated in that area, I personally wouldn't object to high rise buildings, but they are not suited to everywhere en masse.


no tax penalties for vacant properties; no effective tax on land hoarding,

often thrown out there by opposition parties on the left. This is a notoriously difficult thing to administer. What constitutes a vacant property? Is it 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, what? If a person is in a nursing home, is the property considered vacant? Do you want to go after holiday homes in rural areas? You can't just bring in a system, you need to design it and this is such a complicated proposal.


no effort to get derelict buildings renovated,
the budget made such allowances permitted and the parties of the left lambasted them for being pro-landlord.


zero affordable houses & cost rentals last year (and a derisory number this year),
Where have you been living since March 2020? And prior to CoVid, we were coming out of the worst financial crash since the Great Depression in 1929. If I want to build one house, it'll take be over 12 months (best case scenario) from start to finish. To build estates with hundreds of house takes years. The plans are being put in place now, give it 2 years or 3 years (government to run til 2025 anyway!) and see how housing building numbers are looking then.


no compulsory purchase orders for golf courses and huge bus garages in the centre of Dublin etc etc etc
sure build a few apartment blocks on stephens green and marley park while you are at it. And get rid of the roads in the city centres and just have footpaths. Imagine all the apartment blocks you could build 50 storeys high?!
 
sure build a few apartment blocks on stephens green and marley park while you are at it.
That's a red herring. Donnybrook golf course & the nearby bus garage alone could accommodate apartments for thousands of people, and the same applies to Clontarf golf course and others. Golfers golfing in the middle of the city while others have to spend 4 hours a day commuting beause they can't afford to live anywhere near the city makes no sense. Buses sleeping in the centre of the city rather than around the outskirts makes no sense either.
 
That would be an awful policy! I'm not sure there are a lot of gold courses in the areas with greatest social housing need, but the last thing they should be doing is removing what little green space there is left.
There are 12 golf courses within the M50!

Yes, they are "green space" but only accessible to a tiny % of the population and not very intensively at that.

I would build on half and put the other half to leisure use.
 
There are 12 golf courses within the M50!

Yes, they are "green space" but only accessible to a tiny % of the population and not very intensively at that.

I would build on half and put the other half to leisure use.
12 isn't a lot given the population living and working in the area. With ~500 golf courses around the country, you could argue Dublin is currently very much under-served.

Those courses are also in affluent areas with little need for social housing, certainly not nearly enough to justify CPOs. You'd fit the land owned by those 7 in a small corner of the Phoenix Park, why not tarmac a load of that instead? You'd get way more housing

Just because you may not play or like golf doesn't mean these facilities don't server a purpose.
 
It's less a red herring than your suggestions. A large scale development like that on Donnybrook would breach the density limits and is very unlikely due to massive opposition. It also wouldn't solve the problem for those who have to commute 4 hours, they wouldn't be able to afford to buy anything that would ever get built there.

There's plenty of under utilised land within Dublin that could be used for smaller scale and more affordable developments. Many of those locations are far better placed than Donnybrook in terms of proximity to needs and employment. Tearing down amenities and moving buses out will just degrade the city for everyone.
 
Why is a long term lease to a council a good idea? They guarantee the rent ok but you'll be tied in to a ten year contract, you can only sell to another investor, you can't use the property yourself, rent is 20% below market rates, no regular rent increase, no say about tenants. What if the government brought in a huge second property tax and you weren't able to pay it or new rules about energy efficiencies/insulation or some other new property tax and you're tied in? Why not rent to a private tenant or sell?
 
Why is a long term lease to a council a good idea?
1. Twenty per cent guaranteed is not bad actually. (And it's 15% for properties with an annual service charge.) An agent would charge you about 8%. Voids might not be a problem these days, but historically, you'd normally expect 5 to 10% void periods between tenancies. Then there's costs of repairs, maintenance, replacement of furniture and effects.

2. No risk of nightmare tenants, rent defaults, serious damage.

3. No admin, no finding, vetting, dealing with tenants, no RTB requirements, easier tax returns.

4. If below market rent at the moment, you escape the RPZ restrictions.


They guarantee the rent ok but you'll be tied in to a ten year contract, you can only sell to another investor, you can't use the property yourself, rent is 20% below market rates, no regular rent increase,
Rents increase in line with CPI.
no say about tenants.
No skin off your nose. If they wreck the place, the council have to repair it.
What if the government brought in a huge second property tax and you weren't able to pay it or new rules about energy efficiencies/insulation
Extremely unlikely to be retrospective. If they did make improved standards mandatory for rental sector, it's the council's problem not yours! Best case scenario, you might even end up getting back a property with significantly improved BER.
or some other new property tax and you're tied in? Why not rent to a private tenant or sell?