If you want certainty you have to give it as well.
If you want certainty you have to give it as well.In principle, why not ? In any contract the terms binding the parties do not have to be mirror images of each other. They can be quite different. If we want to move towards more professional (rather than casual) landlordism there would seem to be merit in this. The landlord buys /builds the investment property for long term rental. He/she is not going to move it to another location. The renter may have to move. The renter should be tied to certain conditions to protect the landlord but not necessarily a 5 year lease.
Yes, the terms of the contract should give certainty to both sides. But they do not have to be mirror images of each other.If you want certainty you have to give it as well.
In principle, why not ? In any contract the terms binding the parties do not have to be mirror images of each other. They can be quite different. If we want to move towards more professional (rather than casual) landlordism there would seem to be merit in this. The landlord buys /builds the investment property for long term rental. He/she is not going to move it to another location. The renter may have to move. The renter should be tied to certain conditions to protect the landlord but not necessarily a 5 year lease.
This may work when the landlord is a professional landlord who have purchased the property specifically for the long term. How you do you see this working for the small/accidental landlord. Surely the terms for both parties of a small/accidental landlord and tenant should be the same (ie equally protective of both sides).
What brings you to that opinion?My opinion, though, is that we need to move towards a more professional rental market. I think this would be better for society, for the economy and for the housing market.
What brings you to that opinion?
My landlord is a small time operator but is an excellent landlord.
I like the idea of the odd house here and there being rented rather than blocks or estates where every unit is rented. That's not going to continue to be the case if every landlord is a large company.
That's not going to continue to be the case if every landlord is a large company
My landlord is a small time operator but is an excellent landlord.
Not all companies are good to deal with either. I have as good a level of security as anyone else paying rent in the private sector. I would have more options if so much of my income wasn't being taken to provide housing for people who choose not to work.Great, but not all are (nor are all tenants, lest I be accused of leaving this out). And have you security of tenure or could you face eviction again through no fault of your own ?
It doesn't necessarily have to be a large company.
Great, but not all are (nor are all tenants, lest I be accused of leaving this out). And have you security of tenure or could you face eviction again through no fault of your own ?
Why not legislate that the tenant isn't impacted by the sale of the property, just like a business lease?Can I suggest then if someone wants security of tenure (for a long period) then they look for accommodation with a professional landlord who in all certainty would not be selling properties individually (assuming they own a block of apartments) but would sell them to another institutional investor so your landlord is changing but you are still in the same property.
If you only want a property to rent for a short period then you can rent either from a professional landlord or a small/accidental landlord.
I often wonder why if it is so easy and profitable to be a landlord why there are so many vacant properties in Ireland.
It's too hard to get a bad tenant out. It's too hard to get paid if they stop paying. It's too hard to get tenants to cover the costs of damage to a property
Those are the reasons why landlords leave the market. It doesn't matter though; the property doesn't cease to exist, someone else moves in. The net impact on the housing shortage is zero.
Why not legislate that the tenant isn't impacted by the sale of the property, just like a business lease?
Landlords wan't the property for their use or their families use? Tough luck! The resident has a contract which entitles them to reside there until the contract is up.
My opinion, though, is that we need to move towards a more professional rental market.
Why not legislate that the tenant isn't impacted by the sale of the property, just like a business lease?
Landlords wan't the property for their use or their families use? Tough luck! The resident has a contract which entitles them to reside there until the contract is up.
Firefly, perhaps it wasn't explicit enough but I think it was implied here:
Thanks, I was mixing your posts up with those from TheBigShort
Not the first either is it that you have mixed up our posts? In fact, one of your previous posts had to be deleted by the moderator because you were speculating that Early Riser and me are the same person.
Or if you are in no way speculating, then you must have poor attention span which explains why you need so many clarifications.
Rent caps have done the same thing. This is about broad public policy, it will negatively impact on some landlords but basically it's a case of tough luck; the greater good has to be served and it's not some breach of a basic human right. It will also lead to fewer casual landlords who are really just investors looking for someone to cover their mortgage until they can flip their property.In the future yes this could be done but I would be against it for existing small time landlords. You have devalued the property and your potential market to sell it ie owner occupiers would not want to buy it.
It must be nice all the same to have someone else who agrees with you on nearly everything!
Well I tell you something, Brendan's views are pretty much in line with my own (a few differences but not much) and if someone was to run for election with this as their only mandate they would get my (and a lot of others I would imagine) vote.
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?