RonnieShinbal88
Registered User
- Messages
- 275
Oh I agree there is a value to retaining a good long-term tenant, but there is a limit in terms of what remains good business and what could be considered poor business practice in failing to increase rents for years as the market continued to move at pace. Rent controls wren't implemented overnight. There were growing calls for, and government reference to rent controls in the years preceding their introduction.I think that’s a weird attitude TBH.
It was perfectly logical for a landlord to continue renting a property to a good, long-term tenant at a discount to market rent.
OK, if a landlord in 2016 had a good long-term tenant paying a lower-than-market-rate rent, didn't particularly need to receive anything higher than that, and knew from their tenant's circumstances that this was the most they could afford without it causing them undue hardship or even shortening the odds of a default, are you really saying that they should have jacked up the rent regardless?Oh I agree there is a value to retaining a good long-term tenant, but there is a limit in terms of what remains good business and what could be considered poor business practice in failing to increase rents for years as the market continued to move at pace. Rent controls weren't implemented overnight. There were growing calls for, and government reference to rent controls in the years preceding their introduction.
If you're referring to me, my wife owns a rental property. What's hers is mine and all that, so I'm very much not against the prospect of landlords making a return on their investment. They absolutely need to get a return or we will have no rental market here and that would be a national disaster.I've noticed that there are a lot of people who are not invested in property who strangely seem to be invested in not seeing it do well as an investment (even though we clearlyneed investment for the common good at this point). I guess it relates to a desire to have one's own invetment decisions vindicated or a desire not to experience regret. There is really no point in arguing with someone coming from that perspective and I am not saying that to be nasty it's just an observation over a large number of discussions.
They were actually.Rent controls wren't implemented overnight.
It's very much the landlord's call on whether they want to prioritise providing a social service over seeking the best return for their investment. It's a poor financial strategy but is commendable for other reasons.and knew from their tenant's circumstances that this was the most they could afford without it causing them undue hardship or even shortening the odds of a default, are you really saying that they should have jacked up the rent regardless?
I think the point was specifically that 'it's better that we don't have landlords like that in the Irish rental market', it's better that a REIT would buy them out and do a refurb or leave the place off the market for 2 years then rent it out at over twice the rent.OK, if a landlord in 2016 had a good long-term tenant paying a lower-than-market-rate rent, didn't particularly need to receive anything higher than that, and knew from their tenant's circumstances that this was the most they could afford without it causing them undue hardship or even shortening the odds of a default, are you really saying that they should have jacked up the rent regardless?
You seem to be retrospectively blaming people for acting decently towards others.
True the legislation was, but they had been debated for some time prior to that, you even had the Minister for Housing proposing linking limits to inflation at the start of 2014. Most commentators ridiculed controls as ineffective at best, but again we were reminded that doesn't deter our politicians.The legislation was rushed through the Dail and became effective on Christmas Eve, 2016 - there was no implementation period.
That's clearly not what I said, and clearly not good for the market or renters.I think the point was specifically that 'it's better that we don't have landlords like that in the Irish rental market', it's better that a REIT would buy them out and do a refurb or leave the place off the market for 2 years then rent it out at over twice the rent.
It would be good for the entire country if the value of property dropped. That doesn't mean people want to see investors losing money.I've noticed that there are a lot of people who are not invested in property who strangely seem to be invested in not seeing it do well as an investment (even though we clearlyneed investment for the common good at this point). I guess it relates to a desire to have one's own invetment decisions vindicated or a desire not to experience regret. There is really no point in arguing with someone coming from that perspective and I am not saying that to be nasty it's just an observation over a large number of discussions.
Income generating investments referred to in terms of 'yield' are normally quite low risk.If you're referring to me, my wife owns a rental property. What's hers is mine and all that, so I'm very much not against the prospect of landlords making a return on their investment. They absolutely need to get a return or we will have no rental market here and that would be a national disaster.
I'm simply making the point that at a time when yields on property letting far exceed other options, then there are greater factors dissuading further investment than a lack of a return.
'Many of those are now leaving the market, and that may be for the best.'That's clearly not what I said, and clearly not good for the market or renters.
I don't see you quoting where I said:'Many of those are now leaving the market, and that may be for the best.'
it's better that a REIT would buy them out and do a refurb or leave the place off the market for 2 years then rent it out at over twice the rent.
OK, so maybe you'd like to explain why it's a good thing that landlords charging lower than market rent are leaving the market.I don't see you quoting where I said:
All forms of investment must consider projected yield versus risk, property investment should be no different in that regard.The risks are huge it isn't just about yield when you compare investments.
I know it's apples and oranges to a certain extent, but I'd want a 2x differential in expected return to make me indifferent between Irish residential property and a basket of global equities.Judging by the figures quoted by some posting on here in the investment forum, there aren't too many options available that beat the yield of rental property today,
And people demand higher return for higher risk, or they sell up.All forms of investment must consider projected yield versus risk, property investment should be no different in that regard.
Not really - the Irish Times first reported the RPZ proposals on 13 December 2016 - it became effective 11 days later and landlords had no ability to react.True the legislation was, but they had been debated for some time prior to that, you even had the Minister for Housing proposing linking limits to inflation at the start of 2014.
How so?If Fine Gael had agreed to Alan Kelly’s proposal to limit rent increases to increases in general inflation, we wouldn’t be in the current mess. The RPZ regime has been a disaster.
Very true, but at this time, what do do you consider a lower risk opportunity with similar or greater yield?And people demand higher return for higher risk, or they sell up.
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?