Newstalk reports:
More than nine out of ten rental properties are priced beyond the reach of those on State supports.
A study by the Simon Communities found that just 7% of properties available in 11 locations during August were priced at or below Rent Supplement or Housing Assistance Payments levels.
Single people fared particularly badly with just two properties affordable to them in total, but none in any of the five major city centres.
Just 7% of rentals accessible to people on benefits (Newstalk)
Previously: ‘I Don’t Know How Santa Is Going To Get In’
Sponsored Link
The same Simon Community that’s balls deep in nepotism. Do you need more funding Sam to cover your family members salaries?
Non sequitur alert.
The other blueshirts didnt want to play this morning
Fluffywhinge. What is wrong with you? Are you bullying again?
Well, you’re precious, aren’t you.
@Charlie/Jonotti
The sock puppet thing is very 2005
Simon Community told me that ‘just the tip’ – rather than ‘balls deep’ – is his preference as Nepotism is more narrow alley than O’Connell Street ‘down there’.
Cool.
Just a note, rental prices of houses around us have gone up by 25-30% in the last 8 months (Cork). Ours is due to be reviewed in 4 months. We cannot afford this hike.
“Sure, why don’t they just go rent a house, there’s tons out there”
There isn’t a bump in the road on this benighted isle that has a surfeit of affordable, rented homes.
I was preempting
Ah no, I get that, Don! No slam intended.
Right on
I’m working full time in a professional position and I’m single. There’s no way I can afford a place on my own so it’s fairly dishonest to try and suggest rent allowance should enable a single person to live alone since that’s not the norm in Ireland.
What about single parents? The nature of that is that they often need a property…
I agree with you and that’s my point. Single parents are the ones I feel sorry for in all this but none of the campaign groups deal with it realistically. Housing for single parents and housing for drug addicts etc. (i.e your average visible homeless person on the street) are separate issues and as such should be dealt with separately.
Housing for single parents and young families IS strictly a homeless crisis, whereas the lads you see sleeping in doorways is a drug and drink crisis IMO. Still a crisis.
That guy who died on Molesworth St last year is an example of political posturing and barking up the wrong tree. He had been given two houses and had money in the bank. His problem was his addiction. I don’t understand why that specifically spurred the homeless campaigners into action rather than the addiction campaigners.
Perfectly said.
+ 1
Well said!
+1
This cannot be said enough. That man’s death is being rolled out again in the media to address the housing problem. I was at a talk recently and his name and his death was mentioned in the context of ‘Irish society in 2015.’ Yet people with acute addictions inevitably lead to poor health and that’s not exclusive to this country at all.
The answer my friends is blowing in the wind.
Did the study happen to mention how many properties would be affordable were it not for the drop in rent supplement?
Why would someone want to rent ten properties? Surely we shouldnt be funding ten rental properties to people on state support? One should be enough.
House share – not suitable for families but if you’re single . . .
It’s not always appropriate for single people either
Every house I’ve shared, or my close friends have done has ended in horrible drama and at least two people falling out. It may be necessary economically, but sharing close quarters with somebody is hard enough if you’re in love, let alone friends/relatives, or even strangers.
Yup. If so called functional adults can’t do it, imagine putting 5 vulnerable people in the same house together. A recipe for addiction relapse and worse.
But hey, I feel entitled to a free house because I work. That’s big society for you!
Over 70% of rental properties are owned by people who have a shortfall on costs every month.
FG/Lab have increased taxes on landlords to a point where it’s no longer economically viable to rent many properties.
Rent control is unconstitutional
Rent supplement is too low
And now a survey. This is the position I am currently in, totally self inflicted so I’m not complaining.
I have an apartment rented to a young working couple with a child. They can’t afford childcare so the mother isn’t working currently. I am self employed and the property was purchased for a pension income. I took out a 25 year mortgage on variable rate and paid a 20% deposit.
The rent I charge is about €250 a month below what I could get.
The property costs me €400 a month to keep.
The tenants can’t afford a rent increase. They’ve shown me their payslip.
Should I:
1. Throw them out and get someone who can pay the market rate?
2. Throw them out and get someone on rent allowance and take advantage of the benefits Alan Kelly is about to introduce
3. Sell the property, and take a 100% hit on the €60,000 I invested
4. Only take rent in cash?
5. Keep throwing my own money into the property in the hope that I’ll eventually benefit.
Did you buy the place as an investment?
bought it to provide a retirement income which it will, although I’ll probably sell it when it’s paid for and spend the tax free income rather than take monthly rental income and give the government property tax, income tax, prsi, usc, etc.
Well, to me, you as a landlord are just another greedy person* driving up the cost of buying a property for others looking to buy.
*You want 80% of the value for free paid for by tenants with little minimal input.
Disasta what do people like you actually want?? I’m sick to death with the “greedy landlord” line. Do you think that people who bought investment properties should throw open their doors to the poor and afflicted? Do you think that landlords should all put their keys in a big bowl in Stephen’s Green and say “Ah go on, take it, Ah ya will”? Get real.
Meh – this is no different to any other investment. And fundamentally, we need people to rent from, since lots of people move around when they’re young (or just can’t afford a deposit when they’re young).
wearnicehats have you seen the quality of rental property and the prices of said property in this country?
Ah yes Disasta, the old Irish begrudgery flows freely in your veins I see.
Did you miss the property boat? From boom to bust to emptiness.
As mentioned already I didn’t buy. Thankfully I am one of the few I know who didn’t overextend themselves.
Ergh, the worst people are those who buy property for their retirement in a housing market with low stock. The worst.
“FG/Lab have increased taxes on landlords to a point where it’s no longer economically viable to rent many properties.”
This is not the underlying problem. The underlying problem is we don’t build enough houses. Thus houses are too expensive to buy relative to incomes. This problem still exists, but was far worse in the past – thus lots of people have mortgages at values that are simply to high for sustainable property prices in a decent society.
The solution is running inflation at ~5-10% for several years, while building houses in large numbers (so that house prices remain stable, while incomes go up). This avoids screwing all those who already owns houses, while moving house prices to a more long term sustainable level (which should be somewhere around 3-4 times median income).
The problem with this solution, of course, is that
1) We can’t meaningfully control our own inflation rate – that’s controlled by the ECB
2) Even if we could, this would fupp those on fixed incomes. You could ameliorate this by increasing benefits at the rate of inflation, but it’d still fuck lots of those with private pensions.
The other solution is just build more houses, and deal with the fact that lots of people own houses with ridiculous mortgages, and have to either swallow that loss, or if they cannot, go broke.
There is no “the problem” there are a multitude of contributing problems.
Well said Cian.
How would you take a 100% hit. That’s actually impossible. And honestly iv “kicked” people out, I’d have said not renewed the lease myself, I was offered €230 a month more than they could afford so I rented to someone else. It’s not my fault the market price went up. And before people start moaning about it, nobody complained when the rent dropped by over 25% from around 09-13 and I was actually losing money.
“How would you take a 100% hit”
You put down a deposit of 60k on a house worth 400k. You pay off 40k of mortgage. The house drops by 100k in value. You sell. You therefore lose 100% of your investment.
The 60k secures your mortgage of 340,000 you’ve paid 40k off it so owe 300k, it sells for €300k that’s all correct so far. But your mistake is calculating in the 60k deposit so that your still owed it. Anyone buying to rent or for long term investment surely understands that you need to class your deposit as business expenses and you only need to recoup your mortgage so as to rent it out mortgage free. Now if you have to sell before recouping all cost. Selling and owing nothing is the best case. Again you need to have your plan set out to just forget about the deposit.
I’ll type this slowly for you Anomanomanom .
You invest €60k, property is currently worth exactly what is owed on it. Therefore…wait for it……….. you sell and don’t recoup your €60k.
the absolute arrogance of expecting someone else to pay for your property is bad enough, but bitching that you had to contribute a tiny fraction of the mortgage YOU took out?
what a willy. you really are. i read you moaning about others with their sense of entitlement and here YOU are expecting a house for free.
Stupid investment for your pension.
How so Jonotti? Even with the tax increases the rent covers all of the costs. So I have to contribute a monthly sum towards the mortgage but the balance drops by an equivalent amount.
At some stage I will own the property and be able to get a tax free lump sum.
If you think it’s a stupid pension investment maybe you’re right but at least I still have something tangible that will always be worth something and thanks to FG/Lab the demand for rental property is never going to wane.
If I had invested in a private pension I’d be goosed now considering the drop in funds coupled with the government’s Annual raid to prop up the tourist industry, over €2 billion to date and counting!
I detect a subtle scent of jealousy in your post!
I wouldn’t have put it as strongly as Jonotti, but it is the definition of having all of your eggs in one basket. Very hard to turn into cash quickly should the need ever arise, also.
Property, once your not worrying about a price crash, is always a sound investment over the long term.
You came to a crap place to get advice on how to manage your investment.
That’s probably not that helpful.
That said, 1 and 2 both make you an absolute bastard. So don’t do them.
I don’t need advice from anyone how posts here but I think I managed to stimulate a little debate.
By the way, I have no intentions of throwing anyone on the street but if Alan Kelly does what’s being reported and incentivises me for renting to someone on the housing list I will.
How so. I bought for €215,000 I paid €26,000 in cash so only needed €189,000. I’m living there 7 years. The mortgage is currently €160,000. Considering I was renting before at €850 a month. 850x12x7=71,400 in rent assuming it averaged at 850 over 7 years. Taking my deposit from 71,400-26,000=45,000. So there’s a 45k difference. You never get back rent/deposit but take the difference from my total cost of 215,000 and you get 170,000 so the cost of eventually owning the place as so far only been €10,000 extra over 7 years. Buying is never a bad option.
Unless the place you bought doesn’t have its own land.
give it over to the local authority to rent out under Rental Accommodation Scheme.
I heard David Cameron has an affordable homes idea he’s pushing…. the homes cost £450,000
Maybe we should follow his lead, or is he already following ours…..
For all the landlord hating people out there let me give you an example of someone I know. This person was living in a not so great area of town, had just got married and was expecting sprog 1 (all in the right order like the good catholics they are). Bought a house in 2007 in a better area – couldn’t realllly afford it but the bank said “ya will”. 4 years later – and this will really please the likes of Disasta etc, this will really have them heading upstairs to lay out the tissue runway – they can’t afford the mortgage repayments on their house. So they rent it out because then they can afford – just – to cover the mortgage. They were pressured into doing so by the bank that lent them the money in the first place. They are now renting a house themselves, not that far away from the place they moved from in 2007, because they can afford that. Scheming dirty irony laden lowlife landlords that they are. I suppose they could have gone to the welfare though…
I reckon the likes of Disasta lays out a lot of tissue runways when he’s locked away in his (parent’s provided) bedroom. I also reckon he sits on his arm until it’s numb :-)
wearnicehats, I’m not saying it 100% of them, that’s just jumping to conclusions, hence why I asked did the other guy did he buy for investment.
I can imagine how bad it is for those people forced into renting when they own their own place. I know a lot of people in the same boat, panic bought cause prices got so high. I didn’t buy myself, luckily, as the location of my work changed.
I am also forced into renting, and I also have a young family, but I can’t afford to buy due to new rules and the gigantic prices. Also the fact you have to live where I am for 10 years before you can build yourself.
I could buy in the sticks, but I want the better half to have some neighbourly company when she’s at home with the child.
More than nine out of ten rental properties are priced beyond the reach of those on State supports.
So that is 10 out of 10 rental properties then, is it? Not looking for a fight but why not just say 10 out of 10 or 100%?
More than nine out of ten rental properties are priced beyond the reach of those on State supports.
So that is 10 out of 10 rental properties then, is it? Not looking for a fight but why not just say 10 out of 10 or 100%?