CZpOl0aWcAEnh4X

Today’s Irish Times.

 

Be Your Own Reason tweetz:

“Plain Cockamamie Part 2 [Part 1 at link below], on steroids…”

Survey finds 95% of homes for rent too high for rent allowance (Irish Times)

Cockamanie Part 1

Meanwhile:

904063119040631690406309

This afternoon.

Glasnevin, Dublin 9

Minister for the Enviornment Alan Kelly (above left) at the Fold housing development Agency development with new resident Hilda Hickey Wrenn (above centre) and local Labour TD John Lyons TD .

Sam Boal/Rollingnews

70 thoughts on “How Few?

    1. scottser

      did your shirt turn blue?
      seriously, i’m fukn sick of all the blueshirt calling. it was mildly amusing around march last year.
      so fukn stop it.
      yis coonts.

    1. Mickey Twopints

      The limits are scaled to local norms. Some rural areas have very low limits (one person I know lives in an area with a monthly limit of €280 for a single person). It’s very common for landlords and tenants to collude in lying about the rent to the DSP in order to get a flat under the official limit, then top up the rent in cash from their 188/wk. (bear in mind that they already make an “official” contribution). The DSP inspectors know this is going on, and they turn a blind eye. All the paperwork is squared way. Joan Burton has a lot to answer for.

      1. Spaghetti Hoop

        I see. Thanks for that. I always assumed that the long-term unemployed would have a better standard of living in rural areas and that the rural resettlement scheme should be returned to address the urban/rural inequities. Now if you move out of the cities you are penalised. Does NOT make any sense.
        Heaven help you if you decided to start a rural-based business.

        1. Mickey Twopints

          This issue also impacts those living with chronic illness on disability allowance. OAPs on state pension are not much better off if they are renting from private landlords.

        2. Lorcan Nagle

          My Brother in law has been unemployed for years, after he and his girlfriend moved down the country when they got sick of living in Dublin. Even though she’s been lucky enough to get work their quality of life isn’t great.

        3. Kieran NYC

          +1

          Would be a very easy way to get money into rural Ireland, with all the knock-on benefits (including getting people off benefits).

          1. ahjayzis

            It’s also social cleansing. I don’t want to live in cities with an income limit, I’m sure the long-term unemployed don’t want to leave their families, and they’re far less likely to ever be employed living in the middle of nowhere with no social or familial connections.
            And do we really want to further boost the dispersal of the population? That costs a fortune too.

          2. Kieran NYC

            Can’t keep adding to Dublin either, with the Irish mentality of treating tall buildings that people inhabit in a city as something that only happens in fairytales or ‘out fordin’. Can only sprawl for so long.

    2. Anne

      From the link there –
      “The survey, of all properties listed for rent on Daft.ie in 11 locations, was conducted at the end of November. Of the 726 properties surveyed, just 34, or 4.5 per cent, were within rent supplement caps. ”

      Looks like they locations they used for the snapshot survey were- Kildare, Athlone, Dublin City Centre, Dundalk, Galway City Centre, Limerick City Centre,Portlaoise, Galway, Athlone and Dundalk

      Here’s some more info from the Simon Community who did the survey –
      http://www.dubsimon.ie/NewsReports/TabId/292/ArtMID/1182/ArticleID/140/Rent-Supplement-safety-net-failing-to-keep-people-out-of-homelessness.aspx

      “Conducted over three consecutive days in November, ‘Locked Out of the Market III: The Gap Between Rent Supplement/HAP Limits and Market Rents’ highlights the extent of the shrinking private rented market as the ever increasing gap between rising rents and rent supplement/ housing assistance payments (HAP) limits. The Simon Communities also undertook this study in May and August 2015. Rents have increase by 32.3% since April 2012 while rent limits have remained unchanged since June 2013.

      Locked Out of the Market III found that there were 746 properties to rent over the snapshot period in eleven locations. This is a 13% fall to the number of properties available to rent compared to the August study (859) and a 35% drop in the May study (1,150). The number of properties available to rent at or below rent supplement/HAP limits fell by 47% when compared to August from 64 to 34 properties. This was a 75% drop from the May study when 138 properties were available to rent at or below rent supplement/HAP limits.”

  1. diddy

    Rents have risen 40- 45% since 2010 by my reckoning. 50% of workers earn 30 k or less per year. Whats the point in working?

      1. diddy

        touché, but should we expect our wages to buy us more than eeking out an existence? Its a low wage economy folks. pensions? forget about it

        1. Dόn Pídgéόní

          Yes. Stop voting people in who are on the side of landlords, big business and low wages. Get angry, make a noise, go on a march, sign a petition, tell your MP (or equivalent).

          And while you are there, tell them to build more social housing, you big bollocks.

  2. Walter-Ego

    The Government have been told this for over a year and still they chose to do nothing, adding to the homeless crisis.

    1. Zuppy International

      Smelly Kelly the Sinister Minister for fupping things up.

      It’s my opinion and I have every right to express it.

      That is all.

    1. Anne

      “increasing the rental allowance pushes rates up further for everyone, always has always will.”

      What orifice did you pull that one out of? Eh Wrong.

      If that were the case,that would mean rents would have decreased .. but the opposite has been the case –
      ” Rents have increase by 32.3% since April 2012 while rent limits have remained unchanged since June 2013″

      Up 32.3%.. not due to increase in rent supplements knucklehead.

        1. Anne

          ha. thanks.
          I ‘marshaled the allies to win the online space’ .. I call them logic and reason.. lol

      1. Anomanomanom

        In 2007 I was paying €850 a month in rent. I live in the same apartment block now and rents are around the €950 high end €1000. So in 9 years rent as gone up by €100/150 at that’s Dublin 8. It’s really not to bad in fairness. So this greedy landlord comment that gets thrown around is not really true. Well in my area anyway.

        1. Mickey Twopints

          If you are unfortunate enough to become unable to work (illness, disability) or become unemployed, you’d better have some serious savings put away or private insurance otherwise you’ll be living in a bus shelter. The HAP limit for a singleton where you live is €520 a month. If you’re a couple with 3 or more kids you’d qualify for up to €1000. Don’t think it could happen to you?

          1. Anomanomanom

            I can state for a fact it won’t happen to me. I wouldn’t have three kids if i could not afford to house them, yes I know people have lost jobs and I feel sympathy for real hard luck cases. Not for someone, like on the program Rte did moaning she had 3 kids and was pregnant, Oh and was homeless the last few years. So she had her youngest while “homeless” and got pregnant while “homeless”. I’m sorry but she should not have kids. Anyway like I said these rent hikes are not happening where I live, from what I can see.

          2. Anomanomanom

            Oh and genuine question here Can people add money to the rent allowance the receive, legal or are they meant to find a place to rent for that sum. Because if they can add to it I can’t see the problem. Add only €80 a week and you’d get a lovely place.

          3. Mickey Twopints

            You can state for a fact that you are invincible? You could never be struck down by debilitating illness or be run over by a bus? Right so. As for your question re topping up the rent, you clearly haven’t read the discussion above. Yet you are happy to throw your uninformed opinions around the place.

          4. Dόn Pídgéόní

            Famous last words Anomanomanom….

            Everyone is about 2 paydays away from being homeless. And once you are there, it’s a hard slog back. I hope you are never in the situation that you have children and are homeless but to say that would never happen to you is naive.

          5. It's frequently Dave

            @Anomanomanom

            No, you are not allowed (officially) to make up the difference. That’s why so many people have these side deals with landlords.
            If I remember rightly, when challenged on the issue either Harney or Burton said “I would expect that landlords would take tenants circumstances into account and negotiate.” or something similar.

      2. sqoid

        It’s a well documented and long touted result of intervention into a market with inelastic supply.

        If you increase the money available to buyers (or drop the costs for suppliers) then the net result is more money for sellers as the equilibrium price moves while the supply stays stagnant.

        1. Anne

          “It’s a well documented and long touted result of intervention into a market with inelastic supply.”

          Re intervention in the market, here you go –
          http://www.davidmcwilliams.ie/2015/11/02/why-we-need-rent-controls

          “There seems to be a lot of ideology involved in this debate. The mainstream economics profession and the property/landlord lobby appear to argue that we shouldn’t introduce rent controls because it interferes with the “free market” or the status quo. But this is silly because the market isn’t free; it is rigged at every stage and the “status quo” doesn’t deliver stability but delivers massive instability.

          If we really want a free market in housing, we should scrap all tax breaks to property, stop allowing debt interest costs to be deducted from tax liabilities, stop any tax incentive into any form of building, introduce “use it or lose it” schemes in planning, introduce “non-recourse” mortgages and address a whole variety of other legacy interventions in this most tampered with market.

          Until these are done, signaling out rent control as being uniquely distortive smacks of ideology, group think and a weakness for thinking economics is a pure science when in fact is it far from that. “

          1. Anne

            And –
            http://www.davidmcwilliams.ie/2015/02/02/the-central-banks-new-rules-simply-make-life-even-easier-for-those-who-are-already-wealthy

            As more than half of all mortgages are taken out by first-time buyers, the Central Bank focused on this sector. For properties up to €220,000, the maximum LTV for the first time buyer is 90 per cent. Above that, the LTV will be 80 per cent. In the past, the figure was an LTV of 92 per cent.

            As the average house in Dublin costs €270,000, this means that the first time buyer aiming to buy this house has to come up with €32,000 (a deposit of 10 per cent on the first €220,000, plus a deposit of 20 per cent on the remaining €50,000), as opposed to €21,600. This is a massive change for the potential buyer.

            How are they supposed to find this type of cash, when the top income tax rate is kicking in below €40,000? Income taxes are simply too high, and take-home pay is simply too low…

            First, the kids of rich parents will be fine, because the parents will pony up. There is some €90 billion on deposit here, so there are plenty of wealthy parents. A move which results in the social endgame of only the relatively rich getting a look in seems to be a bit odd, don’t you think? “

          2. Anne

            And – last one, sorry

            “Just because the first-time buyers may be locked out from buying doesn’t mean they automatically emigrate. They are still here, for the most part, and they still need a place to live.

            The fact that many first-time buyers are locked out of buying means they will have to rent for longer. So we will see a spike in demand for rental properties, pushing up rents and therefore yields for investors.

            Thus, young workers will be tenants for old landlords, again providing an income to the already wealthy and topping up their pensions. “

      3. karlj

        Rent supplement is a state support that sets a floor on rents.
        If rent supplement ceilings were raised, rents would rise even more than now. This has been proven time & time again.

        1. Anne

          “Rent supplement is a state support that sets a floor on rents.”

          Sets a floor.. but with no ceiling, the skies the limit huh.
          Proper rent controls would put a stop to that.

          “If rent supplement ceilings were raised, rents would rise even more than now. This has been proven time & time again.”

          This has not been proven time and time again, not since 2013 anyway –
          “Rents have increase by 32.3% since April 2012 while rent limits have remained unchanged since June 2013.”

          Rent supplements have remained the same, but rents have increased … 32.3%..
          All by themselves rents have increased, with no help required from increasing rent supplements.

          You’re wrong.

    2. ahjayzis

      Can’t increase the supplement or rental costs will explode.

      Rental costs explode anyway, can’t increase the rent allowance.

      Maybe if we withdrew it altogether we’d get super cheap rents and no homeless people!

  3. Dav

    nice blushirt policy, keep the poor on their knees, keep the landlords in gravy. How many blushirt td’s are landlords?

      1. Steve

        How many Shinner TDs are terrorists/ murderers/ rapist apologists/ criminals??

        That’s got to be a lot worse than being a landlord???

        1. ReproBertie

          Don’t be silly Steve. If it wasn’t for the existence of landlords we’d all have free homes.

    1. ReproBertie

      I seem to remember that it was Labour that cut the allowance and told tenants to ask their landlords to drop the rents. They didn’t waste their time telling landlords to ask the banks to drop the mortgage.

      1. Mickey Twopints

        At the same time imposing the “Household Charge” regardless of ability to pay. The rent supplement cuts are a pet project of Moan Burton. She is also well known in the department for having a bee in her knickers over welfare payments to single parents.

  4. DubLoony

    We have a growing population, more families being formed and for a number of years a construction sector that was a on its knees.
    We’ve hit a point where demand has outstripped supply and as a predictable result, rents have gone skyward.

    The freeze on rents will go some way to taking the pressure off but that obviously not going to help anyone in emergency accommodation today.

    If rent supplements increase, arguable that they now should given the freeze, pressure on rent will rise further.
    The only answer is to get building & renovating again. We need all types of houses – social, affordable, sheltered and private. We need family homes, places for singles, for elderly and those who need a bit of extra help.

    Over 2 billion was allocated in the budget before last. It takes time to filter that down to keys in the door between plans being drawn up, planning permission & JCBs on site.

    Its starting to filter though now but not fast enough.

  5. Bobby

    I used to work for Fold and they do great work.

    I moved Hilda Wren Hickey into that home and she cried with the emotion of it all. It being SO much nicer than the old Corpo housing she was living in.

    Support Fold if you can.

    1. mary

      There isn’t one, because 13,000 social housing units weren’t ‘built’ in 2015. Around about 13,000 were ‘delivered’ through a mixture of HAP (moving rent supplement tenants onto a renamed rent supplement scheme and calling them ‘new’), RAS (which has been around since 2005 so nothing new about a few coming on stream), the Social Housing Leasing Initiative, 2,700 vacants being returned to use (question arises: why were they left vacant until the end of 2015?), leasing by Housing Bodies, and builds, of which there were 28 commenced. To the best of my knowledge, that 28 includes Part V acquisitions, though I’d need to double-check that.

      The 13,000 figure is the very worst, most cynical kind of fudging and chicanery. They ‘delivered’ around the same number of social housing units last year as they have every year that they’ve been in power: Sod All.

      1. Cian

        The 28 commencements is wildly inaccurate also – but relying on wildly inaccurate single-source statistics to continue backing up your opinion is pretty common on here these days.

  6. karlj

    That link
    “Dept of Environment publishes home completions for 2015
    12,666 homes (incl ~100 social homes) completed in year “

  7. Joe cool

    John lyons is absolutely fkd for a seat in the upcoming election. His own can’t wait to finish his little political dream for him

Comments are closed.