"43,000 landlords exiting the market..." but how many are buying in?

Allpartied said:
If landlords are flooding out of the market, they have three options.
1. Sell to another landlord
2. Sell to an owner occupier.
3. Leave the property empty.

Apart from 3 , which would seem unlikely, for most investors, how does landlords selling up, reduce the housing stock,

In category 1, the property stays in the rental market,
In category 2, the owner occupier, was, most likely, renting from the private market, so their rental becomes available.

So, what’s the big crisis?

In fact, the more sellers, the more affordable the housing cost becomes, for everyone.
Click to expand...

Housing stock is not rental stock. They are not one and the same.

You can't talk about stock without talking about demand. Population is increasing and the demand for rental stock is increasing as house ownership gets more expensive and unaffordable. There's already an existing backlog of people stuck at home unable to rent.

So ultimately the issue is "rental stock" available to rent. Of which there has been a massive shortage for years and only getting worse. Even if total rental stock had increased over time. If it's all occupied you can't rent it.
 
I've never found RTB stats to be reliable. Anytime I've gone digging they seem to present snippets of data and not the whole picture. Which I always thought was an attempt to muddy the waters.

Could never find my rentals on their site. Constant problems with registrations. Even when going though and completed a dispute with them, and tenancy long expired, they still had it registered. Their "process" requiring me to reregister in order to unregister it.

You can tell its tied itself up in knots with it's breaucracy and processes, with one hand not knowing what the other side is doing. When they built their IT system instead of taking the opportunity to simply, they just mirrored their existing chaos. So then predictably and as reported their IT system is problematic. They should be able to coordinate with other agencies and departments to see what financial and other activity occurs at an address. So if a property is sold and welfare rental payments cease at that address it should end an existing tenancy. Same with evictions etc.
 
It's pretty damming that during a decade (or two) of a historic rental and housing crisis the govt has no clear robust statistics on what's happening. Is the chronic lack of resources for the RTB by the govt disinterest or deliberate neglect.
 
You can't really talk about numbers of landlords leaving or entering the market without putting it in the context of demand. Which is rental availability and population growth. It will never be accurate due to a certain (small?) % off book transactions. But it should be indicative of general trends.
 
By the way, the option 3 (an idea that seems mad at first sight) is more tempting than one might think. I calculated that it would take me about 3 years to recover my costs and loss of earnings.
 
Last edited:
azerty said:
By the way, the option 3 (an idea that seems mad at first sight) is more tempting than one might think. I calculated that it would take me about 3 years to recover my costs and loss of earnings.
Click to expand...
Talk about perverse incentives, this aspect should really be publicised more.
 
azerty said:
By the way, the option 3 (an idea that seems mad at first sight) is more tempting than one might think. I calculated that it would take me about 3 years to recover my costs and loss of earnings.
Click to expand...

Hi azerty
this came up already in another thread and I was surprised by it.

Could you add your calculations to this thread:

Would it make sense to leave a rental empty for 2 years to avoid the RPZ rent limits?

Copied from another thread A studio apartment is available for sale for €160k. Because it's a studio, the banks won't lend for it. So the only possible buyers are investors... But the problem is that it's in a RPZ and with a monthly rent of €750 - well below market value. So investors...
www.askaboutmoney.com

Brendan
 
azerty said:
By the way, the option 3 (an idea that seems mad at first sight) is more tempting than one might think. I calculated that it would take me about 3 years to recover my costs and loss of earnings.
Click to expand...

Have to say I seriously considered it myself with on property. Do a slow rebfurb on the property at my leisure while it was vacant. In the end, just got a light touch and sold to an owner occupier.
 
Last edited:
I know a few properties in the family that have been left empty for long periods. Only get intermittent use and the owners don't want the hassle of renting.
 
Allpartied said:
If landlords are flooding out of the market, they have three options.
1. Sell to another landlord
2. Sell to an owner occupier.
3. Leave the property empty.

Apart from 3 , which would seem unlikely, for most investors
Click to expand...
I think option 3 would be a reasonable option for someone with an investment property bought some time ago with a little or no mortgage attached. They can take the hit for a year or 2 and see how this whole thing pans out regarding the likelyhood of SF getting into power and any changes made by them. They can then decide to sell an empty property which will be almost 2 years vacant, ensuring market rent, or re-let.
 
I see Sherry FitzGerald have estimated that there has been a net reduction of 80,000 rental units over the last 10 years.
www.irishtimes.com

Rental market shrinks by 80,000 homes in 10 years, housing conference told

Sherry FitzGerald managing director highlights flight of landlords from Irish market while Glenveagh boss says planning policy is aggravating crisis
www.irishtimes.com www.irishtimes.com

Given the considerable population growth over this period, this really makes grim reading.
 
You'd have to say the lack of Govt action on trying to build new housing even emergency (war time) housing is baffling. They've been effectively sitting on their hands for a decade.
 
AlbacoreA said:
You'd have to say the lack of Govt action on trying to build new housing even emergency (war time) housing is baffling. They've been effectively sitting on their hands for a decade.
Click to expand...
It's utterly unaffordable on any meaningful scale and in any event impossible under our tortuous planning system.
 
Sarenco said:
I see Sherry FitzGerald have estimated that there has been a net reduction of 80,000 rental units over the last 10 years.
www.irishtimes.com

Rental market shrinks by 80,000 homes in 10 years, housing conference told

Sherry FitzGerald managing director highlights flight of landlords from Irish market while Glenveagh boss says planning policy is aggravating crisis
www.irishtimes.com www.irishtimes.com

Given the considerable population growth over this period, this really makes grim reading.
Click to expand...
While it's good to get the perspective of someone other than the State and those involved in the homelessness Industry it's also the case that Builders and Estate Agents are hardly neutral parties in this.
 
Purple said:
While it's good to get the perspective of someone other than the State and those involved in the homelessness Industry it's also the case that Builders and Estate Agents are hardly neutral parties in this.
Click to expand...
How? Wouldn't both sectors gain dramatically from a reversal of the recent trend?
 
T McGibney said:
How? Wouldn't both sectors gain dramatically from a reversal of the recent trend?
Click to expand...
They have a different agenda than those who make a living from the homelessness industry but they are not neutral parties. Estate Agents talk up the price of properties and the construction sector is grossly inefficient but rather than addressing that they spend their time whinging about costs and looking for tax breaks.
If the construction sector was better at their job then housing would be cheaper to deliver. They are part of the problem, so unless they are shouldering a good chunk of the culpability for the lack of housing delivery then it's hard to take them seriously when they bemoan the lack of housing.
 
AlbacoreA said:
You'd have to say the lack of Govt action on trying to build new housing even emergency (war time) housing is baffling. They've been effectively sitting on their hands for a decade.
Click to expand...
Look at calibre of current and past Housing Ministers....appalling incompetents all

Need a heavy hitter like Richard Bruton to take on the role
 
Purple said:
They have a different agenda than those who make a living from the homelessness industry but they are not neutral parties. Estate Agents talk up the price of properties and the construction sector is grossly inefficient but rather than addressing that they spend their time whinging about costs and looking for tax breaks.
If the construction sector was better at their job then housing would be cheaper to deliver. They are part of the problem, so unless they are shouldering a good chunk of the culpability for the lack of housing delivery then it's hard to take them seriously when they bemoan the lack of housing.
Click to expand...
Yet they made shedloads of money when delivering many tens of thousands of new housing units every year during the 2000s.

Are they stupid or is there something else outside their control preventing them from repeating this feat?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top