Is it time for private landlord to exit the rental market in RPZs?

Equality

Registered User
Messages
14
Is it time for private landlord to exit the rental market in RPZs?

Like a lot of landlords we recently underwent a ‘notice of rent review’ in accordance with the RTB RPZ calculator. In addition to the RTB RPZ maximum cap on any rent increase, which we have endured for the last 7 years, what’s even more disappointing is the difference between the increased rent and the details of the ‘comparable dwellings', our rent is presently between 34% and 43% below comparable market rent.

Any increase in rent is taxed so the landlord receives approximately 50 % of the increase, so for a 2% cap dictated by the RTB in RPZ, the average landlord receives 1%. This means the rent increase received under the RPZ does not keep pace with inflation. We have reviewed our rental statements for the last 5 years and the increase in rent is about 7.5 % or 1.5% average per year, that is before tax. Added to that is the maintenance costs have also increased dramatically, the increased rent does not cover the annual maintenance costs. The consequences are that we will have no choice but to terminate a tenancy as it is now financially unviable to be a private landlord in a RPZ.

Without increasing the rent for the tenant, we could have managed financially if we had received a tax credit for the difference between the market rent of comparable dwellings contained in the notice of rent review and our present rent which is 34% and 43% below comparable market rent. This would remove the 2 tier system of market rent and below market rent between landlords in the same rent area. In addition it would have incentivised us to remain and maybe even invest in the private rental market in a RPZ.

The recent articles and publications from the RTB etc are no more than political football between parties and box ticking exercises, the data they quote bears no resemblance to what we as average landlords are experiencing, between 34% and 43% below market rent and an average annual increase of 1.5% in rent before tax.

Is it time for private landlords to exit the RTB RPZ rental market because the restrictions are so severe and the proposed budget 2024 tax relief for small landlords is just a box ticking exercise to appease the opposition?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
When Sinn Fein get into Government in a little over a year you won't even get that 2% rent increase. They have said they will implement a 3 year rent freeze. They also plan on bringing in a ban on no fault evictions meaning you can only sell your property with the tenant in situ. Think about that one.
Get out when you can.
 
Last edited:
Was in the same position as original poster - that with the threat of SF coming in to power convinced me to sell up, which I did a few months ago...
 
As it stands I can evict a tenant to sell or move me or a relative in. That is a no fault eviction which is currently allowed.
When Sinn Fein get to power they have said they will ban this type of eviction.
 
What people mean is a termination of tenancy for which no reason is necessary.

The above is impossible in Ireland except in the case of some older tenancies but these will expire in a few years.
What people.
If I evict a tenant to move in or sell, that is a no fault eviction

 
If Sinn Fein are successful in introducing this then I can only sell my property with the tenant in situ.
So I am limited to selling to a landlord, who will have to take on my tenant possibly at below market rent.
 
I evict a tenant to move in or sell, that is a no fault eviction
No it isn't.

"No fault eviction" means just that; UK-style means they give notice & tenant leaves.

In Ireland, all other things being equal, you have to supply reason, sworn declarations etc.
 
Pretty much everyone I know with rentals has sold up. Only one or two I know left still in it.
 
No it isn't.
It is, the term is a common one in tenancy law, where a 'no fault eviction' permits the termination of a lease for reasons other then a fault, or breach of the lease terms by the tenant. The tenant clearly isn't 'at fault' if the landlord decides to sell the property.

The proposals to prohibit 'no fault evictions' here would see the further restriction of when landlords can terminate a lease, removing the personal use, sale, change of use, and refurbishment options.
 
Last edited:
I have served a termination notice to my tenants. The rent is way below market value (I can't increase it due to RPZ rules) and I cannot afford to hang onto property due to the rise in inflation and interest rates. I don't want to be in a situation where I am trying to sell it with tenants in situ.
There is a possibility that the tenants may buy it, which I would be happy with as they are good tenants.
The current set up is forcing out landlords that charge a low rent. Madness!
 
Its quite simple. Penalise landlords with low rents, then you push those low rents out of the market.
 
I think if you are in a RPZ zone, with a RPZ price (in Dublin, the first rent freeze was in 2015), it's a very difficult investment to justify. I have one, I keep it because I have children who will probably need it in the next 4 years. But we are trying to make sure our renters are short-term to be in a position to review our situation easily. Not a good yield at the moment. But it's paid and we don't have any other mortgage. The fact that we bought it relatively cheap also helps. I recently gave my renters their rent review. I was allowed to increase by 25 euros. And looking for comparable properties on daft to complete the rent review, all were at least 5 to 600 euros more expensive. Frankly ridiculous at this point. They are leaving in a few months so our options are sell, keep it renting and have it for our children in 4 years time or leave it vacant for 2 years.
 
The link above says "reintroduction" - which suggests SF again don't know what they are talking about.
Or that you forget that they were temporarily introduced during Covid under the Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Act.
 
That was a moratorium on all evictions; regardless of non-payment of rent etc.

Different kettle of fish.
 
That was a moratorium on all evictions; regardless of non-payment of rent etc.

Different kettle of fish.
Not all that different given the legislation referred to the 2004 act, but they want to reintroduce a slightly less restrictive version that just allows termination in the event of the tenant breaching the lease.
 
Back
Top