More evidence of a massive landlord exodus due to the new rules

G

Greenbook

Registered User
Messages
2,548
Video from Owen Reilly a prominent Dublin EA here

In Q1 2026, 65% of his sellers where landlords. Only 5% of his purchasers were landlords.

As he says in the video, the exodus is continuing and investor demand has collapsed. As he says this is very bad news for the rental market.

His operates around the Docklands, Dublin City Centre etc. You would think with a large amount of mobile and wealthy tenants, the exodus would not be as bad, but it is. Rural areas must be even worse, no landlord purchasers at all, only sellers.
 
I think its only going to get worse.
Good for buyers though at least.
As leases are up they wont be rented again for a lot of the current rentals.
Even the sale price of a property where the rent is still locked until its empty 2 years will be effected badly.
I think anyone with a property empty now who has to wait 2 years will just leave it sit there and put it on the market about 1 year 9 months into the 2 year reset period.
The PRS is just a sh1t show now and all of the chickens havent even come home to roost yet. They will do so over the next couple of years though.
Thats part of the reason for the mad panic on garden rooms by the government. You would think the government would just come clean and say what the situation is, as most know already, but they continue to lie about it instead of fixing it properly.

I believe there should be a big bold line put at the bottom of every property listing that is obviously an ex rental. "Property vacant and not encumbered by rent control." As that type of property will be worth far more than properties that are.
 
I know this may sound incorrect to many We have landlords and investors but their is a subtle difference between the two,
One is in it for the long haul and sees himself or herself as proper landlords who always ran their business to make money like any other business,
You also have the investor who never seen it as a business for the long haul
We will call them Landlords/investors for want of a better word,
I feel as a landlord who is in it for the long haul we needs to get out from under the wing of the Landlord/investor,

The landlord who is in it for the long haul should be treated like any other business tax wise and business wise,

At the present time our industry is looked at trough the eyes of the Landlord/Investor who will go out the back door and collect his chips and move on
The present taxation setup is built around catching the Landlord/Investor while he/she is around making money short term,

Proper Landlords in it for the long haul are getting unfavorable treatment the at present Time both tax wise and business wise,

While the Landlord/investor is getting all the press both good and bad,
 
Last edited:
JamieB_ said:
Even the sale price of a property where the rent is still locked until its empty 2 years will be effected badly.
Click to expand...

It depends on demand. If there are enough owner occupier buyers to buy all previously rented properties, then it shouldn't matter much.

If you are selling a previously rented house, you would just lose the BTL bidders. If they are only a small fraction of the bidders, then it shouldn't depress houses much.

Ironically, BTL bidders will want to buy previously owner occupied houses and owner occupier bidders would be fine bidding on previously rented house. The rules encourage churn between the two types.
 
LarryScott said:
It depends on demand. If there are enough owner occupier buyers to buy all previously rented properties, then it shouldn't matter much.

If you are selling a previously rented house, you would just lose the BTL bidders. If they are only a small fraction of the bidders, then it shouldn't depress houses much.

Ironically, BTL bidders will want to buy previously owner occupied houses and owner occupier bidders would be fine bidding on previously rented house. The rules encourage churn between the two types.
Click to expand...
The problem will be that for owner occupiers your house will be the last to be considered.
 
Luternau said:
I don't follow ...can you explain what you mean?
Click to expand...
Apologies. I read your reply incorrectly. I thought you said enough BTL buyers when you actually said enough owner occupiers to buy. It does all depend on who is looking to buy and whats available. I dont think there will be many BTL buyers going forward, especially for houses and especially outside the cities.
 
Thanks ...I think you are confusing me with the very knowledgeable @LarryScott
I would not think there are many BTL investors active in the sales market now
 
JamieB_ said:
The problem will be that for owner occupiers your house will be the last to be considered.
Click to expand...
A previously rented house should be just as good for an owner occupier. The downside is that you can't rent it for at least 2 years, which most won't want to do anyway. I think the loss of BTL buyers isn't likely to have a huge effect on the price bid.

Ofc, a previously rented house might have a lot of wear and tear.

Luternau said:
I would not think there are many BTL investors active in the sales market now
Click to expand...
Sure :).

This is why vacant possession is key when selling. You should get (almost) as much as you would for an owner occupied house.

There are now 3 types of house

Owner occupied (no rent history)

These houses will be preferred by BTL buyers. These houses effectively has no rental history and thus can be rented out at market rate. It would then be locked into the rent control 2% per year rules.

Owner occupiers can still bid ofc, but they are ideal for BTL. There are probably enough of these houses to satisfy all BTL buyers, so they will focus exclusive on these houses.

Rented recently (vacant possession)

An owner occupier will be happy with these houses, since they aren't planning to rent them out anyway. The previous rent is irrelevant and after 2 years of living in the house, it goes away anyway. That should be fine for most owner occupier buyers.

BTL investors will avoid these houses. It means the initial rent setting will need accurate information that the buyer won't have and the seller has no incentive to provide. This just adds hassle and extra risk. Better to buy from an owner occupier (or not buy at all).

Rented (tenants still in situ)

An owner occupier won't want these houses since they can't move in immediately. They will have to go through the whole process of evicting the tenants. They will have the right to evict for landlord move-in though, but it is complex and time consuming.

BTL investors will strongly avoid these houses, since they likely would have long term tenants with below market rent in them. If the tenants were amenable to leaving, the seller would have obtained vacant possession already.

In both cases, it might be worth buying if there is a sufficient discount on the price.

An owner occupier who isn't planning to move in to quickly might decide it is worth it for the discount. This is very risky though.

There is a potential arbitrage opportunity. It could be profitable for someone to buy these houses at a discount, evict the tenants and then sell with vacant possession at full price. As long as they make sure to remain small landlords, they could evict for landlord usage. Given the delays, it is not clear if this would be feasible and there is a lot of risk.
 
Last edited:
galway said:
One is in it for the long haul and sees himself or herself as proper landlords who always ran their business to make money like any other business,
You also have the investor who never seen it as a business for the long haul
We will call them Landlords/investors for want of a better word,
Click to expand...

Interesting perspective. I would actually view things very differently.

An investor landlord in my opinion should have consideration for time needed to manage a property, potential for breakdown of area of the house or white goods depending on age and have some level of separation between the business costs and income.
 
I would have thought the YoY figures are the relevant metric to account for seasonality. Still down 8% but a little less dramatic.

Interestingly the mortgage value is only down 4% YoY reflecting price increases one would assume.
 
Banquo said:
I would have thought the YoY figures are the relevant metric to account for seasonality. Still down 8% but a little less dramatic.
Click to expand...
Agreed, but all the indications are that there is a massive exodus in train. 65% of Owen Reilly's vendors are landlords and he's operating around the docklands in Dublin.

This trickle of borrower is an indication of the extent of additional rental properties coming on stream. It's tiny and falling.
 
An estate agent is Galway here taking about the ongoing exodus again with the small landlords leaving the market in force.

He says that the primary reason is the complex regulation. Equally I think is the rigidity of the rules (you maybe get to sell once every six years if your tenant doesn't leave volunarily before that) and the real risk of being stuck for years with a non-paying tenant that you can do very little about.
 
Greenbook said:
An estate agent is Galway here taking about the ongoing exodus again with the small landlords leaving the market in force.
Click to expand...
Obviously the author has skin the game, but that's an excellent summary. The conclusion that increased housing supply is the only long-term solution is is right on the mark.
 
patfert1 said:
Obviously the author has skin the game, but that's an excellent summary.
Click to expand...
It is an excellent summary, but I think he doesn't concentrate on the other problems we see, the rigidity of the rules and that landlords get no help whatsoever from the RTB with a problem tenant (quite the opposite in fact).

I think he is right as well, there is a massive structural change underway. It'll be big professional landlords in urban areas only from now on.

I wonder is that the government's plan or is their usual blundering into unforeseen consequences.
 
Another point from the Galway EA which we dealt with in an earlier thread, a lot of family home rentals in solid residential locations are being sold off by landlords.

That makes sense, these command high sale prices to owner occupiers but are often on low historic rents with tenants who won't be leaving. Also, again covered in another thread, the new rules don't suit 4 or 5 tenants house sharing either. The PRS will consist of 1 and 2 bed apartments and small town houses going forward.

The EA says

At Fair Deal Property, we are seeing a growing number of former rental properties entering the sales market, particularly family homes in established residential areas.
 
Greenbook said:
It'll be big professional landlords in urban areas only from now on.
Click to expand...
I recall Pat Kenny saying (at least a decade ago) that they (presumably the Dept) not the transient Ministers, want to move away from the "mom and pop" landlords to the big shiny stock market listed Landords. They wanted the professional LL.

My opinion is they seem to have had it in for the small Landlord since early 2000s.

Looks like thats the future and may I just say best of luck getting them to operate in the edworthstowns and the emyvales.
 
M.Martin is an absentee Taoiseach, ready and willing to change with the wind. He is the opposite of a conviction politican. If he were a paint he would be Magnolia ( Woodies brand the kind that takes 4 coats before you realise you need to buy Dulux and start over).

I used to send emails to him and at the time to Varadkar and latterly to Harris relating to the meddling in the rental market...may as well have been talking to myself.

I recall ( in unrelated matters) dealing with Charlie Haughey and Ivor Callelly and both offices were professional and decent and engaged with me. Ivor in particular was a tremendous constituency political operator.This was in the 80s.

Enda Kenny was a another who listened.

They knew their base. ( I know the history etc so don't need reminding nor does anyone, its laid out in black and white and was tremendouly disappointing) however they listened and acted.

Today's political "elite" dont want to listen to the plain voters, it's do as I say and thats a pity. Politics in Ireland is a bottom up/ grassroots system not a top down and always has been. Too much listening to citizens assemblies.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top