Stop funds from buying blocks of apartments to rent

odyssey06

Registered User
Messages
3,861
I'd be swayed by a political party who could put a stop to this type of transaction.
Developer building 1100 homes - Good
Developer pre-selling 220 homes to landlord - Bad

If the pre-sale makes the overall development of 1100 homes economically practicable for the developer, what's the issue?
We have 220 new properties for rent and the rest for sale, and presumably some within that have been reserved for the Council?
Seems like a win win all round.
 

TarfHead

Registered User
Messages
1,671
If the pre-sale makes the overall development of 1100 homes economically practicable for the developer

I don't know if that is true

We have 220 new properties for rent and the rest for sale, and presumably some within that have been reserved for the Council?
Seems like a win win all round.

Not as good as 1100 new homes for sale.

I have a distaste for residential property being referred to as an asset class. With interest rates at zero, and stock markets stagnating, institutional investors need places to get a return. I favour the Government putting the needs of the society ahead of those of investors, through applying levies to the industrial-scale ownership of residential property.
 

Ceist Beag

Registered User
Messages
1,374
I have a distaste for residential property being referred to as an asset class. With interest rates at zero, and stock markets stagnating, institutional investors need places to get a return. I favour the Government putting the needs of the society ahead of those of investors, through applying levies to the industrial-scale ownership of residential property.

Amen to that Tarfhead, 100% agree with you on those points.
 

odyssey06

Registered User
Messages
3,861
I don't know if that is true
Not as good as 1100 new homes for sale.
I have a distaste for residential property being referred to as an asset class. With interest rates at zero, and stock markets stagnating, institutional investors need places to get a return. I favour the Government putting the needs of the society ahead of those of investors, through applying levies to the industrial-scale ownership of residential property.

I'm not saying don't look at the tax treatment of REITs, at the same time, society needs more houses built sooner rather than later and this seems to be getting them built quicker. In a functional property market, as in other countries, there's nothing inherently wrong with 20% of properties being buy to rent.

Many small landlords don't call their rental properties an "asset class", but they often call it their nest egg or pension fund informally.
REITs are invested in by company pension funds also, the only difference is scale and the impersonal nature of it.
Unless you want all rentals to be government run I don't see how you are really getting away from residential property being an "asset class".
And Dublin City Council's rent arrears is a red flag as to how sustainable that would be.
 

Sunny

Registered User
Messages
4,354
I'd be swayed by a political party who could put a stop to this type of transaction.


Developer building 1100 homes - Good
Developer pre-selling 220 homes to landlord - Bad

This is one of my pet hates as well. It is bad policy. The argument that the houses wouldn't be built without the capital is rubbish as well. If the banks are not willing to fund the development, the State should set up a mechanism that the funding will be provided at a commercial rate so the houses get built. New developments now are seeing a large % percentage go to social housing. A % to affordable housing. And now these funds are buying another larger % because rent yields are ridiculous. Normal working people are now competing against the State and these funds to buy property. It's ridiculous.

Stop demonising landlords (many of who might be renting out an second home or an apartment that they ended up with because of the boom and negative equity and hate every second of it) while giving different tax treatment to these funds for doing the same business.

Stop treating Dublin City Centre like a beautiful historic city. It's too late for that. look at the docklands. We have nearly developed every inch but it is still severely underdeveloped because we decided that high rise wasn't suitable for the city so we get the odd high rise building.

I don't want to see more Ballymuns built but start realising that buying 500k houses for a woman and two kids for the rest of their lives at the expense of working people needs to stop. I am sorry but it does. I am not saying we need to send them off by train somewhere but families will only struggle paying their mortgage, childcare etc for so long while looking at neighbours not working. It might be politically incorrect to say it but there is a huge resentment bubbling under the surface here. If the State is to provide social housing, it should build social housing. Just because it is social housing doesn't mean it has to be like estates built in the 1960's. But stop competing with private buyers.
 

odyssey06

Registered User
Messages
3,861
This is one of my pet hates as well. It is bad policy. The argument that the houses wouldn't be built without the capital is rubbish as well. If the banks are not willing to fund the development, the State should set up a mechanism that the funding will be provided at a commercial rate so the houses get built. New developments now are seeing a large % percentage go to social housing. A % to affordable housing. And now these funds are buying another larger % because rent yields are ridiculous. Normal working people are now competing against the State and these funds to buy property. It's ridiculous.

How long would we have been waiting for the houses to be built before any of those solutions happened? This has at least increased the overall housing stock available.

If you want to talk about government cut of new builds, how the housing is allocated all well and good - but in the interim, this is what's happening and the homes are now there.
e.g. When local councils buy second hand homes in existing estates they are also competing against normal working people without increasing the housing stock one yard. To me, that seems ridiculous.
 

Sunny

Registered User
Messages
4,354
How long would we have been waiting for the houses to be built before any of those solutions happened? This has at least increased the overall housing stock available.

If you want to talk about government cut of new builds, how the housing is allocated all well and good - but in the interim, this is what's happening and the homes are now there.
e.g. When local councils buy second hand homes in existing estates they are also competing against normal working people without increasing the housing stock one yard. To me, that seems ridiculous.

Not long at all. We have a bloody State housing Agency (NAMA) that had all the capital and land that was needed. But no. We decided that all these nice friendly funds coming and providing capital was proof that Ireland great once again and gave ourselves a pat on the back. Those houses are there. Great. They are going straight to the rental market to cater for the people who can't afford to buy a house because of lack of supply. Part of the reason why there is a lack of supply because the State and these funds are buying a large % of very block of new houses. Only in Ireland would our housing policy make it more difficult for people to buy their own property and yet we spend countless hours discussing how we can help State provide housing to people.....
 

Firefly

Registered User
Messages
3,409
Developer pre-selling 220 homes to landlord - Bad
It wasn't too long ago that you had a poster in these parts labelling landlords with one or two properties as "Cowboy Landlords" and calling for more professional landlords in the market
 
Top