Plus all the unknowns that will happen
We cant challenge them, therefore we are exiting, making the issue worse for tenants
Who would be a landlord?
- Thread starter Greenbook
- Start date
We cant challenge them, therefore we are exiting, making the issue worse for tenants
I don't think the goal was low rents and masses of supply, tenant security yes
yes up to around 2023 I would be taking the same view ,
In other words up to 2022/23 there was still value to be got to become a Landlord and be sure of riding out a downturn in the market in rent and landlord exposure to repossession,
I would be a little afraid that in a downturn the people renting are the very people wanting to leave the country the bank may move very quick to repossession landlords vacant property,
I would expect we may have lots of tenants with enough cash to buy out landlord property if landlord defaulted on loan,
i would also be taking into account if the new tenants rules has made a landlord property worthless not devalued in a downturn ,
i see a risk that i would not be prepared to take if i had to borrow most of the money to buy,
I also expect the banks to need away bigger deposit when giving out a loan if I buy a house on the open market for 500K once I move a tenant in it may be only worth 400K which has to be taking into account when becoming a landlord in 2026
I haven't looked at it because I have no loan to repay, if I was a landlord and was taking out a loan in 2026 I would be looking to buy a house already rented out and the discount already built in ,
As of Eriday the 13 of march 2026 not worth the chance,
Last edited:
Take a look at the Minister's statements, Tanaiste and Taoiseach's as well. Increased supply and low rents are the goals too.
Yes, but you are buying someone else's tenant and there is always a risk they are selling to escape the tenant. Also, banks don't lend at all without vacant possession.
JoeRoberts
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,215
Why is that ?. It's going to have to change to have a functioning market.
Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 58,249
But we have a dysfunctional market. I don't think that the banks will lend. They would have to do due diligence on the tenant as well as the landlord.
Or maybe they will lend on the assumption of zero rent so that the landlord will have to be able to afford the mortgage from their other income.
LarryScott
Frequent Poster
- Messages
- 528
Banks know that vacant possession increases the value of the property.
They probably don't want to openly say that tenants devalue the property, but they are going to take it into account when assessing loan to value.
A property with 70% loan to value might effectively be a 90% loan to value if there is a tenant in situ. What happens if the landlord tries to get a reduced rate due to < 80% LTV.
Does anyone know what happens with a foreclosure if there is a sitting tenant. Does the bank count as a large landlord if they foreclose on 4 or more properties with tenants in situ
?Ireland only just managed to maintain a functioning mortgage market for owner occupiers during & post-bailout. It had the highest mortgage rates, significant numbers of non-performing or in arrears accounts, and it became apparent to lenders (esp foreign ones) that the idea of a residential mortgage loan being secured on the underlying property in Ireland was a bit of a mirage.
There was plenty of media hysteria about a "tsunami of repossessions on the way", but repossessions in any sort of quantity never arrived. Courts would do almost anything, and believe almost anything, to allow them to postpone and postpone. It was totally out of line with other markets. No way were even the highest mortgage rates in the EU going to suck more suckers in, and provide competition.
Can you imagine a mortgage provider trying to realize the security they lent on in the case of attempted repossession of a property rented out - essentially permanently? The politics of it? And once repossessed, then how much rent should need to be paid and how regularly being a political football?
And the behaviour of the tenant directly feeding into the property valuation? While there's a financial incentive for the tenant to negotiate with the bank for a payout or share of the sale proceeds should that tenant agree to vacate the property and allow it to be sold at full market (vacant possession) price?
As a strategic advisor to, or executive director of a bank, how keen would you be to enter that market?
There was plenty of media hysteria about a "tsunami of repossessions on the way", but repossessions in any sort of quantity never arrived. Courts would do almost anything, and believe almost anything, to allow them to postpone and postpone. It was totally out of line with other markets. No way were even the highest mortgage rates in the EU going to suck more suckers in, and provide competition.
Can you imagine a mortgage provider trying to realize the security they lent on in the case of attempted repossession of a property rented out - essentially permanently? The politics of it? And once repossessed, then how much rent should need to be paid and how regularly being a political football?
And the behaviour of the tenant directly feeding into the property valuation? While there's a financial incentive for the tenant to negotiate with the bank for a payout or share of the sale proceeds should that tenant agree to vacate the property and allow it to be sold at full market (vacant possession) price?
As a strategic advisor to, or executive director of a bank, how keen would you be to enter that market?
Its far too risky these days. Anyone who has nay intention of having a simple retirement should have no place for the massive risk that owning a rental is now. Your pension could be wiped out with just one bad person or one more random rule change. If you have a residential rental in your retirement plans now you are not being advise properly.
On the flip side when renting elsewhere I was given a sales pitch of sorts. I was an attractive tenant, decent job but easily to find yet it was always a one to one showing, clarity provided on what’s included and not, parking, gas / electricity etc.
I must have visited 50 properties in Dublin in one month. More than 50% would have used an agent, mass showings, agent knows nothing about the place just unlocked the door and let you look around, you got the feeling if you asked a question you were off the list. They wouldn’t know how many parking spots you got in the private car park etc.
It was a renters market and they would act that way. I would be annoyed if I was the one paying the agency.
Individual landlords were more of a mixed bag, but seemed to to open communicating racism (too many x or y applying…), or other personal stuff about my employer.
You got a few who clearly set out im busy with work and family and don’t have time for anyone calling.
You also got very genuine people obviously and luckily ended up with a landlord like that.
Basically there is a lack of professionalism across all the entire industry.
I look at it slightly different than most posters on hear
Possibly all TD and senators have loan free property which they manage themselves Government policy have driven rents higher the new rules will keep rents up a win win for myself who has no interest in selling,
If you are in it for the long haul and have no interesting in selling in retirement it is not as bad as people think,
My take it is only a matter of time before they will have to give incentives to get new landlords to enter the market this will be structured for small landlords to enter the industry for the return from rents rather than what we had up to now people entering the Industry for short term gain,
As i already pointed out it makes no Business since to enter the Industry at present this well all change once their is a shortage of rental property up and down the country they landlord of the future will not be like the Amateurs I meet ill prepared to run a business in the home rental sector,
If fact I will not be shocked if the new Incentives are structured to hold rental property in a Company,
Do you have data to support this assertion? I would very much doubt the vast majority is getting anything close to market rate.
If an accommodation provider did an annual rent review from Feb20-Feb25, they could only increase rent by a cumulative 7.6%, yet inflation is up 25% over the same period (national wages up 26%).
I would say most the vast majority accommodation providers have taken significant real terms cuts over the past 5 years.
Detail on my numbers in this post
Last edited:
And 100% guaranteed cuts going forward now too.
While I couldn't make generalisations about individual accommodation providers, I would flag serious concerns about the RTB's conduct. They routinely fail to respond to queries despite repeated follow-ups, and their published timelines are deeply misleading - they advertise an average adjudication processing time of 16 weeks, when the reality is currently in excess of seven months. Their systems show a striking disregard for basic consideration, with routine reminder emails dispatched at midnight. They email accommodation providers alleging potential RPZ breaches without providing any rationale when pressed. Their data is unreliable - cost rentals, for instance, are incorrectly bundled into private rental sector tenancy figures. They appear comfortable with misleading the public, as illustrated by their claim that cost rentals are excluded from the rent register when the evidence suggests otherwise. I could continue for quite a while.
It is also worth keeping in mind that of the three parties involved - the RTB, the accommodation provider, and the tenant - it is only the accommodation provider who faces the prospect of imprisonment for non-compliance with the RTA. The legislation allows for criminal sanctions for accommodation provider even for administrative errors, yet a tenant who doesn't pay rent for years faces no penalty whatsoever.
Could you elaborate on why you think its not so bad? If one has a sitting tenant under pre-1March rules, you are forced to take a real terms cut to income annually. See post above showing how over the past 5-6 years, accommodation providers have taken a real terms cut of over 18%. How could someone, in it for the long haul, retire securely with this type of an investment?
Hasn't this shortage already been the case for many many years? If i advertise a 1 bed apt in Cork, I'll have >300 inquiries within 24 hours. Even five years it was also in the 100s.
On this point, it's worth flagging the new rules incentivise bad behaviour from the accommodation provider. If a tenant moves out, then the rent can be reset. So then if a fridge breaks for example, why would they ever rush to fix it? Why would they repaint their own houses now etc? The legislation incentivises them to do the absolute minimum, and no more.
Also worth noting again how unprofessional the RTB is (post above, #33)
My take is that there is a chance that even more drastic legislation might be put into place in the coming years.
We were never in for the short-term. However 10 years of rent control have considerably changed our take on our investment. As it's paid, increased value... It wasn't inherently bad. However, on the rental side, the income has reduced and risks have increased.
Last edited:
Which amateur landlords do you mean?
What?
From the pension standpoint, it made sense in the past when, as another poster pointed out, you had to buy an annuity and these were generally very bad value.
If it is a pension you are after, it makes far more sense to just DD a certain amount into the pension every month and top up if you get a bonus or something. With the tax breaks, the return is good. You're not under the pressure of a mortgage payment every month, your tenant not paying rent for a couple of years is not a risk, neither are drastic and sudden regulatory changes.
Residential property as a pension is gone.
It is even risky having residential property within your pension fund, again, tenant may not pay, restrictions may increase etc.
Ireland is full of them, I was one myself an Amateur Landlord back in the 1980s, Built a house in an area I expected I would move back to and then rented it out,
got out around 1986 did not have the time or skill needed to be a landlord back then,
On a different subject but related I know of 2 families who bought in Dublin for their kids to use going to 3rd level education, the only people they ever had to issue eviction notice to was their own kids and kids friends,
Lovely day outside today will come back to this subject later,
Property rental is a business and a Industry, I know of no other Industry where people commit and borrow large amount of money and expect a Agent to run it better than themself,
Last edited: