Who would be a landlord?

The Horseman said:
I have a vague recollection that rental income was excluded from means (although I could be wrong) and don't know how the new rules affect a landlord (ie a pensioner in a home in this scenario) when they pass away.
Click to expand...

Under the new rules, the Executors just take over everything. If the landlord couldn't evict before they die, then neither can the Executors.

If the house is in the first year of the 6 year cycle, then the Executor couldn't evict to sell until the end of the cycle, five years later.

If the landlord was a small landlord, they could evict for family move-in (children/spouse only). This would require one of the children being able to say that they intend to move in.
 
LarryScott said:
If the house is in the first year of the 6 year cycle, then the Executor couldn't evict to sell until the end of the cycle, five years later.
Click to expand...
So Executors or family members of the deceased are forced to become landlords. Mad system.
 
bipped said:
So Executors or family members of the deceased are forced to become landlords. Mad system.
Click to expand...
It seems so.

Basically, if the will says that the house should be sold and proceeds split, then the Executor must go through the process of evicting the tenants and then selling it.

This could cause issues if some members of the family want to sell with tenants in situ, while others want to wait so they will get more.

If they can agree, one (or more) of the children could buyout the others with tenants in situ.

If a child is willing to move in themselves (and trusted by the others), then they could evict immediately for family move-in. I think they need to intend to live there for at least 1 year. Afterwards, the child could move out and then the house could be sold.
 
Greenbook said:
Mary Buckley landlords are parasites. They suck workers wages and create nothing.
Click to expand...
It’s hard to see why people think like that but some politicians have been peddling that myth for years. Some people can’t seem to join the dots that if you use a product or service provided by someone else, you have to pay for it. It would make you wonder if that FB poster ever took a flight anywhere or stayed in an hotel or rented a car. It seems some people are so brainwashed that logic flies out the window.
 
Greenbook said:
Same here - only close family and very close friends know. Our daughters have been warned likewise not to mention it.
Click to expand...
If we were to kick the bucket next week my kids would be very surprised to hear that they have inherited an investment property. They dont know a thing about it. Only a little while now anyway until we dont have one. As soon as we get it back its getting sold.
 
Last edited:
bipped said:
It’s hard to see why people think like that but some politicians have been peddling that myth for years. Some people can’t seem to join the dots that if you use a product or service provided by someone else, you have to pay for it. It would make you wonder if that FB poster ever took a flight anywhere or stayed in an hotel or rented a car. It seems some people are so brainwashed that logic flies out the window.
Click to expand...
I think some of it is applying social housing thinking to the PRS.

The Council charged you low rent that never increased and you could stay for life even if you misbehaved or didn't pay the rent. The Council, in theory anyway, was responsible for all repairs and maintenance. I've cousins who grew up in Council houses. Some think that is renting and can't see why landlords shouldn't behave any differently. The thinking is sure you own the house and it is a valuable asset!

The head civil servant in the Department of Housing grew up in a Council estate in Waterford City. Obviously, I'm very much speculating, but perhaps in the Department of Housing that type of thinking is being applied to the PRS.
 
LarryScott said:
the Executor must go through the process of evicting the tenants and then selling it.
Click to expand...
Oh my, who’d agree to be an Executor for anyone who owns rental properties. It’s stressful enough to get everything finalised after losing someone without that extra headache. Interesting to see how long it will take for some story like this to hit the media, not only heartless landlords but their heartless families as well. This could be really troublesome for families in future.

Of course if landlords were to terminate now and sell to owner-occupiers, revenue will get their cgt, families will inherit and then revenue will get another bite of the cherry. At least someone will be happy.
 
Mary Conway of the IPOA on a recent Linkedin asks

Did I miss something on the RTB webinar ??
RTB compliance & enforcement on PROPERTY OWNERS
Where was the slide for tenants enforcement ??

She was told apparently

The RTB regulator is for landlords not for tenants !
So who is the regulator for tenants??

One person responded to her posts with the following example

One live case I’m directly involved in, arrears currently stand at €33,000, compounded by RTB’s failure to issue the Determination Order in a timely manner. The case has now escalated to the District Court, and with legal fees, the total cost to the landlord will exceed €50,000 with virtually zero prospect of recovery.

Who would be a landlord?
 
Last edited:
Interesting article from a UK website here

Not paying rent in the UK is regarded as fraud and those involved are described as scammers. (Obviously, the article isn't talking about those who have genuine difficulties with their rent)

Tenant not paying the rent in Ireland - the tenant is fully supported by the RTB. Also, it takes 6 months on average to get repossession in the UK. The squatter here can remain in place for 2 or 3 years.
 
@Premos the Minister's statement is very odd.

It seems to miss the point entirely that our main market is first time buyers and other owner occupiers. There are few investor purchasers out there even for properties which can be rented at full price.

I really wonder whether the Department of Housing just makes this stuff up to cover themselves or whether they just don't fully understand how the PRS works.
 
Premos said:
Before selling, landlords should apparently contact the RTB for "good advice" as there are no real benefit to a LL leaving the market.
Click to expand...
Given the quite obvious anti-landlord sentiment permeating from the RTB in the last few months in particular, I would have thought the RTB would be the very last place a landlord should seek "good advice" from...
 
Firefly said:
I would have thought the RTB would be the very last place a landlord should seek "good advice" from...
Click to expand...
The comments are bizarre, like if LL had no understanding of the situation. And then he goes on about attracting new younger LL thanks to the rent reset and certainty in terms of return.
 
Premos said:
And then he goes on about attracting new younger LL thanks to the rent reset and certainty in terms of return.
Click to expand...
Which is unlikely to happen except in limited circumstances. You need €300k cash these days to buy a decent rental property. It is a lot of money to tie up in such a risky investment. Lots of people are exiting because of the risks and unattractiveness. The opposite must be true as well, few are entering because of the risks and unattractiveness.

Premos said:
like if LL had no understanding of the situation.
Click to expand...
He probably sees us as the caricature guy the RTB ad - dodgy and not too bright.
 
Daphne said:
Agreed. Furthermore, the fact that you can’t terminate a lease on the death of the landlord is even more egregious - leaving the executor and the ultimate beneficiaries to deal with a property and tenants they didn’t ask for.
Click to expand...
Could you imagine being forced to be a landlord.. what an absolute nightmare...
 
What annoys me is alot of people have to rent cause they cant afford to buy a house, why arent developers vilified the same as landlords, house prices are so expensive ppl cant get the mortgage.. and the materials used by developers in alot of cases are terrible.. House prices are high cause of demand, same for renting.. except alot of the small landlords rent is low as they are way off market rent!

Also why is the government not vilified for wasting public money?
 
- House to rent €2,000
- Tenant earns €4,000 to pay that €2,000 (Government takes 2,000k in tax)
- Landlord pays €1,000 in taxes on rental income
- Government gets €3,000 from this rental transaction and a landlord gets €1,000
- No risk for the government, significant risk for landlord
- Generally bad rental situation for tenants due to government mismanagement of housing supply and rental rules
- Government invests proceeds of 100 such transactions in appropriate bus shelter

General numbers in this example but you get the idea which group is the real problem
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top