Abbey Close (aka Abbey Court), Rathfarnham (-825k, -66%)


#21

I think you’ll definitely see some of them move after the volume of people that passed through the place on Saturday. Lots of youngish couples with young kids and the grandparents along also (they seemed to be doing most of the looking at what was needed on the construction/fittings side of things, so perhaps retired builders or well to do’s about to help out their kids).

The lack of a back garden was enough to see off my other half. We had our young lad in the Phoenix park yesterday and he spent an hour running around roaring, delighted with all the room he had - it brought it home to us that he just would’nt have the space/freedom to do the same in this location and we’d just be moving from 1 clausterphobic house into another one (loads more internal space allright, but none outdoors). And with more kids on the way, this is’nt for us.
Plus your only about 30 yards back from Nutgrove avenue which is busy most of the day/night and the traffic is very audible outside the house.

They’d be great houses for someone looking to put their own stamp on things as they’re a blank canvas, but not for young kids IMO.


#22

Mrs FB went to see them, apparently the EA was inviting offers too.

Should you have to put up with no garden, poor public transport and road noise for this price? I think they are still a bit too expensive but the paucity of choice like this will see them sold fairly quickly


#23

yeah, they said that to me allright, all offers would be entertained.
if one had family/friends who were in the building trade and stuck for a bit of work, these houses would be worth a bid


#24

Worth a bid of how much I think is the big question, I was thinking 260k then a further 60 or 70k to get the house up to scratch… would it be laughed at!?


#25

I imagine it would not be taken seriously but there is no harm in trying. If your offer turns out not to be realistic relative to what the market is willing to pay, you can always downsize your expectations or upsize your offer. Good luck!


#26

can’t see that being a runner at all, but they might give you some feedback (truth or not!) on what offers have gone in or what they would at least expect


#27

Any opinions on WIW then?
Or what a “reasonable” offer would be?


#28

Apparently they had approx 200 people to view, and a high proportion of those have called back over the course of yesterday and this morning. There’s more viewings this week, and another open viewing on Saturday

It would be nice to pick one up for 300 grand but with the level of interest in them I imagine they will get much closer to the asking prices.

It’s very frustrating that with a huge level of pent-up demand our government isn’t letting the reins off for the unfinished developments in the city. Surely someone could finish and sell the Sandyford eyesores now, if allowed to buy them for market value.


#29

I agree that there is a backlog of demand as evidenced in the many crowded viewing we are seeing and the disappointment voiced daily in this forum by disappointed would-be buyers.

However, I’m also wary of the regular exhortations by pinsters that the government or NAMA can and should open a floodgate of property onto the market. NAMA is in a difficult position, as the very people who will advocate a fire-sale in one page on these forums will voice their fury in another post that the state is selling assets for even less than the haircut prices at which it acquired them. Of course NAMA and the government are not too concerned about what a few hundred pinsters think but they have good reason to be cautious of how journalists would treat such a sale and how the general public would react: “Property developers have last laugh as NAMA is forced to sell off assets at fraction of purchase price” and so on. They are damned if they do and damned if they don’t: so their approach seems to be a slow drip-feed to the market.

There is another argument for NAMA only slowly drip-feeding the market rather than “letting the reins off”, which presumably means releasing property in relatively large batches to depress prices further. Releasing property in large batches - as called for by some pinsters - would provide a much-desired respite for those who are in the relatively fortunate position of being able to buy. It would not be provide such a happy result for the presumably much larger grouping in society who are already despairing about the negative equity in which they find themselves and which many feel is no fault of their own. The question is, who should be protected? And how many people will perceive a given action to be fair or unfair?

I am not arguing the rights and wrongs of either viewpoint (drip-feed versus letting go the reins), merely trying to show that there are no obvious or easy solutions. What benefits some will hurt others.

Finally, I’m also sceptical as to how cheaply some of the unfinished developments could be completed to an adequate and safe standard, even if they were handed over free to a developer, although I don’t know if it has yet been tried.


#30

I’m fully aware of the competing demands in the country and i know why the govt is trying to keep prices high to minimise the negative equity for private homeowners as well as protect the investment made by Nama. But they can’t fight the market any more than Canute could fight the incoming tide. Prices will reach the bottom however hard we try to put the brakes on the decline. INstead of spending billions trying to prevent the decline in prices, let the bottom come quickly so we can move on. If it means cheaper housing, all the better for a large portion of the population - I would argue that this is a larger population than is in NE at the moment.

I think that this Abbey Court example show though that there is an appetite for new property in south Dublin at the right price. I’ve mentioned the latest unfinished phase of Wyckham Point before and it’s a bugbear of mine because I pass it quite often. That’s a large development, close to a Luas stop and the M50, almost finished, but sitting there empty waiting for … what? A miracle, 2004, the next credit explosion? What about the huge empty eyesores in Sandyford, what are the plans for those?

What is certain is that these empty buildings are not appreciating in value and are unlikely to in the next few years. Sell them for what they can fetch in the open market. There is money out there, if there are offered in open auction they will be bought and employment will be created in finishing them.

You’ve identified the problem though - if Nama sells at a loss then it will expose the madness of setting up Nama. It seems to me that’s the reason why it is holding on to properties, so they can pretend that we haven’t just pissed billions of euros away bailing out developers. I’m not suggesting they dump properties, but ffs it is now 2012, how much longer does anyone think they should hold on to properties in Dublin City?


#31

It’s amazing how the property owning status of individuals seems to colour their opinions

Some pinsters are quick to criticise any suggestion of using tax payers money for debt write offs yet constantly moan about NAMA not flooding the property market with cheap property for them. It’s amazing how they fail to see that they amount to the same thing – using tax payers money to benefit a small section of the population.

As a tax payer I am strongly against people that borrowed stupidly being bailed out with my tax money. I also believe that, as some of my taxes have also been ploughed into NAMA, NAMA should be run as a business attempting to make a profit, as it stated it would. If NAMA hoardes, knocks or leaves properties unfinished to make a profit that’s fine with me. If NAMA were a private as opposed to state company would pinsters really expect it to flood the market with property so they could pick up a “bargain”? IMO, people whinging about NAMA not releasing cheap properties for them just puts them up there alongside the “where’s my NAMA?” groups

I think the use of the phrase “NAMA flooding the market” is a bit of an exaggeration . Last September / October it controlled less than 10,000 residential units. Over half of these were in counties Dublin, Cork, Limerick and Galway with over 17% of those outside the commuter belts. I’m not sure how many desirable properties that actually leaves them with. There are circa 1,700,000 properties in the state and as per NUIM there is a requirement for 45k-50k new units in the State each year i.e. NAMA is holding less than 0.6% of the properties in the state and less than the amount we’ll need over the next 3 months.


#32

It’s not amazing at all - people will naturally have their opinions coloured by their own situations!

“If NAMA hoardes, knocks or leaves properties unfinished to make a profit that’s fine with me.”

I strongly disagree with this, particularly the bit about knocking properties. That’s the old thinking of high price good, low prices bad. Knocking properties to control supply is such an appalling waste of resources, such an environmental disaster, I can’t see how anyone would support it. Hoarding properties and leaving them unfinished to make a profit just sounds crazy to me: half finished buildings exposed to the elements, depreciating, with loans that have to be repaid but generating no return on investment; how is that going to make any more money than finishing them now and generating an income from them? The only way that can work is if we have a quick return to a rising market and that simply isn’t going to happen any time soon.

Meanwhile, as discussed elsewhere, we have more expensive rents in Dublin than in prosperous German cities of a similar size, and 200 people queuing up in one day to see 4 houses.


#33

4 **UNFINISHED **houses!


#34

NAMA is an unnatural entity setup to prop up the market. Irrespective, even if it managages to keep up the price of property, and thereby hurt competition and reduce jobs, it still will lose money due to its wages and fees. NAMA holds a lot of development land as well as houses.

The market would find its own level much quicker without it. People would buy and renovate houses, releasing cash & jobs into the economy, aiding with the recovery. This shall not happen until NAMA is abandonned.


#35

Without the establishment of NAMA or similar action being taken to take bad loans off the books of banks our banking system would have collapsed. The picture of idyllic domestic bliss in a life without NAMA overlooks the fundamental requirement of having a banking system. Critical as we may be of the flaws in the banking system, having one is an absolute necessity for survival.


#36

Excellent post Esselte.


#37

We are part of the Euro. If our local regional banks had collapsed it would not have been then end of the world. Bankruptcy, guarantee of deposits, receivership, sale. Cheaper than the 76 billion NAMA is costing, which we’ll be lucky to see half of back


#38

Would you argue that it is still needed?


#39

And the foreign owned banks are still open here without NAMA, albeit with help from the UK taxpayer.

The proper way would have been for the banks to collapse and then be taken over by the bondholders, who would then decide how to proceed, most likely either scaling down and continuing to run the banks, or selling them off with a large discount. In either case we would still have banks working at least equivalent to what we have now, because it would be in the bonholders interest to keep them in some shape or form to recover some of their money.

NAMA does not do anything that the banks could not have done themselves, had the government pumped the money/bonds into them directly instead of NAMA (not saying that would have been a good idea either). It just creates an additional huge bureaucracy including many former vested interests to gobble taxpayer money and distort the market.

Worst case we could have built a new bank network costing a fraction of the 76bn using the credit unions or postoffices.


#40

I’m surprised that people who are so negative about the outlook for this country are so optimistic about the relatively cheap and easy solutions that could have been achieved if some other plan had been enacted, instead of the one we went with. I’m also surprised that people don’t seem to realise how dire a situation we were in just 15 months ago and how serious would be the impact of banking collapse or default on every aspect of society - it would be a meltdown situation and what we face now is a walk in the park in comparison.

NAMA was essentially a “containment” strategy for preventing the collapse of the banking system. It is separate to but linked to the troika bailout, since we needed to get the funds for that strategy from somewhere. So far, we can say that the containment strategy pursued has been effective, in that the banking system and other key social and economic structures that depend on it (government, pension funds, social welfare system, import/export capability, payment systems and so on) are still in place. On that basis I would say that the containment strategy was an effective one. Will we get the money borrowed by investors now in NAMA? Highly doubtful. Should the structure stay in place forever? No, a wind-down plan will be needed at some point. Should NAMA be wound down now? No, I wouldn’t say the system is in clover just yet.

If anyone is in doubt as to what would have happened if we had pursued a laissez-faire strategy, watch what happens if Greece defaults or allows its banking system to collapse.