Pre-63 Properties and the Potential Impact of Standards


#1

Introduction

(This is pasted from a Word document and so formatting has been lost.)

Having a few spare hours and a nerdy disposition, I decided to do some analysis on Pre-63 houses.

I wanted to understand and attempt to quantify the possible impact on the housing market, the rental market and house sale prices of the changes in Pre-63 properties as detailed in the Revision of the Standards Regulations Applying to the Private Rented Sector.

I have not seen any such an analysis. I have seen partial analyses that look at areas such as impact on low-cost rental market due to the possible loss of this rental sector but nothing that looks at the impact across the entire property sector: from increased rents at the low end, to reduction in availability of low-cost rental to affect on property supply and property prices if owners of these properties decide to sell rather than renovate to the affects of numbers of houses remaining unsold.

I have been considering the matter for a few weeks and so decided to put my time where my mouth is and produce an initial analysis to start discussions, rather than just expressing opinions not supported by facts or by producing a tendentious a priori analysis to support an existing view.

So, first things first. I am not a landlord. I do not own a second property. I have no vested interest in supporting landlords from a position of dogma. I do believe that a healthy rental market is an essential component of a healthy wider property market.

As an aside I have seen inconsistencies bordering on hypocrisy on this board with posters advocating on the one hand a more European approach to rental rather than purchase combined with vitriol directed against those who provide properties for rent. You cannot have it both ways. You need to be consistent. There are various factions on this forum who take dogmatic views on either side of the landlord topic.

Also, landlords have to make a profit otherwise they will not enter or stay in the market. There is nothing wrong with making a profit from business, even from renting houses.

Layering costs on rental and removing profit by these changes represents a major intervention in the market that has distorting affects. The public service loves to introduce regulations and other changes without taking any notice of their likely consequences. It is a consequence of their insulated working environment and lack of experience. BER certificates and registration fees for rental properties cost money that will have to be retrieved from rental prices. Introducing regulations that have costs mean those costs have to be recovered or absorbed somewhere.

Personally, I believe that a functioning private rental market is an important component of a functioning wider property market.

However, I prefer to do the analysis and let the information speak for itself rather than performing tendentious analyses.

To make the analysis easier, I am only looking at Dublin postal regions 1-9. I feel, without supporting information, that is both representative and that these areas probably contain a higher proportion of Pre-63 properties that other areas of Dublin and even the country.

To have a pre-63 declaration a property has to have been built and rented in bedsits before 1964. That rules out large sections of other postal districts.

The detailed analysis that follows applies to Dublin 6/6W. I selected this because it has the largest number of PRTB registrations of Dublins 1 to 9. It may also have the highest proportion of pre-63 rental properties.

The PRTB data relates to 15 November 2011.

Key Questions I Feel Need to be Considered

  1. How to identify rental properties that are Pre-63?

  2. How much will it cost to upgrade a pre-63 property to the new standards?

  3. How many pre-63 properties will be sold rather than renovated?

  4. What impact will this have on the rental sector?

  5. What impact will the sale of pre-63 properties have on the market?

  6. If pre-63 properties are withdrawn from rental but not put on the market or unsold, what impact will this have?

  7. What impact should these changes have on housing policy?

Background Information

See Revision of the Standards Regulations Applying to the Private Rented Sector September 2008 Centre for Housing Research - environ.ie/en/Legislation/De … 126,en.doc

Pre '63 is the term used to describe residential investment properties let in multiple units and converted into such prior to the operation of the Local Government Planning and Development Act 1963.

(The correct URL is now public.prtb.ie/pubregfStats.htm)

Note the published PRTB statistics are published only up to 2009.

See environ.ie/en/DevelopmentHou … edHousing/

The Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2009

See New Standards Regulations for Rented Houses - The Housing (Standards for Rented Houses) Regulations 2008 SI 534/2008 -
environ.ie/en/DevelopmentHou … 400,en.doc

The Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2009 is available from

environ.ie/en/Legislation/De … 568,en.pdf

Housing (Standards for Rented Houses) Regulations 2008 S.I. 534 2008:

environ.ie/en/Legislation/De … 142,en.pdf

Housing (Standards for Rented Houses) Regulations 2009 S.I. 462 2009:

environ.ie/en/Legislation/De … 710,en.pdf

PRTB Data

PRTB data is available here: prtb.ie/public_registrations.aspx.

The PRTB supplies data for counties and Dublin postal districts that contains the following fields:

• Address Line1
• Address Line2
• Address Line3
• Address Line4
• Address Line5
• County
• Type Of House
• Number Of Bedrooms
• Bed Spaces
• Floor Space

The field Type Of House is frequently blank.

The data supplied by the PRTB is of very poor quality. There are frequent spelling errors and inconsistencies that makes data analysis difficult. For example, the data for Dublin 6/6w contains many errors such as:

• Zicharlston Avenue
• 1040 Lower Rathmines Road
• 105 Grove Park and 105 grove park
• 12 LEINSTER RD and 12 Leinster Road
• 12 Lowper Road
• 12 Maxwell Road and 12 Maxwells Road
• 12a Grosvenor Sq and 12a Grosvenor Square and 12A Grosvenor Square and 12A Grosvenor square
• 13 Chelmsford Road and 13 Chelmsfort Road
• 13 Palmerston Road and 13 Palmerstown Road
• 108 New Seskin Court Whitestown Way Tallaght
• apartment 3 583 north circular road Dublin 6W
• Rathgar Road 20
• Orwel Road
• 1 Beuumont House 60 Terenure Road East
• 1 Palmerstown Villas Rathmines and 1 Palmerstown Villas Upper Rathmines Road
• Apt.94 oakfield house Seven oaks Church avenue
• Apartment 94 Oakfield House Seven Oaks Rathmines

Take one example of 293 Kimmage Road Lower and the values for the first three address lines where the address lines are not consistently used.

• Address Line1 - Apt 6 Clonallen, Apartment 4 Clonallen, Apartment 5, Flat 3, Apartment 2, Apartment 3
• Address Line2 - 293 Kimmage Road Lwr, 293 Lower Kimmage Road, Clonallen
• Address Line3 - 293 Kimmage Road Lower

I have just done the analysis for Dublin 6/6W.

I used the following houses listed on Myhome.ie that were explicitly classified as Pre-63 and had full address details:

• 188 Lwr. Rathmines Road, Rathmines, Dublin 6
• 93 Sandford Road, Ranelagh, Dublin 6
• 124, 124a 124b Leinster Road, Rathmines, Dublin 6
• 44 Kenilworth Park, Kenilworth, Dublin 6, Dublin
• 190 Lwr. Rathmines Road, Dublin 6, Dublin

There are many others that are clearly pre-63 advertised on myhome.ie but I omitted these because of the absence of an explicit identification.

The main problem with this analysis is the truly dreadful nature of the published PRTB data. The PRTB may have more accurate data internally but somehow I doubt it. The data really needed proper rationalisation and improvement.

This poor quality data has required some manipulation to extract useful information.

It would be a lot easier if better data was more easily available.

Some Results

The total units registered by the PRTB for Dublin 1-9 are:

Area Units Bedrooms Bed Spaces
D1 7,125 2,119 3,458
D2 3,911 6,917 11,621
D3 3,996 8,153 13,117
D4 7,141 14,394 23,776
D5 1,562 4,102 6,279
D6 10,487 20,210 30,438
D7 6,962 12,340 19,442
D8 9,645 5,706 9,402
D9 4,548 11,047 16,680
Total 55,377 84,988 134,213

The PRTB have 10,487 residencies listed for Dublin 6/6W. These have a total of 20,210 bedrooms and 30,438 bed spaces.

Based on the analysis listed below, there are 2,383 unique properties of the PRTB register for Dublin 6/6W. (This number is probably a slight underestimate).

Of these there are around 825 that appear to be Pre-63. That represents 34.6%. This seems a bit high but let’s leave it for now.

These apparently pre-63 properties have 8,209 bedrooms and 12,005 bed spaces. They represent 5,253 units.

The average rental income per unit for the small sample of properties identified explicitly as pre-63 and where rental income is provided is €7,027. The estimates for renovation of an average unit that is currently not at the required standard is €15,000. This amount will clearly vary depending on the number and type of units and the size of the house. This number seems high but it is provided by the Department of the Environment so let it stand for now.

There is also a second cost related to lost rental income while the property is being renovated.

Note that the €7,027 is revenue, not profit while the €15,000 is all cost. How much will rent need to rise to recover costs over a reasonable time?

Given that these will be older houses and so the property costs will be, in most cases, low, making an assumption that the net profit from the average of €7,027 is €3,500 then the renovation costs represent over four years profit, assuming the renovation costs are accurate and that there are no other costs.

If the entire 5,253 units in the identified pre-63 properties were renovated, the estimated cost based on the€15,000 cost per unit is €78,795,000.

Currently there are 243 houses for sale in Dublin 6/6w listed on myhome.ie. What would be the impact of a significant proportion of the 825 properties in the areas that appear to be Pre-63 being put on the market?

Key Questions I Feel Need to be Considered - Some Possible Answers

**How to identify rental properties that are Pre-63? **

See below.

**How much will it cost to upgrade a pre-63 property to the new standards? **

€15,000 per unit (based on Department of the Environment estimates)

**How many pre-63 properties will be sold rather than renovated? **

This is clearly hard to forecast. I have noticed a larger number of pre-63 type properties being advertised. Auctions being organised by Allsops and others contain a high proportion of this. I can recall the idiot from the September auction who bought the houses in Waverly Terrace from money from motorcycle accident compensation saying they would be worth millions in a few years but saying in the interim he was going to continue to rent them, not knowing that he had bought himself a huge renovation cost in order to continue to rent them in a year.

If I was a landlord with such a property and I was facing €15,000 costs per unit, wiping out my profit for several years at least and facing other property-rental-related regulatory changes such as reduction/removal of rent allowances that will squeeze me from the revenue end, I would look to sell. If I was a landlord with lots of such properties I might stay in the business and seek to attract higher rents for my upgraded units, assuming I could fund the upgrades.

It depends on whether the trickle of pre-63 sales becomes a flood and when this happens. If I was selling, I would sell now and sell cheaply to achieve a sale. But that depends on a rational analysis. Clearly one of the major lessons from the last few years in that decision making and rationality are ill bed-fellows.

Also, one of the other lessons from the last few years is that matters take longer to come to a head than would be expected. However, with the pre-63 regulation changes due to come into force in February 2013, there is just over a year for a resolution to happen.

**What impact will this have on the rental sector? **

Drive rents up, reduce supply at least in the short term during renovations and probably reduce supply in the long term. This will affect the low end of the market aimed at those who cannot afford high-rents.

It depends on the areas in which the houses are located. A pre-63 house in Rathgar can be realistically converted to a single dwelling and then rented in its entirety or lived-in because the area can sustain this. A house on the Phoenix Park end of the North Circular Road will still be in the middle of knackersville no matter what is spent on it individually. The area would not sustain such a change in usage.

If the Dublin-based low cost rental sector is removed, this may force this cohort to move to lower cost areas farther from Dublin, increasing their travel costs and time.

**What impact will the sale of pre-63 properties have on the house sale market? **

If there is a large number of such houses put up for sale, the consequences could be multiple and substantial.

• Anyone buying such as house for rent will have to factor in a substantial renovation cost which will drive the price - for example look at 19/20 Charleston Road, Ranelagh, Dublin 6 myhome.ie/residential/brochu … -6/1736219. This could be an example of someone looking to exit the rental market quickly. This has16 self contained units: eight 1 beds, two 2 beds, 4 bedsits and two 2 bed apartments. The renovation costs of this would be of the order of €240,000 to bring it to the standards of the new regulations. The ad says the annual revenue is €130,000. The asking price of €1,600,000 seems very high because the property is effectively not being bought as a going concern but one which needs substantial investment. What will happen to houses like this when there is a much larger number on the market?

• Sellers should want to sell quickly before more houses are put up for sale and so should drop their prices to achieve quick sales. (There are too many shoulds here that imply rationality that may not exist.)

• Other property sellers should recognise that the market may be flooded with doer-uppers and react by dropping their prices to achieve quick sales. (Again too many shoulds here.)

• Estate agents should be advising their customers of the potential. (What are the chances of this?)

• There should be an associated increase in house renovations, either by landlords or buyers. If I was the CIF I would seek to offer packages. (Then again if I worked for the CIF, I would have taken other actions like offering pyrite resolution packages to generate business in the past instead of whingeing.)

**If pre-63 properties are withdrawn from rental but not put on the market or unsold, what impact will this have? **

Possible clusters of derelict houses in areas where renovation does not make economic sense or where the area cannot be gentrified.

**What impact should these changes have on housing policy? **

If I was a policy maker I would consider some, none or all of the following, subject to a more detailed information gathering and analysis exercise to enable me make effective decisions:

• Loan guarantees for landlords renovating properties to avoid a sudden shock to the rental sector

• Work with building industry bodies to create renovation packages

• Work with landlord representative bodies to understand the problem and produce solutions

• Phased introduction of new pre-63 regulations and associated sanctions

• Relaxation of new pre-63 regulations and associated sanctions

Then again, if I was a policy maker I would not realistically consider any of the above because I would be lazy and incompetent.

Notes on Data Analysis Approach

Create property code based on processing of address to allow for spelling errors concatenated with property number. I took this approach as an easy and quick way of cleansing very bad data. There are better data cleansing approaches and tools that will resolve the data issues if a more detailed analysis is required.

Sort by property code.

Identify as potentially pre-63 if words Flat, Apt, Apartment, Unit, Room appear in the address line and there is more than one unit for the property code.

This is not exact as it will include some apartment blocks. It will also exclude others. There are errors in this analysis. It is not exact. Pay me and I will do a more exact analysis.

Further some of these pre-63 properties will have already been renovated to the standard.

As mentioned above, the analysis has been done for Dublin 6/6W but it could be repeated for the other Dublin districts and other areas.

My worked data can be viewed here depositfiles.com/files/81h2ocln5. This contains a zipped spreadsheet. Select Free Downloading. Wait 60 seconds. Then enter a RECAPTCHA.

Let the informed discussions begin.

Any and all errors identified are welcome.


#2

I am surprised that this rather excellent post has not attracted more attention. The new regs and their impact on the pre 63 stock, and on the rental market, is I think one of the most significant changes in the property market for many years.

I would hope they might lead to two things:

  1. Better quality housing for lower income groups
  2. The revitalisation of the lovely and central areas blighted by these horrible units

I won’t hold my breath.

One other thing, a large portion of pre 63s are no such thing, having been converted well into the 80’s. I see some for sale at the moment, which claim pre 63, and I know for a fact they where family homes in the late 70s.


#3

I think that the introduction of proper standards is a good thing - I think the cost of it is likely to be underestimated however. Have you any information on the nature of the work to be undertaken for €15000? If these are old buildings divided into bedsits there will be some input from a Conservation architect likely. If there are changes in layout reqd., there will also be need for a PSDP, if significant work is carried out there will also be need for Fire Cert., Disability Access Cert. and for old buildings Planning Permission.
That all costs money.
The requirements of the building regulation on disabled access require what is currently considered best practice as standard from the 1st January - those requirements are extremely onerous. Frankly I seriously doubt that €15k will be enough to cover the works.


#4

Super post, thanks for the extensive research that you’ve been willing to share.

One thought occurs to me…

a pre-63 property has been rented in bed-sits since 1963…I had it in my head that it was any property pre-63 that is currently rented in bed sits.

A question…

what volume of properties are we talking here…

If there are (guess) 1000,000 houses in Dublin…would we be talking 1000 of these are pre-63


#5

10,487 registered residencies in D6/6W = an estimated 2,383 houses.

134,213 registered residencies in D 1-9 = 30,497 houses based on the same proportion.

825 houses appear to be Pre-63 in D6/6W.

So 10,558 pre-63 houses in D1-9, assuming the values from D6/6W apply to other areas, such they do not.

So, reduce by 50% to allow for errors = 5,297.

It would be better if actual data was available instead of having to infer and make assumptions.

I have the feeling that more and more pre-63 houses will start appearing on the market soon as owners sell their assets rather than incur the renovation costs.


#6

So 35% of houses in D6/D6W have been in bedsits since 1963? Seems a bit high but who am I to say.


#7

You’re certainly on your game jbxr. I’ve only spotted this thread today and immediately thought of a post I’d seen in the Allsop auction thread:

viewtopic.php?p=555530#p555530

which it turns out of course, was posted by you. :smiley:


#8

The work required is listed in the link above environ.ie/en/DevelopmentHou … 400,en.doc.

The 15,000 per unit cost was produced by the Department of the Environment. I also seriously doubt it but have used it as a working assumption.

I have not seen any builders offering renovation packages. If I was an unemployed builder, I would seriously consider this. If multiple houses were renovated together, they would be some savings.

Also, I have not seen anywhere how houses are to be vacated during renovation and what happens to the old tenants after renovation.

This is a big fuck-up waiting to happen.


#9

No - 35% of houses that are rented out appear to be pre-63. The analysis only applies to tenancies registered with the PRTB. As best as I can work out without going though their data line by line and fixing the errors, there are 2,383 houses rented in D6/D6W whose rent is registered with the PRTB. I do not know what proportion this represents of the total housing stock in this area but it would be quite small.


#10

Assuming the installation of bathrooms, installation of electrics for emergency lighting, removal of existing internal rooms, new ventilation to internal toilets and kitchens, new kitchen layout to take into consideration requirement for freezer, replacement ceilings to comply with fire safety - houses will be vacated.

IIRC, the tenant will be given the opportunity to take back the unit if works completed within 6 months under the Residential tenancies act. (I think the 6 month also applies to renovation - it applies to some of the other reasons a landlord may take back a property).

What I find a lot is that people don’t fully follow through with the logic of their initial starting requirements here. I would expect to see the loss of 1 in 3 bedsits possibly 1 in 2 bedsits to comply with requirements, with costs in the order of €100k to do this. (finger in the air pricing). That’s a big hit for a landlord.


#11

But the flip side is that we are only seeing 10,000 new mortgages per annum.


#12

A working estimate is that rents have to increase by c. 40% to cater for renovation costs, loss of units through renovation requirements and loss of income through property being empty during renovation. This increase would allow the owner recover these costs/loss of future income in around 6-8 years.

Again, these are just estimates and need to be validated. The impact of the loss of these low-cost rental units and the need to increase post-renovation rents has not been factored into any official analysis I have seen.

If I owned one of the yokes, I would be looking to sell it as soon as possible for as much or little as I could get. The affect this increase of houses on the market has also not been assessed as far as I can see.


#13

A good idea. In most countries, uncertainty as to future works needed is generally overestimated when discounting the price of property (more certainty allowing a more accurate discount). I find in Ireland that the prices properties are sold at massively underestimates the cost of necessary works.


#14

excellent post and well done, i don’t believe you have a nerdy disposition but i shall take your word for it…Can you outline what is currently been changed with the reg’s around pre 63 houses ?.. are these just recommendations and options prepared by the Centre for Housing Research(has to be a quango) which may or may not be adopted into a new Housing Standards Act?


#15

I honestly can’t see the new regs having much impact on the property market.
The new regs basically say that units must have a bathroom and a heater.
A house/group of units being pre-63 doesn’t mean it doesn’t meet the new standards.

From what I can make out of the property market, a property without it’s own bathroom has been basically unrentable for a number of years now.
Certainly no one I know of my own age has ever rented a place with a bathroom down the corridor. There are a few relics around, but even the tiniest bedsits I looked at the last time I was flat hunting already had a bathroom somewhere.

The standards in total are:

They’re not exactly spectacularly high or demanding.
Most pre-63 stuff will already meet it.

Regs changes are here
citizensinformation.ie/en/ho … dards.html


#16

I think Jess makes a good point. If you look at the text of the act, the rules are pretty strict. But the summary of the rules provided by the citizens’ information website is much less onerous. For example, the act is very clear that there must be a way of extracting fumes from cooking facilities, but the citizens information website doesn’t mention it.

If the government agency that is supposed to provide citizens with accurate information about their rights just doesn’t think that some of those new rights are important enough to even mention, it’s pretty unlikely that those responsible for enforcing the rules will be too bothered either.

My guess is that in February 2013 the government will start announcing that from now on landlords will be expected to follow the new rules, and that they need to start getting their houses in order. For at least the first six months nothing is likely to be done, and when eventually the government starts to act, it will be to direct landlords to get started on those changes. My guess is that even if the authorities are aware of buildings that don’t meet the requirements, there will be no real consequences for the landlord for at least a year or two after the new rules come in.

This of course assumes that the landlord tells the authorities that they are not compliant. I may be wrong, but I would guess that many landlords in the pre-63 business don’t worry too much about things like meeting standards and paying taxes. If a landlord is not registered with the PTRB and doesn’t pay any tax, the won’t be too worried about meeting the new rules. In principle, their tenants could report them. But in reality if the landlord is prevented from renting the house because it doesn’t meet minimum standards, the tentant will have to move elsewhere. Many of these tenants are vulnerable people who might find it difficult to find accomodation elsewhere. They may not choose to make themselves homeless at a time of rising rents and a shortage of rental accomodation in Dublin.

I know one tenant who had a dispute with his landlord, and withheld his rent. The landlord resolved the issue by simply punching the tenant, who then handed over the money. I’ve no doubt that there are lots of good landlords out there. But there are also plenty of shysters, and I suspect that many of them are owners of pre-63 properties.

I imagine that in the medium to long term rentals that don’t meet the new standards will become increasingly rare, as more landlords become compliant. But I doubt very much that on February 1st 2013 there will be a sudden big change.

Having said that, this is a very interesting thread, and the information on pre-63 properties is excellent and very useful.

BG.


#17

One point I make is that I do not know and that no one else appears to know also or have the desire to find out in order to be able to make informed policy decisions.

I have certainly seen a number of houses that are classified as pre-63 and do not even come close to meeting the required new standards.

Take as an example 79 Kenilworth Square, Rathgar, Dublin 6:

myhome.ie/residential/brochu … n-6/198651

This has been for sale for well over a year. It is currently at €775,000 having dropped from €975,000 at the start of 2011.

The PRTB has tenancies listed for the following numbers in Kenilworth Square:

11
14
16
20
30
42
52
56
57
64
68
79
81
82
86

There are probably others that are not listed or declared.

Take a look at the details of some of these:

Unit 9 14 Kenilworth Square North
Flat 1 14 Kenilworth Square North
Flat 11 14 Kenilworth Square North
Flat 2 14 Kenilworth Square
Flat 4 14 Kenilworth Square North
Flat 5 14 kenilworth square north
Flat 5 14 kenilworth square north
Flat 7 14 Kenilworth Square North
Flat 8 14 Kenilworth Square North
Unit 3 14 Kenilworth Square

Apartment 3 30 Kenilworth Square
Apartment 9 30 Kenilworth Square
Apartment 9 30 Kenilworth Square
Apt 1 30 Kenilworth Square
Apt. 10 30 Kenilworth Square West
Apartment 7 30 Kenilworth Square West

Apartment 11 52 Kenilworth Square
Apartment 16 52 Kenilworth Square
Apartment 2 52 Kenilworth Square
Apartment 3 52 Kenilworth Square
Apartment 4 52 Kenilworth Square
Apartment 7 52 Kenilworth Square
Apartment 8 52 Kenilworth Square
Apartment 9 52 Kenilworth Square
Apartment 6 52 Kenilworth Square
Apartment 1 52 Kenilworth Square
Apartment 10 52 Kenilworth Square South
Apartment 11 52 Kenilworth Square South
Apartment 12 52 Kenilworth Square South
Apartment 14 52 Kenilworth Square South
Apartment 5 52 Kenilworth Square South
Apartment 9 52 Kenilworth Square South
Apt. 5 52 Kenilworth Square South

1 56 Kenilworth Square
Flat 1 56 Kenilworth Square
Flat 1 56 Kenilworth Square
Flat 2 56 Kenilworth Square
Flat 3 56 Kenilworth Square
Flat 3 56 Kenilworth Square
Flat 1 56 Kenllworth Square

Flat 7 79 Keilworth Square Rathmines
Flat 1 79 Kenilworth Square Rathmines
Flat 5 79 Kenilworth Square Rathmines

3 81 Kenilworth Square
4 81 Kenilworth Square
5 81 Kenilworth Square
7 81 Kenilworth Square
9 81 Kenilworth Square
Flat 1 81 Kenilworth Square
Flat 1 81 Kenilworth Square
Flat 6 81 Kenilworth Square
Flat 7 81 Kenilworth Square
Flat 8 81 Kenilworth Square

Apartment 1 82 Kenilworth Square
Apt. 1 82 Kenilworth Square
Apartment 3 82 Kenilworth Square
Apartment 4 82 Kenilworth Square
Apartment 6 82 Kenilworth Square
Apt 2 82 Kenilworth Square

Ignoring the poor data quality from the PRTB (inconsistency, misspellings), there are a lot of houses with a lot of small bedsits - number 52 has 17 listed.

Even though number 79 has seven units, the PRTB lists only three tenancies.

Number 79 would require significant expendenditure to either bring it up to the new rental regulations or to restore it to a single house.

If I was the owner of this house, I would drop its price to sell it for whatever I could get now.

The key questions as I see them are:

  1. How many more of these houses will come onto the market in the next year as the owners decide they cannot afford or will not invest to bring them to the new standard?

  2. What will the impact be on the low-cost end of the rental market from the removal of these houses?

  3. Will the new standards be enforced to cause such a selling trend?

  4. What will the impact be on house prices in these areas if there is a large number of houses in poor condition being sold?


#18

Number 79 has seven units but only three tenancies.
While it would take alot of money to bring the whole of 79 up to the new standards, I’ll put money on it that the three units which are rented out do meet them, or almost meet them.
Extractor fans, storage heaters and washing machines are cheap.

What’s not cheap are new bathrooms, but a place without its own bathroom has not been rentable for years now.
In properties like 79 Kenilworth Sq, that’s why there are four units sitting empty.

Nothing changes for the landlord with the new regulations.
Property he could rent out before can still be rented out, maybe with up to E1000 spent in some cases.
Property he couldn’t rent out before still can’t be rented out, although now instead of tenants not wanting it, it’s a legal thing too.

The landlord of 79 had to make the decision years ago whether it was worth holding onto a property with only 3 lettable units or selling it. The new regulations change nothing.

Q1 - Very few. The decision to invest or not came up years ago.
Q2 - they’ve been unrentable for a while because there hasn’t been any demand, so they’re not being removed
Q3 - The new standards have been adopted by prospective tenants in the last number of years
Q4 - this won’t happen.


#19

daft.ie/searchrental.daft?id=1143299

https://c2.dmlimg.com/abeafefb1775bcdec36d9c59ed8951225308d54b129a8005ecd44265cd37e6fb.jpg

This is described as a mezzanine - any idea how common this is? I think I saw something similar on Elgin Road - but the ceiling was way higher. These have got to go too surely?


#20

Probably not.
It has a bathroom. The blurb says it has a washing machine and a microwave.
Provided all the other specs are met (hot and cold running water, presence of a heater, 4 ring cooker, ventilation etc.) then it’d be fine.

They might get them on bathroom ventilation, but they’re probably ok.