Rent supplement is in the crosshairs


Deposits will now go up to cover potential for loss to two or three months which is fine if you are dealing with an honest landlord but not one who sees the deposit as his from the day you hand it over.


I doubt it will make any difference at all. Landlords/agents already pick which tenants they want. They do not have to give a reason for refusal. As long as they’re not stupid, no-one will be prosecuted for this. “We decided on a different tenant” is all you say.


We decided to only accept market rent, paid monthly in advance and yes we do require a deposit and work references :slight_smile:


What makes you think that the prospective tenant will tell you that they receive rent supplement before signing the lease?


most landlords won’t even need to ask


When I rented out my house and rang the Insurance Company to change it to a rental policy I was asked
if I would be taking in people on rent allowance.
I wasn’t as I rented it to family but asked what the extra premium would be
for if I did in the future, it was a few hundred extra a year.

Surely I am not in a position to take in people in receipt of rent allowance if they are not insured.
The extra premium is quite prohibitive as the house doesn’t really make much profit due to it’s location.

Maybe the Insurance company is discriminating but in my opinion they have to discriminate, they are in the
discrimination business, otherwise all our car insurance would be identical.


I was only thinking to myself yesterday when reading a thread on another site, that that social engineering, holier-than-thou, interfering fook bag Aodhan O’Riordan had gone quiet the past few weeks…which was an ominous sign.

I’ll be the happiest man in Ireland on the night of the next general election count in this shithole


They discussed this proposal on The Last Word tonight (rent allowance refusals) after initially going through Savills report on increasing house prices as a result of the new CB rules.
Anyways, the discussion got round to more building being the answer to all problems. Ciaran Cuffe (a Planner by trade) of the Greens said semi-state pension pots should be forced to invest 30%/50% or something like that into a fund for building social housing in Ireland, rather than being invested in International funds etc. He specifically mentioned CIE’s pension pot of 1.5bn.

Now last time I heard, CIE had the 2nd largest underfunded pension in Ireland, after BoI i think.
And isn’t the rent arrears/mortgage arrears rate on Social Housing astronomical?

So is this more hair brained, looks great on paper, Green manure


There is no way the risk / compliance dept of my company would allow us to ask this, let alone rate on it.


It’s not a case that you don’t accept rent allowance, usually. It’s that the rent you can get for this property is far more than the rent allowance threshold


Yeah so this is an empty, ideologically-driven gesture by Labour.


Ok I just re-read the Insurance Schedule,
under the heading
Tenancy / Occupancy type.
Various options , student professionals retired and Social Welfare/ Unemployed / Local Authority / RAS Scheme.
These were the options given to me down the phone when I rang for a quote.
They didn’t say rent allowance but assuming if they are unemployed they will be
looking for a landlady who accepts rent allowance.
Bottom line is If they are unemployed then the Premium will be more expensive.
It was a Broker, Based in Dublin.


Couldnt agree more,a hateful cunt of the first order.


Just wastes everyones time and money,SW tenants mow have to squander huge money ringing up landlords who don’t want them and landlord now have to field 100s of calls from tenants they will never rent to.
What syphilitic donkey thought " yay rental crises sorted 5 me someone"


Housing in Ireland, that well-known low-risk asset class which rivasl t-bills as a safe haven in times of financial stress.

Just perfect for a pension fund!


The obvious response by landlords would be to ensure their rent is above the threshold level, then they don’t have to worry about any surprises after they’ve accepted a tenant.

Y’all didn’t think the government was interested in either cooling the market or making anything better for anyone other than property investors did you?


This does not look great on paper. In fact, it is utterly stupid on a scale of being so stupid, teh stupid it hurtz.

Christ almighty, pension funds should be run not to save the guts of the housing market or property support but to ensure the fund is adequately funded. Anecdotal said one of the big issues with Irish pension funds after the bank crashes and associated stock exchange crash was that they were overly exposed to local problems because they were heavily invested locally.

I’m also sick of “more building fixie the problems”. Most of the houses and apartments built in this country are horrifically awfully designed and difficult to customise internally and permission for one off houses are falling off a cliff. We build metric trainloads of apartments in the wrong place (ooh, Motorola site in Swords, nice example, most of Sandyford where Access to Luas is a twenty minute walk (ffs).

Intelligent building might fixie the problems along with some levelling of shite stuff built about 70 years ago which is no longer aligned with people’s lifestyles. Instead of worrying about pensions and housing we could do with worrying about public transport and housing more. Maybe do a quick calculation of the amount of money we spend on outside consultants lately and start from there instead of underfunded pension funds.


People love cul-de-sacs in this country. Man our entire economic policy and general logic path that form decisions is rinse and repeat cul-de-sac-ism. We drove the stretched hummer down one and we’re not for turning! Regardless of the reality we need to hire a crane if we so choose to lift us out of our real quandry. Ditch thte hummer would be the solution.

So then you start building quality stuff in density that are also quality and generous but you devalue everything before it and just as they got those price inflated! No way … too risky.

Bouncy castle merchants at the helm is all we have. It’s like taking the bubble and floggin’ it to the next generation, bubble for rent! Wanna rent a Bubble mister?

The most important part of the economic recovery is that nothing important is resolved with no genuine problem solved. It’s about planting enough problems and declaring it a forest (dark in there and complex too, maybe even scary) declaring it of national interest and slapping a heritage protection order on it making sure it is forever too complex to chop down.

The more frightening aspect of it all is we are not dealing with some poorly paid antiquated underinvested organization a la “donkey & cart” postcard era. No, it’s so dam well funded in terms of billions it should be regular trips to the Moon and Mars for all Irish citizens. Yet all you get to enjoy are still moon like surfaces here on earth as you drive in your heavily taxed moon buggy commuting inhuman distance across sprawling seas of semi-d tranquility.


Didn’t Daft decide to remove their “No rent allowance accepted” option from rental ads? I can’t recall if that was a voluntary move or imposed by new regulations. Anyway, this gaff in Ballymun breaks that rule (and possibly a few others - no BER, minimum standards, planning permission?): … n/1538672/


It has been mooted as a new law, not voluntary. Daft voluntarily removed it some time ago but quickly brought it back after tenants complained their time was being wasted calling about places that did not accept RAS.