Give your landlord a xmas gift - shop him!

by blisset Sat Dec 14, 2002 16:49

At the lower end of the market, an increasing number of households are in receipt of Supplementary Welfare Allowance rent supplement. The number of households dependent on rent supplement has increased from 33,000 households in 1995 to 42,683 in 2000. Of those in receipt of rent supplements, 42.6 per cent live in the Eastern Health Board Region (ERHA), and 56 per cent were aged between 20 and 34 years of age (Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs, 2001).

The Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) (1992) Act provided for the registration of private rental properties. All landlords were required to register their rented properties with the local authority. It is estimated that over 130,000 households live in private rented housing. To date, just over 20 per cent of these houses have been registered, and, upon inspection, many have been found inadequate. Of the dwellings inspected in the Dublin Corporation area in 1998, 72.4 per cent did not meet the requirements of the regulations.

The Act requires certain minimum standards that could be inspected at any time. The low compliance with the Act and the inertia to implement it suggest that households accommodated in this sector are not a priority for government. This is very worrying given that the health boards spent over €150m (£119m) in 2000 to finance the accommodation of 42,683 households in this sector (Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs, 2001). This means that taxpayers are often subsidising poor-quality, but expensive, accommodation to the benefit of unregistered landlords.

by whoever Sat Dec 14, 2002 17:39

.
shopping your landlord results in landlords ONLY taking in tenants who do not require RENT ALLOWANCE. fact!

dont be stupid.

and blisset. cope on. why are you advocacing tactics which puts at risk the tenanys of the the Unemployed/low waged. u should Know better!

it would be wise to reflect that tenants who dont have a lease with there landlord (and leases aren't in tenants interests anyhow) can be served with a 'noice to quit' without any restictions. ie at landlords discretion.

go back to the drawing board!

by blisset Sat Dec 14, 2002 17:41

Or better do nothing?

by and btw (blisset again) Sat Dec 14, 2002 17:43

Maybe though it is in everybody's interests for those in Private Rented accommodation to keep their heads down

by Blisset Sat Dec 14, 2002 17:58

as follows . . . .

EHB etc pay rent to landlords who they know or can work out are unregistered and who pay no tax -(I have seen forms indicating the EHB etc telling landlords that they will not use the info on these forms to do any crosschecks with other registers/agencies)

So an arm of the state makes sure that those profiting from results of the Housing crisis remain largely untaxed.

I think this process can be summed up as follows - an ongoing process of privatisation of Public Housing Provision in the Irish State where the EHB act (1) as a conduit of Taxpayers money to private interests AND (2) by negligence conspire to rub salt into the wound and defraud taxpayers while they're at it.

I understand my 'shop your landlord!' kite in the wind is no solution but is meant as a way to provoke talk/brainstorming about this issue.

Been involved in housing campaigns myself in the past and I always thought that this registered/unregistered business and the tax avoidance business was a weak point that campaigners should use.

CORI and THRESHOLD do good work in the area of Analysing the problems but act as traditional NGOs and leave it at analysis.

Housing is an explosive issue in Ireland at present but no group or groups have come up with an analysis of it and acted on that analysis in a coherent way.

Thus you get YFG headbangers on IMC trying to score political points with their outdoor sleeping charity efforts and that's the extent of the discussion.

What if 10.000 households shopped their landlords at the same time? Would the landlords be able to evict them all.

No they wouldn't

by TR Sun Dec 15, 2002 23:08

Whoever said that leases are not in the tenant's best interest has their head up their arse! The lease is a binding contract between owner and renter and gives the renter legal rights! (read your lease!) You could "shop" your landlord, fine, but don't bitch when you find your lazy ass out on the street wondering why no one will rent to you. People who save their money and buy a house (or an apartment) to rent out are running a business and doing a service. They have a RIGHT to make money providing you with housing. Do you really want owners getting out the the rental business? Its not enough that the government has to carry your ass by paying your fucking rent, now you want to THE MAN to come and inspect your "substandard" accomidations? Get a grip man!

by MG Mon Dec 16, 2002 09:20

"People who save their money and buy a house (or an apartment) to rent out are running a business and doing a service. They have a RIGHT to make money providing you with housing."

What kind of right-wing bullshit is this. If a landlord is unregistered, he/she is breaking the law. He/she is also more than likely evading tax (why else would he/she be unregistered?). I have lived in several different houses and flats in Dublin over the past six years. Two of them were a disgrace and would undoubtedly have been shut down by any inspector who visited. I was evicted from one of these when one of my flatmates, a 20-year-old girl who was month's away from having a baby, applied for assistance from the Department of Social Welfare. The landlord was unregistered and punished a pregnant girl and her friends with immediate eviction. He changed the locks and effectively confiscated all our belongings. When we told the Gardai, they laughed.

The reason I write this is to show that, in my experience, the majority of landlords are greedy scum who care nothing for tenants and their wellbeing. (They also have the State, the Gardai and the so-called opposition political parties on their side). They are wealthier than the average home-buyer and can outbid people looking to buy homes for their families. This, in turn, drives up the price of houses, meaning the only people who can afford them are investors.

There is nothing wrong, per se, with somebody investing in property with a view to making a profit. However, when this becomes tax evasion it is illegal. It is also immoral for property owners to charge sky-high rents simply because they control the supply of rented accommodation.

by whoever Mon Dec 16, 2002 22:51

TR. who writes up the lease? lawyers for the tenants or the landlord. i was not even being anti-landlord. but bye the way. landlords (most part) are involved for business reasons, not charity. you make it sound like they rent out of the goodness of their hearts.

BLISSET.
The reason why EHB doesn't shop landlords is because the knock on effect would be detrimental to people, who require rent allowance, being able to get accomadation.
landlords who don't register there propertys is a fact.agreed. for whatever reason. lets say for tax avoidance for the most part. though there are a host of other reasons. conflicts of ownership?? fear of hassle from the authoritys?? why bother?? etc etc.....their desire to keep their business/propertys has created an evident paranioa with regard to signing Rent allowance forms. ie they have the impresson that the health board to going to stiche them up to all the other state authorithys. this has resulted in landlords refusing to sign rent forms (remember there is no legal requirement on them to do to do so, and tenancy IS denyed as result), and this has REALLY impeeded rent allowance receipeants ability to find acommodation.
To combat this, health boards, both on there own advice, as well as by campaigning by groups/organisations for the unemployed, have taken a practical step to remove the 'landlord paranoia' out of the equation. this being to ensure landlords that they won't be in practice stiched up. its a practical solution. and one where 'knowledgeable landlords'/health boards/rent allowance recipients generally are okay with on a working level at least.
Situationally the landlords 'paranoia' still exists, and their propertys only POSSIBLE sytematic contact with other state authoritys is via the health boards. therefore a campaign to shop your landlord would result in landlords putting 2 and 2 together in error; thinking that the health boards had done the dirt on their agreement. knock on effect: landlords diconecting themselves from the healthbords. ie refusing to rent to rent allawance recipents. one has to remember that the tenant shoppers aren't for the most part going to DECLARE themselves to the landlord that they 'shopped them in'. unless they wish to risk their tenancy.

if you are still into 'SHOPPING THE LANDLORDS', at least some form of declartion that 'this is being done' should be sent to the landlord.

i'm personnally not much into shopping people to the state. it would seem only to reinforce/create the state authority powers. though Organizing to challange landlord practices is much needed. the state only responds if needs be! the needs have to be created!!!

by vert-et-noir Tue Dec 17, 2002 10:06

A variation on the name and shame game when it comes to landlords is for interested community groups to get together and publish the details of all those from whom their members are renting accomadation, this has the advantage of encouraging the landlords to register.

Alternatively: STOP PAYING RENT, SQUAT YOUR FLAT AND FORCE THE LANDLORD TO PROVE THAT AN UNREGISTERED PROPERTY WAS IN FACT OCCUPIED BY A TENANT.