Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
RENTING IN IRELAND is becoming more expensive by the month but the rate of increase is slowing thanks to rent pressure zones, according to a new report.
The RTB Rent Index reports the national average rent was €1,122 per month, up from €1,044 one year earlier. Dublin remains the most expensive place to rent with average monthly prices now at €1,620, representing an increase of €141 from the same period last year.
The RTB Rent Index is compiled in conjunction with the Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI). It has shown that rent increases for existing tenancies (5.4%) were lower than those for new tenancies (8%).
This indicates that Rent Pressure Zones are having a slowing effect on the level of increase. The measures were brought in to tackle spiralling rental costs. If a property is in one of these zones, it means the landlord can only increase the rent by 4% every year.
Although rents are now at a record high, and the Irish rental market is experiencing unprecedented demand, the number of landlords is falling with a decline of 8,829 tenancies and 1,778 fewer landlords than in 2015.
Commenting on the latest results, Rosalind Carroll, Director of the Residential Tenancies Board, said: “Affordability still remains an issue for the rental market with continued economic, unemployment and population growth contributing to rising demand across the country. We can also see rents across the country have continued to increase year-on- year.
The rate of rent inflation slowed this quarter somewhat, and which we will continue to monitor in the months ahead. The importance of strong protections for tenants is underlined by the fact that the pace of rent increase under existing tenancies is well behind that of new tenancies, which shows us that Rent Pressure Zones are working much better within existing tenancies, but there is still more to do in respect of new tenancies.
Carroll said she is very concerned that the number of landlords continues to decrease. She said that if we are to meet demand and ensure a well-functioning rental sector, then we need more landlords and different types of landlords to offer market options.
Carroll added: “Unsurprisingly, Dublin is experiencing the most acute rent pressures with fewer than 15% of tenancies agreed at less than €1,000 per month, as compared to 70% elsewhere in the country. We can also see the Dublin rental sector is dominated by apartments (73%) as compared to less than one-in-two elsewhere.”
Dublin’s rental market continues to be the largest in the country, accounting for nearly two-in-five tenancies (72%) that were registered with the RTB. As of the third quarter of 2018, the standardised average rent for Dublin stood at €1,620, up from €1,479 one year earlier. This represents an increase of €141 euro on the standardised average monthly rent over a 12 month period, or nearly a €12 increase per month.
Second highest rents were in Galway City at €1,187 per month. Cork City’s average rents stood at €1,172, rents in Limerick City were €928 and rents in Waterford City were €638. On an annualised basis, rents in Limerick City have been growing most rapidly at 11.8%.
The data is reported in the RTB’s Rent Index report published today. The report is produced in conjunction with the ESRI and is based on 25,448 new tenancies registered with the RTB in the same quarter.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Sad that his tenure ended this way, but there seems to be a culture of non corporate compliance & lack of proper accountability within Goal. For example, John O’Shea refused to publish his salary details. The company relies on public donations and that the public have a right to know how there money is being spent.
We all know what sorted out this dispute, money, and probably lots of it.
Great business to be in that Charity lark, they are falling over each other in Africa enshrining the many of the people into culture of poverty. They would be better off lobby Politicians across Europe to help Africa economically which is the only meaningful solution. Ah well the important thing is that John the professional giver gets “paid” , of course this will be partially funded by tax payer , wonder how much he will donate to Charity , maybe his daughter will tell us , apparently she wants to take over the family business , I mean Charity now !
I wonder if his daughter Lisa O’Shea will get his job ? Also, she should stop promoting her name in the radio ads for Goal – it’s a waste of valuable money & promotes her own career.
Too many chiefs not enough charity!!!
If only there was a way to cut out the middleman when giving to charity
No doubting the great work he did and he will always have a great legacy, but I’d love to see how much he earned since 1977.
A lot of money, lived the high life while being an arrogant rude man on top of it.
He earned silly amounts of money, what was it like €400,000 a year or something? How is that a charity, it’s more like a scam to me
Popsicle.
Where did you get this 400k a year figure from? Can you back it up or is it something you hope is true so you can discredit the man.
Well Neil. Are you in the charity business yourself?
Everybody’s money is nobody’s money so just like the civil service they get to pay themselves what they think they are worth probably along with unvouched expenses
Retirement my arse, no doubt a tidy little financial arrangement for this chap who always bothered me with his approach, in your face attitude. Perhaps the truth will surface one day. Nice pension to look forward to given the outrageous salary he was on and before the bleeding hearts have a moan, it was the public who donated to the destitute as Mr O Shea described Goals target audience.
A score draw!
There is clearly an urgent need for transparency, regarding senior executives pay within all charities. The publics trust is being severely threatened, by repeated stories of grossly overpaid charity workers. If I’m not mistaken, wasn’t it recently reported that one of Rehab’s senior executives was earning close to a quarter of a million?. How could this be?. What justification could there possibly be for plundering a charity of its financial resources to this unmelodic tune?. I don’t smell a rat as such. It’s much more like the smell of a new car, or, the scent of expensive Egyptian cotton sheets, or maybe the smell of first class air travel, or luxurious hotels, or fine dining, or the taste of fine wine?. I wouldn’t know, because I am unfamiliar with these scents. My guess is, that I am smelling the increasingly familiar stench of hypocracy and usury. I should add that in no way do I mean my comments to be directed at the personality mentioned in the above article. I do however, suspect that there are some within these organisations that are attracted to overpaid positions, not because of charitable concern, but rather because of personal greed. And possibly also because of a serious and callous personality disorder.
Well Popsicle ,he gave to the poor unlike the last couple of taoisigh who took from the poor and still are and for what 250 k per annum . He deserved it he set it up
I know you shouldn’t judge book by its cover, but he doesn’t even look like a charity person to me lol. By the way, does anybody know what is the deal with those charity people stopping you for a chat in the city centre? Sometimes they are more pushy than street merchandisers in Egypt. I know its their job so I’m never rude to them, but its seriously annoying at times.
And what does a charitable person look like then?
There is alot of speculation here about this man living the high life.
Can we have some of the statements backed up by facts. That seems reasonable doesn’t it?
You may well be right Gerard. I remember during the early eighties, a friend of mine was selling raffle tickets, for a pound, of which, she got twenty per cent and the rest went to the owner of the charity. During that period, he was only obliged to hand over one per cent of his “earnings”.to the charity. That meant that seventy nine per cent went into his pocket. The charity got one per cent. The sellers got twenty per cent. Because of the charitable status, tax was only paid on the one per cent. Negligible. To refer back to your point, if a charity was modestly successful and earned a million, then two hundred grand would not have to be accounted for. This is the rich and ripe plucking ground for the socially adept psychopath. They live for that twenty per cent that does not have to be accounted for. While doing so, they will destroy everybody and everything that gets in their way, without remorse, without conscience.
Please somebody correct me if I’m wrong but I think I once heard that once you are running a legal charity you are only obliged to hand over 80% for charity causes, the rest you get to keep. Like I said, please correct me if I’m wrong
This article claims he earned 98k a year:
http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/how-much-does-giving-really-cost-2161786.html
Any registered charity should be forced to have full disclosure of all their accounts. All salaries, expenses etc should be public.
Read half this article before I realised it wasn’t John O’ Shea the footballer, how disappointed I was :)
Or perhaps if he wasn’t paying himself as much as we thought we would be very disappointed as we wouldn’t be able to point score.
Facts please.
What caused all the deformities in children around the Chernobyl area then William?..
have your say