FWIW, some observations from my totally anecdotal feeling from the ground (with CATU in Dublin):
- my exp chimes with your main takeaway, ie. a significant increase of evictions without being a “tsunami”;
- my guess is that Q1 2026 will follow a similar trend;
- the unreliability of the RTB data is a huge huge issue. We deal extremely regularly with non-registered tenancies, “licensee” arrangements, etc which do not show up in the data.
That's really interesting Michael, really appreciate it. Yes I agree there is a big issue with the data. A couple of years ago Threshold did a small review of a sample of 200 cases they were working at the time, and over 50% weren't registered. That does not chime with the CSO estimate that unregistered tenancies are quite few.
I wouldn't want to take a stab at estimating the percentage, but I imagine even Threshold cases are not a perfect sample - knowledge of orgs like Threshold is not ubiquitous, and is far LESS common amongst migrants, who (anecdotally at least) seem way more likely to be in an unregistered tenancy arrangement.
Thanks for this analysis, Michael. As you pointed out, we’re clearly seeing a significant increase in eviction notices, with the majority issued on the grounds of property sales. Could this be pushing smaller landlords out of the market and potentially leading to longer-term challenges if the sector becomes increasingly dominated by larger, particularly institutional landlords?
That's a very good question Mansi. I don't know the answer, but some quick reflections:
1. Institutional landlords won't provide housing outside of Dublin, and possibly other cities.
2. If 129 institutional landlords control a third of Dublin tenancies already, and virtually all new supply, that poses a risk of market concentration and potentially ability to set higher than warranted rents. But there is currently no hard evidence that this is happening
3. Institutional landlords are very likely providing a better quality service to tenants. If the rents weren't so high (which is a problem across the sector of course) then this could very well be a good thing. Obviously it will only benefit the more high income tenants, but still a positive if these can access professional, long term rental housing. Especially with the new rules giving life time security of tenure
4. The biggest issue in my view is over-reliance on international capital because this could prove very volatile, e.g. in the context of changing global markets. If the new geo-political context, for example, leads to higher inflation, higher interest rates, and higher yields on zero-risk assets (German government bonds) then it is conceivably that all that money could dry up. The housing system is now dangerously over-reliant on state and international capital. The solution is obviously having domestic finance for development but for some reason the Government don't seem particularly interested in this
Any place where I can get and idiot's guide to Irish landlord-tenant law? I ask because I am a landlord in the US (New York State - huge variation between states and municipalities) and I need some context to compare apples to apples.
My main beef with New York L-T law is that, when dealing with a recalitrant resident, eviction is my only remedy. That is like using nuclear weapons to enforce parking violations - but until the State gives me another remedy, it is the remedy that I need to use.
Not as far as I know John. But in terms of eviction it is pretty similar I think. Landlords have a right to issue an eviction notice almost straight away once a tenant enters into rent arrears. If the tenant doesn't comply the landlord has to take the tenant to a kind of landlord-tenant court (Called the Residential Tenancies Board). The whole process can take quite a long time. Most tenants will comply though.
In the U.S., the amount of protection granted tenants subject to eviction varies significantly state-to-state. Tenants in red states are more vulnerable to eviction than tenants in blue states (in the US, the 'red-blue' metaphor is flipped. 'Red' means 'Republican' and 'Blue' means 'Democratic'. We also drive on the right side of the road). For example, I believe that a landlord in, say, Alabama, can issue a deficiency notice three days after rent is due and the process for getting a court date and executing on a warrant is quite fast. By contrast, in New York State, a so-called 'thirty day notice' can not be served until the end of the month in which rent is due, and the thirty days referenced therein start from the date of service, not the due date for rent. That said - zoning and permitting is laxer in red states than in blue states. That means that there is a more abundant supply of housing in Alabama than there is in, say, New York or Massachusetts, and housing is cheaper (although query whether it is as-well constructed). Advocates of deregulation say that market forces protect tenants better than the government does. I am curious whether you know of any empirical studies re same.
Cheers for the essential update as always Michael!
FWIW, some observations from my totally anecdotal feeling from the ground (with CATU in Dublin):
- my exp chimes with your main takeaway, ie. a significant increase of evictions without being a “tsunami”;
- my guess is that Q1 2026 will follow a similar trend;
- the unreliability of the RTB data is a huge huge issue. We deal extremely regularly with non-registered tenancies, “licensee” arrangements, etc which do not show up in the data.
That's really interesting Michael, really appreciate it. Yes I agree there is a big issue with the data. A couple of years ago Threshold did a small review of a sample of 200 cases they were working at the time, and over 50% weren't registered. That does not chime with the CSO estimate that unregistered tenancies are quite few.
I wouldn't want to take a stab at estimating the percentage, but I imagine even Threshold cases are not a perfect sample - knowledge of orgs like Threshold is not ubiquitous, and is far LESS common amongst migrants, who (anecdotally at least) seem way more likely to be in an unregistered tenancy arrangement.
Thanks for this analysis, Michael. As you pointed out, we’re clearly seeing a significant increase in eviction notices, with the majority issued on the grounds of property sales. Could this be pushing smaller landlords out of the market and potentially leading to longer-term challenges if the sector becomes increasingly dominated by larger, particularly institutional landlords?
That's a very good question Mansi. I don't know the answer, but some quick reflections:
1. Institutional landlords won't provide housing outside of Dublin, and possibly other cities.
2. If 129 institutional landlords control a third of Dublin tenancies already, and virtually all new supply, that poses a risk of market concentration and potentially ability to set higher than warranted rents. But there is currently no hard evidence that this is happening
3. Institutional landlords are very likely providing a better quality service to tenants. If the rents weren't so high (which is a problem across the sector of course) then this could very well be a good thing. Obviously it will only benefit the more high income tenants, but still a positive if these can access professional, long term rental housing. Especially with the new rules giving life time security of tenure
4. The biggest issue in my view is over-reliance on international capital because this could prove very volatile, e.g. in the context of changing global markets. If the new geo-political context, for example, leads to higher inflation, higher interest rates, and higher yields on zero-risk assets (German government bonds) then it is conceivably that all that money could dry up. The housing system is now dangerously over-reliant on state and international capital. The solution is obviously having domestic finance for development but for some reason the Government don't seem particularly interested in this
Any place where I can get and idiot's guide to Irish landlord-tenant law? I ask because I am a landlord in the US (New York State - huge variation between states and municipalities) and I need some context to compare apples to apples.
My main beef with New York L-T law is that, when dealing with a recalitrant resident, eviction is my only remedy. That is like using nuclear weapons to enforce parking violations - but until the State gives me another remedy, it is the remedy that I need to use.
Not as far as I know John. But in terms of eviction it is pretty similar I think. Landlords have a right to issue an eviction notice almost straight away once a tenant enters into rent arrears. If the tenant doesn't comply the landlord has to take the tenant to a kind of landlord-tenant court (Called the Residential Tenancies Board). The whole process can take quite a long time. Most tenants will comply though.
In the U.S., the amount of protection granted tenants subject to eviction varies significantly state-to-state. Tenants in red states are more vulnerable to eviction than tenants in blue states (in the US, the 'red-blue' metaphor is flipped. 'Red' means 'Republican' and 'Blue' means 'Democratic'. We also drive on the right side of the road). For example, I believe that a landlord in, say, Alabama, can issue a deficiency notice three days after rent is due and the process for getting a court date and executing on a warrant is quite fast. By contrast, in New York State, a so-called 'thirty day notice' can not be served until the end of the month in which rent is due, and the thirty days referenced therein start from the date of service, not the due date for rent. That said - zoning and permitting is laxer in red states than in blue states. That means that there is a more abundant supply of housing in Alabama than there is in, say, New York or Massachusetts, and housing is cheaper (although query whether it is as-well constructed). Advocates of deregulation say that market forces protect tenants better than the government does. I am curious whether you know of any empirical studies re same.