Header Ad Module



No announcement yet.

We know what is squeezing the life out of the rental market

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Perry View Post
    They are just numbers, in a sense. As has been observed, LLs have to 'meet the market,' like any other product or service vendor.

    LLs can only obtain $500 for what in reality may only be a $380 product when there is insufficient competition because there is a shortage of $380 products.

    The $500 buyer and seller are willing, but the market price is a response to duress.

    The current gummint's immigration reduction targets and fantasies like kiwibuild are intended to redress that shortage duress.

    If successful, it will not be possible to obtain $500 for a $380 product.

    Meanwhile, back in the drones' house, the blame game rages on . . . .
    I totally agree.
    One of the problems with this (undersupply leading to ability to overcharge) is the optics to the general public.
    When the press show disgusting properties they are often rented for 'over the odds' leading to an outcry.
    If the shit properties were offered at a shit price then there would be some defence - that there is a market for them from people happy (??) to pay little because they got 'value'.
    Now I know that is a bit idealistic. I know the press would still show the shit properties and not mention the rent but PIs would have a defensible position that they are meeting the market much as $2 shops do (and the Warehouse did more than it does now).

    While there is this market distortion of not enough houses allowing people to charge above the odds (but market rate because someone in the market is paying it) we'll continue to get hammered and struggle to defend.


    • What makes the product $380? Why not $200? Or $300? Or $85?


      • Market forces, vendor need and buyer need.


        • Originally posted by Don't believe the Hype View Post
          What makes the product $380? Why not $200? Or $300? Or $85?
          generally the price to produce or replace it

          renting is expensive because housing is expensive

          + housing is expensive because councils are out of their depth...
          have you defeated them?
          your demons


          • Originally posted by Don't believe the Hype View Post
            What makes the product $380? Why not $200? Or $300? Or $85?

            Oh, good question.

            What gives a thing value?

            To answer this you need to say what creature you are talking about.

            In this case its still okay to look at the monkey brain.

            Well, perhaps not the brain, perhaps we need to break the monkey down into little Lego block type pieces called cells.

            A thing has higher value if the monkey cell needs it to continue its existence.

            So water for example has a high value when the cell is deflating through lack of it.

            Fish don't value water as much as monkeys, because they had the good sense to stay in it.

            The equation of value is somewhat more complicated in the monkey brain because its a more complex collection, and is in fact part of its tribe.


            • Bringing back price or value to a human perspective.
              (a single person that is, not a community or organisation).

              Most people do a simple procedure to figure out the value of a thing.

              First they go to their memory to see what they paid for it last time.

              Then they compare the quantity and quality of the thing to the memory of the last time the bought that type of thing..

              Then they add some because they expect price inflation.

              If the numbers on the price tag are lower, they feel they are getting a bargain.
              If they are a bit higher then they moan about price creep.
              If they are really high, they may not buy because the seller is probably the creep.


              • Crackdown on mouldy rental homes, as 1947 law shows its teeth
                2 August 2018

                Originally posted by Stuff
                The Tenancy Tribunal is cracking down on damp rental properties with the help of a law from 70 years ago. A little known law from 1947 saying homes must be "free from dampness" was unearthed in a 2015 study by law academics and is now being used by the tribunal to vigorously clamp down on damp and mouldy rental properties. Bryan and Skye Donnelly were awarded $2000 in damages by the tribunal last month for dampness and mould found at a Mt Eden unit they rented from Alison Joy Edwards.


                • So they're saying tenants can just close all windows, dry laundry inside and turn on a gas heater and week later apply to TT?


                  • Originally posted by AlFa View Post
                    So they're saying tenants can just close all windows, dry laundry inside and turn on a gas heater and week later apply to TT?
                    Almost seems like that doesn't it.
                    You'd hope that the devil is in the detail of each case.


                    • The next step will be a LL fined for failing to keep a rental warm, despite supplying a heat source.


                      • Originally posted by Perry View Post
                        The next step will be a LL fined for failing to keep a rental warm, despite supplying a heat source.
                        No problem Perry. Landlord installs a smartphone app that monitors temperature in every room and automagically turns on the heating full bore until the whole property meets the required temperature. Tenant pays the power bill of course, and also the increased rent for all the monitoring and heating sources. What fun eh!

                        It was reported recently that in Ashford Borough Council in the UK there are huuuuge fines for landlords where a doesn't fix heating systems within a few days if there is a baby there. And that one large private landlord plans a programme of evictions where a baby is on the way.

                        In NZ the Healthy Homes Guarantee Act standards probably won't go that far. Interesting to see how practical any new standards are and what unintended consequences follow.


                        • I had one renter that managed to turn a nice fresh place into a damp mouldy cave.

                          They just had lots of plants and watered them each day and never opened the windows for ventilation.

                          Their lifestyle was up and out early , back late and away most weekends.

                          Assuming they couldn't change their habits, I suppose some sort of ventilation was in order.

                          Trouble was, I had never even seen that sort of thing before.

                          This is where being an experienced landlord is an advantage.


                          • Maybe landlords will need to go in at 4am to stoke the fire and prepare breakfast.

                            That'd be a turn around.


                            • Of the same era as the infamous 'fire or approved heating' requirement. When will these people realise that these laws were written for a different time with different lifestyles and technologies? It was pretty much a given, then, that people would heat their houses with a roaring, drying fire in the colder months and have the windows and doors flung open during the warmer ones. Therefore, any dampness was almost certainly to be a fault of the house.
                              The whole thing needs to be updated for modern living, with consultation from all stakeholders and not just the lefty academics.
                              My blog. From personal experience.


                              • The lefty academics are the only ones who have unlimited time and unlimited (Government) funding.
                                The rest of us are too busy scratching a living.