asked the Minister for Local Government if he is aware that Dublin Corporation valuers of tenant purchase houses in Cabra have divided applications for valuations into arbitrary lots of 2,000; that the valuations arrived at vary greatly from one group of 2,000 to the next; and that the situation is causing great concern amongst the applicants; and if in view of the widespread concern he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Dublin Corporation Tenant Purchase Schemes.
118.
I am not so aware. The administration of their approved sales scheme is a matter for the corporation. I understand, however, that because of the large number of purchase applications received the corporation decided to have the houses valued in lots by reference to the dates of application. The valuations would naturally vary because of the different house-types, dates of applications to purchase, and the location of the houses.
Is the Minister aware that valuations were grouped in 2,000 lots and that the valuation of a house valued on the 30th April and that of a house valued on the 1st May, similar in structure and size, vary by as much as £500?
House valuations have increased consistently over the past number of years. The Deputy is referring to valuations carried out at different times and there is of course a difference in the valuation.
There was an increase from £800 to £1,300 on houses valued between 30th April and 1st May. An overnight increase of 50 per cent appears to the people to be very unjust. Will the Minister investigate this matter?
There is no need to investigate the matter. I have answered the Deputy's question. The question the Deputy asked was whether houses were divided into arbitrary lots for valuation purposes. This is not so. Houses were grouped together into lots determined by the dates of applications, valuations were carried out at different times. Some were valued before 1st April, 1969 and some were valued after that date. There was an increase in the valuation of the houses because of inflation. This seems to be a factor which we have lived with for quite some time. Local authorities when making a sale scheme are obliged under statute to make these houses available to the tenants who are anxious to purchase at a price related to the current market value or replacement value of the house.
I thank the Minister for his informative reply. The Minister is aware of the apparent injustice in the increase from the 30th March to the 1st April. The arbitrary division of these houses into groups of 2,000 does not appear to be just to the people involved. Private houses have appreciated in value over the last ten years by 85 per cent and corporation houses, by virtue of what the Minister has said have appreciated by 50 per cent overnight.
The Deputy is quoting figures; I have not quoted any. I do not know which houses the Deputy has in mind or what the valuations of those houses are. The Deputy must not quote me as supporting the statement he has made relating to the figures he has mentioned.
Will the Minister say whether he proposes to meet the National Tenants Organisation Executive Committee to discuss this with them because the matter is causing a great deal of unrest in the area?
As I indicated to the National Tenants Organisation when I met them in July last, a further meeting is to take place and this is certainly one of the matters which can be discussed at this meeting.
These people feel the situation has reached such a stage that they were carrying placards outside this House yesterday. I have attended numerous meetings. I promised these people I would ask the Minister a question and I told them I felt quite sure I would receive a reasonable explanation or at least an undertaking that the matter would be investigated.
119.
asked the Minister for Local Government if purchase houses in Finglas West, Dublin, are at present occupied on foot of a caretaker policy agreement; if he will state the length of time the intending purchasers will have to wait before commencing repayments from their loan; and if he intends advising local authorities to offset rent instalments against loan repayments.
120.
asked the Minister for Local Government if rents are being accepted by Dublin Corporation in Finglas West from people who have paid full deposit and fees to enable them obtain the keys of their houses.
With your permission, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 119 and 120 together.
I understand that the corporation have permitted persons to whom purchase houses have been allocated in Finglas West to occupy the houses under caretaker agreements, pending the issue of their loans by building societies and assurance companies, in return for payment by the purchasers of amounts necessary to cover loan and other charges which have to be met by the corporation in respect of the houses. This facility is made available by arrangement between the corporation and the purchasers and I have no function in the matter.
The amount of time that would elapse before purchasers would commence loan payments would depend on the date on which individual sales are closed.
Is the Minister aware that certain corporation caretaker tenants have been in Finglas West purchase houses for over 12 months during which time they have been paying rent? Will the Minister issue a directive that the rent which was paid will be offset against the repayment of their loans?
They are not paying rent to the corporation, they are only making a payment necessary to cover the loan charges and other charges which arise.
Does the Minister agree that one of the basic reasons for this disgraceful situation is the continuation——
The Deputy is not asking a question.
——of non-fixed price contracts whereby schemes take two years to complete during which time the builders keep putting up the prices and local authority tenants have to go in under caretaker agreements because the local authorities do not know the charges they are going to face by the time the contract is completed.
We are aware there is a need for a certain tightening up in this matter.
It is one of the biggest inflationary factors we have.
Am I to take it that the people who move into these houses under caretaker agreements are not paying any money?
I do not mind what the Deputy takes out of it.
Is the Minister aware that these people are paying up to £6 a week to the corporation under the caretaker rental agreement? As far as these people are concerned this is money down the drain.
When the time arrives and the final cost is known will the Minister treat this retrospectively and regard the money that has already been paid as repayments in the normal way?
I do not imagine I would have any legal powers to do that, irrespective of whether I wished to do it. It should be appreciated that the corporation have facilitated these people by allowing them into the houses. These people are only paying the loan charges which arise in respect of the cost of building the houses.
They save the necessity of employing a night-watchman and a corporation official to prevent squatting and in this way these people are doing the corporation a service.
121.
asked the Minister for Local Government if he is aware that many would-be tenant-purchasers of Dublin Corporation houses have been informed by that corporation that they may not now purchase their houses at prices previously quoted to them, notwithstanding delays of several months on the part of the corporation in processing applications; if, having regard to the prohibitive increases in prices imposed by reason of the corporation's attitude, he will intervene; and, if not, why.
122.
asked the Minister for Local Government if he is aware that the Dublin city valuer has increased the value of tenant purchase houses in Dublin Corporation estates to intending purchasers by up to sixty-five per cent in eighteen months as a result of which the objects of the tenant purchase schemes are being defeated; and if he will take steps to remedy the situation.
With your permission, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 121 and 122 together.
A local authority are not required to make a scheme for the sale of their houses. If they do decide to make a scheme they are under a statutory obligation to base their prices on the market, or replacement, value of the houses. They may, however, allow tenants a discount of up to 30 per cent for houses in built-up areas.
Dublin Corporation made their original sale scheme in 1968 on the basis of estimates of values then current. It was approved in the same year. The corporation notified tenants who expressed interest in buying, of these prices and allowed a year from the date of this notification for the tenant to decide to purchase.
A number of tenants who bought at these prices resold their houses for prices up to two hundred per cent more than the price they had paid. This, in the corporation's view, established clearly that the prices in the original scheme required revision to bring them into conformity with the law. They had, therefore, no alternative but to carry out this revision and did so with effect from the 1st April, 1969. Sales, however, continued to be made on the original basis to persons who have accepted the corporation's firm price offer to sell within the time limit laid down for acceptance.
The prices in the new scheme, approved in June, 1970, are based on estimates of market value made by the corporation's own valuers and supported by valuation made independently by a firm of professional valuers. They compare favourably for tenants with the prices obtained by tenants who bought their houses from the corporation within the past two years and resold them on the open market. Because tenants who expressed interest in buying in the year ended 31st March, 1970, were not notified in that year of the price at which the corporation could sell, I agreed to the corporation's proposal in the interest of these tenants that, in these cases, the market value would be that operating at the time of valuation, or in the quarter in which the purchase application was made, whichever is the lower, provided it is within 10 per cent of the market value of the scheme.
I do not accept that the objects of the tenant purchase scheme are being defeated. The revised prices have been notified by the corporation to about 2,600 tenants within the last two months approximately. Although those tenants have a year in which to accept the corporation's offer, more than one in three has already agreed to purchase. I would not consider that other tenants who genuinely want to buy have anything to gain by waiting.
I may add that the first aim of a housing authority is not to provide houses for those who can afford to buy them; it is to build houses for letting to persons without decent accommodation and who cannot afford to buy. By selling houses local authorities lessen their ability to do this since the more houses they sell the less they will have available for letting to persons in need. I have, however, in the interests of tenants with a genuine desire to purchase, encouraged sale schemes on the basis of market, or replacement, value less the appropriate discounts. The use of capital from these sales to finance the provision of other houses helps local authorities to ensure that sales do not, in fact, impede the attainment of the authority's first aim of housing persons lacking proper accommodation.
The remaining questions will appear on next Tuesday's Order Paper except where Deputies are prepared to take written answers.
The Dáil adjourned at 5.5 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Tuesday, 10th November, 1970.