Results 12,981-13,000 of 16,849 for speaker:Dermot Ahern

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Dermot Ahern: This is a technical amendment which inserts the word "lease" into the definition of transfer of ownership. Deeds of transfer, conveyance and assignment are already included.

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Dermot Ahern: We considered this but we believe section 2(2)() already caters for this. It is already clear that the section applies to any person who is the owner of common areas in a multi-unit development, which would in most cases mean the developer.

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Dermot Ahern: I do not consider it appropriate to make such provision in this section. I can understand the concerns behind the amendment and I will consider whether it would be possible to include a requirement along these lines in another section before Report Stage.

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Dermot Ahern: This is a technical amendment that deletes the word "entire". In some developments, one person or company may not own all of the common areas of a development.

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Dermot Ahern: Is this being taken with any other amendment?

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Dermot Ahern: This relates to the 5% of the purchase price being withheld. This was considered by an interdepartmental group which was set up to look at the Law Reform Commission recommendations. At the time the group sat - it is some time ago - it came to the conclusion that a developer might react by simply increasing the sales price by 5% and it would prove completely ineffective in securing...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Dermot Ahern: We are ad idem with regard to what we want to be achieved, namely, that all developments will be completed - either on a phased basis or in toto - in a proper way. We considered what the Law Reform Commission had to say about this matter and a question arises as to how it arrived at a figure of 5%. Senator Coffey stated people would be willing to pay money into these trust funds if they...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Dermot Ahern: The Senator is correct. He and I entered the Houses on the same day. In my experience, on any occasion when a housing grant or other change was introduced, developers took the money and then increased the purchase price accordingly. Purchasers and those in the wider community did not, therefore, enjoy the benefit of the grants made available. I hazard a guess that developers would discount...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Dermot Ahern: I understand why the architects and engineers are supportive of the amendment - there is business in it for them.

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Dermot Ahern: Then there would be a statutory requirement for them to give certificates of completion. They would not come cheaply. We have all been lobbied by various groups. We have to understand where they are coming from. If one were to adopt a measure such as the amendment proposes, independent certification of the completion would be required. The Law Reform Commission does not investigate the...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Dermot Ahern: Perhaps because the 5% is pretty clear. It is actual money. Local authorities did not require proper bonding and then it took housing estates in charge in cases of non-compliance or non-completion. The local authority bonding system related to a different type of circumstance. It was devised for traditional housing estate developments. Non-completion involved roads and footpaths. By and...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Dermot Ahern: Amendment No. 23 is a technical amendment clarifying a cross-reference in subsection (4). Amendment agreed to.

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Dermot Ahern: I cannot accept the amendment because the section is designed to cover new developments only. Provision has been made in sections 3 and 4, respectively, for completed and semi-completed developments. The way we have structured the Bill takes care of new developments and semi-completed developments.

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Dermot Ahern: Preventing a developer from retaining a unit for his own legitimate purposes may very well infringe his property rights under the Constitution. What the Senator is trying to do is to combat the practice whereby a developer would retain a unit thereby preventing the management company from taking over the common areas. That will no longer be possible following the enactment of the...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Dermot Ahern: I am not altogether certain that the Senator's proposal would achieve what she desires. I stated previously that I would consider the possibility of mandating in the legislation some form of basic information that would have to be given to purchasers on purchasing in order that they knew of their rights, entitlements and duties vis-À-vis the management company. I am not altogether sure....

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Dermot Ahern: Yes.

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Dermot Ahern: The purpose of the technical amendments Nos. 27 and 33 is to ensure all ownership interests held by the developer, including the reversion, are transferred to the owners' management company. I understand that as amendment No. 28 has the same purpose, it will not be required if amendments Nos. 27 and 33 are accepted.

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Dermot Ahern: Section 3 deals with developments in which some units have been sold but the development has not been completed. The words, "Except where the multi-unit development has been completed", in section 3(2) are superfluous and amendment No. 29 proposes to delete them. Amendment No. 30 proposes the deletion of subsection (2) from the section. As this would mean that the developer would no longer...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Dermot Ahern: The Labour Party amendment proposes to delete all of subsection (2) which would then delete the necessity for the merging of the beneficial interest with the legal interest. I believe the deletion of the words as proposed in my amendment deals with the situation I am trying to address, that is, the transfer of developments in which some units have been sold but the development has not been...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Dermot Ahern: Section 4 imposes an obligation on a developer to transfer the common areas in substantially completed developments to the owners' management company within six months of the enactment of legislation. I do not perceive any need to delay such a transfer by requiring certification by a professional person. There is a risk that this would provide an excuse for the developer not to proceed with...