Ciò costituisce un precedente pericoloso. Chi mai ha oggi un reddito tre volte superiore all’affitto? Specialmente a Bruxelles, ma spesso anche ad Anversa? Certo, tutti noi vorremmo spendere solo il 30% del nostro reddito in affitto, ma nella maggior parte dei casi non è la realtà poiché i prezzi degli affitti sono completamente irreali….
https://thebulletin.be/ruling-favour-landlords-over-income-requirements-could-set-legal-precedent
di Tsavkko
15 commenti
I assume it’s shared income?
Het is toch al zo dat je 3x de maandelijkse huur op een rekening blokkeert?
No one on any kind of welfare, sick money or any kind of government money receives cheapest rent x3 income. So that would mean all welfare people can be fully legally denied to rent anything, if the landlord so wishes
It’s pretty sad indeed, in antwerp a normal flat will set you back 800-1000 EUR.
* **Median net salary:** about **€2,500 – €2,700/month**
* **Average net salary:** roughly **€2,400 – €2,900/month**
So yeah, good luck renting, half the belgian population is not welcome in any major cities it seems :’)
Just so people don’t freak out unnecessarily..
Precedent is influential but not formally binding in Belgian law.
De conclusie is dat een verhuurder dat MAG vragen, niet dat hij dat MOET vragen.
It will only become harder to find a rental place. As it stands now i couldn’t put my house with a epc B on the rental market.
It’s a rule that other countries have. And honestly it can drive rent prices down. If landlords don’t find anybody to rent anything they’ll bring down their prices.
Bruh.
Tell me if you find something for rent below 449.08€ (yes that’s 1/3 of my income).
If there is not enough people we fit the criteria those criteria will be lowered. Those landlords want to rent out the property.
Also I think it’s fair to discriminate on income. You should be able to pick the lowest risk candidate
> Who on earth has, nowadays, an income three times higher than the rent?
I had, but my landlord had set the rent very cheap, I was paid well, and that was 10 years ago!
You could argue that it would force rental prices down in certain areas as well.
What’s the fuzz…?
It’s normal to be able to show you’re eligible and able to pay the rent, monthly!
You got to be honest, you can’t expect someone to rent their house out to someone who barely stand woth their nose above water!
The landlords also take risks by putting their good for rent, and if a Tennant doesn’t pay on time or even for months, the landlord may get into trouble himself.
I’ve read the whole decision and it kinda makes sense. There were references to the 3x rule in the travaux préparatoires and no explicit prohibition to use it, so it was not really legal to fine people as it was not established that this requirement is disproportionate.
I think they could put a specific rule in the law (and hope that the constitutional court doesn’t find it disproportionate).
But the rule doesn’t really make sense across all income levels because there are other fixed costs that don’t scale linearly with income. So, if you want to rent a 1000 euro apartment on a 2200 euro salary, you’ll have huge problems because you’ll be left with 1200 euros for your expenses. But if you want to rent a 2500e apartment on a 5000e salary, you still have a whole other salary to live on.
If I’d been the region or their lawyer, I’d have put more emphasis on this and that the little you have in the travaux préparatoires isn’t enough to say that the rule is always appropriate. If I make 10.000 euros a month and rent a 3500 euro apartment, it has no impact on my solvency.
the only thing this ruling shows is how disastrously shit the subs understanding of basic market economics and how the legal system works is in general. that includes you OP