Should the banks wait longer before starting possession proceedings?

merlynthewizard

At the moment they can start after 2 payments are missed but they virtually never do. These are very difficult times and people missing payments

BobbyD10

In the UK the RBS group has guaranteed not to repossess the properties of customers who fall behind on payments for at least six months.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7757840.stm

Blackjack

Gilmore's populist nonsense about giving a 2 year holiday moratorium is definetly the wrong idea. That's basically a ticket for people to not bother paying a mortgage and to be protected for it.

The_Conductor

If you have a problem making your repaying- don't stick your head in the sand, like an ostrich, approach your lender and talk to them. Also contact MABS and organise your finances.

Its these people who hope all their problems are going to be magic'ed away who are hoping for a bail out. Why should the banks not foreclose on property in arrears? They are commercial businesses, not charities.

The 2 year moratorium on repossessions proposed by the Greens is ludicrous political pandering to the masses (keep in mind the local and EU elections next year)..........

Victor

I think they should be quicker to be honest.

Ste.phen

Victor wrote: »

I think they should be quicker to be honest.

Agreed, the damage that would be caused to the economy at large if it became widely known that you won't lose your home if you stop paying your mortgage would be immense,

Fatloss08

Ste.phen wrote: »

Agreed, the damage that would be caused to the economy at large if it became widely known that you won't lose your home if you stop paying your mortgage would be immense,

and what about the government giving €200m xmas bonus to dole people ???

or more give money from the spongers , sure why work these days if there gonna pay for you not to , and why pay foreigners childrens allowance when there claiming it in there own countries

government needs to look after the workers not the spongers or foreigners

The_Conductor

Fatloss08 wrote: »

and what about the government giving €200m xmas bonus to dole people ???

I agree this is wrong.
Workers don't get a Christmas bonus- we are expected to borrow to cover our additional costs (or do the intelligent thing and save in advance). Its hard for everyone. The Irish social welfare system is incredibly generous, and particularly for lower paid people, a massive disincentive to working. For those on middle incomes or better- there is a massive resentment at the perception that they are subsidising wastrels who really couldn't be bothered to find themselves something meaningful to do.

Fatloss08

or young single mothers

why save for a house , just have a kid and the social will pay for it and then move ur bf in

free house practically

we let go a few foreign workers 3 weeks ago , and there in poland getting dole money for a year lodged into their account

i know this as fact as he showed me the documentation that the social sent him , so he gets paid benefits for a year and he aint even here ??????

what the fook ????????????????

The_Conductor

I think we'll leave that topic where it is. If you want to discuss this- there is a forum dedicated to social welfare here.

Regards,

SMcCarrick

Fatloss08

well on the repossesion thing

banks shouldnt be allowed to

they created the mess , buy giving mortgages to people who didnt qualify for a mortgage , i borrowed 305k and i checked and i needed to earn 140k a year to get that on my own , but i earn half of that but they still gave me it , so its their own fault and the banks want tax payers money used to bail them out so they can screw us more ???

ehh no

asdasd

For those on middle incomes or better- there is a massive resentment at the perception that they are subsidising wastrels who really couldn't be bothered to find themselves something meaningful to do.

Some of these middle income boyos will be on the dole next year, or for some part of it. maybe even me.

thus attitudes will change.

The_Conductor

asdasd wrote: »

Some of these middle income boyos will be on the dole next year, or for some part of it. maybe even me.

thus attitudes will change.

I agree- there is no such thing as a safe job anymore. They are even suggesting making between 10 and 20% of public sector worker redundant- something no-one ever considered. A lot of people who never ever anticipated themselves relying on social welfare will end up on the dole queues.

BendiBus

Fatloss08 wrote: »

well on the repossesion thing

banks shouldnt be allowed to

they created the mess , buy giving mortgages to people who didnt qualify for a mortgage , i borrowed 305k and i checked and i needed to earn 140k a year to get that on my own , but i earn half of that but they still gave me it , so its their own fault and the banks want tax payers money used to bail them out so they can screw us more ???

ehh no

You chose to accept the offer. Caveat emptor.

The_Conductor

BendiBus wrote: »

You chose to accept the offer. Caveat emptor.

Very true. A shocking number of people made what is the biggest financial decision of their lives without ever reading the fine print of what they were signing....... It is unreasonable and unrealistic to expect to be bailed out. Apart from anything else- the money simply is not there to bailout people who got carried away with irrational exuberance about the economy...... Perhaps they might pay a little less heed to politicians and the media next time round, and actually put a bit of research into their actions........

Fatloss08

so its the buyers fault

cop on , some need to get a life

a bank is ment to be one of the safest financial institutes

they should be more responsible end off , the buyer or public will always try get more if they can , and always will

its up to the banks to say no sorry

instead of saying yes please

good business practice from there end , they no better than the consumer

The_Conductor

Not so.
A bank is a business like any other business- and is ultimately responsible to its shareholders, not its customers. It would be doing its shareholders a disservice were it to simply allow people park their debts. Certainly they should be prudent about their lending practices- in order to safeguard the interests of the shareholders- not to mollycoddle the poor people looking for mortgages. If people lied about their income (and many did) those people are at fault for having done so- the local bank manager is not a psychic. The expectation that the good times would continue was not an unreasonable expectation at the time- the probability of house prices continuing to rise at stratospheric rates is entirely a different matter. Could the various cards that ultimately contributed to the downfall of the economy all have been foreseen to fall in the manner they did? Highly unlikely. Who is at fault- everyone, not just the crazy bankers who shoveled out the money like there was no tomorrow. Who will shoulder the burden of paying for the mess- everyone too....... Why should the banks allow people to park their debts and walk away? I can't walk down to the local Jag dealer, take an XJS for a week and then park it on the forecourt and take the bus to town instead. Its just not how things work. If difficulties were isolated- perhaps the individual cases could be looked at in isolation. They aren't though. There are problems everywhere- businesses are just trying to cover their backs. I am sympathetic to the people who find themselves in these situations- but bloody hell- they should have been more prudent.

asdasd

and is ultimately responsible to its shareholders, not its customers

What if its shareholders include us, We the People. As seems likely.

By the way if a mortgage defaults does the debtor still owe the money, or is the asset good enough? I think in American you just hand in your keys. In England it seems you are liable for the debt.

anybody know?

Fatloss08

yes many people lied not hiding that fact , but there should be more secure methods ie 6 month account statement in order to obtain or have any reasonable idea of what somebodys earning

ive friends who lied and provided a statement contradicting what they said they where on , still got mortgage , why is that , have they not got morals or set practice to adhere to ???

if ye dont got the funds ye get no house , plain and simple , we wouldnt be in this mess were in

i didnt lie , gave them statements and poyslips ( correct ones ) showing €70k , did they turn me down when i should have 140k wages ???? no

everybody chances their arm be honest , it will always be this way , people looking for more wages etc but u have to say no is no at some point and the banks didnt

The_Conductor

asdasd wrote: »

What if its shareholders include us, We the People. As seems likely.

By the way if a mortgage defaults does the debtor still owe the money, or is the asset good enough? I think in American you just hand in your keys. In England it seems you are liable for the debt.

anybody know?

In Ireland the asset is insufficient- the debt must be repaid in full and final settlement, in order to be extinguished. This might not necessarily mean the whole debt, but an agreed sum, be repaid in lieu. A persons salary and pension contributions can be purloined indefinitely to satisfy the debt (if personal bankruptcy is declared). Irish laws are incredibly out of date in this respect- and desperately in need of updating.

The_Conductor

Fatloss08 wrote: »

everybody chances their arm be honest , it will always be this way , people looking for more wages etc but u have to say no is no at some point and the banks didnt

Not everyone chances their arm- no.
Perhaps the current situation is a learning experience for people- they should sit down and work out what they can afford to pay- before blindly feeding financial institutions false information in order to secure additional cash.

I am not picking on you in particular- the whole country went on a mad credit binge- even the sanest of people went out and bought their 40" plasma and lcd panels- and new cars like they were going out of production. Some people had a little more sanity than others- but most people at the end of the day, when the dust settles, have to accept, that the position they find themselves in was percipitated by their own actions.

Ps- I borrowed more money than I am now comfortable repaying too- I'm far from innocent, I don't pretend to be.

seamus

smccarrick wrote: »

Perhaps the current situation is a learning experience for people- they should sit down and work out what they can afford to pay- before blindly feeding financial institutions false information in order to secure additional cash.

It's a learning experience for a lot of us. The assumption was that the money would keep coming and if we didn't get a bumper payrise next year, we could jump jobs to something with better pay. Now we'd be lucky for either scenario to appear.

Ultimately, we'll just have to put the head down, work hard and spend frugally. It'll be fine, we'll adjust. Ultimately none of use will end up dead or living on the streets, so if it does go down the crapper, it's not the end of the world.

I don't think Gilmore's suggestion is that stupid, though I haven't heard the whoel thing.

I wouldn't condone it as a get out of jail free card for people who aren't making their repayments, but if it could be used as a period where someone could restructure their debt without having to panic about not having the cash.

Ideally, the person shows the court that they will/should have sufficient means to restructure their debt, and the court issues an instruction to the ICB to put a freeze on their record.
This prevents any other lenders from providing money to the person and also freezes credit cards and overdrafts.
The person then uses the two years to repay their other debts (the bank can get involved and advise if they wish). At the end of the two years, the expectation would be that they've cleared most if not all of their extra debts and all they need to service is the mortgage.
It should also include an additional five-year freeze in the ICB record which prevents the person from getting personal loans and caps credit cards - maximum of one card (per family) with a limit of no more than €500 - and overdrafts @ €250.

Obviously if the person's situation seems hopeless, the court can reject the application.

The main concern with any kind of moratorium is that it only serves really to put off the inevitable and prolong the pain, which is why I thought of the above.

jimmycrackcorm

smccarrick wrote: »

Not everyone chances their arm- no.
Perhaps the current situation is
I am not picking on you in particular- the whole country went on a mad credit binge- even the sanest of people went out and bought their 40" plasma and lcd panels- and new cars like they were going out of production

Guilty as charged too but then I've a good salary. The problem comes only if I lose my job and can't get another. Then, whether or not I went and bought a new car or plasma tv is irrelevant as either way my mortgage is in danger regardless.

AARRRGH

Fatloss08 wrote: »

banks shouldnt be allowed to, they created the mess, by giving mortgages to people who didnt qualify for a mortgage

Bull****.

Haven't you ever heard of personal responsibility?

I would never apply and accept a mortgage of one million because I know I can't afford the repayments.

The fools who took on too much debt - they should lose their homes if they can't afford to live there.

People need to stop looking for someone to blame. The problems in your life are your own fault. Take the blame and sort out your life.

SimpleSam06

smccarrick wrote: »

I am not picking on you in particular- the whole country went on a mad credit binge- even the sanest of people went out and bought their 40" plasma and lcd panels- and new cars like they were going out of production.

Not everyone. I have a forty grand overdraft facility on one of my accounts alone, and I never touched it, owe nothing to anybody. Maybe I was lucky, maybe I was frugal and prudent, take your pick, but my commercial enterprises are struggling with the rest of the economy because the people I do business with, like most other people, depend on credit. At this point I'm looking at going turtle on it, just locking up and heading off to the tropics for a few years rather than trying to tough it out.

Either that or get into politics.

AARRRGH wrote: »

I would never apply and accept a mortgage of one million because I know I can't afford the repayments.

In an environment where houses were growing at double figures annually, its hard to blame people for taking risks. Its hard to blame the banks too, because they were acting within the regulatory framework given to them - they didn't break any laws. Its easy to blame the lawmakers, however.

AARRRGH

SimpleSam06 wrote: »

In an environment where houses were growing at double figures annually, its hard to blame people for taking risks. Its hard to blame the banks too, because they were acting within the regulatory framework given to them - they didn't break any laws. Its easy to blame the lawmakers, however.

I think people should accept responsibility for themselves. They were the ones who filled in the application form, and they were the ones who took the money.

Blaming the banks and Government is a cop out. (Note, I don't think the bank and Government are innocent, but no one was forcing people to take on debt they can't afford.)

SimpleSam06

AARRRGH wrote: »

but no one was forcing people to take on debt they can't afford.

As far as they knew, they could. I mean if worst came to worst, they could always sell their property for a profit, right?

Fatloss08

AARRRGH wrote: »

Bull****.

Haven't you ever heard of personal responsibility? of course , shouldnt they for being gun ho with throwing money at people

I would never apply and accept a mortgage of one million because I know I can't afford the repayments. wow ur sensible

The fools who took on too much debt - they should lose their homes if they can't afford to live there. hey pal ever hear of recession ??? its happening u know and some dont have a choice

People need to stop looking for someone to blame. The problems in your life are your own fault. Take the blame and sort out your life.

my life is dandy , earn alot , work for a family business etc

im not blamming anybody , i simply just said that if a bank gives out money without proper precautions they should be thought a lesson ,

better give back my new car and 50" tv and get my life sorted out so

cop on , not always back and white

The_Conductor

Guys- just keep this 1. Ontopic, and 2. Deal in facts, not personal issues. Ok? Cheers- SMcCarrick

AARRRGH

Fatloss08 wrote: »

my life is dandy , earn alot , work for a family business etc

im not blamming anybody , i simply just said that if a bank gives out money without proper precautions they should be thought a lesson ,

better give back my new car and 50" tv and get my life sorted out so

cop on , not always back and white

Blaming others for your own actions is a recipe for a life of disappointment.

People made mistakes - that's fine. And I have a lot of sympathy for people who are struggling (even if it was their own stupidity which caused them to buy that two bed apartment for 500k), but again, they filled in the form and took the money. By choice.

So if they are in debt, they have a responsibility to deal with it.

The_Conductor

Warning.....
No personal abuse.......