Get you debts written off!

http://www.sbpost.ie/news/debt-writeoff-scheme-agreed-44966.html

The government has agreed to create formal new arrangements which could allow individuals who cannot pay off their personal debts to have a sizeable portion of them written off without going into bankruptcy or losing their home.

Take a look at the range of incomes of the people who will avail of this

http://www.thepropertypin.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1859

voxpop

I dont get this - why is there a push to allow ppl who have gotten into debt to write a big chunk of it off ? I had a large amount of debt over me from college loans, etc. I paid them all off, I had to take a cut in my living standards, but paid everything off none the less.

I didnt buy a house over the past few years because common sense told me that the prices were way too high, 800k for a 3 bed near templeogue!! I dont see why someone with large amounts of debt should suddenly get a part written off. Its their own fault for getting into debt in the first place.

Tipp Man

voxpop wrote: »

I dont get this - why is there a push to allow ppl who have gotten into debt to write a big chunk of it off ? I had a large amount of debt over me from college loans, etc. I paid them all off, I had to take a cut in my living standards, but paid everything off none the less.

I didnt buy a house over the past few years because common sense told me that the prices were way too high, 800k for a 3 bed near templeogue!! I dont see why someone with large amounts of debt should suddenly get a part written off. Its their own fault for getting into debt in the first place.

Agree completly and this is something that i feel very strongly about, I like you looked at house price these last 5-6 years and laughed at how stupid people were to buy these properties, now when the s''t hits the fan these guys are going to have their debts written off is ridiculous. Where has the responsibility for 1's own finances gone?

If this does come to fruitition then let me tell you this country will have learned nothing from the last 7 years of gross overindulgence. For people to simply go out and live like kings and then not suffer the consequences of having to pay them off is mind boggling. Why should i have to pay off my loans when someone else doesn't??

there are very few things that would have me marching in the streets but let me tell you if this happens it is 1 thing i would march about

Dannyboy83

The scheme is only binding if creditors representing 75 per cent of the total debts agree to its terms.

Why would the banks possibly be interested in IVAs when they already have NAMA?
The Government become the creditor, so therefore it will be a bail out for the private homer owner if the government agree to write off a percentage.

So, my tax will be paying for
A) the banks who caused the mess - NAMA
the clients who overborrowed and contributed to the mess - IVAs

Whos getting stuffed?
Me <- the one who was financially responsible and didn't buy a house.

I swear to God, if that happens, the government can either i) agree to give me the deposit for my house, or ii) the banks can lock me into a 0% interest rate.

Or I can just fcuk off to another country where I'm not a peon under the Irish Feudal system.

Dannyboy83

Or failing that, I'll just go have my own little Celtic Tiger and get a bailout next year when the parties over.

hellboy99

What a joke, I should of racked up a load of debt and bought myself an overpriced house. If this goes ahead I would like to get back all of the money I lost in my PRB Fund due to the banks mess.

johnnyskeleton

I know I say this with every new innovation that this government brings in to deal with the crisis, but it seems to me that such a piece of legislation is unconstitutional.

Let's say that I am one of 5 people who are owed money by Joe Soap. We are all owed 20k and Joe owes 100k in total. But, he only has 50k to offer to his creditors in total (or so he says anyway). The other 4 look at it and decide to take the 10k and cut their losses. But I know Joe quite well and know that he has some money stashed away or that he is just about to open up a new business with assets from his wife/son etc. So I say to Joe that I want all my money in full.

However, because such agreements are legally binding if 75% of the creditors agree to it (or whatever amount is ultimately specified in the legislation) I lose my right to sue for the money or seek it against his new business at a later date and so I get shafted (either by being forced to take the 10k or, seeing as it's Ireland, possibly being left out in the cold if I do not accept it). I lose 10k and Joe gets to keep that 10k because he outwitted the other 4 creditors.

This seems to me to violate my right to private property, to enter into contractual arrangements and to enforce same through the courts. Even if it wasn't strictly speaking unconstitutional, I wouldn't be interested in giving anybody an unsecured personal loan because I would lose my right to claim it back if they invoked this new legislation.

johnnyskeleton

voxpop wrote: »

I dont get this - why is there a push to allow ppl who have gotten into debt to write a big chunk of it off ? I had a large amount of debt over me from college loans, etc. I paid them all off, I had to take a cut in my living standards, but paid everything off none the less.

I didnt buy a house over the past few years because common sense told me that the prices were way too high, 800k for a 3 bed near templeogue!! I dont see why someone with large amounts of debt should suddenly get a part written off. Its their own fault for getting into debt in the first place.

Secured personal debts aren't covered it seems, only unsecured debts.

peasant

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Secured personal debts aren't covered it seems, only unsecured debts.

hang on ...hang on ...

So the hard working young family that just about managed to buy an overprized carboard box in the arsehole of nowhere and now can't pay for it due to losing one (or two!) incomes gets a re-negotiaton of their repayment terms so that they don't and up in the street (instead their grandchildren will be paying off the mortgage) ...

but all the smug fucckers who maxxed out on 15 credit cards to buy three new cars and five flat screen TV's get to keep their glitter and walk away grinning even more smugly?

You MUST be kiddin' me :mad:

peasant

peasant wrote: »

hang on ...hang on ...

So the hard working young family that just about managed to buy an overprized carboard box in the arsehole of nowhere and now can't pay for it due to losing one (or two!) incomes gets a re-negotiaton of their repayment terms so that they don't and up in the street (instead their grandchildren will be paying off the mortgage) ...

but all the smug fucckers who maxxed out on 15 credit cards to buy three new cars and five flat screen TV's get to keep their glitter and walk away grinning even more smugly?

You MUST be kiddin' me :mad:

Who says these are different people? Who is being bailed out with NAMA?
Who will be bailed out with this.......... we dont know the full details of this plan yet only an obscure reference to the UK system. I wouldnt be holding out on it being an equitable show at all

peasant

Deleted User wrote: »

Who says these are different people?

Well, the way I see it there were four different kind of people during the property boom:

1) people who stayed out of it and lived prudently and within their means
2) ordinary people, young families, who needed a home and due to our miserable tennancy laws were more or less forced to buy a family home, pretty much regardless of the price
3) ordinary people who lost the run of themselves, believed that they were rich (because the price of thier one and only house had gone up) and went on a spending splurge
4) property speculators ...some of them with the cash to play the market, lots of them without.

If anyone thinks that I (member of group one) will sit quietly while my money is used to bail out the 3's and 4's ...they've got another thing coming

PCPhoto

this is simply the government trying to ensure that they manage to keep their jobs ...claiming we're helping out "the people" too.

if anyone from the government reads this (how about punishing the people responsible instead of being so nice to them - yerselves included)

This country needs serious overhaul - how can our Taoiseach earn so much more than the president of the USA, or even how can our TV presenters earn that much, most of our politicians earn as much as president of USA (if you include their "expenses")

Scofflaw

It's a way of alleviating impossible situations. I'm sure there will turn out to be ways in which it can be abused (isn't everything?), but it's mostly a recognition that recovery becomes all the more difficult if people have a perpetual open liability to their creditors if they can't settle all debts in full.

Taking this example:

Let's say that I am one of 5 people who are owed money by Joe Soap. We are all owed 20k and Joe owes 100k in total. But, he only has 50k to offer to his creditors in total (or so he says anyway). The other 4 look at it and decide to take the 10k and cut their losses. But I know Joe quite well and know that he has some money stashed away or that he is just about to open up a new business with assets from his wife/son etc. So I say to Joe that I want all my money in full.

In that situation you would persuade the other creditors that Joe Soap has the money. However, let's say he really doesn't have it:

However, because such agreements are legally binding if 75% of the creditors agree to it (or whatever amount is ultimately specified in the legislation) I lose my right to sue for the money or seek it against his new business at a later date and so I get shafted (either by being forced to take the 10k or, seeing as it's Ireland, possibly being left out in the cold if I do not accept it).

That's kind of the point - you've lost your ability to hold your debt permanently over Joe's head, so that if he manages to crawl back from the abyss, nobody's waiting for him. He has settled his debts, and that settlement, unlike the informal arrangements he might otherwise have come to, is legally binding. You might not be the kind of person who would agree to "settle" for €10K now, but come after Joe the minute he looked like he had money again, but there's plenty who are.

This also has nothing to do with people like developers - anyone with the nous to incorporate as a limited liability company already has their debts covered by better arrangements.

cordially,
Scofflaw

hellboy99

This country is turning more and more into a badly run circus everyday :mad:

Like many other sensible people in this country I worked my arse off for years, was sensible with my money, got myself a PRB fund that is now 90% gone :mad:, I didn't / don't live beyond my means, no debts, and now on top of the government asking me to bail out the banks, building developers, a budget that will no doubt see my taxes go up and new ones come in, water rates, welfare cuts etc... I'm now been asked to bail out all the idiots that lived way beyond their means and thought the boom would never end, the wannbe yuppies with their overpriced houses, second homes they rent out, BM's and Mercs that now find themselves shopping in Aldi & Lidl every week, what a joke.

It's true what I've been told for years about this country, "the rich get rich and the poorer get poorer, if you're not rich and a crook you will be walked all over".

Amhran Nua

Somebody is going to take the hit on a scheme like this. If its the banks, why are we recapitalising them on one hand and removing their income with the other? More details are needed methinks.

AARRRGH

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Somebody is going to take the hit on a scheme like this. If its the banks, why are we recapitalising them on one hand and removing their income with the other? More details are needed methinks.

I'm going to make a wild guess and say the tax payer will pay for it. It would not surprise me at all to hear Brian Lenihan announce a "Debt Repayment" fund or something which of course is made up of a few billion of the tax payers money.

Thank god I am emigrating next year. It's the only thing keeping me going in this banana republic!

Amhran Nua

AARRRGH wrote: »

Thank god I am emigrating next year. It's the only thing keeping me going in this banana republic!

Its the sensible option. If all the people who know whats wrong leave though, who will be left to fix it?

Idbatterim

i cant believe this latest propsal, everyone who saw what was going on with the ridiculous house prices and held off buying, are now being rewarded for their foresight and correct thinking! Now this proposal! let them pay back every red cent! I couldnt care less how they do it! if they borrowed incomprehensible sums for the sh*t heaps let them pay for it for years to come! God I wish I had finnished my college course, so I could get out of this joke of a country easier!

Festus

Of course you could just get a job in RTE. The more like a plank you are the more money you make. All debts cleared within a couple of months.

thebman

It is ridiculous but was always likely to happen.

One guy I used to work with when I said, I wouldn't buy a house with the market the way it was (just as it start to collapse), he said, sure there are too many people involved now, the state can't let it fail, might as well get in now as they'll have to bail everyone out if it all falls apart.

Guess he was right :-/

lmimmfn

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Its the sensible option. If all the people who know whats wrong leave though, who will be left to fix it?

those in the public sector, the politicians and those on the dole, im sure they'll sort it out amongst themselves lmao

In the context if you move though would you really give a $hit?

its something im keeping an eye on doing personally, i dont want my family to grow up in a long term Nama/overtaxed workforce/poor economy.

AARRRGH

lmimmfn wrote: »

those in the public sector, the politicians and those on the dole, im sure they'll sort it out amongst themselves lmao

In the context if you move though would you really give a $hit?

its something im keeping an eye on doing personally, i dont want my family to grow up in a long term Nama/overtaxed workforce/poor economy.

I only have one life, so there's no way in hell I'm going to spend it in (let's be honest) a country that can be quite miserable at the best of times. When I try to imagine post-NAMA Ireland, all I can see is a shit hole.

Barcelona here I come.

lmimmfn

AARRRGH wrote: »

I only have one life, so there's no way in hell I'm going to spend it in (let's be honest) a country that can be quite miserable at the best of times. When I try to imagine post-NAMA Ireland, all I can see is a shit hole.

Barcelona here I come.

If you have the opportunity mate, then seriously go for it and dont look back

AARRRGH

lmimmfn wrote: »

If you have the opportunity mate, then seriously go for it and dont look back

That's the plan! :pac:

lmimmfn

AARRRGH wrote: »

That's the plan! :pac:

nice one, good for some , a few of my colleagues have already left, its currently not so easy for myself but something im seriously considering, the next 6 months will tell.

Amhran Nua

lmimmfn wrote: »

In the context if you move though would you really give a $hit?

Yes, I would. I think we should keep AARRRGH here and put the politicos on the next boat out of here.

lmimmfn

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Yes, I would.

well the majority of those that moved to another country would have enough to deal with in their new adopted country with politics/laws/tax etc. to be concerned about whats going on at home( thats not to say they wouldnt read the papers/web out of curiousity

If i moved then the fact that i moved would be enough for me not to give a crap anymore, its such an extreme step to take in the current climate that not giving a crap would come in around the point of having a job to go to in another country.

thebman

Yeah I'd need a job secured before I left but I'd love to leave this country at this stage TBH.

You can grass is greener on other side bla bla bla but the reality is there is less corruption in many other countries. This is a cosy little backwater where those with power have a close circle of friends. The whole country is too small and too easy for this to form. Combined with an electorate that don't seem to care and a state broadcaster which seems to have a monopoly on interviews with political leaders and never asks hard questions and your left with a system that doesn't ever look like changing.

Amhran Nua

thebman wrote: »

This is a cosy little backwater where those with power have a close circle of friends. The whole country is too small and too easy for this to form. Combined with an electorate that don't seem to care and a state broadcaster which seems to have a monopoly on interviews with political leaders and never asks hard questions and your left with a system that doesn't ever look like changing.

Ah we're still shaking off the detritus of the bad old days, give us a chance and we'll get there. I may be a fairly optimistic person, but I feel Ireland is just getting started.

thebman

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Ah we're still shaking off the detritus of the bad old days, give us a chance and we'll get there. I may be a fairly optimistic person, but I feel Ireland is just getting started.

Unfortunately the state is bankrupt, its too late to get started. Even if it wasn't too late, the government are incapable of managing us out of the crisis.

We have a serious infrastructure deficit and no money to improve it. Our only hope is th EU pities us and decides to give us free money and I don't really want that to happen or be relying on it.

If they do, we'll be back here in 20 years again waiting for an EU handout. We are the welfare bums of Europe as a nation or at least it seems that way at times

Like I say to my friends, its time to move to a real country.