LIVELINE Thread - (05/10/11 to 14/02/2012)

IvyTheTerrible

Pat wants the bank to let the debt go so his daughter can come home?

Ah here. I'd love to be living at home too but we can't just wipe debts off.

europa11

"The house is loved"

Really? So that's why they went halfway around the world to get away from it.

yosser hughes

It's not her home,it's an investment property now that she no doubt isn't paying tax and is probably in contravention of the mortgage agreement.
You're not a great grandad, you're a self serving fool.

surferdudz

Pat ...fly emirites...dublin-dubai-Oz

JonathanAnon

Cmon Joe you got a half hour out of him... Open up the liveline fund

nosey guy

Pat you are not the government.

Thank fcuk for that.

syklops

IvyTheTerrible wrote: »

Pat wants the bank to let the debt go so his daughter can come home?

Ah here. I'd love to be living at home too but we can't just wipe debts off.

"Wheres my NAMA joe"

Thats what it smacks of to me. I cant believe so much time was dedicated to that caller.

Cardinal Richelieu

IvyTheTerrible wrote: »

Pat wants the bank to let the debt go so his daughter can come home?

Ah here. I'd love to be living at home too but we can't just wipe debts off.

It does show a high level of delusion still exists here and Duffy just encourages it.

withless

'This isn't rational, its emotional.'

Ireland 2012.

my friend

tomorrows show...

Sean Quinn whining like a baby

europa11

withless wrote: »

'This isn't rational, its emotional.'

Ireland 2012.

It's de Lahvhlahhn.

pc7

my friend wrote: »

tomorrows show...

Sean Quinn whining like a baby

That I couldn't cope with, you'd have a load of loons on saying he was the best thing since sliced bread and poor Sean was only taking a little gamble and he's a great man. It would make me vomit :mad:

mickydoomsux

That auld lad displayed the kind of utter ignornace people in Ireland have when it comes to personal finance.

-Firstly, you say your daughter took out a mortgage for 300k and the repayments are roughly 1k a month and you have someone paying 950 rent but if it goes up slightly that'll be that as far as repaying it goes.

Pray tell exactly what are her and her husband doing in Australia? I presume they are working and earning money (probably a decent amount as well). Money which could be sent back home to service the shortfall in the mortgage payment to prevent them from irresponsibly defaulting on the debt they incurred for themselves. But, nah, why would you do that and cramp your brand new life Down Under. Better to run away like children and leave your Da to sort out your mess in crappy olde post-Celtic Tiger Ireland.

-Secondly, the offer to pay back 2/3rds of the loan is just silly. Your daughter took a loan of 300k to buy the house, She now owes the bank 300k (plus interest). The fact that the house is now worth 150k is utterly irrelevant to the equation. She is paying money back on the loan which is valued at 300k, not the house which is vauled at 150k. You can't expect the bank to accept less that what they loaned you back.

The value of the house could have halved the day after the mortgage funds were drawn down and it wouldn't matter a lick, you still owe what you borrowed. If we want to use this guys logic, when the value of the house goes up, his daughter should be busting the bank managers door down trying to pay back more than the borrowed principle amount.

HeidiHeidi

Is anyone else listening to the interview on the Mooney show?

Much as I'd slag him along with the rest a lot of the time, I'm struck by the calmness and dignified manner of the interview, he's allowing her to tell her story without hype or harrassment.

Then I think, how would Joe have handled that?

:eek:

califano

HeidiHeidi wrote: »

Is anyone else listening to the interview on the Mooney show?

Much as I'd slag him along with the rest a lot of the time, I'm struck by the calmness and dignity of the interview, he's allowing her to tell her story without hype or harrassment.

Then I think, how would Joe have handled that?

:eek:

Yeah remarkably restrained from Derek as he usually doesnt miss a chance to get a straight jab in. I was just waiting for "So you didnt ring her on new years eve or new years day either!?".
What is Kristins surname btw?.

HeidiHeidi

rounders123 wrote: »

Yeah remarkably restrained from Derek as he usually doesnt miss a chance to get a straight jab in. I was just waiting for "So you didnt ring her on new years eve or new years day either!?".
What is Kristins surname btw?.

Oh I don't know, he has his moments, and IMO is well able to be a decent interviewer when he turns off the slapstick.

Didn't catch the woman's name, I was only half listening (while washing windows), but even so I was just struck by the calmness of the interview.

Fair play Derek.

europa11

I was listening to it Heidi, while the subject matter wouldn't be ideal afternoon listening I guess I'd have to ask when is a good time to listen to such a harrowing tale.

But to your point, agree with you re Mooney, rarely leave him on, but I found his style was genuinely sympathetic to the woman yet not overbearing or false.

Duffy would have had her in tears and turned on the misery porn.

syklops

HeidiHeidi wrote: »

Then I think, how would Joe have handled that?

:eek:

He would do fine, in that he wouldnt do much of anything. He would let her tell her story responding with regular "yeah, yeah" and various other strained sighs. Where is the sounding board, that would give you an idea of what it would be like.

califano

HeidiHeidi wrote: »

Oh I don't know, he has his moments, and IMO is well able to be a decent interviewer when he turns off the slapstick.

Didn't catch the woman's name, I was only half listening (while washing windows), but even so I was just struck by the calmness of the interview.

Fair play Derek.

Ah yeah i say that in a kind of joking appraisal of Derek. Hes one of the most entertaining presenters on Irish radio in my opinion. I tipped him as the most appropriate candidate to take over Gerry Ryans show but it didnt happen, wasnt even muted actually but for me he would have been a better fit for that particular programme than Tubridy.

Gophur

mickydoomsux wrote: »

That auld lad displayed the kind of utter ignornace people in Ireland have when it comes to personal finance.

-Firstly, you say your daughter took out a mortgage for 300k and the repayments are roughly 1k a month and you have someone paying 950 rent but if it goes up slightly that'll be that as far as repaying it goes.

Pray tell exactly what are her and her husband doing in Australia? I presume they are working and earning money (probably a decent amount as well). Money which could be sent back home to service the shortfall in the mortgage payment to prevent them from irresponsibly defaulting on the debt they incurred for themselves. But, nah, why would you do that and cramp your brand new life Down Under. Better to run away like children and leave your Da to sort out your mess in crappy olde post-Celtic Tiger Ireland.

-Secondly, the offer to pay back 2/3rds of the loan is just silly. Your daughter took a loan of 300k to buy the house, She now owes the bank 300k (plus interest). The fact that the house is now worth 150k is utterly irrelevant to the equation. She is paying money back on the loan which is valued at 300k, not the house which is vauled at 150k. You can't expect the bank to accept less that what they loaned you back.

The value of the house could have halved the day after the mortgage funds were drawn down and it wouldn't matter a lick, you still owe what you borrowed. If we want to use this guys logic, when the value of the house goes up, his daughter should be busting the bank managers door down trying to pay back more than the borrowed principle amount.

You obviously missed the point that was being made. (Or didn't want to see it?)

The Bank are being made a proposal, which would leave them in a better position than if the borrower walks away. They have refused this proposal, despite benefiting from similar debt-reduction from the State.

So. If they foreclose on the house they might get 50% of the money they are owed. if they accept the proposal they will get 66% of the debt. They want 100% of the debt.

mickydoomsux

Gophur wrote: »

You obviously missed the point that was being made. (Or didn't want to see it?)

The Bank are being made a proposal, which would leave them in a better position than if the borrower walks away. They have refused this proposal, despite benefiting from similar debt-reduction from the State.

So. If they foreclose on the house they might get 50% of the money they are owed. if they accept the proposal they will get 66% of the debt. They want 100% of the debt.

As far as i know PTSB aren't interested in foreclosing on houses at all. They'd sooner get their money back.

What they "could" get from selling the foreclosed house doesn't interest them. They want the loan to be paid back, end of. 66% of the debt is no good to them.

HeidiHeidi

Gophur wrote: »

You obviously missed the point that was being made. (Or didn't want to see it?)

The Bank are being made a proposal, which would leave them in a better position than if the borrower walks away.

Am I wrong in thinking that there's no such thing here as "walking away", or "jingle mail" as it's known in the States? You still own, and owe, the debt, even if you hand back the house.

I'm open to correction, but that's my understanding.

IvyTheTerrible

HeidiHeidi wrote: »

Am I wrong in thinking that there's no such thing here as "walking away", or "jingle mail" as it's known in the States? You still own, and owe, the debt, even if you hand back the house.

I'm open to correction, but that's my understanding.

No you are correct.

europa11

Think you're correct Heidi. You still owe the debt afaik.

Whether the bank will - or can - chase you to Australia (or anywhere else outside the State/EU) for the outstanding amount is what I'd be asking. Personally I doubt they would and certainly not in this case.

mike kelly

Glad to see these pensioners having to pay tax. Why doesn't Joe ask them how much they are actually earning?

yosser hughes

Gophur wrote: »

You obviously missed the point that was being made. (Or didn't want to see it?)

The Bank are being made a proposal, which would leave them in a better position than if the borrower walks away. They have refused this proposal, despite benefiting from similar debt-reduction from the State.

So. If they foreclose on the house they might get 50% of the money they are owed. if they accept the proposal they will get 66% of the debt. They want 100% of the debt.

No I think most of us got the point alright. It's another where's my NAMA whinge. The daughter is well able to service the debt. The debt she freely took on herself. Just because the property she bought has fallen in value is utterly irrelevant. She just doesn't feel like paying.
Her Da is a mug that doesn't understand what he's getting in to.

syklops

Gophur wrote: »

You obviously missed the point that was being made. (Or didn't want to see it?)

The Bank are being made a proposal, which would leave them in a better position than if the borrower walks away. They have refused this proposal, despite benefiting from similar debt-reduction from the State.

So. If they foreclose on the house they might get 50% of the money they are owed. if they accept the proposal they will get 66% of the debt. They want 100% of the debt.

The bank state didn't benefit from debt reduction, they were re-capitalised. For them to go on a spending splurge by reducing other peoples debts would be the ultimate two fingers to the government and to the people.

What banks ultimately want, as does the new boss of the re-capitalised banks, the Irish taxpayer, is for people who are struggling at the moment to try and keep up with their payments. Go and make a plan for the future and keep them appraised of any developments. They want people to stay in their homes and try to pay it off, even if they are only chipping away at it for the next few years, thats the only way it is going to work. There are all kinds of offers being put on the table from holidays from payments, to reduced rates. All you need to do is engage with the bank and keep them updated of your situation.

Suddenly announcing that you are moving to Australia is not what the bank wants to hear. "Why are you moving to Australia?"
"Well we have been struggling with our mortgage"
"Why didnt you tell us"
"Well, er, and we have always been attracted to Australia"
"Pity you didn't tell us that four years ago when we were giving you 320,000 euro to buy a
house"

People doing what they said they would do which is pay off their loan is the only way it is going to work. No amount of Joe Duffy sighing is going to improve the situation.

europa11

mike kelly wrote: »

Glad to see these pensioners having to pay tax. Why doesn't Joe ask them how much they are actually earning?

Fear that they might ask him the same question?

my friend

Cardinal Richelieu wrote: »

His daughter and son in law are prob having a great time in Oz with Pat paying her debts.

Pat's daughter has been found

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/35c-oz-outback-ordeal-of-irish-woman-who-stormed-off-after-boyfriend-row-2985019.html



"Everything looked exactly the same," Kelly, speaking to the Irish Independent from Bourke Hospital where she is recovering, said yesterday.


"My eyes were playing tricks on me. I would think I had seen groups of people looking for me but really it would be a group of emus.


"I would call out for my boyfriend and think I heard people calling back, but it would really be birds.


"I was sure I was going to be bitten by a snake, I don't know how it didn't happen," she added.

_________________________________________________

emigration has its positives.

syklops

my friend wrote: »

From the article:

Shortly before 5pm she spotted a plane that had been dispatched as part of the search effort. She took off her T-shirt, placed it on a stick and began waving it in the air.

Tit saved by tits?