Home Reposessed??

Senna

One of the big advantages of renting, especially in the current job market, is renting leaves you highly mobile, allowing you to move with jobs. I think few people anywhere bar Dublin would want 3 year leases.

lima

themadchef wrote: »

Hope you have a lovely Christmas guys and dont let the begrudgers get yee down.

I'm not a begrudger by the way; I don't resent or envy all those stuck with NE, I'm just telling them they have a skewed sense of entitlement and took out loans entirely at their own will, on the pretense they would make money from it. And because bankers et al are cheating the system they feel they should cheat the system.

Sure there's big writing saying 'YOUR HOME IS AT RISK IF YOU DO NOT KEEP UP YOUR PAYMENTS' on your application forms... well folks, your home is now at risk, so if you stop paying your loans back then you deserve to get kicked out of your home and rent like people like me. It's the way the world works.

(Also, just so you know, I have mortgage approval, and a large deposit, so could buy if I wanted but I prefer to rent right now)

cookie1977

Good column today from McWilliams:

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/david-mcwilliams/david-mcwilliams-mortgage-debt-deal-can-prevent-default-disease-from-spreading-3331455.html

Here's the deal. A large debt for equity swap needs to be done for the mortgages to prevent more arrears and defaults. If the ECB, which is proving itself much more inventive, can be convinced of the merits of this, we have a chance.

The banks take 50pc ownership of homes. These homes are sold in 20 years' time. The banks get paid then. In the meantime the people pay half the mortgage, which is affordable. They don't default now but get on with the business of living. The ECB takes as "collateral" the potential equity upside that banks are holding. In effect it gives the banks a price today on Irish houses which are not worth much today but will be in 20 years.

Jaysoose

lima wrote: »

I'm not a begrudger by the way; I don't resent or envy all those stuck with NE, I'm just telling them they have a skewed sense of entitlement and took out loans entirely at their own will, on the pretense they would make money from it. And because bankers et al are cheating the system they feel they should cheat the system.

Sure there's big writing saying 'YOUR HOME IS AT RISK IF YOU DO NOT KEEP UP YOUR PAYMENTS' on your application forms... well folks, your home is now at risk, so if you stop paying your loans back then you deserve to get kicked out of your home and rent like people like me. It's the way the world works.

(Also, just so you know, I have mortgage approval, and a large deposit, so could buy if I wanted but I prefer to rent right now)

Well are'nt you just great.

lima

Jaysoose wrote: »

Well are'nt you just great.

aren't, mate.

faceman

lima wrote: »

I'm not a begrudger by the way; I don't resent or envy all those stuck with NE, I'm just telling them they have a skewed sense of entitlement and took out loans entirely at their own will, on the pretense they would make money from it. And because bankers et al are cheating the system they feel they should cheat the system.

Sure there's big writing saying 'YOUR HOME IS AT RISK IF YOU DO NOT KEEP UP YOUR PAYMENTS' on your application forms... well folks, your home is now at risk, so if you stop paying your loans back then you deserve to get kicked out of your home and rent like people like me. It's the way the world works.

That's exactly what begrudgery is

There are big signs on the side of packets of cigarettes saying how smoking will kill you but that doesn't stop tax money being spent caring for people sick due to smoking related illnesses in hospital being cared for

As a nation we need to move away from that time of opinion of you got what was coming to you. We're human, we have only a few years in this world. People shouldn't be punished for mistakes indefinitely.

lima

http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/begrudgery

Definitions
noun

(Irish, informal) resentment of any person who has achieved success or wealth

I think those people with massive debts would be begrudging me.

I do not envy their situation, I just feel that life is life and tough luck, we all make mistakes, but I don't want to pay for your mistake.

Ipso

faceman wrote: »

People shouldn't be punished for mistakes indefinitely.

But other people will be, any action not taken on reposessions and none payments to banks cost the taxpayer and its money diverted from other areas.

nacimroc

faceman wrote: »

That's exactly what begrudgery is

As a nation we need to move away from that time of opinion of you got what was coming to you. We're human, we have only a few years in this world. People shouldn't be punished for mistakes indefinitely.

But as well as the moral hazard of writing off debt or letting people live in houses for free, why would everyone else continue to struggle with their mortgage when others are being written down/off. I can see your point, but the alternative is a lot worse.

The principle of NAMA and drip feeding the property market is a good one, but nothing is happening. This inevitable disaster has to be dealt with. The banks need to repo more, NAMA needs to pick up the pace and stop holding too much back etc etc.

BUT..the public are the mortgage holders in question, the politicians are elected by these people and the people who would ordinarily force the government to deal with it (young mortgage free people) are gone. Nothing will happen until it all goes belly up!

faceman

Ipso wrote: »

But other people will be, any action not taken on reposessions and none payments to banks cost the taxpayer and its money diverted from other areas.

The banks have already written down the debtor assets on their books.

nacimroc wrote: »

But as well as the moral hazard of writing off debt or letting people live in houses for free, why would everyone else continue to struggle with their mortgage when others are being written down/off. I can see your point, but the alternative is a lot worse.

The principle of NAMA and drip feeding the property market is a good one, but nothing is happening. This inevitable disaster has to be dealt with. The banks need to repo more, NAMA needs to pick up the pace and stop holding too much back etc etc.

BUT..the public are the mortgage holders in question, the politicians are elected by these people and the people who would ordinarily force the government to deal with it (young mortgage free people) are gone. Nothing will happen until it all goes belly up!

Herein lies the issue. IMO there is greater moral hazard with doing nothing. We all pay insurance levys, health levys and our tax money goes towards services that most of us will hopefully, never need. However that doesnt justify removing that facility for those that need it, be it through someone accidentally or deliberately ending up in that position. We dont begrudge lung cancer treatment to smokers in the public health system.

Its in the government interest for Joe Public to turn on one another. We saw it with the whole public vs private sector debate and we are seeing it again now over the debt crisis. For as long as we quabble with one another over it, it detracts from the real issue and solutions

lima

nacimroc wrote: »

the people who would ordinarily force the government to deal with it (young mortgage free people) are gone. Nothing will happen until it all goes belly up!

True and I guess this is where my frustration come into it. I'm one of those people, who is back, but living among these other types of people (the majority of voters?) who expect to be bailed out by me.

faceman

lima wrote: »

I do not envy their situation, I just feel that life is life and tough luck, we all make mistakes, but I don't want to pay for your mistake.

You're not paying for their mistake.

lima

faceman wrote: »

You're not paying for their mistake.

Through taxes, blah

Ipso

faceman wrote: »

You're not paying for their mistake.

How not?

faceman

lima wrote: »

Through taxes, blah

But you're still not paying for their mistake. Thats a myth.

The banks, aided by a government supportive of fueling the property bubble, made credit and risk decisions without making adequate provisions against bad debt that had them loans on the strength of other loans being classed as assets. As the loans turned sour, and adequate capital wasnt available to cushion the bad debts, the banks became insolvent. The government issued a bank guarantee which we still have the honour.

In any other industry if a business becomes insolvent, they liquidate or whatever.

But the troika were of the view that the impact to the markets of a banking going under is far too catastrophic hence the banks were bailed out.

A condition of the bailout was that the banks had to write down their debtor assets to reflect reality. Those write downs were not passed on to the consumer.

Poor negotiation and awful economic planning has resulted in the government using increased taxes as a measure to fund the bank bailout. But that's a separate issue.

Ipso

The crisis in Ireland was caused by a few things: lack of understanding of basic maths, confusing debt with wealth and the inability to elect capable leaders amongst them.
Failure to allocate blame correctly will only set the country up for more failure in future.

nacimroc

faceman wrote: »

Herein lies the issue. IMO there is greater moral hazard with doing nothing. We all pay insurance levys, health levys and our tax money goes towards services that most of us will hopefully, never need. However that doesnt justify removing that facility for those that need it, be it through someone accidentally or deliberately ending up in that position. We dont begrudge lung cancer treatment to smokers in the public health system.

Your not comparing like with like. Health service is for the greater good of everyone. Writing off investment debt only benefits the select few people who invested and failed and was discretionary spending. It is not their choice to gamble with our money. Making them debt free whilst the rest of us remain to struggle makes no sense.

To be honest, the "them versus us" is all their fault. I'm not attacking them out of spite as I do empathise, but the people in trouble act as if they are entitled to write offs etc. The "screw the f**kin banks" attitude is just screwing the taxpayer and makes us jump to the other side of the fence and resist any help we would give! We are generally a caring society, but when they put the banks on the other side of the ring they are alienating us.

lima

faceman wrote: »

But you're still not paying for their mistake. Thats a myth.

The banks, aided by a government supportive of fueling the property bubble, made credit and risk decisions without making adequate provisions against bad debt that had them loans on the strength of other loans being classed as assets. As the loans turned sour, and adequate capital wasnt available to cushion the bad debts, the banks became insolvent. The government issued a bank guarantee which we still have the honour.

In any other industry if a business becomes insolvent, they liquidate or whatever.

But the troika were of the view that the impact to the markets of a banking going under is far too catastrophic hence the banks were bailed out.

A condition of the bailout was that the banks had to write down their debtor assets to reflect reality. Those write downs were not passed on to the consumer.

Poor negotiation and awful economic planning has resulted in the government using increased taxes as a measure to fund the bank bailout. But that's a separate issue.

The banks are nationalised, they are owed money by people who are not paying their mortgages. The government loaned money to the banks, out of tax money. I pay tax.

faceman

nacimroc wrote: »

Your not comparing like with like. Health service is for the greater good of everyone. Writing off investment debt only benefits the select few people who invested and failed and was discretionary spending. It is not their choice to gamble with our money. Making them debt free whilst the rest of us remain to struggle makes no sense.

Fwiw, my view applies to those who purchased property as a home, the PPR. Investment property is a different matter

faceman

lima wrote: »

The banks are nationalised, they are owed money by people who are not paying their mortgages. The government loaned money to the banks, out of tax money. I pay tax.

We'll never see eye to eye on the issue but I respect your opinion on the matter.

cookie1977

lima wrote: »

The banks are nationalised, they are owed money by people who are not paying their mortgages. The government loaned money to the banks, out of tax money. I pay tax.

The situation is a lot more complicated. There were many people who did budget for their mortgage when they got it taking into account situations such as an increase in mortgage rates etc... but they find them selves in trouble now and unable to pay do to a massive correction involving higher taxes/pay cuts and job losses. As faceman said the banks have already made preparations for sizeable defaults and losses but none of these were passed on. Instead we have gotten banks increasing mortgage rates on variable rate holders solely because they're loosing on trackers.

There has to be some sensible way out. The few people like yourself who've come back wanting to buy will not get this country back on it's feet on their own. There's too few of you. Look at the rates of arrears. They're huge and that's all before the full property taxes kick in.

Yes of course debt should be paid off, but how about giving people more time or (as McWilliams said) let the banks take a stake in the property so the owner can continue to pay while the bank owns some equity proper. There's no way we can get blood out of a stone. It becomes a vicious circle. We reposes houses then we have to rehouse those people at the tax payers expense, thus driving taxes up putting more people under pressure.

nacimroc

cookie1977 wrote: »

There has to be some sensible way out. The few people like yourself who've come back wanting to buy will not get this country back on it's feet on their own. There's too few of you. Look at the rates of arrears. They're huge and that's all before the full property taxes kick in.

Yes of course debt should be paid off, but how about giving people more time or (as McWilliams said) let the banks take a stake in the property so the owner can continue to pay while the bank owns some equity proper. There's no way we can get blood out of a stone. It becomes a vicious circle. We reposes houses then we have to rehouse those people at the tax payers expense, thus driving taxes up putting more people under pressure.

The good part about McWilliams idea is that its seen as fair. There have been very few 'fair' solutions. I genuinely don't want to see families on the streets because of circumstances out of their control, but the current system of giving them no help or completely writing off their debt are polar opposites. The Irish will stand behind any way of helping them out but it must be fair!

Facemans point of investment properties is a good one. Why are we lumping everything into one pot when family homes and investment properties are totally different things. Trying to find a solution to help a family at the same time helping an investment is ridiculous. Second homes should be treated as such. No help with write off's or assistance. Give them to NAMA and get the ball moving all the while it allows people to help out the families without the moral issue of taxpayers helping more investors!

lima

cookie1977 wrote: »

The situation is a lot more complicated. There were many people who did budget for their mortgage when they got it taking into account situations such as an increase in mortgage rates etc... but they find them selves in trouble now and unable to pay do to a massive correction involving higher taxes/pay cuts and job losses. As faceman said the banks have already made preparations for sizeable defaults and losses but none of these were passed on. Instead we have gotten banks increasing mortgage rates on variable rate holders solely because they're loosing on trackers.

There has to be some sensible way out. The few people like yourself who've come back wanting to buy will not get this country back on it's feet on their own. There's too few of you. Look at the rates of arrears. They're huge and that's all before the full property taxes kick in.

Yes of course debt should be paid off, but how about giving people more time or (as McWilliams said) let the banks take a stake in the property so the owner can continue to pay while the bank owns some equity proper. There's no way we can get blood out of a stone. It becomes a vicious circle. We reposes houses then we have to rehouse those people at the tax payers expense, thus driving taxes up putting more people under pressure.

Why would we as tax payers need to rehouse those people who would rightly get their houses taken from then (as they are not their houses until they have paid off their mortgage loan)?

Once they get removed from the properties (which the bank can sell on to people like me for cheap) they can rent like in any other market. Who cares about their family and kids and all that - they can have a comfortable lifestyle paying rent, so be it, suck it up.

Give up all this protect the family crap, I don't care, get out of the house you can't pay off and let me buy it and I can rent it to you.

cookie1977

lima wrote: »

Why would we as tax payers need to rehouse those people who would rightly get their houses taken from then (as they are not their houses until they have paid off their mortgage loan)?

Once they get removed from the properties (which the bank can sell on to people like me for cheap) they can rent like in any other market. Who cares about their family and kids and all that - they can have a comfortable lifestyle paying rent, so be it, suck it up.

Give up all this protect the family crap, I don't care, get out of the house you can't pay off and let me buy it and I can rent it to you.

And what if they can't afford to rent?

TCP/IP

Lima you come across as a child throwing toys out of their pram. You are obviously young with no commitments which is fair enough but stop acting like a spoilt child because you want people and families evicted so you can purchase at a lower price. It's easy been a keyboard warrior.

cookie1977

Maybe they shouldn't have come home.

cypressg

I wouldn't worry too much about it OP,14 months behind in payments is nothing,I know people that haven't paid their mortgage since 2007 and nothing seems to be being done about it.
Don't mind the dopes that whinge and bitch about the tax payer being ripped off either,you didn't get your mortgage off the taxpayer,you got it off what was then a private institution,that's who you signed a contract with,not the taxpayer.

youtube!

TCP/IP wrote: »

Lima you come across as a child throwing toys out of their pram. You are obviously young with no commitments which is fair enough but stop acting like a spoilt child because you want people and families evicted so you can purchase at a lower price. It's easy been a keyboard warrior.

To be honest he sounds like he would fit in well in the Gestapo . What a completely heartless person you are Lima .referring to your own people as " you Irish " when you say you are Irish yourself and wanting anyone who cannot pay their debt to leave the country and never come back shows such a selfish lack of compassion that I have never seen on boards before. This crisis affects so many good people and their children but you could give a flying one about them could you? Well merry Xmas to you , one day karma will catch up be assured of that.

nacimroc

nacimroc wrote: »

The "screw the f**kin banks" attitude is just screwing the taxpayer and makes us jump to the other side of the fence and resist any help we would give! We are generally a caring society, but when they put the banks on the other side of the ring they are alienating us.

cypressg wrote: »

Don't mind the dopes that whinge and bitch about the tax payer being ripped off either,you didn't get your mortgage off the taxpayer,you got it off what was then a private institution,that's who you signed a contract with,not the taxpayer.

This is why your up $hit creek wondering why we won't help you and never will!

Lima has a fair point (although a bit hasty)! You all just don't like it. If you step back and look at thousands of people living for free in houses whilst the taxpayer is ACTUALLY picking up the tab. No property on the market as people don't need or want to sell. The property that is up is artificially elevated thanks to NAMA doing nothing. The whole thing is a farce and will collapse because of peoples blatent ignorance to the fact that there was a crash and god forbid they might lose some money.

cookie1977

The point some of us are making is that it's neither a good thing to bail everyone out and let the taxpayer take the hit nor is it a good thing to let a large percentage of the country go to the wall for what in my mind is only partly their fault (and I speak as an owner occupier and a btl'er).

Lima's idea of let them all go to the wall so I can get my cheap house seems to me to be self centered and no better then the government at the time. A real hard fast logical and practical solution has to be found as I can only see the next year or 2 getting worse for many people. In order for us all to have a good society (I'll borrow the conservatives term big scoiety too) we need the majority to flurish and help those who cannot.

A little more caring for our fellow human beings struggling at a time of great hardship might help the entire country move forward.