Huge negative equity on apartments.

jlacey

i also know freinds with this kind of negative equity, but this is the tip of the iceberg...watch this space when property taxes and water charges are added on too and interest rates will be at 6% in 2 years

Thinkingaboutit

MadsL wrote: »

You are starting to sound like that bloke in Dundalk who doesn't want to pay his mortgage because his basement apartment is no longer worth 225k.

Worth. As opposed to function. It still functions as a house, you just paid too much for it. I once bought a video camera sold to me by a very clever salesman in a Times Square electronics store. I paid way more than it was worth. It still worked.

Several hundred thousand people having barely any disposable income, isn't a good thing. It means nothing to drive economic growth.

Councils setting property tax I read.

The Labour Party dominates South Dublin CC (despite the rhetoric FG are only their favoured group is different). They have always prefered services to be cut to the bone rather than jobs being cut, or pay falling heavily (pay has fallen quite heavily in a number of categories like outdoor CC workers who lack the effective union representation and political connections of admin staff, and they get a pension barely better than a lifetime welfarian, but that is another story). That would mean no private rooms in the hospital for the highly paid. It sounds ominous for anyone who is not well connected. I somehow doubt that many local authorities will get cut.

91

Ivan Mealy Index wrote: »

Never said I wasn't lucky. If you read back I said we have good jobs.
This thread is about negative equity apartments etc and I just told MY story. Never said I wouldn't pay it back and admitted I messed up.
It's unfortunate that some people twist things to make it look like i am playing the victim. And unfortunate that others decide to be nasty. I only told my story. That's all.
I'm not impinging on anyone with my debt other than myself. Of course I could be a million times worse off.
I'm not having a pity party. I'm pi$$ed off that I owe hundreds of thousands of money in neg equity. WHO WOULDN'T BE???
It's easy for those who are not in the situation to 'throw stones'.
I will pay back every cent I owe and not inflict my debt on anyone else. So I don't see why some people on here feel the need to slate me.

I totally feel your pain! I bought a one bedroom apartment in Dublin city 6 years ago, I was single, it was close to work and I loved it. The problem now is that I'm with my boyfriend 4 years and we'd like to get married and have a family and I can't just sell up and move because of the huge negative equity. EBS brought out their negative equity mortgages and I applied but was told I'd need 30000 euro to qualify. So I feel my life is on hold. I have no problem paying my mortgage but it upsets me that I can't move to a house so I could have a family, that's all

take everything

You borrow money.
Borrowed money needs to be paid back.
Grownups understand that borrowed money has to be paid back.

This is the case irrespective of whether the price of your apartment/house rises or falls.

Simple really.

Noel Dempseys Den

take everything wrote: »

You borrow money.
Borrowed money needs to be paid back.
Grownups understand that borrowed money has to be paid back.

This is the case irrespective of whether the price of your apartment/house rises or falls.

Simple really.

That is so, but doesn't stop you from being a non-empathic bollocks with moral superiority issues.

Zulu

take everything wrote: »

You borrow money.
Borrowed money needs to be paid back.
Grownups understand that borrowed money has to be paid back.

This is the case irrespective of whether the price of your apartment/house rises or falls.

Simple really.

Yeah just like the banks. And the property developers. Oh no, wait, they didn't have to pay itback for some reason...

... what was it again? Lets see if I can work it out - the last post made it easy...
The banks borrowed money.
Borrowed money needs to be paid back.
They didn't pay it back, we did...
Wait, that's not right, hold on.

The property developers borrowed money.
Borrowed money needs to be paid back.
They didn't pay it back, we did...
Wait, that's not right either.

I'm confused - I thought this was 'simple really'

TheChizler

Zulu wrote: »

Yeah just like the banks. And the property developers. Oh no, wait, they didn't have to pay itback for some reason...

... what was it again? Lets see if I can work it out - the last post made it easy...
The banks borrowed money.
Borrowed money needs to be paid back.
They didn't pay it back, we did...
Wait, that's not right, hold on.

The property developers borrowed money.
Borrowed money needs to be paid back.
They didn't pay it back, we did...
Wait, that's not right either.

I'm confused - I thought this was 'simple really'

Have you not heard of NAMA or the successful cases brought against many developers?

Sorcha16

Noel Dempseys Den wrote: »

That is so, but doesn't stop you from being a non-empathic bollocks with moral superiority issues.

It's nothing to do with moral superiority. It's called living in the real world where your bills and/or debt are of your concern and nobody else's

Grayson

Zulu wrote: »

Yeah just like the banks. And the property developers. Oh no, wait, they didn't have to pay itback for some reason...

... what was it again? Lets see if I can work it out - the last post made it easy...
The banks borrowed money.
Borrowed money needs to be paid back.
They didn't pay it back, we did...
Wait, that's not right, hold on.

The property developers borrowed money.
Borrowed money needs to be paid back.
They didn't pay it back, we did...
Wait, that's not right either.

I'm confused - I thought this was 'simple really'

Well since a couple of people didn't follow the rules, I guess that means no-one needs to. Want to lend me 20 grand? I swear I'm good for it.

Monty Burnz

Zulu wrote: »

Yeah just like the banks. And the property developers. Oh no, wait, they didn't have to pay itback for some reason...

... what was it again? Lets see if I can work it out - the last post made it easy...
The banks borrowed money.
Borrowed money needs to be paid back.
They didn't pay it back, we did...
Wait, that's not right, hold on.

The property developers borrowed money.
Borrowed money needs to be paid back.
They didn't pay it back, we did...
Wait, that's not right either.

I'm confused - I thought this was 'simple really'

The owners of the banks lost all their money. What more do you want? The outside of the buildings thrashed with sticks?

Zulu

Monty Burnz wrote: »

The owners of the banks lost all their money. What more do you want?

Bond holders burnt.
Like they should be.

pwurple

Zulu wrote: »

Bond holders burnt.
Like they should be.

At the stake?

Seems a bit much for a bunch of old age pensioners.

Monty Burnz

Zulu wrote: »

Bond holders burnt.
Like they should be.

It's a bit late for that though, isn't it? We'd basically be telling the EU/IMF to f*** off with their money too - do you fancy the consequences of balancing the budget overnight? I'd be up for it (as it will probably be better in the 10+ year term), but I'm pretty sure it would cause massive misery for other people.

Zulu

Monty Burnz wrote: »

do you fancy the consequences of balancing the budget overnight?

Yes. But it should have been done years ago. I know for a fact I'd lose my job, but I still believe we should have grasped the nettle! Sure it would have been hard medicine, but I don't see any changes being made in this country. We still have the poison in the system, and it's not being purged.

At least we could have secured a better opportunity for the coming generations, instead of shackling this with burden.

Zulu

pwurple wrote: »

At the stake?

Seems a bit much for a bunch of old age pensioners.

Only pensioners were bondholders? Really??

Monty Burnz

Zulu wrote: »

Yes. But it should have been done years ago. I know for a fact I'd lose my job, but I still believe we should have grasped the nettle! Sure it would have been hard medicine, but I don't see any changes being made in this country. We still have the poison in the system, and it's not being purged.

At least we could have secured a better opportunity for the coming generations, instead of shackling this with burden.

Right, so you are on board with me on this. But do you think the general public would go for it? You saw the howling that went on when they tried a tiny bit of tinkering around the edges.

pache

P.C. wrote: »

No thanks.
I do not want to share your debt.

You allready have!!

pache

MadsL wrote: »

Of course they will....house prices only go up.

That's why house prices in Japan surged to a standstill for 15 years after their crash.

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/images/2008/japan-house-prices--nov08.gif

I really dont think you can compare Irelands property bubble/crash to that
of japans.
Both were literally "worlds apart".

Monty Burnz

pache wrote: »

I really dont think you can compare Irelands property bubble/crash to that
of japans.
Both were literally "worlds apart".

Why not?

Zulu

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Right, so you are on board with me on this. But do you think the general public would go for it?

Clearly not. Hence we are where we are.

You saw the howling that went on when they tried a tiny bit of tinkering around the edges.

Exactly. So we've adopted a half arsed, ham-fisted unofficial bastardisation of capitalism & socialism. A policy that sees us protecting those who reaped benefits of taking risks, but without being exposed to the risk; where those most incompetent are protected in jobs they've no interest in; where those responsible for gross mismanagement have been either promoted, offered other roles, given bonuses or given golden handshakes.

...and all the while screwing a generation that were naive enough to believe their government; that were naive enough to trust the senior officials in the central bank; that were naive enough to heed what experts were advising them.

So we continue to protect those guilty, while destroying the lives of the honest.

This Ireland, isn't an Ireland I'm proud of; I'm ashamed of the society we've created.

Monty Burnz

Zulu wrote: »

Clearly not. Hence we are where we are.

Exactly. So we've adopted a half arsed, ham-fisted unofficial bastardisation of capitalism & socialism. A policy that sees us protecting those who reaped benefits of taking risks, but without being exposed to the risk; where those most incompetent are protected in jobs they've no interest in; where those responsible for gross mismanagement have been either promoted, offered other roles, given bonuses or given golden handshakes.

...and all the while screwing a generation that were naive enough to believe their government; that were naive enough to trust the senior officials in the central bank; that were naive enough to heed what experts were advising them.

So we continue to protect those guilty, while destroying the lives of the honest.

This Ireland, isn't an Ireland I'm proud of; I'm ashamed of the society we've created.

I agree with most of that, but to be fair, you can only go so far in protecting people from themselves. What I find disgusting is that the same people who in large part caused the bubble by buying property at any price are now bleating about their negative equity and demanding a return to the peak of the bubble.

They have learned nothing. And the people who naively believed the pap fed to them by vested interests still can't be arsed to invest a couple of days in informing themselves as to the options available to the country from here and consequences of those choices.

Zulu

Monty Burnz wrote: »

I agree with most of that,

It doesn't appear so from your posts.

but to be fair, you can only go so far in protecting people from themselves. What I find disgusting is that the same people who in large part caused the bubble by buying property at any price are now bleating about their negative equity and demanding a return to the peak of the bubble.

They have learned nothing. And the people who naively believed the pap fed to them by vested interests still can't be arsed to invest a couple of days in informing themselves as to the options available to the country from here and consequences of those choices.

And this is where we differ. I don't expect the general public, who by & large, are not financial professionals to know any better than their professional officials. I don't hold them responsible for the actions of those who are responsible. For some reason, apparently, you do.

<aside: who's calling for a return of the peak of the bubble??? I haven't met or heard of a single person who is.>

Monty Burnz

Zulu wrote: »

It doesn't appear so from your posts.

Perhaps a more nuanced reading is required? I'm not sure which posts you refer to though.

Zulu wrote: »

And this is where we differ. I don't expect the general public, who by & large, are not financial professionals to know any better than their professional officials. I don't hold them responsible for the actions of those who are responsible. For some reason, apparently, you do.

I wasn't a financial professional when I saw the bubble developing. You don't need to be to understand what was happening - it could be explained to a person of moderate intelligence in about 15 minutes. Or a person of moderate intelligence could figure it out for themselves if they spent - say - a week reading up about it. Many people spend more time than that choosing which part of Spain to holiday in this year. Sure, reading about the property market and basic economics isn't fun - but before borrowing a quarter of a million euros, I'd be damned sure I knew what I was getting into.

Most people didn't seem to do even that much.

Zulu wrote: »

<aside: who's calling for a return of the peak of the bubble??? I haven't met or heard of a single person who is.>

You haven't met a single person demanding that the government doesn't cut whatever their particular hobby horse is, or protesting at the introduction of new taxes, or having to pay a mortgage for a property that has lost half its value?

Zulu

Monty Burnz wrote: »

I wasn't a financial professional when I saw the bubble developing. You don't need to be to understand what was happening - it could be explained to a person of moderate intelligence in about 15 minutes.

Indeed, only those who were supposed to be doing the explaining; those charged with advising the public; the professionals working on behalf of the public, were busying themselves explaining the opposite to the public.

Or a person of moderate intelligence could figure it out for themselves if they spent - say - a week reading up about it.

Aside from your insistence to remain insulting, your position is that anyone spending a "week reading up on it" could see the future. Which is laughable. No one knew for certain what was going to happen, just as no one ever knows for certain what's going to happen tomorrow. What they did know for certain was what they were being informed from those charged with advising them correctly. Sadly those people proved to be either utter cheats & liars, or grossly incompetent.
I wish to see those people charged/sacked/punished and their mistakes made (somewhat) right. You wish to kick the people who suffered as a consequence of those mistakes/lies/incompetencies.

You haven't met a single person demanding that the government doesn't cut whatever their particular hobby horse is...

You are being disingenuous.

Monty Burnz

Zulu wrote: »

Aside from your insistence to remain insulting

Ok, at this point I can't be arsed engaging with you anymore. You can live on in your bitter world of victimhood, reading what you want to read in the posts of others.

take everything

take everything wrote: »

You borrow money.
Borrowed money needs to be paid back.
Grownups understand that borrowed money has to be paid back.

This is the case irrespective of whether the price of your apartment/house rises or falls.

Simple really.

Bankers understand that money can be created out of thin air and lent into existence!

Scanlas The 2nd

Zulu wrote: »

It doesn't appear so from your posts.
And this is where we differ. I don't expect the general public, who by & large, are not financial professionals to know any better than their professional officials. I don't hold them responsible for the actions of those who are responsible. For some reason, apparently, you do.

<aside: who's calling for a return of the peak of the bubble??? I haven't met or heard of a single person who is.>

It's not that hard to understand if you borrow 500k you will be expected to be pay it back with interest. Unless we treat people like children we really need to leave people to make their own decisions. No one forced people to borrow money, I want to live in a society where one has to live with the consequences of one's stupid decisions, I don't want to live in a society where other people have to pay for someone else's stupidity.

Monty Burnz

Deleted User wrote: »

Bankers understand that money can be created out of thin air and lent into existence!

This isn't new though, is it? It's how banking has always worked.

Scanlas The 2nd

Zulu wrote: »

It doesn't appear so from your posts.
And this is where we differ. I don't expect the general public, who by & large, are not financial professionals to know any better than their professional officials. I don't hold them responsible for the actions of those who are responsible. For some reason, apparently, you do.

<aside: who's calling for a return of the peak of the bubble??? I haven't met or heard of a single person who is.>

It's not that hard to understand if you borrow 500k you will be expected to be pay it back with interest. Unless we treat people like children we really need to leave people to make their own decisions. No one forced people to borrow money, I want to live in a society where one has to live with the consequences of one's stupid decisions, I don't want to live in a society where other people have to pay for someone else's stupidity.

Monty Burnz

Monty Burnz wrote: »

This isn't new though, is it? It's how banking has always worked.

True, but things are different now.

Fractional reserve banking only functions when there is infinite growth, when limits to growth are reached one of two things happen;

either, growth is created by stimulating a new market, we've been doing that for the past couple of centuries, but we've run out of new "markets".

or, the whole system breaks down, we're seeing the early signs of that right now....

Monty Burnz

Deleted User wrote: »

True, but things are different now.

Fractional reserve banking only functions when there is infinite growth, when limits to growth are reached one of two things happen;

either, growth is created by stimulating a new market, we've been doing that for the past couple of centuries, but we've run out of new "markets".

or, the whole system breaks down, we're seeing the early signs of that right now....

Well, not really. Bear in mind that 'growth' can take the form of new types of wealth. Google is one of the most valuable companies on the planet and produces virtually nothing tangible.

fro9etb8j5qsl2

Gauss wrote: »

I know of people paying off 400k mortgages on apartments worth about 100k. I'm sure there plenty even worse off than that.

If I were them I'd hand in the keys to the bank and say good luck. See ya later.

I'd prefer to rent for the rest of my life than pay off a ridiculous mortgage.

Would you do the same?

So you would just fcuck off and leave the rest of the taxpayers pick up the pieces for your mistake and stupidity? Nice one OP....

It's people like you who refuse to take responsibility for your own wrongdoings that have the country in the state it's in. The sense of entitlement that people have in this country is gobsmacking :mad:

Monty Burnz

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Well, not really. Bear in mind that 'growth' can take the form of new types of wealth. Google is one of the most valuable companies on the planet and produces virtually nothing tangible.

But it is totally dependent on the advertising revenue from companies that produce "stuff", all that wealth that has flowed into google and similar companies has come from somewhere else.

Growth is one sector has been cancelled out by declines elsewhere, globally, growth is running out of steam (or should I say ever increasing supplies of oil).

Shakti

I have sympathy for these people OP they are the victims of a financial scam apparently all perfectly legal or so they say at least for now re: 'illegally sold mortgage protection' not a huge leap for the courts to rule that the mortgage product as a whole to be considered illegally sold.

Monty Burnz

Deleted User wrote: »

But it is totally dependent on the advertising revenue from companies that produce "stuff", all that wealth that has flowed into google and similar companies has come from somewhere else.

Right, but it's an example of massive growth with tiny consumption of resources. Growth can continue in unexpected ways as new markets are created.

Scanlas The 2nd

Growth just means an increase in products sold be they goods or services. So as long as the population and technology increase/improve there is potential for growth assuming our resources don't run out.

Monty Burnz

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Right, but it's an example of massive growth with tiny consumption of resources. Growth can continue in unexpected ways as new markets are created.

Growth without substance cannot sustain jobs for any length of time, make hay while the sun shines. When the advertising revenue shrinks, the likes of Google will see their share prices plummet (like last week).

Zulu

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

It's not that hard to understand if you borrow 500k you will be expected to be pay it back with interest.

I'm not suggesting otherwise.

Unless we treat people like children we really need to leave people to make their own decisions.

This is true, however, people charged with providing information, or who are employed by the state to protect the public, and fail so miserably and are so grossly incompetent should be held accountable.

No one forced people to borrow money,

Indeed & no one forced people to invest in bonds. We are however protecting bond holders for some reason.

I want to live in a society where one has to live with the consequences of one's stupid decisions

You and I both.

I don't want to live in a society where other people have to pay for someone else's stupidity.

Neither do I, but sadly thats the society we live in.
Taking that into consideration, if I had to choose, I'd rather cover the mistake of the nurse & gard that are stuck in a crappy 2 bed, than that of the property developer/wealthy bond holder living in a 5 bed in ballsbridge driving the range rover with low profile tyres.

Sorcha16

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

No one forced people to borrow money, I want to live in a society where one has to live with the consequences of one's stupid decisions, I don't want to live in a society where other people have to pay for someone else's stupidity.

And if they borrowed with utmost intelligence, I don't want to pay it back then either!

Your mortgage+your house= your problem -simples!

Monty Burnz

Deleted User wrote: »

Growth without substance cannot sustain jobs for any length of time, make hay while the sun shines. When the advertising revenue shrinks, the likes of Google will see their share prices plummet (like last week).

Sorry DB, but that is nonsense. They created a whole new business model which created more wealth and growth. Even if Google disappeared tomorrow, someone else would take over their business model.

This notion that growth consists of eating bigger sandwiches or driving bigger cars is just silly.

Monty Burnz

Zulu wrote: »

wealthy bond holder living in a 5 bed in ballsbridge driving the range rover with low profile tyres.

A neat demonstration here of someone who has no idea who actually held the bonds in Irish banks.

Zulu

Monty Burnz wrote: »

A neat demonstration here of someone who has no idea who actually held the bonds in Irish banks.

I thought you weren't responding to me anyone? :rolleyes:

Scanlas The 2nd

Zulu wrote: »

I'm not suggesting otherwise.
This is true, however, people charged with providing information, or who are employed by the state to protect the public, and fail so miserably and are so grossly incompetent should be held accountable.

Indeed & no one forced people to invest in bonds. We are however protecting bond holders for some reason.
You and I both.
Neither do I, but sadly thats the society we live in.
Taking that into consideration, if I had to choose, I'd rather cover the mistake of the nurse & gard that are stuck in a crappy 2 bed, than that of the property developer/wealthy bond holder living in a 5 bed in ballsbridge driving the range rover with low profile tyres.

If you have a pension plan you are probably one of these bond holders.

AlmightyCushion

dolanbaker wrote: »

Growth without substance cannot sustain jobs for any length of time, make hay while the sun shines. When the advertising revenue shrinks, the likes of Google will see their share prices plummet (like last week).

The reason Google search search price took a tumble was because their net profit was down massively versus the same quarter last year. If you take out the massive loss Motorola had for that quarter then Google's net profit would have been higher than the same quarter last year. So the drop in share price has nothing to do with their core business and advertising revenues like you seem to suggest.

Monty Burnz

Zulu wrote: »

I thought you weren't responding to me anyone? :rolleyes:

I'm not engaging with you. You are wilfully ignorant in every sense of the word.

Monty Burnz

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Sorry DB, but that is nonsense. They created a whole new business model which created more wealth and growth. Even if Google disappeared tomorrow, someone else would take over their business model.

This notion that growth consists of eating bigger sandwiches or driving bigger cars is just silly.

It's called perceived obsolescence, growth is being maintained by persuading people (via advertisements) to buy the latest model and junk their previous one, plus many products are designed to be "life limited", in other words they fail much earlier than they should.

When disposable income declines, more and more consumer goods are going to stay on the shelves or their prices drop to keep them moving (that is actually what is happening) thus lower profit margins for business.

Which in fact is what has happened to housing thus all the negative equality.

Monty Burnz

Deleted User wrote: »

It's called perceived obsolescence, growth is being maintained by persuading people (via advertisements) to buy the latest model and junk their previous one, plus many products are designed to be "life limited", in other words they fail much earlier than they should.

What is called that? The creation of new products, new whole markets and hence new wealth?

Zulu

Monty Burnz wrote: »

You are wilfully ignorant in every sense of the word.

You simply can't forgo the personal insults, can you? :rolleyes:

Squ

Ah, yet another after hours tread for those with perfect 20/20 hindsight vision.

Joy.

Monty Burnz

Squ wrote: »

Ah, yet another after hours tread for those with perfect 20/20 hindsight vision.

Joy.

This is the standard response of those who ignored all the warnings beforehand and now pretend they never heard any.