Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Glut of repossessed houses could depress prices ‘by up to 25%’

Options
1…1011131516…100

Comments

  • Options
    #362
    The_Conductor
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 32,285 Mod ✭✭✭✭The_Conductor


    cookie1977 wrote: »
    You still wont see the glut of ppr/pdh repossessions many hope for. It'll primarily focus on btl's which again are probably more made up of apartments all over the country which not many are going to be rushing after to buy.

    I'm not so sure. Its not worth a lender's while repossessing properties that they can't at very least rent out, never mind sell. Personally I think properties in Dublin and surrounding areas will be the first to be targetted, and only then will the crud elsewhere be tackled. Its simply not worth their while focusing elsewhere- particularly given the unrealistic targets that they have set.


  • Options
    #363
    cookie1977
    Registered Users Posts: 6,794 ✭✭✭cookie1977


    Galego wrote: »
    I do not expect tons of repossessions, no. But any repossessions or threat of repossessions will stop this non-sense carrying on which Ireland has had for the past few years. At least, that is what I am hoping for.



    Yes many apartments but also many family homes AND yes some in desirable areas in Dublin. I've been reviewing arrears cases lately and some of the stuff is shocking. The country went completely bonkers lending and borrowing....

    Time will tell.


  • Options
    #364
    stevedublin
    Registered Users Posts: 979 ✭✭✭stevedublin


    cookie1977 wrote: »
    What would many of you have an issue with (in relation to luxuries) in that article to be honest?

    People who are supposedly trying to pay back debt should not be driving around in a 2011 BMW and have full SKY package.


  • Options
    #365
    cookie1977
    Registered Users Posts: 6,794 ✭✭✭cookie1977


    smccarrick wrote: »
    I'm not so sure. Its not worth a lender's while repossessing properties that they can't at very least rent out, never mind sell. Personally I think properties in Dublin and surrounding areas will be the first to be targetted, and only then will the crud elsewhere be tackled. Its simply not worth their while focusing elsewhere- particularly given the unrealistic targets that they have set.

    I agree in cases where it should happen it needs to happen but when you have parish pump politics in play things dont always happen as they're supposed to.


  • Options
    #366
    Galego
    Registered Users Posts: 1,237 ✭✭✭Galego


    cookie1977 wrote: »
    What would many of you have an issue with (in relation to luxuries) in that article to be honest?
    ......................


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #367
    cookie1977
    Registered Users Posts: 6,794 ✭✭✭cookie1977


    stevedublin wrote: »
    People who are supposedly trying to pay back debt should not be driving around in a 2011 BMW and have full SKY package.

    Em but didn't the article state that both the BMW and SKY full package have to be given up?


  • Options
    #368
    stevedublin
    Registered Users Posts: 979 ✭✭✭stevedublin


    cookie1977 wrote: »
    Em but didn't the article state that both the BMW and SKY full package have to be given up?

    yep, I agree with the article.


  • Options
    #369
    The_Conductor
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 32,285 Mod ✭✭✭✭The_Conductor


    cookie1977 wrote: »
    I agree in cases where it should happen it needs to happen but when you have parish pump politics in play things dont always happen as they're supposed to.

    I honestly don't think politicians are going to get involved (with a few notable exceptions- thankyou Enda). Its toxic and will only come back to haunt them, regardless of what they do.

    God, how I hate the way this country is run.......


  • Options
    #370
    cookie1977
    Registered Users Posts: 6,794 ✭✭✭cookie1977


    smccarrick wrote: »
    I honestly don't think politicians are going to get involved (with a few notable exceptions- thankyou Enda). Its toxic and will only come back to haunt them, regardless of what they do.

    God, how I hate the way this country is run.......

    Might want to tell that to the supporters of
    Luke Flanagan
    Michael Lowry
    Any of the Healy Raes
    Mick Wallace
    James O'Reilly
    ...

    I think I'll stop now.


  • Options
    #371
    The_Conductor
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 32,285 Mod ✭✭✭✭The_Conductor


    cookie1977 wrote: »
    Em but didn't the article state that both the BMW and SKY full package have to be given up?

    Lol- so they have to give up their status car and full sky packages- and live like the rest of us plebs? So what! I drive a 10 year old Volvo- and its the most reliable motor I've ever sat into- if I won the lottery I wouldn't swap it.

    Sky- who cares- Freesat and Saorview are more than sufficient for 99% of people. So damn what they don't have their sports channels. I'm crying crocodile tears.

    People really have no idea what is a necessity and what is a luxury.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #372
    cookie1977
    Registered Users Posts: 6,794 ✭✭✭cookie1977


    stevedublin wrote: »
    yep, I agree with the article.

    I got the impression that Villa did not agree with allowing them to keep some things (like the car for 2000 etc...). I was querying what he thought was a luxary for what they were being left with.


  • Options
    #373
    Villa05
    Registered Users Posts: 4,618 ✭✭✭Villa05


    cookie1977 wrote: »
    Em but didn't the article state that both the BMW and SKY full package have to be given up?

    Check out the comments in both articles I linked, people have no clue what "misery" and "struggling" is.

    Countries that are loaning money to Ireland for the bailout have citizens that can only dream about the income levels we are on


  • Options
    #374
    cookie1977
    Registered Users Posts: 6,794 ✭✭✭cookie1977


    smccarrick wrote: »
    Lol- so they have to give up their status car and full sky packages- and live like the rest of us plebs? So what! I drive a 10 year old Volvo- and its the most reliable motor I've ever sat into- if I won the lottery I wouldn't swap it.

    Sky- who cares- Freesat and Saorview are more than sufficient for 99% of people. So damn what they don't have their sports channels. I'm crying crocodile tears.

    People really have no idea what is a necessity and what is a luxury.

    I'd agree but in relation to the article and what they were being allowed to retain I didn't see any issue with that (maybe any sky package would be bad). I still think (and many will disagree no doubt) that the internet should be left on as a basic package. And as the article pointed out. If someone is currently sick and receiving essential care under private medical insurance I dont see a huge issue with that. If they're not sick at all then they should have to give up private medical insurance


  • Options
    #375
    cookie1977
    Registered Users Posts: 6,794 ✭✭✭cookie1977


    Villa05 wrote: »
    Check out the comments in both articles I linked, people have no clue what "misery" and "struggling" is.

    Countries that are loaning money to Ireland for the bailout have citizens that can only dream about the income levels we are on

    There's a lot I agree and disagree with but some do make good points. Many families would be fine now with their mortgages if the government didn't keep knocking on their door for more and more cash (I included). These families were not at fault to begin with but they're being hit as they (just about) have some cash or at least a job.

    If they didn't keep taking cash in the form of taxes (stealth or otherwise) off them then they would not need any help from the state/bank or the personal insolvency bill


  • Options
    #376
    stevedublin
    Registered Users Posts: 979 ✭✭✭stevedublin


    cookie1977 wrote: »
    I got the impression that Villa did not agree with allowing them to keep some things (like the car for 2000 etc...). I was querying what he thought was a luxary for what they were being left with.

    I thought Villa0 was criticising Martin in the second linked article, who seemed to think debtors should keep larger car, TV package.


  • Options
    #377
    cookie1977
    Registered Users Posts: 6,794 ✭✭✭cookie1977


    stevedublin wrote: »
    I thought Villa0 was criticising Martin in the second linked article, who seemed to think debtors should keep larger car, TV package.

    If that's the case then I agree with villa.


  • Options
    #378
    Villa05
    Registered Users Posts: 4,618 ✭✭✭Villa05


    cookie1977 wrote: »
    I got the impression that Villa did not agree with allowing them to keep some things (like the car for 2000 etc...). I was querying what he thought was a luxary for what they were being left with.

    as per my original post please note
    Journal Article = Balanced
    Indo Article = Rubbish


  • Options
    #379
    Villa05
    Registered Users Posts: 4,618 ✭✭✭Villa05


    smccarrick wrote: »
    I'm not so sure. Its not worth a lender's while repossessing properties that they can't at very least rent out, never mind sell. Personally I think properties in Dublin and surrounding areas will be the first to be targetted, and only then will the crud elsewhere be tackled. Its simply not worth their while focusing elsewhere- particularly given the unrealistic targets that they have set.

    Hence the point made on Vin B that Banks would go after those on Trackers and those with equity in their homes first.


  • Options
    #380
    cookie1977
    Registered Users Posts: 6,794 ✭✭✭cookie1977


    Villa05 wrote: »
    Hence the point made on Vin B that Banks would go after those on Trackers and those with equity in their homes first.

    Would people consider it a good thing if banks went after those in short term (but still significant) arrears first who still had equity in their home rather than those in hugely significant arrears but zero equity in their property?


  • Options
    #381
    Galego
    Registered Users Posts: 1,237 ✭✭✭Galego


    cookie1977 wrote: »
    Would people consider it a good thing if banks went after those in short term (but still significant) arrears first who still had equity in their home rather than those in hugely significant arrears but zero equity in their property?
    Yes.
    What's the point in repossessing assets which have zero equity value? It would only add more costs for the banks.

    The whole thing about repossession is that the lender can recover certain level of debts lent to the borrower.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #382
    The_Conductor
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 32,285 Mod ✭✭✭✭The_Conductor


    cookie1977 wrote: »
    Would people consider it a good thing if banks went after those in short term (but still significant) arrears first who still had equity in their home rather than those in hugely significant arrears but zero equity in their property?

    Big time- we want to avoid having to add yet more capital into the banks- any measures taken have to have a cost:benefit analysis for the taxpayer- the owner of the property is a secondary consideration. The ordinary person in the street who didn't gamble wildly- is the one carrying the bucket for the whole sorry mess, we owe it to those lucky enough to still be in employment, not to lumber yet more debt on them. Repossess- properties with equity, alongside those easy to dispose of, and only after this, should the crud be dealt with.


  • Options
    #383
    Zamboni
    Registered Users Posts: 4,305 ✭✭✭Zamboni


    smccarrick wrote: »
    Repossess- properties with equity, alongside those easy to dispose of, and only after this, should the crud be dealt with.

    And lets be honest, the teams in the banks tasked with getting as much equity out of these cases will be working on some form of a performance related/commission basis - i.e. they will be like schools of piranha.


  • Options
    #384
    cookie1977
    Registered Users Posts: 6,794 ✭✭✭cookie1977


    So what would be the criteria for repossession? Either legally defined or defined by yourselves.

    If we go with the idea that a lender does not want your home but would rather you stay and pay, what would be the repossession criteria.


    In other news:
    Sean Dunne declared Bankrupt in America
    http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/sean-dunne-declared-bankrupt--in-america-589751.html


  • Options
    #385
    bnt
    Registered Users Posts: 12,998 ✭✭✭✭bnt


    I was wondering whether (a) many repossessions are happening, and (b) what the outcome is for the banks. An Indo piece on the AIB Pensions deficit gives some figures on what AIB has done so far:
    The widening pension deficit comes as it emerged that the banks are losing millions on repossessions.

    AIB lost €14m on houses it took over and sold during 2012 at an average loss of €220,000 per house, with some houses going for less than 40pc of the value of the original mortgage, while PTSB saw €19m disappear on 127 houses it had taken ownership of and then sold.

    Bank of Ireland was the most active of the three banks, repossessing 141 houses during 2012.
    That's why we aren't seeing more repossessions: they're costing the banks millions already.

    There's another headline today: Property crash wipes €257bn off value of homes in six years. Which is only true if you assume that that €257bn value was there in the first place ...

    From out there on the moon, international politics look so petty. You want to grab a politician by the scruff of the neck and drag him a quarter of a million miles out and say, ‘Look at that, you son of a bitch’.

    — Edgar Mitchell, Apollo 14 Astronaut



  • Options
    #386
    The_Conductor
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 32,285 Mod ✭✭✭✭The_Conductor


    bnt wrote: »
    That's why we aren't seeing more repossessions: they're costing the banks millions already.

    We allowed for all of this when we recapitalised the banks.
    If they are seeing 40% returns on mortgages- its damn close to the accepted fall in property value. The reason we're not seeing more falls- is the banks are comfortable sitting on their cash, rather than crystalising losses, despite the fact that they have been supplied with cash for this very purpose.

    Our banking sector is dysfunctional- plain and simple- and crystalising the losses on their balance sheets is only one exercise towards normalising them as commercial entities.


  • Options
    #387
    gaius c
    Registered Users Posts: 3,528 ✭✭✭gaius c


    smccarrick wrote: »
    The actual bill is to be distributed to TDs next week, for discussion in the next session. From the sounds of it- it will be more onerous than many have speculated- which is fine, as people won't be rewarded for their foolishness, but will be given an opportunity over time, to get back on their feet.

    They are saying that the terms of this are such that folk may be inclined to continue going to the UK to seek bankruptcy as the terms may not be sufficiently generous to satisfy them. So be it.

    UK bankruptcy isn't a total lark for small-time robopaddys either. There are residency requirements for instance.
    cookie1977 wrote: »
    So what would be the criteria for repossession? Either legally defined or defined by yourselves.

    If we go with the idea that a lender does not want your home but would rather you stay and pay, what would be the repossession criteria.


    In other news:
    Sean Dunne declared Bankrupt in America
    http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/sean-dunne-declared-bankrupt--in-america-589751.html
    He has only applied for bankruptcy. He hasn't actually got it yet.
    cookie1977 wrote: »
    You still wont see the glut of ppr/pdh repossessions many hope for. It'll primarily focus on btl's which again are probably more made up of apartments all over the country which not many are going to be rushing after to buy.
    I don't think it matters what gets repossessed really. Apartments get sold for what they are worth and become available as low-cost rentals for young single people, rather than the half-occupied (or not at all) blocks which litter our cities. This will affect other prices by substitution.


  • Options
    #388
    cookie1977
    Registered Users Posts: 6,794 ✭✭✭cookie1977


    gaius c wrote: »

    I don't think it matters what gets repossessed really. Apartments get sold for what they are worth and become available as low-cost rentals for young single people, rather than the half-occupied (or not at all) blocks which litter our cities. This will affect other prices by substitution.

    Yes but will that satisfy those thinking that a windfall of cheap top quality properties in prime locations is coming?


  • Options
    #389
    Galego
    Registered Users Posts: 1,237 ✭✭✭Galego


    cookie1977 wrote: »
    Yes but will that satisfy those thinking that a windfall of cheap top quality properties in prime locations is coming?

    Let the market (without any intervention) decide that. I am ok with prices going up or down or remaining the same - I couldnt care less because I already bought. But as a tax payer in this country, I am not happy with the current banks/government strategy, then tax payers' money will need to come to the rescue again - or maybe depositors this time!


  • Options
    #390
    gaius c
    Registered Users Posts: 3,528 ✭✭✭gaius c


    cookie1977 wrote: »
    Yes but will that satisfy those thinking that a windfall of cheap top quality properties in prime locations is coming?

    Now now, you're sounding like the WUM you claim not to be.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #391
    cookie1977
    Registered Users Posts: 6,794 ✭✭✭cookie1977


    gaius c wrote: »
    Now now, you're sounding like the WUM you claim not to be.

    Pathetic comment really.

    I think this and other threads (not to mention the media comments) points to an urgent need to analyse what is the real and current situation of arrears in this country. A proper analysis of can pay wont pay, those in arrears but which could be workable long term, those with unworkable mortgages and of these those with equity still in their properties (a tiny proportion I suspect).

    Until a full analysis has been done we wont know A) what to do or B) the real cost.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement