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

jmayo

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Rent coming in regularly pretty much guarantees you can keep the property. Are you trying to suggest the majority of BTLs bought more than one property to rent out? A minority did this to even bring it up as a substantial impact is a bit much. Even with rent below mortgage the likelihood of repossession is close to zero and an extended mortgage period is likely. You don't have to rely on capital appreciation. Once the mortgage is paid off you have an income of rent. So what if it take a bit longer that is still the standard BTL plan.

You seem to suggest that there is a huge portion of people with multiple rental properties. This is news to me .

All the landlords I know have multiple properties with the modus operandi of the younger ones during the bubble of releasing equity in earlier purchases to put down deposits on even more properties.
The image of all these people just buying the one additional property is the one I reckon that is the least likely.
IMHO you will find a lot of the owners of the one rental property are the ones who got into a relationship where their partner also had a property and they now rent one of them, or the owner is renting out their former primary residence as they have had to move for work.

BTW when I say multiple I mean anything above 1 and also ones who bought overseas.

I used to visit foreign property exhibitions and the amount of people I met who had a rental proeprty here, but then found it too expensive to buy anymore so decided to buy overseas.
Trouble with that was that they were buying in Dubai, Bulgaria, Florida, etc at the height of their bubbles.
A lot of the ones I talked to were not looking for financing in the country they were buying, but were financing through releasing equity here at home.

riclad

PRICES have gone up 1 per cent in dublin.in 2013.
I don,t think ulster bank have enough market share to effect the market ,
up or down ,in most areas.
ANY good investor knows ,you should be aiming for 10 per cent profit on a buy to let,
if its not there do not buy.

Ray Palmer

jmayo wrote: »

All the landlords I know have multiple properties with the modus operandi of the younger ones during the bubble of releasing equity in earlier purchases to put down deposits on even more properties.
The image of all these people just buying the one additional property is the one I reckon that is the least likely.
IMHO you will find a lot of the owners of the one rental property are the ones who got into a relationship where their partner also had a property and they now rent one of them, or the owner is renting out their former primary residence as they have had to move for work.

.

I know lots of LL the older ones may own more than one property for rental but didn't buy during the peak. Younger ones don't own multiple rental properties. How many LL do you know? I know lots more people with 1 rental property than multiple ones.

Anybody willing to gamble by doubling down on property was insane. If we were to take your word that the majority of BTL own multiple rental property it would mean the 1 in 5 BTL figure means something totally different. Instead of 1 in 5 LL in trouble we get much lower figure as one person in trouble would have multiple properties defaulting

Now maybe you know more gamblers than me but I did spend 6 months as a pro poker player:D

Frank Lee Midere

God this thread isn't the brightest.

What needs to be explained is why rents are increasing in a recession. This is an unlikely scenario, and needs to be explained.

Answer: lack of repossessions and lack of credit. Thats it. Thats all. This reduces the normal supply on the market, keeps sales prices artificially high, and keeps people in the rental sector. With 20 percent of people not paying their mortgages, which has got to be the highest ever anywhere, that won't continue. If supply is increased then house prices will fall. House prices at the moment depend on very few cash buyers. Any housing market depending on cash buyers has no long term future.

Rents will at best stay static, because - as exhaustively argued here - the repossessed have to move into rental accommodation. However rent won't go up. In likelihood the rents also likely to fall, because immigration is continuing, and disposable income is falling.

there are plenty of empty properties out there. About two in my apartment of 10 flats. I bet the landlords are just waiting to sell, to get that deal from the bank, so they can move on and aren't bothering to rent out. 20 percent is a high vacancy rate.

uberalles

Ray Palmer wrote: »

You seem to suggest that there is a huge portion of people with multiple rental properties. This is news to me .

If you group all the LL together that are under water and average out all their properties, Its 5.

I know of one person who has 25!

Not everyone bought just 1.

Supply and demand = price. At the very least they will give buyers some more choice but its going to have a downward effect on price for sure IMHO.

Ray Palmer

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

God this thread isn't the brightest.

What needs to be explained is why rents are increasing in a recession. This is an unlikely scenario, and needs to be explained.

Answer: lack of repossessions and lack of credit. Thats it. Thats all. This reduces the normal supply on the market, keeps sales prices artificially high, and keeps people in the rental sector.



.

That would keep prices low it is basic economics. 2 apartments in a block of 10 does not make a great sample size. 150 houses near me and only 2 came up for sale in the last year. They both sold above asking and maybe 15 were sold in the last 10 years. Not much repossessions even possible. Larger sample size and longer period make it more relevant data. In fact in most older areas would have had very few houses sold over the boom years.

Repossessions don't increase supply as the people who lived there don't disappear. It is a rob Peter to pay Paul situation. The hope would all rely on empty BTL being what is repossessed. That is some hope and also smells like a wish to punish BTL investors which aren't all in trouble. There are people on here that have mentioned their landlord is gone and the bank has the property so your dream isn't happening.

uberalles wrote: »

If you group all the LL together that are under water and average out all their properties, Its 5.

I know of one person who has 25!

Not everyone bought just 1.

Supply and demand = price. At the very least they will give buyers some more choice but its going to have a downward effect on price for sure IMHO.

You'll have to provide proof for that and explain your meaning of under water. I suspect you are not taking account of all the LL out there that don't have mortgages and are using BTL figures from the last 10 years.

Never said everybody bought one but the vast majority will be in that category than people who own multiple rentals.

Your friend with 25 were they all geared up in the manner you said earlier? Is he in trouble? I know a guy who owns two apartment blocks of 30 apartments but I wouldn't call him your average LL. He is doing fine.

If your friend with 25 is in trouble and 1 in 5 BTLs in trouble that would mean 125 separate individuals are doing fine.

uberalles

Ray Palmer wrote: »

That would keep prices low it is basic economics. 2 apartments in a block of 10 does not make a great sample size. 150 houses near me and only 2 came up for sale in the last year. They both sold above asking and maybe 15 were sold in the last 10 years. Not much repossessions even possible. Larger sample size and longer period make it more relevant data. In fact in most older areas would have had very few houses sold over the boom years.

Repossessions don't increase supply as the people who lived there don't disappear. It is a rob Peter to pay Paul situation. The hope would all rely on empty BTL being what is repossessed. That is some hope and also smells like a wish to punish BTL investors which aren't all in trouble. There are people on here that have mentioned their landlord is gone and the bank has the property so your dream isn't happening.


You'll have to provide proof for that and explain your meaning of under water. I suspect you are not taking account of all the LL out there that don't have mortgages and are using BTL figures from the last 10 years.

Never said everybody bought one but the vast majority will be in that category than people who own multiple rentals.

Your friend with 25 were they all geared up in the manner you said earlier? Is he in trouble? I know a guy who owns two apartment blocks of 30 apartments but I wouldn't call him your average LL. He is doing fine.

If your friend with 25 is in trouble and 1 in 5 BTLs in trouble that would mean 125 separate individuals are doing fine.

Punish? A lot of people just want to buy a house at real market value to house their family.


The 1 in 5 - I read it somewhere months ago and dont have any links to prove it.

The fellow with 25 houses "underwater". I was told this by a reliable contact in a bank. This individual has over extended himself and cannot meet repayments. They used the term "underwater". I presume the rents are no longer covering the mortgages.

Ray Palmer

uberalles wrote: »

Punish? A lot of people just want to buy a house at real market value to house their family.


The 1 in 5 - I read it somewhere months ago and dont have any links to prove it.

The fellow with 25 houses "underwater". I was told this by a reliable contact in a bank. This individual has over extended himself and cannot meet repayments. They used the term "underwater". I presume the rents are no longer covering the mortgages.

Well hoping for repossession to reduce rent and prices is not looking for real market value.

the 1 in 5 refers to BTL mortgages. That does not equate to 1 in 5 rental properties being repossessed by the banks. It completely misses LL that already own the property. It also doesn't show anyway to know the amount of properties LL own individually.
So do you know the guy with 25 properties or did a friend in the bank tell you about him? Nice to see confidential information is being protected. Not able to meet payments is not such a big deal. It is pretty difficult to take possession of the properties and will remain so even with new legislation.

That is the market no point dreaming it being another way. We are discussing the actual market. Repossessions are not a solution to rental or prices in high demand areas. When you average it all out you will get the apparent big impact but it will be a minority that will benefit and there will be lots of vacant properties near by so the "benefit" will be a mixed blessing. Effectively the problem was people moving further and further out of areas of employment. That was always going to a problem one way or another.

desertcircus

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Well hoping for repossession to reduce rent and prices is not looking for real market value.

If reposessions are less than one in a hundred of properties over three months in arrears and less than one in fifty of buy to lets, increasing repos is the only thing that's ever going to create real market value. At the moment, there's a vast disconnect between what sellers want for their houses and what buyers can get mortgages for, and there's effectively zero pressure on underwater mortgages (which are common enough that real movement on that would have ripple effects throughout the market). The fact that 40% of sales are to cash buyers is pretty clear evidence that something's going to blow up in someone's face soon enough. You can't sustain a housing market with 40% of sales being in cash, and the only reason we have that at the moment is because nobody is being forced to sell when they should be.

uberalles

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Well hoping for repossession to reduce rent and prices is not looking for real market value.

the 1 in 5 refers to BTL mortgages. That does not equate to 1 in 5 rental properties being repossessed by the banks. It completely misses LL that already own the property. It also doesn't show anyway to know the amount of properties LL own individually.
So do you know the guy with 25 properties or did a friend in the bank tell you about him? Nice to see confidential information is being protected. Not able to meet payments is not such a big deal. It is pretty difficult to take possession of the properties and will remain so even with new legislation.

That is the market no point dreaming it being another way. We are discussing the actual market. Repossessions are not a solution to rental or prices in high demand areas. When you average it all out you will get the apparent big impact but it will be a minority that will benefit and there will be lots of vacant properties near by so the "benefit" will be a mixed blessing. Effectively the problem was people moving further and further out of areas of employment. That was always going to a problem one way or another.

Neither are friends of mine. I was talking to someone from Bank circles and they told me to hold off purchasing at the moment due to lots of repros on the way. The case in point were these 25 houses belonging to one person. His name wasnt given. All 3 bed semi, built in the last 6 years, decent spec, no apts. Thats just one investor.

I was reading on a boards thread months ago where a fellow was selling his house and it went sale agreed. Then low and behold the buyer cancels and buys another house for sale in the estate. It went for 10% less for an identical house. It was a repro and the bank took less than market price. So that one house affected his sale. Wait till there are 1000s more and we will see what happens.

The banks wont flood the market...........
Well they all act independent of each other with their own spreadsheets.
Is AIB going to call BOI etc and find out if they also have a repro house in the same estate for sale? Doubt it.

gaius c

Watch Ulster Bank. They have no real reason to wait and will try to get the jump on the Irish banks. Unless that's some high stakes poker game to force the government to buy them out and prevent them from toppling the deck of cards.

Mark Spilane

I can tell you about one close friend of mine and his strategy for sure.
I think there are plenty more similar cases.
He owns 8 houses and apartments which are all BTL. The rent in them all covers the mortgages + expenses and then some.
He is in arrears on them all to about 120 days the last time I asked him.

He can well afford to pay the mortgages from the rent but wont. His thinking is that he is getting a nice loan at a low interest rate and nothing can happen to him. He sister is his solicitor by the way. He is using the money to build a house for his daughter. And to top up his pension before he retires.

When the banks can repossess he just starts paying the mortgages again and its as you were. He wont have to pay the money owed straight away, it will just be added onto the back end of the mortgages at a nice interest rate. They will probably even give him a good deal to start repaying.

He thinks of it as taking advantage of a situation which will give him a nice payment holiday and access to a chunk of cash at a low interest rate. He doesnt care that he wont get a loan anymore as he is retiring and is cash rich for the moment.

This repossession thing wont be leading to very many extra properties actually being repossessed. It will lead to people starting to pay mortgages again, probably at better deals than they already had too.

Start paying a decent amount off your mortgage again = No repossession.
The bank are better off getting the tap flowing than repossessing and losing out. The new rules are just a stick to wave is all.

khards

Mark Spilane wrote: »

Start paying a decent amount off your mortgage again = No repossession.
The bank are better off getting the tap flowing than repossessing and losing out. The new rules are just a stick to wave is all.

It is great to know that those 20,000+ people who are two years behind on payments just have the money tucked down the sofa.

Crisis avoided - there is no real arrears problem!

The fact of the matter is that people would rather be repossessed than pay back negative equity and that is why there are so many arrears.

Mark Spilane

khards wrote: »

It is great to know that those 20,000+ people who are two years behind on payments just have the money tucked down the sofa.

Crisis avoided - there is no real arrears problem!

The fact of the matter is that people would rather be repossessed than pay back negative equity and that is why there are so many arrears.

Point is that if they start paying a reasonable amount now, even after paying nothing for a few years they will not be repossessed. Until the market is buoyant enough to support selling on repossessed properties there is no point in repossessing them, if they are getting paid again.

Peoples debts remain whether their house is repossessed or not. The vast majority when faced with letting the house go and keeping the negative equity, or keeping the house and paying a reasonable amount with the amount owed stuck on the other end will go for the latter.

Woodville56

gaius c wrote: »

Watch Ulster Bank. They have no real reason to wait and will try to get the jump on the Irish banks. Unless that's some high stakes poker game to force the government to buy them out and prevent them from toppling the deck of cards.

As a prospective buyer and new to the vagaries of the housing market, can I ask a few fairly basic questions re the expected /imminent release of repossessed properties on the market -

1. Is it more likely that these houses (if large numbers of such exist) will be drip fed to the market rather than a bulk sell off thus risking further price drops and reduced income for the sellers/banks

2.If /when released to the market, will these properties by sold off at auction or private treaty via nationwide group EA's (eg DNG/Sherry Fitz) or local EA's in the areas concerned... ie national sell off or local piecemeal sales

3.How can prospective buyers recognise such sell off's when they arise - by increase in no. of properties in same estate offered for sale ? by local knowledge ? or by contacting EA's in the areas of interest ?

Apologies for asking what may be obvious questions (with common knowledge answers I suspect) but as I said earlier,we are new to the house hunting game and would like to take the above into account in timing our purchase and whether such properties would result in significant (or any)savings ?
Thanks!

khards

Mark Spilane wrote: »

Until the market is buoyant enough to support selling on repossessed properties there is no point in repossessing them, if they are getting paid again.

I hate to disappoint you but market is about as buoyant as it will get and should be.

Wage to house price multiples are sensible.
Deposit ratios are sensible.
Sales volumes to first time buyers are healthy.

What makes you think that the market needs to be more buoyant, also please describe more buoyant using some example figures.

khards

Woodville56 wrote: »

As a prospective buyer and new to the vagaries of the housing market, can I ask a few fairly basic questions re the expected /imminent release of repossessed properties on the market -

1. Is it more likely that these houses (if large numbers of such exist) will be drip fed to the market rather than a bulk sell off thus risking further price drops and reduced income for the sellers/banks

2.If /when released to the market, will these properties by sold off at auction or private treaty via nationwide group EA's (eg DNG/Sherry Fitz) or local EA's in the areas concerned... ie national sell off or local piecemeal sales

3.How can prospective buyers recognise such sell off's when they arise - by increase in no. of properties in same estate offered for sale ? by local knowledge ? or by contacting EA's in the areas of interest ?

Apologies for asking what may be obvious questions (with common knowledge answers I suspect) but as I said earlier,we are new to the house hunting game and would like to take the above into account in timing our purchase and whether such properties would result in significant (or any)savings ?
Thanks!

1, As pointed out by other posters, It is unlikely the banks are organized enough to phone each other and make sure that they are not offloading properties in the same streets/areas at the same time. Banks tend to act in their own self interests and will do whatever makes them the most money the fastest. So going after those that are making them a loss will be priority.

2, I have seen many repossessions sold through private agents. Most of the repossessions that will go through auctions will be flats and non-mortgageable properties in a state of repair or having questionable titles.

3, You will recognize the sell-offs by lots more property coming up for sale on daft, people protesting in auctions/estate agents or in the street (some people believe they are entitled to free property). Lots of bad PR from the independent.

Mark Spilane

khards wrote: »

I hate to disappoint you but market is about as buoyant as it will get and should be.

Wage to house price multiples are sensible.
Deposit ratios are sensible.
Sales volumes to first time buyers are healthy.

What makes you think that the market needs to be more buoyant, also please describe more buoyant using some example figures.

So you think the banks will repossess thousands houses with sales figures as they are now and they will be sold.
I think you know what buoyant means. Look it up if you dont.
I dont have figures for what is in the future. If I had those I would be rich.

Feel free to back up your own claims with figures though. Since you say those market conditions actually do exist now you should be able to give us the figures for them.

You do realize that when the market picks up prices will rise at a faster rate than now dont you? Then maybe you will see a fair few repossessions that can be sold on by the banks. Not before though im afraid. Property prices will need to be well into a recovery before that can happen.

khards

Mark Spilane wrote: »

So you think the banks will repossess thousands houses with sales figures as they are now and they will be sold.
I think you know what buoyant means. Look it up if you dont.
I dont have figures for what is in the future. If I had those I would be rich.

Feel free to back up your own claims with figures though. Since you say those market conditions actually do exist now you should be able to give us the figures for them.

You do realize that when the market picks up prices will rise at a faster rate than now dont you? Then maybe you will see a fair few repossessions that can be sold on by the banks. Not before though im afraid. Property prices will need to be well into a recovery before that can happen.

Investors in the UK, US and Europe will buy the best and most rentable properties properties via REITS which allows tax free capital gains. That is why the government setup the scheme, so that the repossessed houses could be sold cheaply to investors.

Re: buoyancy of the market.

The market has returned to normal after being overpriced for a long time. The best indicator of this is the house price to wage ratio.



don't forget it is just as possible for prices to undershoot as much as the overshot in the past.

As you can clearly see houses are affordable again and any upward movement in prices would make them less affordable thus throttling the amount of sales.

In clear terms of prices and house price to wage rations, please can you explain buoyancy and 'when the market picks up'?

I think you can clearly see the market has reached a state of normality and things could go either way. The most likely way is a matter of debate, but time will tell on that one.

khards

A little more information on the REITS that are going to hoover up many of the repossessions:

http://budget.gov.ie/budgets/2013/Documents/Budget%202013%20-%20Presentation%20on%20REITS.pdf

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/reit-shares-rocket-10pc-on-first-day-of-trading-29432091.html

The politicians have already filled their pockets with shares in REITS schemes. Why else would they set up this now in 2013? It is all planned.

What is a Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT)?
> A REIT is a listed company, used to hold rental investment properties.
> It is a globally recognised standard for investment in rental property assets,
already established in many developed economies including the US, the UK,
Europe, Asia and Australia.
> The aim of a REIT is to provide an after-tax return for investors similar to that of
direct investment in property, while also giving the benefits of risk diversification.
> To eliminate the double layer of taxation which typically hinders the holding of
property through a company, a REIT is exempt from corporation tax on
qualifying profits from rental property.
> Instead, the company is required to distribute the vast majority of its profits to
investors each year for taxation at the level of the investor.
>The company must have a diverse ownership – no one person or group of
connected persons can control the REIT.

People must be stupid to think that if they do not pay their mortgage the banks are not going to repossess them!

Mark Spilane

khards wrote: »

Investors in the UK, US and Europe will buy the best and most rentable properties properties via REITS which allows tax free capital gains. That is why the government setup the scheme, so that the repossessed houses could be sold cheaply to investors.

Re: buoyancy of the market.

The market has returned to normal after being overpriced for a long time. The best indicator of this is the house price to wage ratio.



don't forget it is just as possible for prices to undershoot as much as the overshot in the past.

As you can clearly see houses are affordable again and any upward movement in prices would make them less affordable thus throttling the amount of sales.

In clear terms of prices and house price to wage rations, please can you explain buoyancy and 'when the market picks up'?

I think you can clearly see the market has reached a state of normality and things could go either way. The most likely way is a matter of debate, but time will tell on that one.

I think we are agreed that the market is getting better.
What we are not agreed on is that I dont think the market is "normal" at all yet. It will get there though over the next few years.
I fail to see where all the buyers for thousands of repossessions a month are going to come from. Maybe hundreds, not thousands, therefore makes no sense to repossess if they can get mortgage payments going instead.

I see a lot of people around thinking that they will be able to pick up a repossession themselves for a nice cheap price.
I dont think they will be able to, unless they want one in Donegal.
Investors and well off people will buy the better properties. And will keep buying until the prices are too high or rents are too low.

Villa05

Mark Spilane wrote: »

I think we are agreed that the market is getting better.
What we are not agreed on is that I dont think the market is "normal" at all yet. It will get there though over the next few years.
I see a lot of people around thinking that they will be able to pick up a repossession themselves for a nice cheap price.
I dont think they will be able to, unless they want one in Donegal.
Investors and well off people will buy the better properties. And will keep buying until the prices are too high or rents are too low.

I do not know where this obsession with Donegal is coming from. Most of the repossessions will occur in areas of high demand.

Banks are businesses, they will take possession of those assets likely to deliver a return of some kind. Properties in Donegal and the "back of beyonds" Dublin commuter belt will be used as guinea pigs for this split mortgage rubbish making the banks look like they are helping those in distress.

gaius c

Been thinking about this split mortgage business and keep asking "what's in it for the banks?" because they have to turn over the warehoused part of the mortgage while getting no capital (and probably no interest) repayments.

But what if the banks were offloading that portion of the loan to somebody else, somebody who would pay 50c in the euro (instead of 25c in the euro) because there's security against the loan that could be called in at the end of the split mortgage if they don't pay up the remainder...

Villa05

Ray Palmer wrote: »

You seem to suggest that there is a huge portion of people with multiple rental properties. This is news to me . /QUOTE]

There are figures out there from the household charge returns that will give you an idea of how many multiple property landlords/ladys are out there.

Woodville56

Mark Spilane wrote: »

I

I see a lot of people around thinking that they will be able to pick up a repossession themselves for a nice cheap price.
I dont think they will be able to, unless they want one in Donegal.

The inference here is that prospective house buyers are misguidedly circling like vultures waiting to feed of the misfortunes or vulnerability of some genuinely distressed property owners or greedy speculative types whose empire building has hit the rocks. Most house hunters are under no illusion as to the difference between a cheap property and a value for money property. As prospective house buyers, hoping to buy out first home after years of renting , it-would be remiss of us and others in a similar position not to consider carefully the implications and possibilities arising from any repossession sales in our area. As mentioned in postings on this topic, there are speculative types around with money to spend who will once again make the task of those hoping to gain a first step on the property ladder as challenging as heretofore.
I sense a certain condescension and smugness entering the debate around the subject of repossession and those who might benefit from the possibility of acquiring a home at a price within their budget from such repossessions. I for one would gladly live in Donegal , work permitting etc!!

Ray Palmer

Villa05 wrote: »

I do not know where this obsession with Donegal is coming from. Most of the repossessions will occur in areas of high demand.

Banks are businesses, they will take possession of those assets likely to deliver a return of some kind. Properties in Donegal and the "back of beyonds" Dublin commuter belt will be used as guinea pigs for this split mortgage rubbish making the banks look like they are helping those in distress.

Just because the banks would prefer high demand area housing doesn't mean they will get it. This is the least likely to be in distress. They retained more of their value,are easier to rent and situated in areas close to employment.

Woodville56 wrote: »

The inference here is that prospective house buyers are misguidedly circling like vultures waiting to feed of the misfortunes or vulnerability of some genuinely distressed property owners or greedy speculative types whose empire building has hit the rocks.

Oh it isn't being inferred it is what people are hoping for and obvious. People post up threads asking how to buy reposed houses all the time. People make statements like they are waiting for all the repossessions to happen so they can get a cheap house. There were people planning this before the bubble burst completely unaware that the country would be in a terrible state as a result, yes truly misguided.

jay0109

People are waiting for repossessions so that some supply comes onto the market and houses fall to a 'fair' value as opposed to the still very highly priced family homes to be found in parts of the country.
Don't convince yourself that 'fair value' = 'cheap' so as to back up your stance which appears to be anti-repossessions

Ray Palmer

jay0109 wrote: »

People are waiting for repossessions so that some supply comes onto the market and houses fall to a 'fair' value as opposed to the still very highly priced family homes to be found in parts of the country.
Don't convince yourself that 'fair value' = 'cheap' so as to back up your stance which appears to be anti-repossessions

If you actually read the thread you would see I am not anti-repossessions. You may also see that people are looking for property cheap not just value for money.

It is very clear my stance is repossessions will not give the windfall people hope for. Whether it is value for money or cheap they mean. It is wishful thing or telling people how it "should" be and ignoring the reality.

uberalles

gaius c wrote: »

Watch Ulster Bank. They have no real reason to wait and will try to get the jump on the Irish banks. Unless that's some high stakes poker game to force the government to buy them out and prevent them from toppling the deck of cards.

+ 1

UB were not bailed out by anyone here.
UB Mortgages - 1 in 4 paying 0 on their mortgages.
UB are the worst performing bank in their group and lot of their employees and branches are to close. Im sure they are being told to get their balance sheet in the best poss order ASAP by head ofice.
They are also the most difficult to deal with if you are in arrears I hear.

42% of all mortgages are held by foreign banks and as relatively late entrants to the Irish Mortgage market, hold a disproportionate amount of negative equity mortgages.

The foreign banks will lead the way in Repros.

Is it AIB who has outsourced their debt management side of things as a PR job?

gaius c

uberalles wrote: »

+ 1

UB were not bailed out by anyone here.
UB Mortgages - 1 in 4 paying 0 on their mortgages.
UB are the worst performing bank in their group and lot of their employees and branches are to close. Im sure they are being told to get their balance sheet in the best poss order ASAP by head ofice.
They are also the most difficult to deal with if you are in arrears I hear.

42% of all mortgages are held by foreign banks and as relatively late entrants to the Irish Mortgage market, hold a disproportionate amount of negative equity mortgages.

The foreign banks will lead the way in Repros.

Is it AIB who has outsourced their debt management side of things as a PR job?

No need to appease the government and under pressure from their parent bank to recover capital. Of course, they are going to try and beat the others to the exit gate.

Irish banks will be left holding devalued crud...