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

The Spider

daveirl wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Nope, if they leave her alone, for whatever amount of time, whether she pays or not, it's less repo's on the books that they have to get rid of.

Selling the repo's is a massive overhead in terms of manpower etc. The banks have been making staff redundant and it's in their remit to have less staff and encourage people to do all their banking online. Lets say an average wage of 35k for a member of staff, after insurance and other costs this wage is more like 55k, suddenly the banks have to employ a large amount of people to deal with all these repos if they go ahead, and then they're stuck with them. Then they have to engage with various estate agencies and all the other administrative costs. On top of all of the above they have to take a massive hit on the loan.

Much more sensible to leave her be, send out a few letters just so she knows they're watching. Now house prices have turned the corner, the longer they leave her, the less of a hit they'll have to take when they do eventually reposes.

They have a price point or loss amount that's acceptable and when the house reaches that point, that's when they'll move, if the properties don't reach that point then the owner will more than likely have them indefinitely.

The banks have a repo order and can use it any time within twelve years.

The only hope for repo's is for prices to continue to increase.

(there will be areas in the back of beyonds that the bank will take the hit on now, either through writedowns or repo's, more likely to be a writedown as they know they can't sell apartments in Leitrim.)

OMD

cookie1977 wrote: »

Here's some stats from the IBF from 2005-Q2 2013

http://www.ibf.ie/Libraries/Research_Statistics/IBF-PwC_Mortgage_Market_Profile_Times_Series_Q2_2013.sflb.ashx

Total mortgages drawn down in 2005: 201,260
Total Mortgages drawn down by Q2 2013: 5,297

2013 as a percentage of 2005 = 2.6%

And people think things might be on the up? It's going to take quite a few more quarters to determine that to be honest.
]

You need to be careful taking the first 6 months of this year in isolation. It is better to use the year July 12 to June 13. There was an increase in mortgages at end if 2012 to avail of TRS. Consequently there was a reduction in mortgages in Q1 2013. Mortgages are running at about 15,000 a year at the moment. If we believe that cash buyers make up 40% of the market we are probably seeing 25,000 transactions a year.

cookie1977

OMD wrote: »

You need to be careful taking the first 6 months of this year in isolation. It is better to use the year July 12 to June 13. There was an increase in mortgages at end if 2012 to avail of TRS. Consequently there was a reduction in mortgages in Q1 2013. Mortgages are running at about 15,000 a year at the moment. If we believe that cash buyers make up 40% of the market we are probably seeing 25,000 transactions a year.

I did note that in the graph and considering there was an incentive at the end of last year (tax relief on interest) I'd be happy to bet this year will be less then last.

gaius c

The Spider wrote: »

Nope, if they leave her alone, for whatever amount of time, whether she pays or not, it's less repo's on the books that they have to get rid of.

Selling the repo's is a massive overhead in terms of manpower etc. The banks have been making staff redundant and it's in their remit to have less staff and encourage people to do all their banking online. Lets say an average wage of 35k for a member of staff, after insurance and other costs this wage is more like 55k, suddenly the banks have to employ a large amount of people to deal with all these repos if they go ahead, and then they're stuck with them. Then they have to engage with various estate agencies and all the other administrative costs. On top of all of the above they have to take a massive hit on the loan.

Much more sensible to leave her be, send out a few letters just so she knows they're watching. Now house prices have turned the corner, the longer they leave her, the less of a hit they'll have to take when they do eventually reposes.

They have a price point or loss amount that's acceptable and when the house reaches that point, that's when they'll move, if the properties don't reach that point then the owner will more than likely have them indefinitely.

The banks have a repo order and can use it any time within twelve years.

The only hope for repo's is for prices to continue to increase.

(there will be areas in the back of beyonds that the bank will take the hit on now, either through writedowns or repo's, more likely to be a writedown as they know they can't sell apartments in Leitrim.)

Really Spider? You need to add your "interest" to your sig because you're not fooling anybody by parroting the Sindo's "it would cost too much to crystalise the loss" line.

By keeping her on their books, their borrowing costs increase because it's bad debt not realised and that's a cost they'll face year after year.

gaius c

The Spider wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/property-mortgages/property-investors-given-50pc-mortgage-writeoffs-29505899.html

Write downs on the way, a lottery at the moment, but sooner or later this will be spread to all borrowers. Anyone hoping for that cheap repo, keep dreaming, bottom was last year.

Incidentally, I don't believe for a second that the Indo is reporting the facts of this story correctly or honestly. They have a history of selective or downright misleading reporting when it suits whatever agenda the writer has or generation of sales.

The Spider

gaius c wrote: »

Really Spider? You need to add your "interest" to your sig because you're not fooling anybody by parroting the Sindo's "it would cost too much to crystalise the loss" line.

By keeping her on their books, their borrowing costs increase because it's bad debt not realised and that's a cost they'll face year after year.

Everyone has an interest, and its all about timing, I see even over on the pin that long time bears have crossed over and declared the bottom as last year.

Not to worry with prices rising at this rate they'll be able to repossess those apartments in no time.

Villa05

Vincent P Martin: Help finally at hand as heroic homeowners get support

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/vincent-p-martin-help-finally-at-hand-as-heroic-homeowners-get-support-29521790.html

Some complain about the costs of the formal insolvency process. This is utterly mistaken. The costs of the PIP are borne by the banks and so, for most people, there will be no charge and where there is, it should be nominal.

Yet another professional class has stuck their noses in the trough to gouge more fees from peoples misfortune.

PIP's Personal Insolvency practitioners assist the distressed borrower in negotiating settlement of a distressed mortgage, The fees come out of the assets of the distressed borrower and are therefore part of the settlement. So one way or the other you are paying, if there is nothing there the taxpayer is paying which will be you also.

The real irony here is that the PIP will be a QFA (Qualified Financial Adviser). These will be the people that advised many to pile into property in the first place.

There is definitely money to be made on property, just don't be the fool that owns property with a large mortgage.

Villa05

http://www.centralbank.ie/polstats/stats/mortgagearrears/Documents/2013q2_ie_mortgage_arrears_statistics.pdf
- In arrears up to 90 days 142,892 (Q1 2013 142,118) [Change in period: +774 or +0.5%]
- In arrears 91 to 180 days 45,018 (Q1 2013 46,564) [Change in period: - 1,546 or – 3.3%]
- In arrears over 180 days 80,262 (Q1 2013 77,349) [Change in period: +2,913 or +3.8%]
of which
- In arrears 181 to 360 days 23,099 (Q1 2013 23,214) [Change in period: -115 or -0.5%]
- In arrears 361 to 720 days 28,303 (Q1 2013 28,195) [Change in period: +108 or +0.4%]
- In arrears over 720 days 28,860 (Q1 2013 25,940) [Change in period: +2,920 or +11.3%]

11.3% increase in arrears of 2 years or more, nearly 29,000 properties. When we exclude sites from a search on Daft, there are 42,154 properties for sale in the Republic of Ireland.

Arrears present the potential to immediately double the the stock for sale, were we living in a normal functioning economy.

142,892 mortgages are less than 3 months in arrears, This leaves the pipeline of future problem mortgages well and truly open and bulging with significant austerity budgets to come.

Yet the media are warning of a bubble in house prices, at least they are giving a warning this time and not just blowing up that bubble as quickly as they can

roro2

Villa05 wrote: »

http://www.centralbank.ie/polstats/stats/mortgagearrears/Documents/2013q2_ie_mortgage_arrears_statistics.pdf
- In arrears up to 90 days 142,892 (Q1 2013 142,118) [Change in period: +774 or +0.5%]
- In arrears 91 to 180 days 45,018 (Q1 2013 46,564) [Change in period: - 1,546 or – 3.3%]
- In arrears over 180 days 80,262 (Q1 2013 77,349) [Change in period: +2,913 or +3.8%]
of which
- In arrears 181 to 360 days 23,099 (Q1 2013 23,214) [Change in period: -115 or -0.5%]
- In arrears 361 to 720 days 28,303 (Q1 2013 28,195) [Change in period: +108 or +0.4%]
- In arrears over 720 days 28,860 (Q1 2013 25,940) [Change in period: +2,920 or +11.3%]

11.3% increase in arrears of 2 years or more, nearly 29,000 properties. When we exclude sites from a search on Daft, there are 42,154 properties for sale in the Republic of Ireland.

Arrears present the potential to immediately double the the stock for sale, were we living in a normal functioning economy.

142,892 mortgages are less than 3 months in arrears, This leaves the pipeline of future problem mortgages well and truly open and bulging with significant austerity budgets to come.

Yet the media are warning of a bubble in house prices, at least they are giving a warning this time and not just blowing up that bubble as quickly as they can

One of the lines in your table is out - there's 45,018 in arrears of up to 90 days. 142,900 is the total arrears number. Crazy numbers regardless. But there won't be mass repossessions of this scale - just 15 BTLs were repossessed involuntarily in the entire quarter vs 10,000 BTL mortgages in arrears of 2+ years. So the price squeeze will continue, driven by a lack of supply due to the inability of people in arrears/negative equity to move and those with Trackers unlikely to want to.

Villa05

roro2 wrote: »

One of the lines in your table is out - there's 45,018 in arrears of up to 90 days. 142,900 is the total arrears number. Crazy numbers regardless. But there won't be mass repossessions of this scale - just 15 BTLs were repossessed involuntarily in the entire quarter vs 10,000 BTL mortgages in arrears of 2+ years. So the price squeeze will continue, driven by a lack of supply due to the inability of people in arrears/negative equity to move and those with Trackers unlikely to want to.

I think your right, we probably wont see mass repossessions due to the cost involved a more likely scenario will be the bank to offer debt write-downs in return for the owner voluntarily selling the house and returning the proceeds of the sale to the bank. It will be done in a managed way of course, however it will still have a downward effect on prices in two ways
- Increased supply
- Increased interest rates on new and existing mortgages to help cover the massive losses the banks will accrue (Some banks may require another bailout).

who_ru

When you read about the levels of arrears, and 5 years after the collapse started, and so little done.

is it any wonder the IMF are running the show here? We are so grotesquely incompetent at running our affairs in a responsible fashion.

Plus has anyone else noticed how almost no Govt ministers are waffling on about 'exiting' the bailout now, despite going on non stop about it for ages. Can't see it happening myself.

jay0109

who_ru wrote: »

When you read about the levels of arrears, and 5 years after the collapse started, and so little done.

is it any wonder the IMF are running the show here? We are so grotesquely incompetent at running our affairs in a responsible fashion.

Plus has anyone else noticed how almost no Govt ministers are waffling on about 'exiting' the bailout now, despite going on non stop about it for ages. Can't see it happening myself.

we'll exit the bailout even if it means borrowing at twice the current interest rates...this Govt have staked all on that, and they'll achieve it by hook or by crook....most likely a fudge

And if the IMF were running the show as they wanted, would doctors still be charging €50 per visit, would the supply of places in medical colleges still be tightly controlled, would you have to have a barrister in a court case when a solicitor would suffice....would there really still be no repossessions.

No doubt about it, Paddy is still dictating the way the bailout is applied on the ground....and that means hours/budget cuts for special needs areas, cuts for public transport, increased taxes for all...

Villa05

http://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/homes-and-property/latest-increases-in-dublin-prices-does-not-mean-market-will-not-see-further-falls-1.1500229

What about a renewed fall in prices? The biggest domestic risk is a flood of properties on to the market if indebted people use new personal insolvency mechanisms to offload unaffordable mortgages, handing the keys back to the banks in the process, and if the banks move towards the levels of repossessions that take place in peer countries...............
Gregory Connor, an academic economist, and Karl Deeter, a mortgage broker, have both been vilified for correctly stating that a near non-existent level of repossessions is usually not good for those directly involved and certainly not in the collective good.
If the supply and demand fundamentals mean further price falls must happen, best that it happens soon. Dragging it out further will only prolong the pain of adjustment.

I can not see a way out for the majority of those a year or more in arrears other than using the personal insolvency mechanisms to escape the mortgage and return the keys.

Villa05

Villa05 wrote: »

Vincent P Martin: Help finally at hand as heroic homeowners get support

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/vincent-p-martin-help-finally-at-hand-as-heroic-homeowners-get-support-29521790.html
.

A comment from the article well worth repeating here before its gone and the tripe from the salesman remains

Another one-sided article full of claims ranging from the entirely subjective to the completely ridiculous. Who does Vincent P. Martin think will be paying for these debt write-downs? The taxpayer, of course.

So we tax everybody - including renters - to keep people in houses that the renters can't afford to buy at current prices. Brilliant. And of course money taxed from taxpayers who are paying their way is taken OUT of their pockets - money that would be spent in the economy - and put into the pockets of people only interested in paying down debt, handing it over to the banks. So how does this boost the economy exactly?

Why does nobody ask any of the hard questions of the debt forgiveness lobby? Why are the lawyers behind New Beginning so keen on debt forgiveness?

On a side note, it seems that you can't practice in the legal profession if you are bankrupt.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Mustard1972

My friend has plenty of money and a good job (solicitor) but isnt bothered paying his mortgage on either his own house or his 4 investment properties.
He is on trackers for them all and has decided to put the money where it earns more than the tracker interest is. Says he is making about €1500 a month by doing this.
He ignores any letters from the bank. He says he will come to a deal with the bank which is very favourable to him. But if he doesnt get that deal then when at the last ditch he will just pay off the arrears and it will all be over and back to normal, but for the moment is earning more than the interest that is accruing.

People say that the bank can take him off the tracker and they have been threatening that for years, but he says they cant do that at all. And im sure that if they could have they would have.

He says that the difference in the rates pays for his holidays every year and then some - and he goes on some nice holidays.

I wouldnt have the balls to do it, but he seems to know what he is doing.

Villa05

Your friend sounds like the type of person we need to throw the book at and make an example of - The cost of not repossessing in one post

OMD

Villa05 wrote: »

Your friend sounds like the type of person we need to throw the book at and make an example of - The cost of not repossessing in one post

Why? He is simply looking for the best terms he can. He is not looking to default but if he can renegotiate his loans he will do so. I see nothing wrong in what he is doing. If he cannot get a deal he will pay off everything he owes. What is your problem with that?

nomoreindie

OMD wrote: »

Why? He is simply looking for the best terms he can. He is not looking to default but if he can renegotiate his loans he will do so. I see nothing wrong in what he is doing. If he cannot get a deal he will pay off everything he owes. What is your problem with that?

He will have zero chance of renogiating as he is fully capable of paying his debts. It is a massive problem in Ireland that a lot of despicable people are choosing to follow this course of action. Tracker rates should be taken off people who can pay but wont pay.

Mustard1972

nomoreindie wrote: »

He will have zero chance of renogiating as he is fully capable of paying his debts. It is a massive problem in Ireland that a lot of despicable people are choosing to follow this course of action. Tracker rates should be taken off people who can pay but wont pay.

The banks scooped up everyone into as much debt as they could get them into using trackers as the carrot.
Now that that has back fired and there is sweet fa the banks can do about it they cant go crying to daddy that some people are able to play their game better than they are.
My friend is doing the opposite of what the banks did. He is using their own greedy system against them.

They overlent to him. He holds all the cards now and can and will take full advantage. He has already had one bank offer him 10% for paying money off the mortgage he had with them. He went back to them and spelled out to them what it is actually costing them and that it was worth a lot more than 10%. He got what he was looking for off them. Now hes just trying it on with the other banks. Even if it doesnt work hes getting his holidays out of it for a few years.

He has another one now on interest only on the tracker after striking that deal with the bank. He told them that either they take interest only or nothing. They refused at first but caved as it was in their interests and he wasnt caving. Now he pays that at his tracker of ECB + .75%

The last thing he wants at the moment is to get the properties into positive equity, so he is keeping the money. If they were in positive equity the bank would try their best to repossess, but as long as they are in negative equity repossessing them would cost the banks a fortune and there would be nothing at the end of that road for them but more costs.

It is worse for the banks to repossess than to let him hold onto the properties and he knows this, and he knows their letters mean nothing at all. The minute a letter that does mean something comes he pays up what he has or strikes a deal to pay some of it and on it goes.

But its funny. He was explaining to me that even though they are in negative equity the rent more than covers any mortgage , insurance, tax, maintenance and other costs, so even if he never did a thing and just left them with the agent for another 20 years he never has to put his hand in his pocket and yet they will all be paid off and he can sell them then and pocket the money.

Yes, the internet judges will condemn him, but what does that matter to him.

Not something id have the balls to do, but i am impressed with how good he has always being at making deals where he comes out on top.

Im only writing this from conversations i remember the detail of. I must ask him for more detail and i'll post it here. I'll see if i can get him to post here even. Better detail from the horses mouth.

Mustard1972

OMD wrote: »

Why? He is simply looking for the best terms he can. He is not looking to default but if he can renegotiate his loans he will do so. I see nothing wrong in what he is doing. If he cannot get a deal he will pay off everything he owes. What is your problem with that?

And yet he is on the books as a defaulter. And owns a few properties which are in arrears. Makes those default and arrears figures seem less accurate to me. He says there are thousands of people doing exactly the same.

The_Conductor

If he was a commercial entity- his loans would be called in, and if he failed to pay them in full (by sourcing financing elsewhere) the company would be wound up and the proceeds distributed to the creditors. He is very obviously in breach of the terms of his loans, by not making the agreed repayments. At very least- he should be forced pay his arrears in full and moved onto variable rate mortgages- why he imagines he can keep a very favourable tracker mortgage- is beyond me. Ideally the bank would remortgage all the properties at todays rates- make him personally liable for any negative equity and costs associated- and make this liability due immediately, and then he can pay off the mortgages on the properties, as he should have been doing so. Ideally- he'd also have a massive black mark put on his credit history- so anyone who checks knows that he thinks repaying loans is only for the little people (to misquote Leona Hemley).

gaius c

Mustard1972 wrote: »

The banks scooped up everyone into as much debt as they could get them into using trackers as the carrot.
Now that that has back fired and there is sweet fa the banks can do about it they cant go crying to daddy that some people are able to play their game better than they are.
My friend is doing the opposite of what the banks did. He is using their own greedy system against them.

They overlent to him. He holds all the cards now and can and will take full advantage. He has already had one bank offer him 10% for paying money off the mortgage he had with them. He went back to them and spelled out to them what it is actually costing them and that it was worth a lot more than 10%. He got what he was looking for off them. Now hes just trying it on with the other banks. Even if it doesnt work hes getting his holidays out of it for a few years.

He has another one now on interest only on the tracker after striking that deal with the bank. He told them that either they take interest only or nothing. They refused at first but caved as it was in their interests and he wasnt caving. Now he pays that at his tracker of ECB + .75%

The last thing he wants at the moment is to get the properties into positive equity, so he is keeping the money. If they were in positive equity the bank would try their best to repossess, but as long as they are in negative equity repossessing them would cost the banks a fortune and there would be nothing at the end of that road for them but more costs.

It is worse for the banks to repossess than to let him hold onto the properties and he knows this, and he knows their letters mean nothing at all. The minute a letter that does mean something comes he pays up what he has or strikes a deal to pay some of it and on it goes.

But its funny. He was explaining to me that even though they are in negative equity the rent more than covers any mortgage , insurance, tax, maintenance and other costs, so even if he never did a thing and just left them with the agent for another 20 years he never has to put his hand in his pocket and yet they will all be paid off and he can sell them then and pocket the money.

Yes, the internet judges will condemn him, but what does that matter to him.

Not something id have the balls to do, but i am impressed with how good he has always being at making deals where he comes out on top.

Im only writing this from conversations i remember the detail of. I must ask him for more detail and i'll post it here. I'll see if i can get him to post here even. Better detail from the horses mouth.

"Your friend" is doing all this hmmm?

Mustard1972

gaius c wrote: »

"Your friend" is doing all this hmmm?

ok its me....... i wish. Unfortunately i am going to have to wait for some cheap repos to built an investment portfoli for myself. But i fear i may have to wait a long time. The banks are only interested in repoing those in positive equity who fall behind on payments. not so many of those id guess.

murphaph

Mustard1972 wrote: »

ok its me....... i wish. Unfortunately i am going to have to wait for some cheap repos to built an investment portfoli for myself. But i fear i may have to wait a long time. The banks are only interested in repoing those in positive equity who fall behind on payments. not so many of those id guess.

Your pal is a low life. He was happy to get the money off the banks and can afford to pay. The rest of us who play by the rules (if nobody played by the rules by the way we'd be Somalia, before the "you'd do it if you could get away with it" crowd pipe up) can only hope that his deposits are plundered as part of some bail-in.

Villa05

gaius c wrote: »

"Your friend" is doing all this hmmm?

Is it fraud? I'm not sure what else it could be called. Could the person (a solicitor) be barred from practicing in the legal profession for this activity.

Intresting that the person claims that most people he knows are doing the same thing. The strategic defaulter interviewed by Karl Deeter said the same thing and there was a guy (who owned multiple BTL's) on primetime during the year who was getting a write-down who had all his children in private schools.

As i said earlier in this thread there is a high risks associated with dealing with BTL's first.

The_Conductor

I'd suggest its deliberate breach of contract- more so than fraud.
The fact that other people are doing the same thing- doesn't make it right.
As the poster above commented- if everyone in the country did it- we'd be worse off than Somalia.

People like this solicitor- and the woman in that article- seem to think there is some magic money tree that we can shake- and presto- everyone gets their bail-out. I really really hope these fools get their comeuppance, but the way things are going- I fear they may not.

I don't think its fair that the people who are genuinely making an effort to pay their bills- including their mortgages- are being made pay for the immoral actions of these people.

Come to think of it- if there are large cadres of people do this- perhaps some action might be taken- its easier to let a small number of people away with it- than it is to accept the actions of a larger group- who would force banks to crystalise losses and put them in a situation where they need to be recapitalised, yet again. Picture it- BOI and AIB, alone, aside from the other lenders, needing another 30 billion. I know I'd start to cry- immediately before hopping onto Aerlingus' website and seeing just how far away I could fly to get the hell out of here.

Mustard1972

As I said, not something I would be comfortable doing myself, but as he says - if its not against the law (and he knows the law) then its perfectly legal.
So since he is being penalized in the tax system for the banks problems, he is going to claw it back however he can. Clever accounting would be how its described I guess.

Banks do the same thing all the time. Taking money from people who are overpaying their mortgage and putting it into a deposit account instead of off the mortgage, but not telling them. Writing letters to get people to come off trackers until government intervention. Misselling insurance. Repossessing the easy marks. Upping interest rates to ridiculous levels while the ECB rates are going down. Bringing in charges on people who cant afford the amount of money it takes to avoid the charges. And so on.

The_Conductor

Mustard1972 wrote: »

As I said, not something I would be comfortable doing myself, but as he says - if its not against the law (and he knows the law) then its perfectly legal.

I'd love to see how he views this as not being against the law. I'm familiar with the law too- and it most certainly is a breach of contract law. Whether or not he will be pursued and to what extent- are entirely different matters- but if he is indeed a solicitor, then he should now the law- and know that he is indeed in breach of contract law.

Mustard1972 wrote: »

So since he is being penalized in the tax system for the banks problems, he is going to claw it back however he can. Clever accounting would be how its described I guess.

He is being penalised in the system for the banks problems and is going to claw it back in whatever way he can? Clever accounting? Tax evasion is a crime. If he wants to live in Ireland- he has to pay tax the same as anyone else. He is not special- he is a low life- and the honest people of the country are picking up the tab for this low life.

Mustard1972 wrote: »

Banks do the same thing all the time. Taking money from people who are overpaying their mortgage and putting it into a deposit account instead of off the mortgage, but not telling them.

If you want to overpay your mortgage- you discuss it with the bank in advance and specify exactly how the overpayment is to be handled. Banks do not put mortgage overpayments in deposit accounts- unless there is no instruction as to how the overpayment is to be handled. If you have the wherewithal to overpay your mortgage- you should use a modicum of common sense and actually tell your lender what you want done with the overpayment. If you don't- then thats your tough- you're foolish for imagining that someone is going to magically read your mind and say- ah- Sean must want me to take this off the principle of his mortgage and shorten the term of his mortgage- or reduce the future payments (as the case may be). Your bank manager isn't a mind reader you know.

Mustard1972 wrote: »

Writing letters to get people to come off trackers until government intervention. Misselling insurance. Repossessing the easy marks. Upping interest rates to ridiculous levels while the ECB rates are going down. Bringing in charges on people who cant afford the amount of money it takes to avoid the charges. And so on.

If people breach the terms of their loans- their loan becomes delinquint and is subject to all sorts of restrictions. Thats life. Most people who borrow money- accept they have to repay it- and that there are terms associated with the loan. This parasite seems to think- the rules don't apply to him. Well- they do.

If insurance is missold- its a different matter- and the banks are liable to compensate people it was missold to. There are schemes in place to identify these people and make amends.

Repossessing the easy marks- may seem immoral- its not. Its simply gathering the low lying fruit first- before moving onto the harder cases. They will get there in due course.

Upping interest rates to ridiculous levels while ECB rates are going down?
I don't think you seem to get the concept that lenders have to borrow the money they are lending. They are not borrowing the money at ECB rates- they pay significantly more than the ECB overnight rates. Typically banks lend to one another- so a bank with excess liquidity gets a return on their liquidity by lending it to another bank. Typically Irish banks were getting loans at 4-5% on the interbank market- however, even now this source of lending is a pittance- it all dried up in 2008 (and is why the ECB operated its extraordinary lending for financial institutions). Just because the ECB overnight rate is 0.5% means nothing. Its not what the banks can borrow at- far from it. Its the rate the ECB pay to financial institutions for parking funds with them on an overnight basis. Nothing more, nothing less.

As for adding charges to people who breach their lending (go overdrawn or miss loan payments or whatever)- just what do you think these institutions are- charities? They are businesses like any other. They need to try to ensure they don't have to go back to the tax payer, yet again, for more funds. They need to get back onto an even keel. They are the gift of politicians to meddle with- as they choose, and they shouldn't be. Yes- we need more competition in the Irish market- but just as much as we need competition- we need to get the banks out of state ownership, and operating as a financial sector again- and not the sclerotic arms of the Minister for Finance or whichever other government minister decides to do a little kite flying.

There are charges associated with dealing with any financial institution. If you don't like this- you shouldn't have had dealings with them in the first place.

Are you suggesting every borrower in the country give the magic money tree a shake and magic away all our debts to some mysterious benefactor, who will never ever need be repaid- and the banks mysteriously operate as independent financial entities- in full competition with one another? Well- you can dream on, its not an ideal world- and while I'd love there to be a magic tree- we have to leave this to the realms of Enid Blyton.

Villa05

The_Conductor wrote: »

I'd suggest its deliberate breach of contract- more so than fraud.


People like this solicitor- and the woman in that article- seem to think there is some magic money tree that we can shake- and presto- everyone gets their bail-out. I really really hope these fools get their comeuppance, but the way things are going- I fear they may not.

I don't think its fair that the people who are genuinely making an effort to pay their bills- including their mortgages- are being made pay for the immoral actions of these people.

To get some deal like continued interest only, he surely filled out an income expenditure form, not declaring that you are putting repayments into a deposit fund for holidays in my book is fraud.

I don't think they are fools or think they is a magic money tree anywhere. What drives these people is out and out greed. The same greed that drove them to buy multiple BTL's is now motivating them to default on their loans. They know the money will come from the weak, sick and future generations including their own children, who will pay higher taxes, college fees for their behavior.

Again dealing with these trashy BTL''s first means these not so upstanding citizens will probably get debt write down and homeowners that may be doing their best may get repossessed and have to rent from this solicitor who managed to keep their BTL's.

I'm not including all BTL owners in this statement, but a significant portion of them fall into the above category