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

Villa05

The_Conductor wrote: »

Thats called cutting off your nose to spite your face.........
Soooo- the German media goes on a mad anti-Ireland binge.
What then?

Action is taken in Ireland when the Germans kick up a fuss. There is a clear distinction in these recordings between upper class snobbish behavior and looking down on ordinary "actual" working class.
- Stud Farmers using violence to retake land they won't pay for
- Landlady's evicting tenants for co operating with receivers

Banks, Developers and now the so called Socialites bailed out and ordinary workers having to pay for it all. This is how it is, how difficult can it be to convey that message.

The IMF have called for reform of anti competitive policies benefiting these so called professional classes. It would do no harm to you and me to let them know what is happening on the ground

Villa05

The Spider wrote: »

They can afford to buy them, just not in the areas that there's high demand, that's a market at work.

If circa 40,000 mortgages are 2 years or more behind in repayments. Can you explain to me how that is a working market.

Can you identify one other country in the world where this is considered a component of a functioning market? can you even identify a country that measures arrears it terms of two years or more, or is this only done by Paddy because he cant face up to the fact that, at 2 years or more arrears the loan is dead

Cuddlesworth

cookie1977 wrote: »

Can I ask where you got this number from?

Was from figures I saw months ago. A quick google shows me that there are currently 100K in arrears of 3+months, 30k in arrears of 2+ years. So I don't think its unlikely that there are over 148k in arrears at the moment, even with all the "restructured" mortgages.

Potatoeman

The Spider wrote: »

They can afford to buy them, just not in the areas that there's high demand, that's a market at work.

Can they though? It's considered by many that repayments should be under a third of your income to be stable and to provide protection against interest rate increases. I'm wondering if people can afford these prices and are not stretching themselves to get in a nicer area. The average price seems very high, I'm wondering if there are enough people making salaries at this level for it to be sustainable.

cookie1977

Villa05 wrote: »

Action is taken in Ireland when the Germans kick up a fuss. There is a clear distinction in these recordings between upper class snobbish behavior and looking down on ordinary "actual" working class.
- Stud Farmers using violence to retake land they won't pay for
- Landlady's evicting tenants for co operating with receivers

Banks, Developers and now the so called Socialites bailed out and ordinary workers having to pay for it all. This is how it is, how difficult can it be to convey that message.

The IMF have called for reform of anti competitive policies benefiting these so called professional classes. It would do no harm to you and me to let them know what is happening on the ground

I dont believe this is a "class" war. There are as many low paid and middle class workers who are not paying their mortgage debt as there is upper classes. Why do you believe this is a class war? Just because a few of the rich are possibly living it up in NAMA? People of lesser riches are just as culpable when it comes to avoiding their debts and in total there is probably more of them both numerically and when we compare total unpaid debt/arrears there's probably a larger total debt from them compared to all the upper class debt.

One twat of a PIP on the radio's crazy idea does not mean living it up at the expense of others is solely a privilege of the wealthy.

I just thought of another vocal minority...the turf cutters. No one in power seems to be doing anything about there illegal activities. Why? Because again they vote.

cookie1977

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Was from figures I saw months ago. A quick google shows me that there are currently 100K in arrears of 3+months, 30k in arrears of 2+ years. So I don't think its unlikely that there are over 148k in arrears at the moment, even with all the "restructured" mortgages.

http://www.centralbank.ie/press-area/press-releases/Pages/ResidentialMortgageArrearsandRepossessionsStatisticsQ22013.aspx

The stats are:
There are 97K PDH in arrears of 90+ days
There are 30K BTL in arrears of 90+ days

There are not 148K due anytime in the courts. Far from it. A significant number of these are still paying their mortgage but that their total arrears still makes them "x" days in arrears. A significant number of these will have deals done to keep them in there houses and they wont end up in the courts either.

Villa05

cookie1977 wrote: »

There are not 148K due anytime in the courts. Far from it. A significant number of these are still paying their mortgage but that their total arrears still makes them "x" days in arrears. A significant number of these will have deals done to keep them in there houses and they wont end up in the courts either.

I think cuddlesworth was approaching this from the point of view of a person up to date on there mortgage and considering strategic default, seen as all there neighbors were getting away with it ie there are 143k cases to be dealt with before a brand new case

The_Conductor

That was my reading of it too.........
What has to happen before politicians bite the bullet and act in a responsible manner.

Villa05

cookie1977 wrote: »

I dont believe this is a "class" war. There are as many low paid and middle class workers who are not paying their mortgage debt as there is upper classes. Why do you believe this is a class war? Just because a few of the rich are possibly living it up in NAMA? People of lesser riches are just as culpable when it comes to avoiding their debts and in total there is probably more of them both numerically and when we compare total unpaid debt/arrears there's probably a larger total debt from them compared to all the upper class debt.

One twat of a PIP on the radio's crazy idea does not mean living it up at the expense of others is solely a privilege of the wealthy.

- A PIP will not take a case where there is little or nothing in it for them, why would they bother.
- A PIP will be from the professional classes (Accounting, Legal, Banking background) more mula for them
- Up front fees a barrier to low paid entrants to the system
- Listen to Mariane Finucane show last Sunday All the panelist believed that what the twat PIP said was correct, he just mistakenly let the cat out of the bag and it is now general knowledge

As stated on another form; Maybe the economy has been stabilised by choosing the most expensive way possible to sort out a debt crisis and featherbedding the professional classes in the process. All put on the country's credit card for future generations to pay. Does Ireland know any other way!!!

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/dearbhail-mcdonald-conflicts-rife-across-professional-realm-29573340.html

Think of the lawyers and other professionals including auditors, accountants, valuers and estate agents who creamed it during the Celtic Tiger and are now making a killing "working out" the crisis.

Don't just take my word for it: an inaugural survey of 100 Irish law firms revealed last year that work driven by the implosion of Ireland's banks is as a "major filler" for Ireland's top law firms.

The survey carried out by accountancy firm Smith & Williamson, supported by Amarach Research, showed that international business, bank restructuring, NAMA and litigation have helped to shelter Dublin's top commercial law firms from the full impact of the recession.

Zamboni

The_Conductor wrote: »

That was my reading of it too.........
What has to happen before politicians bite the bullet and act in a responsible manner.

Politicians need to be aware that there are plenty of voters out here that want it to happen.
There needs to be a new action group.
I am sick of complaining and want to start doing something.
I am genuinely calling out for volunteers who are willing to stand up and and start demanding repossessions, Nama stock sales, etc.
Nobody is listening to us on this corner of the net.
Let's build a site, build a social media presence and start bombarding media and politicians.
Anyone interested please private message me.
I am happy to coordinate the project but there is a requirement for a media savvy articulate individual.

Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak for me.

The Spider

In regard to repossessions, you folks need to read through the below;

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/losing_your_home/home_repossession.html

That is the process that needs to be followed for every single attempted repossession, and can be dragged through the courts for years, even people who are defaulting at the moment can turn around next week and decided to start paying something towards their mortgage and a repossession won't happen.

Not to mention anyone who took out a mortgage before 2009 can't be touched, and these are more than likely the ones in default.

The manpower required from the banks to go around potentially in circles for years is insane, the cost to pursue them versus the cost of a writedown, means writedowns are probably the only sane way for the bank to legally proceed.

Villa05

The Spider wrote: »

In regard to repossessions, you folks need to read through the below;

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/losing_your_home/home_repossession.html

That is the process that needs to be followed for every single attempted repossession, and can be dragged through the courts for years, even people who are defaulting at the moment can turn around next week and decided to start paying something towards their mortgage and a repossession won't happen.

Not to mention anyone who took out a mortgage before 2009 can't be touched, and these are more than likely the ones in default.

The manpower required from the banks to go around potentially in circles for years is insane, the cost to pursue them versus the cost of a writedown, means writedowns are probably the only sane way for the bank to legally proceed.

IMF want this court process changed and are putting greater scrutiny on this issue + Each of the above outcomes is negative for house prices

The Spider

Villa05 wrote: »

IMF want this court process changed and are putting greater scrutiny on this issue + Each of the above outcomes is negative for house prices

IMF may want it changed but that doesn't matter diddly squat, property rights are constitutionally protected here, any major change will more than likely require a referendum and the chances of that passing are non existent.

Sorry I don't see how those outcomes are negative for house prices, as the title of the thread suggests a glut of repossessions would be. However I just don't see how it's possible to have these repossessions without a massive financial cost to the bank.

Villa05

The Spider wrote: »

IMF may want it changed but that doesn't matter diddly squat, property rights are constitutionally protected here, any major change will more than likely require a referendum and the chances of that passing are non existent.

Sorry I don't see how those outcomes are negative for house prices, as the title of the thread suggests a glut of repossessions would be. However I just don't see how it's possible to have these repossessions without a massive financial cost to the bank.

Spider as usual you dodge the main points
40k 2 years or more in arrears
No repossessions or voluntary surrenders means banks will be even more reluctant to lend and what they do lend will be at much higher interest rates. Other Mortgage holders struggling will have no incentive to continue paying there mortgage, leading to further losses and risks for the banks. Interest rates continue to rise to compensate. The cycle continues untill the state is bust again.

Where does it say in the constitution that if I refuse/can't pay my mortgage that the house cannot be repossessed

cookie1977

Zamboni wrote: »

Politicians need to be aware that there are plenty of voters out here that want it to happen.
There needs to be a new action group.
I am sick of complaining and want to start doing something.
I am genuinely calling out for volunteers who are willing to stand up and and start demanding repossessions, Nama stock sales, etc.
Nobody is listening to us on this corner of the net.
Let's build a site, build a social media presence and start bombarding media and politicians.
Anyone interested please private message me.
I am happy to coordinate the project but there is a requirement for a media savvy articulate individual.

Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak for me.

Do you seriously believe this type of action group could have an effect. Do you think politicians want to be associated with kicking families out of their homes? I say that with the media slant and not my own personal view. The problem you have is like Doctors asking for proper pay, or pharmacists/taxi drivers asking fighting deregulation. The principle behind the idea is sound but it wont carry with the majority of the public, the media and therefore politicians (who are worried about their votes).

I personally believe repossessions have to happen so I support you on that but I would be questioning the motives behind some of the people who might join the group. There has to be give and take, it's part of negotiation. Coming down on a high horse demanding repossessions occur to bring back a normal functioning market so A) people can buy and reduce the burden on tax payers, will end up with the media focusing solely on what I would believe to be the primary motives of the group...A). Even if they're not your personal motives or of those leading the group.

You'd want to come up with a workable solution/proposal for all where we see
A) repossessions of unworkable mortgages
banks forced into proper deals to enable workable mortgages to continue
C) pursuit of those that can pay but wont pay

All backed by a large group of people which equates to a voting block that can worry politicians. By going for a platform such as outlined above (but not necessarily restricted to the above points) you'd get more cross community support and thus media interest. People out there want sanity not another one sided argument.

The_Conductor

The easiest way of doing this- would be for the politicians to find a bogey man they could blame (a la- The Troika made us do it, the ECB made us do it, the IMF made us do it..........) We are under their wings for at least the next 2 years, as we have a line of credit organised with them- and longer- as we need to repay our loans- but they would make very good bogeymen for the politicians to use to hang the blame on........... Once someone else can be blamed, its amazing what can be achieved..........

cookie1977

The_Conductor wrote: »

The easiest way of doing this- would be for the politicians to find a bogey man they could blame (a la- The Troika made us do it, the ECB made us do it, the IMF made us do it..........) We are under their wings for at least the next 2 years, as we have a line of credit organised with them- and longer- as we need to repay our loans- but they would make very good bogeymen for the politicians to use to hang the blame on........... Once someone else can be blamed, its amazing what can be achieved..........

It wouldn't wash. Remember Labours way or Frankfurt's way? Even if politicians walk right up to the line with repossessions once you get families being evicted live on RTE they will baulk.

Remember the outrage of the old couple being evicted? It took a few days for it all to be turned around and it was found out they were landlords a number of properties. Many people here in my work still dont know that, and still believe it was a terrible eviction incident.

The people on here (for the most part) are a tuned in group on the issue. They are not representative of the "common man".

Snakeblood

cookie1977 wrote: »

It wouldn't wash. Remember Labours way or Frankfurt's way? Even if politicians walk right up to the line with repossessions once you get families being evicted live on RTE they will baulk.

Remember the outrage of the old couple being evicted? It took a few days for it all to be turned around and it was found out they were landlords a number of properties. Many people here in my work still dont know that, and still believe it was a terrible eviction incident.

The people on here (for the most part) are a tuned in group on the issue. They are not representative of the "common man".

The tone of the media has been changing on this. You just have to look at the court cases that make headlines now. It started with that couple in Killiney who were camping out in protest, but were discovered to have 11 or so other properties on the go. Then there's the stud farm guy, the woman in Rathmines who didn't pay mortgage for 8 years. it's become obvious that people are exploiting the system and need to be dealt with. The people with big mortgages they have to pay where I work are getting angry about being taken advantage of by people who don't think they need to bother paying debts they entered into legally.

The Spider

Villa05 wrote: »

Spider as usual you dodge the main points
40k 2 years or more in arrears
No repossessions or voluntary surrenders means banks will be even more reluctant to lend and what they do lend will be at much higher interest rates. Other Mortgage holders struggling will have no incentive to continue paying there mortgage, leading to further losses and risks for the banks. Interest rates continue to rise to compensate. The cycle continues untill the state is bust again.

Where does it say in the constitution that if I refuse/can't pay my mortgage that the house cannot be repossessed

Ok lets take a look at what it says:

Article 41
The State recognises the Family as the natural primary and fundamental unit group of Society, and as a moral institution possessing inalienable and imprescriptible rights, antecedent and superior to all positive law.

The State, therefore, guarantees to protect the Family in its constitution and authority, as the necessary basis of social order and as indispensable to the welfare of the Nation and the State.

In particular, the State recognises that by her life within the home, woman gives to the State a support without which the common good cannot be achieved.

The State shall, therefore, endeavour to ensure that mothers shall not be obliged by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home.

The State pledges itself to guard with special care the institution of Marriage, on which the Family is founded, and to protect it against attack.

No law shall be enacted providing for the grant of a dissolution of marriage.
No person whose marriage has been dissolved under the civil law of any other State but is a subsisting valid marriage under the law for the time being in force within the jurisdiction of the Government and Parliament established by this Constitution shall be capable of contracting a valid marriage within that jurisdiction during the lifetime of the other party to the marriage so dissolved.


PRIVATE PROPERTY[edit]
Article 43
The State acknowledges that man, in virtue of his rational being, has the natural right, antecedent to positive law, to the private ownership of external goods.

The State accordingly guarantees to pass no law attempting to abolish the right of private ownership or the general right to transfer, bequeath, and inherit property.

The State recognises, however, that the exercise of the rights mentioned in the foregoing provisions of this Article ought, in civil society, to be regulated by the principles of social justice.

The State, accordingly, may as occasion requires delimit by law the exercise of the said rights with a view to reconciling their exercise with the exigencies of the common good.


So the point that says a woman in the family should not have to work even out of economic necessity to the detriment of her duties in the home.

The other point in bold makes provision for what is perceived to be the common good. An argument can be made that if you can't pay your mortgage because only one parent is working that it's protected under the constitution, the family comes first and foremost, and if repossession threatens the family, then the family is protected by the above articles.

That's my reading of it, the common good can be debated, are repossessions in the common good, for people looking to buy cheaper property yes, but for people looking at being evicted no.

And let's not forget about our history of evictions. I'll be curious to see if any of these repossessions get any traction, there's too many loopholes when it comes to what's best for the family, does being evicted and having to take the kids out of school and go live in another area put a strain on the family? yes would be the answer, so can't do it under the constitution unless other accommodation in the same area can be found.

I'm no expert but seems to me that it'd be very difficult without an ammendment, open to others interpretation.

jmayo

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Already happening, its just being masked by the cash rich buyers who believe we have hit bottom. The second prices dip again, they will scatter.

As long as investors can make a good return then there will be buyers.
The little guys who need to releverage their existing properties will probably be frozen out as banks start getting hit with small time investors welching on their debts.
It actually might be a good thing where the Irish landlord class start being more professional.
Add to this the cost of property investment is also going up.
Landlords can't continously pass the increasing costs onto tenants.

The_Conductor wrote: »

That was my reading of it too.........
What has to happen before politicians bite the bullet and act in a responsible manner.

That will only happen when they are pushed.

The Spider wrote: »

IMF may want it changed but that doesn't matter diddly squat, property rights are constitutionally protected here, any major change will more than likely require a referendum and the chances of that passing are non existent.

Ehh sorry I didn't know that the constitution said that people who do not honour their contracts and repay their mortgages are immune from contract law. :rolleyes:

The Spider wrote: »

Sorry I don't see how those outcomes are negative for house prices, as the title of the thread suggests a glut of repossessions would be. However I just don't see how it's possible to have these repossessions without a massive financial cost to the bank.

And there is a massive cost to the bank of just wiping out people's debts and there is an even bigger moral hazard implication of wiping out people's debts and letting them stay in their property.

If they go down that road then why shouldn't we all do it.
The whole Irish mortgage system would fall apart, our banks would be in limbo and any foreign institution would head for the hills.
The courts would have such a backlog they would be tied up for years.

Snakeblood wrote: »

The tone of the media has been changing on this. You just have to look at the court cases that make headlines now. It started with that couple in Killiney who were camping out in protest, but were discovered to have 11 or so other properties on the go. Then there's the stud farm guy, the woman in Rathmines who didn't pay mortgage for 8 years. it's become obvious that people are exploiting the system and need to be dealt with. The people with big mortgages they have to pay where I work are getting angry about being taken advantage of by people who don't think they need to bother paying debts they entered into legally.

Anger is good.
The one hope I have is that eventually what is termed "Irish begrudgery" will prevent this.
There is nothing like someone seeing their erswhile "rich" neighbour get to continue living a much better standard of living even though they haven't paid for half of it, whilst the poor sod who is paying their debts gets shafted even more.
A lot of Irish taxpayers resent their taxes going for high social welfare.
Wait and see their reaction when it is going to keep somone else in a larger house the hardworking debt paying taxpayer can't ever afford.
And this will have implications on taxpayers who own banks.

And make no mistake for every few honest down on their luck hard pressed small primary residence mortgage defaulters that may be bailed out there is one chancer hoping to engage on strategic default.

The other thing is that if the banks need recapitalising in the future then some of this money will probably come from deposits.
Cyprus proved that.

Now once deposits are targetted depositors will flee.
And even if it only affects deposits above say 100k, there is no way a lot of smaller depositors will wait around to find out if this ceiling is lowered in the future.

cookie1977

jmayo wrote: »

It actually might be a good thing where the Irish landlord class start being more professional.
Add to this the cost of property investment is also going up.
Landlords can't continously pass the increasing costs onto tenants.
.

Sorry but explain to me why they cant? If every landlord is being hit the same then they will pass it on if they see others doing it. You're relying on a majority not but it does not mean it will happen. Look how rents are rising in dublin despite nama. Rents are rising due to demand (lack of supply) and costs such as increased interest rates or landlords coming off interest only and property tax.

jay0109

cookie1977 wrote: »

Sorry but explain to me why they cant? If every landlord is being hit the same then they will pass it on if they see others doing it. You're relying on a majority not but it does not mean it will happen. Look how rents are rising in dublin despite nama. Rents are rising due to demand (lack of supply) and costs such as increased interest rates or landlords coming off interest only and property tax.

uhhhhhmmmm...perhaps because tenants will eventually no longer be able to afford the ever increasing rents
There's only so many working in Google, etc...not everyone is seeing wage increases

cookie1977

jay0109 wrote: »

uhhhhhmmmm...perhaps because tenants will eventually no longer be able to afford the ever increasing rents
There's only so many working in Google, etc...not everyone is seeing wage increases

If as is the case in Dublin at present where demand is out stripping supply then prices will rise until there is no more demand.

jmayo

cookie1977 wrote: »

Sorry but explain to me why they cant? If every landlord is being hit the same then they will pass it on if they see others doing it. You're relying on a majority not but it does not mean it will happen. Look how rents are rising in dublin despite nama. Rents are rising due to demand (lack of supply) and costs such as increased interest rates or landlords coming off interest only and property tax.

Because much like the rental of commerical premises in shopping centres and major streets in our cities and towns, a point may be reached where people just cannot afford it.
Of course maybe then it becomes much cheaper to buy than rent.
Another option is that people just reckon it is just too damm expensive to live here and emigrate.

You some have being arguing elsewhere (high mortgage repayments and need for pesonal debts to be cut) you can not have a functioning economy (consumer spending) where people are spending almost all their net income purely on accommodation.

gaius c

cookie1977 wrote: »

It wouldn't wash. Remember Labours way or Frankfurt's way? Even if politicians walk right up to the line with repossessions once you get families being evicted live on RTE they will baulk.

Remember the outrage of the old couple being evicted? It took a few days for it all to be turned around and it was found out they were landlords a number of properties. Many people here in my work still dont know that, and still believe it was a terrible eviction incident.

The people on here (for the most part) are a tuned in group on the issue. They are not representative of the "common man".

I hear what you say Cookie but the public mood has changed since then. Witness the extremely frosty reaction Ivan Yates got when he gave his sob story on how "hard" bankruptcy in the UK was.

The media is chock-a-block with debt monkeys trying to get us to pay their debts for them. You only need to listen to Pat Kenny on the subject to know that he's limiting the coverage that the pro-repo side are getting. Look at the Examiner's piece on "Middle Ireland fights back" that was treated with the derision it deserved.

There is a very clear media bias in favour of debt write offs. I have spoken to Brendan Burgess who admitted that he feels like a lone rebel against this agenda but he says that what keeps him going are emails & messages from "little people" sick of being ridden for other peoples' debts who praise him for standing up on their behalfs.

You only need to have a look at Broadsheet comments and compare the mood now to even a year ago to see that ordinary folk know blanket debt write offs mean that they get screwed to enrich total chancers.

gaius c

The Spider wrote: »

I'm no expert but seems to me that it'd be very difficult without an ammendment, open to others interpretation.

You don't say...
Even the Freeman loons would struggle to come up with a more ludicrous interpretation of the constitution than what you just posted on this forum.

cookie1977

gaius c wrote: »

I hear what you say Cookie but the public mood has changed since then. Witness the extremely frosty reaction Ivan Yates got when he gave his sob story on how "hard" bankruptcy in the UK was.

The media is chock-a-block with debt monkeys trying to get us to pay their debts for them. You only need to listen to Pat Kenny on the subject to know that he's limiting the coverage that the pro-repo side are getting. Look at the Examiner's piece on "Middle Ireland fights back" that was treated with the derision it deserved.

There is a very clear media bias in favour of debt write offs. I have spoken to Brendan Burgess who admitted that he feels like a lone rebel against this agenda but he says that what keeps him going are emails & messages from "little people" sick of being ridden for other peoples' debts who praise him for standing up on their behalfs.

You only need to have a look at Broadsheet comments and compare the mood now to even a year ago to see that ordinary folk know blanket debt write offs mean that they get screwed to enrich total chancers.

Be careful. Burgess is a bit of a fool. with some bizarre unpopular ideas..

I wouldn't necessarily consider the commenter's on Broadsheet the "ordinary folk" either (more akin to after hours folk).

Cuddlesworth

cookie1977 wrote: »

http://www.centralbank.ie/press-area/press-releases/Pages/ResidentialMortgageArrearsandRepossessionsStatisticsQ22013.aspx

The stats are:
There are 97K PDH in arrears of 90+ days
There are 30K BTL in arrears of 90+ days

There are not 148K due anytime in the courts. Far from it. A significant number of these are still paying their mortgage but that their total arrears still makes them "x" days in arrears. A significant number of these will have deals done to keep them in there houses and they wont end up in the courts either.

Let me rephrase what I said then.

There are currently 28,860 mortgage holders in arrears of 2+ years according to this article. Its also states that there were 63 forced repossessions and 160 voluntary this year.

So assuming my father stopped paying tomorrow, and we had a rough repossession rate of 300 per year right now, he should roughly see a court case in 95 years. At his ripe age of 145, that could be worrying for him.

If the number of repossessions doubles year on year, he might see a court case in six and a half years, with close to 20 thousand other people. Of course with a 11% year on year increase in arrears(and climbing), there would be roughly another 25k waiting for repossession.

cookie1977

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Let me rephrase what I said then.

There are currently 28,860 mortgage holders in arrears of 2+ years according to this article. Its also states that there were 63 forced repossessions and 160 voluntary this year.

So assuming my father stopped paying tomorrow, and we had a rough repossession rate of 300 per year right now, he should roughly see a court case in 95 years. At his ripe age of 145, that could be worrying for him.

If the number of repossessions doubles year on year, he might see a court case in six and a half years, with close to 20 thousand other people. Of course with a 11% year on year increase in arrears(and climbing), there would be roughly another 25k waiting for repossession.

Are repossessions done in order or does the bank decide who they want to go after depending on the value of the property versus the outstanding debt? You could jump to the queue very quickly depending on circumstances.

Bob24

cookie1977 wrote: »

Are repossessions done in order or does the bank decide who they want to go after depending on the value of the property versus the outstanding debt? You could jump to the queue very quickly depending on circumstances.

Very good point.

The banks will probably first move on:
1) Properties for which they think they is a good pool of buyers and they can recover most of the mortgage without too much effort
2) People which they feel have the weakest hands and/or are not too much of a thug and are willing to cooperate if they see a concrete prospect of legal action coming against them

If the house is in a good SCD location and can cover most of the amount left on the mortgage, you might quickly skip the queue and go past a couple of reckless BTL who have a few properties in the Celtic Tiger suburbs that no one is interested in buying. Especially since these guys might feel like they have nothing to loose and willing to take more risks to get the banks interested in other more cooperative people before them.

Having said that, I absolutely understand where you father is coming from Cuddlesworth.