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

Villa05

Couple of points

Repossessions will be very few, Banks will want to avoid the courts. PTSB showing the way on this with the number of voluntary sales rising from 800 to 2,000 from Q1 to Q2.

The majority of customers in arrears are in employment therefore have an income and the where with all to pay rent at the end of the process. To keep these cases out of the courts, deals will be done on the shortfall. Banks have been funded for this outcome.

Those that are not in employment can receive rent allowance the same as a private renters who fall on hard times. This discussion on where people will go if they loose there house is a red herring

cookie1977

Orlaw3136 wrote: »

When did it get more complicated than the basic proposition that if you can't afford to live where you live you have to move to somewhere you can afford to live ?

Ooooooooooooh riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight...I live in Ireland. Of course.

This isn't whats being discussed here. We're getting off topic as far as I'm concerned.

Orlaw3136

So the thread title is 'repossessions could depress prices' by up to 25%' and following a series of posts arguing against people being forced to move out of 'their homes' based on reasoning which has nothing to do with their ability and obligation to repay money they borrowed to buy those homes, i.e. posts canvassing against repossessions, my post which comments sardonically on the lack of basic reality in that reasoning is 'getting off topic' ?

Ah here.

ArnieSilvia

I was suggesting that ones in trouble should relocate on their own accord. Same would have to happen if they were renting, wouldn't it ?

Why bringing on all this "they need to be relocated" talk/worries? Can people not do stuff on their own? Does eveything needs to be done for them?

gaius c

cookie1977 wrote: »

And where can they rent? Will they be moved into apartments or to other housing? I dont see how repossessions will suddenly create lots more houses for "actual families". Lets be honest, most apts that "could" be repossesed are already rented out to people. What happens to those renters?

I really dont see how your argument of more apt repossessions means more family homes for people to buy. It doesn't make sense to me.

I'm getting to the point that I don't really care where they live. Nobody bats an eyelid if renters are evicted from homes they cannot afford and they have to move somewhere appropriate to their means. Sauce for goose, sauce for gander.

But to answer your point, an insolvent BTL landlord who cannot be repo'd isn't really under that much pressure to avoid long void periods or to price appropriately to the market. Clancy Quay has sat mostly empty asking daft rents for the last few years, pushing up rents in the surrounding area as well until the artificial scarcity on the market has pushed rents to the point that Clancy Quay is now only slightly above local market rents.

This "we can remain insolvent longer than you can remain rational" ethos is a sign of a completely manipulated & broken market and I'm sick to my teeth of the game being rigged to extract as much cash from the folk who didn't drown themselves in debt.

Villa05

Supply Boost from Danske bank,

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/sectors/commercial-property/danske-to-sell-portfolio-of-irish-properties-individually-1.1585790

cookie1977

Villa05 wrote: »

Supply Boost from Danske bank,

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/sectors/commercial-property/danske-to-sell-portfolio-of-irish-properties-individually-1.1585790

Most of the Danske portfolio is commercial property or georgian houses. I doubt you'll see lots of regular houses up for grabs:
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/sectors/commercial-property/distressed-portfolio-could-go-for-140m-1.1546424
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/sectors/commercial-property/danske-bank-to-offload-wide-range-of-properties-1.1450395
http://www.worldpropertychannel.com/featured-columnists/done-deals/green-reit-commercial-property-portfolio-real-estate-reit-bank-of-ireland-park-rite-stephen-vernon-dublin-7572.php

cookie1977

gaius c wrote: »

I'm getting to the point that I don't really care where they live. Nobody bats an eyelid if renters are evicted from homes they cannot afford and they have to move somewhere appropriate to their means. Sauce for goose, sauce for gander.

But to answer your point, an insolvent BTL landlord who cannot be repo'd isn't really under that much pressure to avoid long void periods or to price appropriately to the market. Clancy Quay has sat mostly empty asking daft rents for the last few years, pushing up rents in the surrounding area as well until the artificial scarcity on the market has pushed rents to the point that Clancy Quay is now only slightly above local market rents.

This "we can remain insolvent longer than you can remain rational" ethos is a sign of a completely manipulated & broken market and I'm sick to my teeth of the game being rigged to extract as much cash from the folk who didn't drown themselves in debt.

So why not reposes these vacant BTL's then? I'm all for that. I'm all for BTL's in general to be repossessed that are in arrears. I dont see how we differ there at all.

Earlier you said:

gaius c wrote: »

It's quite simple really. More apartments on the market to rent mean less family homes occupied by four nurses house-sharing and thus more family homes available for actual families.

Yet if there's already property sitting idle but being offered for rent then how does your hypothesis work? Clancy Quay is not the sole reason for rent rises in the area or in Dublin in general. Jobs are scarce and are probably most available in the Dublin area which pushes demand for dublin property up and thus rents. Also we haven't built property much during the last few years in Dublin...

A city of almost half a million households is building only slightly more than 1,000 units a year.

House completions throughout Ireland hit a record low of around 8,500 last year, down from an unsustainable 93,000 in 2006 but just a third of the 23,000 built on average a year during the 1970s.

Rents are being pushed up by increased costs to landlords in the form of the LPT and increases in std var rates as well as landlords being forced off interest only loans. If there was sufficient supply in Dublin then those landlords increasing rents wouldn't have people taking their property unless there is a dearth of property in Dublin.

We had the ending of bedsit property too which resulted in improvements in accommodation quality but corresponding increases in demand for higher rents for the improvements.

The rent increases in Dublin are primarily I believe due to supply and demand:

Director of the PRTB, Ms. Anne Marie Caulfield, said the findings were “really a story of two markets”. “The rate of increase accelerated in Dublin between Quarter 1 and Quarter 2 of 2013,” s

All the repossessions that could happen in Dublin will not make the Dublin market easier to get into or affordable never mind the hopes of some for more property price drops.

We need to build again in Dublin where demand is the highest in the country.

Orlaw3136

The current set of artificial influences on the market are, amongst other effects, protecting people who are in living circumstances beyond their means to the detriment of others.

That's unfair.

And in order to justify repossessions I shouldn't have to prove that some other objective is being achieved at the same time, nor should I have to argue for repossessions and only repossessions to the exclusion of e.g. building new stock where the market warrants it.

The stock response against repossessions however is couched in one or all of the following terms :-

(a) shure we all partied and we're all fecked.
(b) repossessions will achieve nothing.
(c) they should be building more homes (so I can stay in mine).

To which my responses are :-

(a) **** off. Lots didn't. They are now however confronted with a nonsensical housing market and can choose either or to put that aspect of their lives on hold for the forseeable future or pay a premium imposed by something other than supply/demand.

(b) Doesn't have to achieve anything beyond the normality of realising a security. That's what happens when you don't/can't repay a loan. Its normal. And in order to achieve a normal housing market we need normality.

(c) They can build more homes. They should build more homes if the market warrants it. If you can afford to live in one you can even buy or rent one of them. Of course, while the market is this distorted its impossible to make good decisions on what the supply side influencers are and how to react to them.

Seriously. If you can't afford to live in your house, you can't live there. Anyone in that scenario has my full sympathy, but not for one moment should your problems be directly imposed on somebody else to their immediate detriment. I'm all for honouring the societal contract but this kind of ****e is exactly what turns people into them/us. A hand up. Not a hand out please.

cookie1977

I think you're dumbing this down to a simple "cant pay get out" scenario when in reality the world is a little more complicated. We dont live in a capitalist society (if we did we wouldn't have bailed out the banks) we live very much in a quasi socialist society (when it suits our needs).

It is very difficult to explain to people in financial difficulty that bailing out the banks was good but helping you out in some way would be totally wrong. Without going over everything I've said before too much what I will say is not enough pressure was applied to banks to do proper deals (not debt forgiveness) on distressed mortgages that could have resulted in re-establishing a functioning banking system. Instead we went for interest only options as the preferred way of dealing with distressed mortgages which in my mind is just kicking the can down the road. Then with mortgages that were unsalvageable, those people should have had repossession happen with debt forgiveness on any outstanding debt on the mortgage not recouped from the sale of the repossessed property.

On top of that the banks have not pursued BTL arrears properly. These really should have been the first properties repossessed but again it has been kicked down the road too.

I dont think there's many on here who actually disagree with repossessions, what we disagree on is how it's done and what is done about salvageable mortgages. Repossessions are not and will not be the savior of our economy. We need more dynamic ideas then that.

Woodville56

cookie1977 wrote: »

I think you're dumbing this down to a simple "cant pay get out" scenario when in reality the world is a little more complicated. We dont live in a capitalist society (if we did we wouldn't have bailed out the banks) we live very much in a quasi socialist society (when it suits our needs).

Thanks for that Cookie ! Totally agree with u'r summation - a voice of realism as opposed to some of the jingoistic populist stuff pandered in these postings of late !

Orlaw3136

cookie1977 wrote: »

It is very difficult to explain to people in financial difficulty that bailing out the banks was good but helping you out in some way would be totally wrong.

Is it ? Are people not speaking loudly, or slowly enough ?

People in arrears on an unsustainable mortgage benefited to precisely the same extent as anyone else in the country on foot of the bailout. There is no weight in the suggestion that a bail out of the banks requires morally that repossessions don't happen/debt forgiveness must.

Woodville56 wrote: »

Thanks for that Cookie ! Totally agree with u'r summation - a voice of realism as opposed to some of the jingoistic populist stuff pandered in these postings of late !

Well thank Christ it's now at least populist. Because for a while there the lunatics were taking over the asylum. I'll take populist as a sign of progress in the right direction.

cookie1977

Orlaw3136 wrote: »

Is it ? Are people not speaking loudly, or slowly enough ?

People in arrears on an unsustainable mortgage benefited to precisely the same extent as anyone else in the country on foot of the bailout. There is no weight in the suggestion that a bail out of the banks requires morally that repossessions don't happen/debt forgiveness must.



Well thank Christ it's now at least populist. Because for a while there the lunatics were taking over the asylum. I'll take populist as a sign of progress in the right direction.

You're clearly embedded in your views as you've a right to be so I dont see what I could say to allow you consider alternatives to them. Suffice to say I think you have a very narrow view of the entire situation.

lima

Orlaw3136 wrote: »

Well thank Christ it's now at least populist. Because for a while there the lunatics were taking over the asylum. I'll take populist as a sign of progress in the right direction.

Totally agree with you. There needs to be a stand against the lunatics who stand in front gardens trying to protect people who are not paying their mortgages.

Ireland astounds me. It really does. It constantly sympathizes with things that turn out to be completely screwing them over, e.g defaulters & Samantha.

jay0109

Anyways back on topic!

No sign of major repossessions.
David Hall getting imbedded with AIB will surely slow up any chance they ever had of any meaningful repossession rates, because thats 1 thing he's 100% against. And he'll now see the case files close up. And will make a huge effort IMO to get the defaulters who are'nt even talking to the bank to come in out of the cold.

Meanwhile, market realities/illusions continue apace. Any sort of a decent 3/4 bed house in a decent/good area of SCD (where I am looking) are quickly going through the roof, literally!
I reckon prices have increased by 25-30% in the past 20-24 months. Asking prices being overshot by 10% on a couple of houses I was looking at recently. So houses that would have being 450-470k (IMO) around winter 2011 are now going for 600k+.

The madness has returned!

lima

jay0109 wrote: »

Anyways back on topic!

No sign of major repossessions.
David Hall getting imbedded with AIB will surely slow up any chance they ever had of any meaningful repossession rates, because thats 1 thing he's 100% against. And he'll now see the case files close up. And will make a huge effort IMO to get the defaulters who are'nt even talking to the bank to come in out of the cold.

Meanwhile, market realities/illusions continue apace. Any sort of a decent 3/4 bed house in a decent/good area of SCD (where I am looking) are quickly going through the roof, literally!
I reckon prices have increased by 25-30% in the past 20-24 months. Asking prices being overshot by 10% on a couple of houses I was looking at recently. So houses that would have being 450-470k (IMO) around winter 2011 are now going for 600k+.

The madness has returned!

Well as long as no one is living in their houses for free..

Regarding the 'boom' - I am also looking - but would you really buy now? Every time I look I am turned off my the EA's saying things like "ACT NOW!!" it's hilarious! Prices can go up 30-40% but it not going to make me buy, surely there are many people who think the same.

cookie1977

lima wrote: »

Well as long as no one is living in their houses for free..

Regarding the 'boom' - I am also looking - but would you really buy now? Every time I look I am turned off my the EA's saying things like "ACT NOW!!" it's hilarious! Prices can go up 30-40% but it not going to make me buy, surely there are many people who think the same.

Considering that properties are scarce in Dublin and prices are increasing I suspect the buyers now out there do not feel the same way as you.

Woodville56

lima wrote: »

Totally agree with you. There needs to be a stand against the lunatics who stand in front gardens trying to protect people who are not paying their mortgages.
.

You are so trivialising the issue here !
I certainly don't support the militant anti repossession fringe either nor do I support those who want to throw the baby out with the bath water - those who do not differentiate between the genuinely distressed homeowner and the Buy to Let / Investor brigade who took a punt which subsequently backfired, to no small extent because of their own greed and the bank's negligence /malfeasance
There's a disdainful sentiment crept into this thread from a number of posters inhabiting a high moral ground and apologists for the laissez faire " let em eat cake " brigade .Time to stop the generalisations and get back on thread. I'm posting here as an ordinary middle income PAYE worker, no expertise in the property market or high finance and also in the house hunting market , but not at the expense of gain via a cheap repossessed family home.
We don't all live, or aspire to live, in SCD ( aka the centre of the universe for some ) you know !

moxin

cookie1977 wrote: »

Considering that properties are scarce in Dublin and prices are increasing I suspect the buyers now out there do not feel the same way as you.

Some areas in Dublin do not have scarce properties, each area is different.

jay0109

lima wrote: »

Regarding the 'boom' - I am also looking - but would you really buy now? Every time I look I am turned off my the EA's saying things like "ACT NOW!!" it's hilarious! Prices can go up 30-40% but it not going to make me buy, surely there are many people who think the same.

I'm running out of time. Live in a very small house with a growing family, fast approaching school age.
If I leave it to the last minute to buy, what happens if the house we decide to go for has no school places available nearby. Thats the nightmare scenario for me.

Sickens me to see the price rises. Have given up on repossessions and just hoping now that these high prices will attract more sellers on to the market. But thats not happening yet....everyone can't be in negative equity:mad:

gaius c

jay0109 wrote: »

Anyways back on topic!

No sign of major repossessions.
David Hall getting imbedded with AIB will surely slow up any chance they ever had of any meaningful repossession rates, because thats 1 thing he's 100% against. And he'll now see the case files close up. And will make a huge effort IMO to get the defaulters who are'nt even talking to the bank to come in out of the cold.

Meanwhile, market realities/illusions continue apace. Any sort of a decent 3/4 bed house in a decent/good area of SCD (where I am looking) are quickly going through the roof, literally!
I reckon prices have increased by 25-30% in the past 20-24 months. Asking prices being overshot by 10% on a couple of houses I was looking at recently. So houses that would have being 450-470k (IMO) around winter 2011 are now going for 600k+.

The madness has returned!

The PropertyPin has covered Hall in quite some detail and he's a chancer of the highest order. Like all great Irish entrepreneurs of the Zanu FF persuasion (Seanie G et al), his business plan consists of finding a rich source of funding (preferably state funding) and clamping his teeth onto it until it runs dry. Some details here and here.

It looks like he has managed to set himself up as a middleman between AIB and their customers in arrears. He is being paid by the bank so that's where his ultimate responsibility lies but he'll make soothing noises about looking after the poor unfortunates and the bank get some "managed opposition" to make the process look like it's fair.

lima

Woodville56 wrote: »

but not at the expense of gain via a cheap repossessed family home.

Why not? I have nothing to do with them so they are not my problem. I'm not going to ask questions if I look at a Repossessed home, I'll be making a purchase from a bank and that is all.

cookie1977

lima wrote: »

Why not? I have nothing to do with them so they are not my problem. I'm not going to ask questions if I look at a Repossessed home, I'll be making a purchase from a bank and that is all.

At the rate you're going you'll probably continue to procrastinate into the next bubble.

cookie1977

moxin wrote: »

Some areas in Dublin do not have scarce properties, each area is different.

We're talking about where people want to actually live and purchase. No need to be obtuse and take everything literally. Dublin prices as a whole are rising some areas faster then others. It is generally accepted in this thread that there is a scarcity of good properties to buy in dublin at present.

lima

cookie1977 wrote: »

At the rate you're going you'll probably continue to procrastinate into the next bubble.

Well I have an overseas partner so if the bubble persists I will happily rent before bringing up my future kids away from Ireland. As I said, the quality of homes in Ireland weren't even worth the money at the bottom of the crash. They certainly are well overpriced now.

lima

cookie1977 wrote: »

At the rate you're going you'll probably continue to procrastinate into the next bubble.

It it's called being cautious, frugal and living within my means. Something that some people in Ireland clearly don't understand as they deservedly have negative equity over their heads.

cookie1977

ECB cuts rates to 0.25%
http://www.rte.ie/news/business/2013/1107/485144-ecb-meeting/

cookie1977

lima wrote: »

It it's called being cautious, frugal and living within my means. Something that some people in Ireland clearly don't understand as they deservedly have negative equity over their heads.

You just said three things that all mean the same thing.

lima

cookie1977 wrote: »

You just said three things that all mean the same thing.

Frugal: sparing or economical with regard to money or food
Cautious: careful to avoid potential problems or dangers.
Means: money; financial resources.

I guess two of these are the same, more for emphasis really, and waay off topic

The_Conductor

We've veered totally off course- lets refocus guys.