Borrow €400k from AIB and only pay back €250k

cookie1977

The_Conductor wrote: »

David Hall reports receiving in excess of 1000 inquiries from people in not dissimilar positions to the couple who received the 140k debt forgiveness, in the last week, as Taoiseach Enda Kenny calls AIB's move a great deal for the borrowers.........

The Indo are reporting this in a story entitled- New Wave of Families seek debt deals

I'm appalled. Why should anyone bother paying their mortgages? There are hundreds of thousands of struggling families somehow managing to pay their bills- having cut back on absolutely everything- who are about to be hit with a slew of further stealth taxes- yet we have these shenanigans going on.........

Arrrrgghhhhhhh........

There really should only be temporary parking of debt (split mortgages) or debt forgiveness upon repossession. You cannot have deals like this without it creating extreme adverse feelings amongst those that are doing everything to pay back their debts. This could seriously back fire for the banks and the government if it's seen as a frequently used option to sort out debt. There are so many other choices that can help the customer before we get to outright debt forgiveness.

_Kaiser_

The_Conductor wrote: »

David Hall reports receiving in excess of 1000 inquiries from people in not dissimilar positions to the couple who received the 140k debt forgiveness, in the last week, as Taoiseach Enda Kenny calls AIB's move a great deal for the borrowers.........

The Indo are reporting this in a story entitled- New Wave of Families seek debt deals

I'm appalled. Why should anyone bother paying their mortgages? There are hundreds of thousands of struggling families somehow managing to pay their bills- having cut back on absolutely everything- who are about to be hit with a slew of further stealth taxes- yet we have these shenanigans going on.........

Arrrrgghhhhhhh........

It's another sad joke at the expense of those who were responsible and grown-up about their commitments and responsibilities, all because of this obsession in Ireland with owning property.

I have a credit card and a personal loan that as my circumstances have changed in the last 5 years (redundancy, lower wages etc) I've had to rearrange payments on. But I have to admit - I'm very tempted to walk across the road to the local branch and tell them I won't be paying 33% of it, or that I'm reducing the payments to €50 a month - if it's good enough for some, it's good enough for everyone!

This latest development just reinforces what I've increasingly come to realise - being honest, paying your way, and doing things "right" in this country only leaves you exposed to picking up the tab for the chancers who don't - and it's no longer the "elite" or the welfare fraudsters... now it's average Joe who doesn't want to pay his bills too!

In not even 100 years we have managed to completely destroy the economic and social fabric of this country.. something that will take decades to repair - assuming the will was even there! The failure of this State is complete! :mad:

mjv2ydratu679c

cookie1977 wrote: »

This could seriously back fire for the banks and the government taxpayer if it's seen as a frequently used option to sort out debt. There are so many other choices that can help the customer before we get to outright debt forgiveness.

:eek:

jmayo

The_Conductor wrote: »

David Hall reports receiving in excess of 1000 inquiries from people in not dissimilar positions to the couple who received the 140k debt forgiveness, in the last week, as Taoiseach Enda Kenny calls AIB's move a great deal for the borrowers.........

The Indo are reporting this in a story entitled- New Wave of Families seek debt deals

If we just work on a conservative estimate of 1000 people receiving only half as much that equates to another 75 million that the banks have to come up with.
And in the case of the taxpayer funded ones (AIB, former EBS, former INBS) that means 75 million more of taxpayers funds is gone.

cookie1977 wrote: »

There really should only be temporary parking of debt (split mortgages) or debt forgiveness upon repossession. You cannot have deals like this without it creating extreme adverse feelings amongst those that are doing everything to pay back their debts. This could seriously back fire for the banks and the government if it's seen as a frequently used option to sort out debt. There are so many other choices that can help the customer before we get to outright debt forgiveness.

For once I think we are on same hymm sheet.
Glad you are coming around.

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

It's another sad joke at the expense of those who were responsible and grown-up about their commitments and responsibilities, all because of this obsession in Ireland with owning property.

I have a credit card and a personal loan that as my circumstances have changed in the last 5 years (redundancy, lower wages etc) I've had to rearrange payments on. But I have to admit - I'm very tempted to walk across the road to the local branch and tell them I won't be paying 33% of it, or that I'm reducing the payments to €50 a month - if it's good enough for some, it's good enough for everyone!

This latest development just reinforces what I've increasingly come to realise - being honest, paying your way, and doing things "right" in this country only leaves you exposed to picking up the tab for the chancers who don't - and it's no longer the "elite" or the welfare fraudsters... now it's average Joe who doesn't want to pay his bills too!

In not even 100 years we have managed to completely destroy the economic and social fabric of this country.. something that will take decades to repair - assuming the will was even there! The failure of this State is complete! :mad:

I gave up on this country a while ago.
The ultimate was learning that charitable contributions meant for disadvantaged kids were actually destined to be used as the salaries and pensions for the connected.

Seeing as we are approaching the centenary of 1916, I wonder what the likes of Pearse et al would have made of what we have become as a free state.

cookie1977

jmayo wrote: »

For once I think we are on same hymm sheet.
Glad you are coming around.

My ideas have not changed. I was never in favor of debt forgiveness the way AIB have gone about it this time. I was in favour of doing all that was possible to allow people stay in their homes short of debt rightoff. The only time debt write off which was acceptable to me was in the case of a repossession and subsequent sale that fell short of the debt. The outstanding debt then should be written off. So I haven't come around to anything new

fliball123

cookie1977 wrote: »

My ideas have not changed. I was never in favor of debt forgiveness the way AIB have gone about it this time. I was in favour of doing all that was possible to allow people stay in their homes short of debt rightoff. The only time debt write off which was acceptable to me was in the case of a repossession and subsequent sale that fell short of the debt. The outstanding debt then should be written off. So I haven't come around to anything new

Why should the remaining debt be written off..can you quantify a reason why these people should shift their debt to others?

cookie1977

fliball123 wrote: »

Why should the remaining debt be written off..can you quantify a reason why these people should shift their debt to others?

Not going to thrash all that out here again. We/I have discussed it in detail here if you want to have a read: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056898823

fliball123

cookie1977 wrote: »

Not going to thrash all that out here again. We/I have discussed it in detail here if you want to have a read: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056898823

I am not going to go through a whole thread..just give me a 1/2 point summary as to why you think peoples debts should be taken off them and slapped onto other people, many of who are struggling and cannot afford them?

cookie1977

fliball123 wrote: »

I am not going to go through a whole thread..just give me a 1/2 point summary as to why you think peoples debts should be taken off them and slapped onto other people, many of who are struggling and cannot afford them?

Because I dont believe in getting blood out of a stone and our mortgage system and bankruptcy laws are in some ways penal. If they've lost their house and it's sold off then let the people re start their lives. Otherwise they could become a burden on the tax payer through social schemes.

fliball123

cookie1977 wrote: »

Because I dont believe in getting blood out of a stone and our mortgage system and bankruptcy laws are in some ways penal. If they've lost their house and it's sold off then let the people re start their lives. Otherwise they could become a burden on the tax payer through social schemes.

Why were these people not stating this blood from a stone metaphore at the time they signed for the loan? What about the blood from the stone that is already an over burdened and over stretched tax payer that is already on the lamb for over 200billion in debts + another 9 billion this year..What about that phucking stone ?

Our bankrupcy laws are not strong enough and the mortgage system which currently allowing someone walk away with 3/8s of their debt written off with no recourse, another 1/8th with no interest being paid..and they get to stay in the phucking house..and you think thats penal? What planet are you living on?

gaius c

Deise Vu wrote: »

It is a stark choice isn't it? The satisfaction of extracting revenge on these morons versus the cost of supporting them on welfare. It sure is tough being smug.

The couple in the OP are both employed. They could rent, like everybody else who is unable to afford to buy.
-> No cost to taxpayer.

The_Conductor wrote: »

The Irish Times is reporting another 2 debt forgiveness deals by AIB, both in excess of 140k each (no further details available).

I wonder how hard it would be for a journalist to check if any of these writedowns involved bank employees?
*whistles*

jmayo

gaius c wrote: »

The couple in the OP are both employed. They could rent, like everybody else who is unable to afford to buy.
-> No cost to taxpayer.


I wonder how hard it would be for a journalist to check if any of these writedowns involved bank employees?
*whistles*

All I will say is AIB, AIB, AIB ...

I mean come on, can anyone name a decade in the last 40 odd years they haven't screwed over someone, especially the taxpayer given the chance.

OldNotWIse

cookie1977 wrote: »

Because I dont believe in getting blood out of a stone and our mortgage system and bankruptcy laws are in some ways penal. If they've lost their house and it's sold off then let the people re start their lives. Otherwise they could become a burden on the tax payer through social schemes.

They haven't.

cookie1977

OldNotWIse wrote: »

They haven't.

Clearly you haven't read all my posts

OldNotWIse

cookie1977 wrote: »

Clearly you haven't read all my posts

Clearly I am not on a 60 hour day like you. Is it no longer permitted to reply to single posts?? Must check the charter.

cookie1977

The posts that might help you answer the question are all on page 17 of this thread.

OldNotWIse

cookie1977 wrote: »

The posts that might help you answer the question are all on page 17 of this thread.

248, where you once again answer the question by inviting someone to find the answer elsewhere? I'm starting to see a pattern

ArraMusha

I hope that the frustrations that others like myself may have, reading and contributing to this thread is not the end of this national scandal.

Venting frustration here on boards is an outlet and hopefully it will help to expose this wrong doing and lead to something other than just marking a point in time where people posted their thoughts on this item.

Some of the media have sensed the public frustrations with what AIB did, and there were a few follow up articles in the paper, but nothing substantial.

I'm planning to contact my local representatives (councillors and TD's) and the papers to express the frustration with how taxpayers money is being used, and I invite others to do similar. Also if you have any other recommendations could you please post.

Its time to act now or look forward to an Ireland where incompetence is rewarded.

Gatling

I don't get the size of the write down at all ,
Borrowed 400k run up debts of 30k miss a few mortgage payments along the way ,
Seemingly the 30k is mainly on credit cards ,
So why the massive write down on this property

Hypothetical what Would actually happen if the economy makes an drastic turn around and wage cuts and levies disappear and this couple then sell the house for close to the 400k ,would the bank get a cut of any future sale or would the very fortunate couple laugh all the way to a bank ,

Cuddlesworth

ArraMusha wrote: »

I hope that the frustrations that others like myself may have, reading and contributing to this thread is not the end of this national scandal.

Venting frustration here on boards is an outlet and hopefully it will help to expose this wrong doing and lead to something other than just marking a point in time where people posted their thoughts on this item.

Some of the media have sensed the public frustrations with what AIB did, and there were a few follow up articles in the paper, but nothing substantial.

I'm planning to contact my local representatives (councillors and TD's) and the papers to express the frustration with how taxpayers money is being used, and I invite others to do similar. Also if you have any other recommendations could you please post.

Its time to act now or look forward to an Ireland where incompetence is rewarded.

At this stage I'd say the major backlash is the people who are ringing up the banks right now and saying I'm not paying a cent back to you until you wipe 150k off my debts.

Then we will see the moral backlash in around a year, if arrears increase dramatically from employed people who have cut back to nothing to keep paying their mortgages. I find it hard to believe that anybody in those circumstances will keep living the frugal life.

Or maybe not.

Cuddlesworth

Gatling wrote: »

I don't get the size of the write down at all ,
Borrowed 400k run up debts of 30k miss a few mortgage payments along the way ,
Seemingly the 30k is mainly on credit cards ,
So why the massive write down on this property

Hypothetical what Would actually happen if the economy makes an drastic turn around and wage cuts and levies disappear and this couple then sell the house for close to the 400k ,would the bank get a cut of any future sale or would the very fortunate couple laugh all the way to a bank ,

I'm not sure if there has been a court case yet where a person has been turfed out of their primary home while still making payments. There is a severe bias towards keeping the family home at all costs.

Every case of repossession I have seen so far is either have multiple property's, hasn't paid or interfaced with the bank in years or gave up the property voluntary.

Zamboni

ArraMusha wrote: »

I hope that the frustrations that others like myself may have, reading and contributing to this thread is not the end of this national scandal.

Venting frustration here on boards is an outlet and hopefully it will help to expose this wrong doing and lead to something other than just marking a point in time where people posted their thoughts on this item.

Some of the media have sensed the public frustrations with what AIB did, and there were a few follow up articles in the paper, but nothing substantial.

I'm planning to contact my local representatives (councillors and TD's) and the papers to express the frustration with how taxpayers money is being used, and I invite others to do similar. Also if you have any other recommendations could you please post.

Its time to act now or look forward to an Ireland where incompetence is rewarded.

I hope and think you are right. I have met seething rage from a variety of people (all in very different economic situations) over the last week.

I would like to invite everyone with a vote in the upcoming European elections for the Dublin constituency to target Brian Hayes.

If you're angry - tell Brian Hayes you're angry.
Tell him he won't be getting votes off you unless he starts campaigning for a transparent register of individuals receiving debt write down. Recipients should waive data protection/anonymity.

Tell him he won't be getting votes off you unless voluntary surrender is mandatory for debt write negotiation in state backed financial institutions.

Tell him to get his party to get the Public Interest Directors on the board of AIB to pull the fingers out of their asses.

Tell him here
brian.hayes@oir.ie

snubbleste

I see your €150k and raise you to €215k
Separated woman with children to stay in home after loans and mortgage reduced. Ok, it was only €154,816 off the mortgage but still..

riclad

CAN a couple who are still working go bankrupt?
THEY are still left with a large mortgage,
larger than the house value.IT sounds like the more you borrowed over the house value ,the stronger your hand is in dealing with the bank.
IT looks like the bank are looking at how much can the client afford to pay,
and than they reduce the mortgage ,so the client can afford to pay the loan every month.
And maybe they fear the client may go bankrupt ,they,ll end up paying legal fees , and getting a house thats worth less the new lowered mortgage
figure.

hellboy99

snubbleste wrote: »

I see your €150k and raise you to €215k
Separated woman with children to stay in home after loans and mortgage reduced. Ok, it was only €154,816 off the mortgage but still..

I can see this getting out of hand very quick, think I'll go borrow a few 100k tomorrow and tell the bank next month I can't pay it back and get it wrote off.

riclad

Banks went crazy in the boom, over lending,
every house was worth 200-300k.
NOW they are getting punished for it.
I assume they look at the present value of the house ,when doing a writedown.

username123

riclad wrote: »

Banks went crazy in the boom, over lending,
every house was worth 200-300k.
NOW they are getting punished for it.
I assume they look at the present value of the house ,when doing a writedown.

I imagine they are looking at a number of factors, the current value of the property, the earning capacity of the mortgage holder, the other financial commitments of the mortgage holder etc... There is surely an affidavit of means produced.

I can see the banks point here, write off some and get some, better than writing off the lot and trying to firesale it, while pursuing blood from a stone by trying to get the outstanding from the mortgage holder. At least this way the bank continues to get some repayments (plus interest) for the term.

But it sticks in my craw that people are allowed to keep the property. Write off the debt sure, but dont leave them with the asset.

Ive massive negative equity. Id love a write off! But because Ive been pulling out all stops to pay the mortgage and dont have lots of other debt - I wont get one! I should have borrowed massive sums and lived recklessly - thats how you get rewarded in this country.

I dont know why i thought it would be any different. If you save sensibly you fail social welfare means tests and are told to live off your savings while the guy next door who blew his wages weekly on coke and hookers gets the full amount.

OldNotWIse

riclad wrote: »

Banks went crazy in the boom, over lending,
every house was worth 200-300k.
NOW they are getting punished for it.
I assume they look at the present value of the house ,when doing a writedown.

People went mad borrowing. Nobody was forced.

It is not the banks being punished, its the taxpayer.

The same people who were looked down on for renting when these idiots were jumping on the property ladder and mortgaging their backsides off are now expected to bail them out.

Also, what does present value have to do with anything? The amount they owe is the amount they owe, regardless of the value of the house.

Why are they allowed to stay in the property? Why not tell them to rent?

cookie1977

Taking it at its simplistic form, and let me be clear I'm not in agreement with rightdowns at all, if the bank that's tax payer backed has a mortgage in arrears on its books valued at 400,000 and lets say the immediate sale post repossession could yield 150,000-200,000 would the bank (and thus the tax payer) not be better off with 100,000-150,000 rightdown of the 400,000 mortgage with an option to come back to the table for anther 20-50K in the future (thus valuing the new now performing mortgage at between 250-350) not be better return then a costly, lengthy repossession followed by sale of the of the same property for between 150-200K? Surely this meets the needs of those concerned about the tax payers cotinuing costs. Is it not the job of the bank to achieve the best return on its cash in what ever way they see fit?

Now of course this depends on the new mortgage deal remaining performing but assuming the banks have been able to fully analyse the state of finances of the people then its quite possible it will. And for those making throw away comments of "sure maybe I'll stop paying the mortgage" I would say that there is no hope that you would get any similar deal. The deal in these cases is being made because it offers the best return for the banks as the current situation means the people with the arrears cannot pay back the existing mortgage.

Cuddlesworth

cookie1977 wrote: »

Taking it at its simplistic form, and let me be clear I'm not in agreement with rightdowns at all, if the bank that's tax payer backed has a mortgage in arrears on its books valued at 400,000 and lets say the immediate sale post repossession could yield 150,000-200,000 would the bank (and thus the tax payer) not be better off with 100,000-150,000 rightdown of the 400,000 mortgage with an option to come back to the table for anther 20-50K in the future (thus valuing the new now performing mortgage at between 250-350) not be better return then a costly, lengthy repossession followed by sale of the of the same property for between 150-200K? Surely this meets the needs of those concerned about the tax payers cotinuing costs. Is it not the job of the bank to achieve the best return on its cash in what ever way they see fit?

Now of course this depends on the new mortgage deal remaining performing but assuming the banks have been able to fully analyse the state of finances of the people then its quite possible it will. And for those making throw away comments of "sure maybe I'll stop paying the mortgage" I would say that there is no hope that you would get any similar deal. The deal in these cases is being made because it offers the best return for the banks as the current situation means the people with the arrears cannot pay back the existing mortgage.

I know of one couple with similar income and with a similar mortgage to the couple in the OP who are just managing to pay it. What exactly was the problem with this couple that they were living far beyond their means.

The issue with debt write downs isn't the actual write down, its our spiralling arrears problem as a country. There isn't a chance in hell that this or the other cases that are starting to appear are not causing further arrears in what would be considered a performing but struggling demographic.