Local hotel owner praised for cancelling auction of family farm.

Guy:Incognito

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

*coughcoughbondholderscoughcough*

a relevant reason?

Guy:Incognito

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

When the people saved the banks' asses by paying THEIR debts, it hardly seems unreasonable to demand that they cut those people some slack.

Lets take the bank in question, BOI. Have we, the tax payer , got any return whatsoever from any money put in to BOI?

and what do you reckon happens if the banks wrote off every mortgage on their books tomorrow?

hatrickpatrick

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Im sure if they only own 25% (or any other amount)they'd be more than happy to have the money they are owed paid to them if that's the way the farmer wants to go. I have a feeling hes not offering them their money though.

What if he used to have that money, but now isn't earning it thanks to the economic clusterf*ck created by said banks? This is the reason the banks get no sympathy from so many people.

Woodville56

tritium wrote: »

Funny the amount of folks who go on about how they pay taxes as though it gives you a get out of jail card on paying your debts. Funny too how no one seems to have had this ethical dilemma with debt during the good times.

I'm not using the fact that I like many others pay our taxes in the context you suggest ie as a get out of jail card. I use it in the context that as taxpayers we are all paying for the mismanagement of the banks, the reckless lending AND BORROWING too, yet I can see that not all mortgage arrears and debt write-down issues can be simplified down as black and white , as many posters here seem to believe ! You simply cannot tar all mortgage defaulters with the same brush , to do so is either being plain ignorant of the circumstances or playing to a populist gallery of self righteous "I'm all right Jack " types !

hatrickpatrick

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Lets take the bank in question, BOI. Have we, the tax payer , got any return whatsoever from any money put in to BOI?

Of course, sure we have this fine gentleman being paid an utterly ridiculous salary using our money!
http://m.rte.ie/news/touch//2014/0425/611719-boi-shareholders-voice-anger-at-agm/

and what do you reckon happens if the banks wrote off every mortgage on their books tomorrow?

Presumably they'd collapse, and good f*ckig riddance to them.

tritium

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

When the people saved the banks' asses by paying THEIR debts, it hardly seems unreasonable to demand that they cut those people some slack.

You do realise that if banks let everyone default they go broke right? You do realise what that means for the shareholders in this case given the events of recent years?

BTW, why should all of the people (I.e. the shareholder collective) shoulder the burden for the small subset who don't want to honour contracts they voluntarily entered? Even if I'm unhappy at the bailouts, why would I want to give a second group the same free meal?

Guy:Incognito

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

What if he used to have that money, but now isn't earning it thanks to the economic clusterf*ck created by said banks? This is the reason the banks get no sympathy from so many people.

That's the risk he took when taking out the mortgage, its right there in the contract.

If the bank bought your house off you, but didn't have the money up front so you agreed theyd pay you a grand month till its paid off, but after a year they said "sorry, we've no money to pay you anymore, but we're keeping the house anyway", youd just say fair enough, yeah?

tritium

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Of course, sure we have this fine gentleman being paid an utterly ridiculous salary using our money!
http://m.rte.ie/news/touch//2014/0425/611719-boi-shareholders-voice-anger-at-agm/

Bank of Ireland is a private company with a relatively small stake held by the Irish government. How do you figure it's your money?

Guy:Incognito

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Of course, sure we have this fine gentleman being paid an utterly ridiculous salary using our money!
http://m.rte.ie/news/touch//2014/0425/611719-boi-shareholders-voice-anger-at-agm/

Why don't you just answer the question?


BOI is a private company that's making money, they can pay him what they like. Maybe the government should sell the shares at what they bought them for, or would you rather they sell them at the current rate and make money? "our" money is worth more now because it was invested in BOI. If people don't pay their mortgages it will be worth this much ----> <

---

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Presumably they'd collapse, and good f*ckig riddance to them.

Ah , my mistake. I thought we were dealing with rational thinkers there for a minute.

Zamboni

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

When the people saved the banks' asses by paying THEIR debts, it hardly seems unreasonable to demand that they cut those people some slack.

Two completely different sections of people there
1. Irish taxpayers
2. Irish people with unsustainable mortgages

Pro Hoc Vice

galwayrush wrote: »

That's the way investments work.

Yes I take the risk in an investment I don't take the risk in giving a loan, that's why one is called an investment and the other a loan.

Pro Hoc Vice

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

When the people saved the banks' asses by paying THEIR debts, it hardly seems unreasonable to demand that they cut those people some slack.

You do realise that in the cases of the banks the people who owned them (shareholders) lost their shirts. Who do you think the banks are owned by it was share holders and is now us we gave them money to survive and we took over large chunks of the same banks.

Pro Hoc Vice

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

I've paid plenty of tax and never taken out a mortgage. Is there a form I fill out or do I just search daft and pick out my free house?

Same here I pay a sizeable rent every month where can I get form so I no longer have to pay. I did not buy a house because I thought or was madness so a fool who bought a house he could never afford gets it free while I have to pay for where I live. To be honest the let them have free houses really annoy me because I'm the stupid fecker whose taxes will pay for it.

Pro Hoc Vice

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Lets take the bank in question, BOI. Have we, the tax payer , got any return whatsoever from any money put in to BOI?

and what do you reckon happens if the banks wrote off every mortgage on their books tomorrow?

Yes I believe we made a profit on the deal.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/business/government-set-to-make-25bn-from-boi-deal-251726.html

But don't let the facts get in the way. If BOI wrote off every home loan it would go bust and we would have to move in again.

fatherted1969

red sean wrote: »

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/local-hotel-owner-praised-for-cancelling-family-farm-sale-628854.html

At last we see a REAL man with balls to stand up to the greedy banks etc.

Think having his hotel associated with the sale of friends/neighbours/gaa club colleagues would have a possible negative impact on his business. Talk about turning a negative into great marketing for his own hotel .

Paddy Power should snap him up !!!

Woodville56

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

So fill us in as to why he shouldn't have to pay his mortgage.

I never suggested that anyone shouldn't pay their mortgage ! What I'm saying consistently is that you just can't assume that everyone is deliberately defaulting and walking away from mortgage debt or that everyone in mortgage repayment difficulties want a "free house" as some posters in this thread insinuate . Maybe the defaulting borrowers you know are in that category but I can tell you that some I know come from a very different position, where the economic downturn and other unfortunate personal issues contributed to a loss in their income and where they have every intention of repaying their mortgage but need a bit of slack to get them over the hump. I would add that they don't own mansions in "des res" areas either, just ordinary folk in ordinary houses trying to get by . I would never advocate debt write off for those who can afford to pay or those who thought they would make a killing on investment properties and now find themselves out of their depth. The arguments here that everyone in mortgage arrears irrespective of their personal circumstances should be turfed on to the public housing list or told to go rent is just too simplistic and in reality few believe in that tenet, with the exception of some inhabitants of these fora who, for whatever motivation, be it personal gratification or business related issues, would force all defaulters, deliberate and misfortunate alike, on to the public housing list or the rental sector at the mercy of speculative and greedy landlords. Then again, maybe the self same hard liners here are of that ilk, landlords or other property speculator types - cheap resale properties and rising rents anyone ? - happy days for some maybe ? Motives abound !

end of the road

Zamboni wrote: »

the focus is on negatively personifying a credit institution.

who deserve to be negatively personifyed, they should have been let go to the wall, instead we bail them out and will see nothing back, anything from sales of properties will not be returned to the tax payer

end of the road

Zamboni wrote: »

Ok so considering the states holding in BOI, as a tax payer, I applaud the repossession and sale of an unsustainably mortgaged asset.
Bravo!

good for you, you will see nothing from it, not a penny

Zamboni

end of the road wrote: »

who deserve to be negatively personifyed, they should have been let go to the wall, instead we bail them out and will see nothing back, anything from sales of properties will not be returned to the tax payer

Bailing the banks out was wrong. I completely agree.
But that is an entirely separate issue from a farmer who hasn't paid back his loan.
If banks have no meaningful recourse in the case of unsustainable debts then why the hell would ANYONE pay back loans?
If banks have no meaningful recourse in the case of unsustainable debts then why the hell would they LEND to anyone?



I mean ffs

Woodville56

Zamboni wrote: »

If banks have no meaningful recourse in the case of unsustainable debts then why the hell would ANYONE pay back loans?
If banks have no meaningful recourse in the case of unsustainable debts then why the hell would they LEND to anyone?



I mean ffs

And the banks bear no responsibility for lending where the repayments have been found to be unsustainable yeah ??
You would never think it though from the banks and their supporters attitude to debt management that they might be in some way complicit in the default mess ?? Wouldn't do their bonus prospects any good to admit they made mistakes , would it now ? And no need to admit to anything long as they've got government policy makers and the financial regulators on their side, much easier to tap the taxpayer some more and at the same time repossess anything worth repossessing ! Nice one !!

maryishere

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Of course, sure we have this fine gentleman being paid an utterly ridiculous salary using our money!
http://m.rte.ie/news/touch//2014/0425/611719-boi-shareholders-voice-anger-at-agm/

There is something deeply unprecedented and extremely immoral about the chairman of a bank in this little country (whose population is the same as a small to medium European city ) getting paid so much money - 3 or 4 times what Obama or Cameron or Merkel is paid - when evicting someone in a county where bloody apartments built 8 years ago now only sell for a quarter of their sale price then - when elderly pensioners who had their life savings in shares in the bank had that wiped out - when the taxpayer saved the bank ?

As a previous poster correctly observed you would never think it from the banks and their supporters attitude to debt management that they might be in some way complicit in the default mess!

I cannot understand why people, whose children have had to go to Australia (and I met many of them there) , have not risen up against the bankers.

dxhound2005

maryishere wrote: »

There is something deeply unprecedented and extremely immoral about the chairman of a bank in this little country (whose population is the same as a small to medium European city ) getting paid so much money - 3 or 4 times what Obama or Cameron or Merkel is paid - when evicting someone in a county where bloody apartments built 8 years ago now only sell for a quarter of their sale price then - when elderly pensioners who had their life savings in shares in the bank had that wiped out - when the taxpayer saved the bank ?

As a previous poster correctly observed you would never think it from the banks and their supporters attitude to debt management that they might be in some way complicit in the default mess!

I cannot understand why people, whose children have had to go to Australia (and I met many of them there) , have not risen up against the bankers.

It is not unprecedented. His predecessor in the job was on €2.9 million a year.

maryishere

I am talking about the greed and incompetence of the bankers in Ireland as being unprecedented this millennium compared to the 60's, 70,s 80's and 90's.

shruikan2553

If we let people out of the contracts they agreed to who is going to pay for it?

Snake

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

That's the risk he took when taking out the mortgage, its right there in the contract.

If the bank bought your house off you, but didn't have the money up front so you agreed theyd pay you a grand month till its paid off, but after a year they said "sorry, we've no money to pay you anymore, but we're keeping the house anyway", youd just say fair enough, yeah?

But the banks have so much money missing a couple of grand from non payments is fine sure, don't you know.

maryishere

shruikan2553 wrote: »

If we let people out of the contracts they agreed to who is going to pay for it?

The bankers - some of whom are paid €900,000 plus perks per year - should take some pain if they too signed contracts which should not have been signed. The bankers who gave out silly loans in 2005 / 2006 should have know their lending was unsustainable, they were supposed to be qualified financial experts. Time they took some pain.

Fair play to the hotel involved.

Del2005

wes wrote: »

Ok, but seeing as the tax payer is paying the banks bills, we really shouldn't be surprised, when the average person think they should get the same treatment.

The taxpayer is paying the banks bills because people aren't repaying loans that they voluntary entered into. If the banks can't recover, some of, the money that they loaned out then the taxpayer will have to cover more bills.

So the choice we have is let people stay in properties that they can't afford and continue to subsidise the banks or let the banks try to rebuild their balance sheet so we can spend taxpayers money on important stuff like running the country instead.

shruikan2553

maryishere wrote: »

The bankers - some of whom are paid €900,000 plus perks per year - should take some pain if they too signed contracts which should not have been signed. The bankers who gave out silly loans in 2005 / 2006 should have know their lending was unsustainable, they were supposed to be qualified financial experts. Time they took some pain.

Fair play to the hotel involved.

Who signed to take these loans? The bank may have offered them but if you said no then they can't give it to you. These people didn't wake up one morning with an envelope full of money and a letter telling them they had to pay or they lose the house.

maryishere

the pain should be shared between both parties which made mistakes in the boom.

end of the road

Del2005 wrote: »

the choice we have is let people stay in properties that they can't afford and continue to subsidise the banks or let the banks try to rebuild their balance sheet and we can still spend taxpayers money on subsidizing the banks.

thats more like it, the tax payer will pay either way, the banks are never going to get back in full what they lent

Pro Hoc Vice

maryishere wrote: »

the pain should be shared between both parties which made mistakes in the boom.

Yes and the pain is being shared. A person buys house for €500,000 is not paying the bank back. The bank force a sale at €250,000 the have lost half the money, the person has lost their house everyone is losing in the transaction.

But one thing I find funny families lost their homes during the good and bad years, but no one cared, during the supposed boom. Families got evicted from rented Accomodation including LA during good years where was the hue and cry, I can assure you that the vast majority did not have a care because they thought it would never happen to them, now its personal an awful lot of people are on the edge.

AngryHippie

maryishere wrote: »

I cannot understand why people, whose children have had to go to Australia (and I met many of them there) , have not risen up against the bankers.

Rise up how exactly ?
How do you rise up against a corporation ?
Massive capital flight is the only way to do it, unless you decide to play out some sort of Tyler Durden Scenario.
Unfortunately for the people, the majority of the capital is not under their control, and they don't understand the system well enough to stop the wolves from taking it all off them once they started moving it, because that is exactly what would happen.

It's time for a global realization that money is not our God, Greed is not good, and that some day, money will not buy food, and it sure as fcuk can't grow it.

That day will come.:(

Wompa1

This is going to slow down foreclosures which is going to keep the cost of houses and rent up. Which will hurt people in the long run

Barely There

maryishere wrote: »

I cannot understand why people, whose children have had to go to Australia (and I met many of them there) , have not risen up against the bankers.

I'm sure there's loads of things you don't understand.

steddyeddy

I think people should pay their debts most certainly. The problem I have is when people think that the recipient of the loan should take all the burden.


During the celtic tiger period the banks gave out crazy loans and mortgages. Surprise surprise the recipients couldn't pay it back in some cases and the banks acted.

You seriously can't tell me that people who work in banks are that stupid that they thought all of these loans would be payed back?Two scenarios here:

• The banks knew the loans wouldn't be paid back
• The people who decided loans were stupid enough to think they were going to be paid back

Ether way they were wrong and should take at least half the hit.

At the moment students in UCD (one who lives off 20 a week) are being offered credit cards by the bank. Surprise surprise some of these will accept them (they're kids) and the bank will act like the innocent party and send them threatening letters when they can't pay.

In short the banks don't always give loans to people who they know will and can pay it back on time. It suits them to offer loans to people who will pay it back in dribs and drabs with interest. I don't buy for a second that the majority of cases of people struggling to pay debts are a result of ordinary people conning the banks.

Good for the hotel owner. Do it again and again and it will become untenable.

steddyeddy

Wompa1 wrote: »

This is going to slow down foreclosures which is going to keep the cost of houses and rent up. Which will hurt people in the long run

Lol, ROLF and the rest. Commercial rents barely went down since the Celtic tiger and landlords are not going to be dropping their greedy rents any time soon.

hatrickpatrick

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

You do realise that in the cases of the banks the people who owned them (shareholders) lost their shirts. Who do you think the banks are owned by it was share holders and is now us we gave them money to survive and we took over large chunks of the same banks.

I know this, I was a shareholder myself and I lost my investment. Point is, the banks were bailed out, and if you bail out x you must also bail out y, otherwise you are saying that x matters more to society than y and thus deserves special treatment.

And I sure as f*ck don't want to live in a society which prioritises the wellbeing of financial institutions above the wellbeing of ordinary people.

Pro Hoc Vice

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I know this, I was a shareholder myself and I lost my investment. Point is, the banks were bailed out, and if you bail out x you must also bail out y, otherwise you are saying that x matters more to society than y and thus deserves special treatment.

And I sure as f*ck don't want to live in a society which prioritises the wellbeing of financial institutions above the wellbeing of ordinary people.

The owners of the banks lost every thing, so treating like for like the banks exist but new owners the state on the other hand if a person does not repay their home lone the house exists just new owners can buy it.

The well being of many people is being looked after, many are in receipt of SW payments to repay interest, many have done very fair deals to repay loans. I know that banks are writing down debt, I know that banks are parking debt. To get to the stage of having a house reposed in this country requires total head in the sand. Visit any court that deals with these lists and person making any reasonable effort will be given every opportunity to remain in occupation, when all else fails the courts are giving 6 and 12 months stays on repossession orders, to get to that stage will usually mean at least 2 years of arrears, so many people are getting upwards of 2 - 3 years rent free. Yes their are some very sad cases, and I know for a fact they will be given every opportunity to arrange alternative housing. But do you really think a person should be entitled to reside in a house payment free with no effort to repay any of the money.

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/personal-finance/sharp-increase-in-debt-write-down-deals-1.1730844

"In one case, involving a couple in Cork, the bank had written off €195,000 in mortgage debt while allowing the couple and their two children to remain in the house."

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/consumer/aib-writes-off-home-debt-for-two-more-mortgage-holders-1.1722816

The news of the two new deals worth between €140,000 and €150,000 comes just 24 hours after details emerged of another arrangement reached between AIB and a couple from Dublin with an outstanding debt of €400,000 on a home now valued at just €150,000.
Under that deal, AIB wrote off €150,000 and allowed the couple, who have two children, to split the outstanding mortgage in two, with €40,000 of it parked and the couple agreeing to pay interest and capital on the remaining portion of the loan.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/archives/2014/0114/ireland/jobless-mother-bids-to-stop-bank-repossessing-700k-family-home-255178.html

http://economic-incentives.blogspot.ie/2013/09/anatomy-of-repossession.html

http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=184727

I feel for anyone in this situation, but in mosts cases where it has gone this far it's the only option.

Head The Wall

Stories like that make me glad my choice to leave Ireland was correct. I was already pissed off with the waste of taxpayers money and this kind of crap which I expected to happen has also come true.

People should not be getting debt writedowns and keeping the asset, if they can afford to still pay a mortgage they can afford to pay rent

martingriff

galwayrush wrote: »

I know, I said it was unfair that the bank can get 100% of their investment and the original owner can lost 100% of theirs, despite the banks share may only be a small % of the overall value.
If it was a limited company the bank may have to take the hit.

You just agreed it was not an investment yet then said they invested. They did not invest in this man farm if they did they be intitled to more money if it sold at a higher price. They LOAN the money not INVESTED there is a big difference

end of the road

Head The Wall wrote: »

Stories like that make me glad my choice to leave Ireland was correct. I was already pissed off with the waste of taxpayers money and this kind of crap which I expected to happen has also come true.

People should not be getting debt writedowns and keeping the asset, if they can afford to still pay a mortgage they can afford to pay rent

its not a waste of money, debt right downs are the only way, prices were over inflated and the banks were quick to give out lowns/mortgages willy nilly without ensuring people would be able to continue paying, they are going to keep the asset, and debt right downs will happen so i suggest you get over it, everyone is going to take a hit including the tax payer, our government were stupid enough to bail out the banks with our money and we just let it happen so we deserve what we get.

Wompa1

end of the road wrote: »

its not a waste of money, debt right downs are the only way, prices were over inflated and the banks were quick to give out lowns/mortgages willy nilly without ensuring people would be able to continue paying, they are going to keep the asset, and debt right downs will happen so i suggest you get over it, everyone is going to take a hit including the tax payer, our government were stupid enough to bail out the banks with our money and we just let it happen so we deserve what we get.

If people get debt write downs, do you think they'll re-adjust the value of their home if they ever go to sell it? F**k no.

Ireland needs a wake up call. The price of a new home in most places in the country is still astronomical when put in relative terms to the sh1tty pay and high cost of living. Homes need to be foreclosed on and quicker. So many homes come on the market at reduced prices to end this BS second property bubble that's going on before it ruins more people.

The banks were irresponsible giving out large loans but what kind of a-holes take out loans that big in the first place. Why weren't people living within their means? Why? Just because they could get that much money from the banks?

end of the road

Wompa1 wrote: »

If people get debt write downs, do you think they'll re-adjust the value of their home if they ever go to sell it? F**k no.

and rightly so, the banks deserve to take a hit, and so do we for being so thick to allow our government to spend our money on them to reward them for being irresponsible

Wompa1 wrote: »

Ireland needs a wake up call.

all ready got it

Wompa1 wrote: »

Homes need to be foreclosed on and quicker.

no they don't, doing so is rewarding the banks

Wompa1 wrote: »

So many homes come on the market at reduced prices to end this BS second property bubble that's going on before it ruins more people.

not in ireland, the banks will hold out for the over inflated prices, nobody learns in this country, should the houses be taken and sold every penny should go to the state in compensation for bailing out the banks, the banks deserve to be punished and this is a good way.

Wompa1

end of the road wrote: »

and rightly so, the banks deserve to take a hit, and so do we for being so thick to allow our government to spend our money on them to reward them for being irresponsible



all ready got it



no they don't, doing so is rewarding the banks



not in ireland, the banks will hold out for the over inflated prices, nobody learns in this country, should the houses be taken and sold every penny should go to the state in compensation for bailing out the banks, the banks deserve to be punished and this is a good way.

Already got it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4GpHyBJ-ho

How about this, can you explain to me how the line of credit system works in Ireland today. How are you rated? how can you tell what your current credit rating is? What independent body provides your credit rating?

Ok, so by your reckoning. The state needs to foreclose on the homes, auction them off and take the profit. The only problem with that is they can't even operate the f**kin tolls on the motorway. Even if it should happen, it won't.

It doesn't change the fact that homes need to be foreclosed on. The cost of living is too high. The next generation if f**ked. If you come out of college and get 18-21k a year and pay a huge lump of that in taxes...then consider your starting point, how much more can you get through raises and promotions? You might be lucky to cap out at 50k a year, MIGHT!

If banks are responsible now and we've learned our lessons as you claimed. And people are making crap money. People won't even be able to get a mortgage until they are quite old and have saved up enough to get a reasonable sized mortgage. They may not ever get to retire since it will take them a life to pay it off.

Cheaper homes, cheaper rent, reduction in the cost of the essentials and a tax break for those willing to start a business (private) and create jobs in my opinion is the way to steady the ship. Bring down the cost of living.

end of the road

Wompa1 wrote: »

Already got it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4GpHyBJ-ho

How about this, can you explain to me how the line of credit system works in Ireland today. How are you rated? how can you tell what your current credit rating is? What independent body provides your credit rating?

Ok, so by your reckoning. The state needs to foreclose on the homes, auction them off and take the profit. The only problem with that is they can't even operate the f**kin tolls on the motorway. Even if it should happen, it won't.

It doesn't change the fact that homes need to be foreclosed on. The cost of living is too high. The next generation if f**ked. If you come out of college and get 18-21k a year and pay a huge lump of that in taxes...then consider your starting point, how much more can you get through raises and promotions? You might be lucky to cap out at 50k a year, MIGHT!

If banks are responsible now and we've learned our lessons as you claimed. And people are making crap money. People won't even be able to get a mortgage until they are quite old and have saved up enough to get a reasonable sized mortgage. They may not ever get to retire since it will take them a life to pay it off.

Cheaper homes, cheaper rent, reduction in the cost of the essentials and a tax break for those willing to start a business (private) and create jobs in my opinion is the way to steady the ship. Bring down the cost of living.

homes don't need to be foreclosed on. the cost will be to great for the tax payer, debt rightdowns and forgiveness and to move on is the only way now, a tax break for small business is a nice idea but just not viable, cheeper anything is a nice idea but in ireland its just never going to happen, also The state wouldn't be foreclosing on the homes and auctioning them off, if that was to happen it would be the banks who would then be forced to hand over the profit as punishment for the reclessness that caused us to bail them out

Wompa1

end of the road wrote: »

homes don't need to be foreclosed on. the cost will be to great for the tax payer, debt rightdowns and forgiveness and to move on is the only way now, a tax break for small business is a nice idea but just not viable, cheeper anything is a nice idea but in ireland its just never going to happen

What cost? The taxpayers have already sured up the defecits in the value of the homes.

ScumLord

Zamboni wrote: »

The value Irish people place on allowing folks to renege on debts is simply astounding.

I think the value some people place on bank debt over actual people is really astounding.

I don't think a family should be thrown out of their home just to satisfy bank debt. I'm not saying the people should get off with paying back their debt but something can be worked out. But definitely against making families homeless because the bank isn't getting it's money fast enough.

comongethappy

ScumLord wrote: »

I think the value some people place on bank debt over actual people is really astounding.

I don't think a family should be thrown out of their home just to satisfy bank debt. I'm not saying the people should get off with paying back their debt but something can be worked out. But definitely against making families homeless because the bank isn't getting it's money fast enough.

Repossessions take years to approve.

If everyone gets their mortgage for free, why would anyone pay?

ScumLord

comongethappy wrote: »

Repossessions take years to approve.

If everyone gets their mortgage for free, why would anyone pay?

They didn't get their mortgage for free though. They paid it up until they couldn't I'm guessing. I don't know the particulars but in most cases people aren't avoiding paying their mortgage they just can't pay it.

The bank handed out stupid mortgages without doing the proper checks so they gambled on people. The gamble didn't pay off, why should they get to walk away with all their chips while the other party get striped?

comongethappy

ScumLord wrote: »

They didn't get their mortgage for free though. They paid it up until they couldn't I'm guessing. I don't know the particulars but in most cases people aren't avoiding paying their mortgage they just can't pay it.

As someone who sees distressed mortgages every day at work I can tell you with certainty that (for the bank I work at) the 'won't pays' far outnumber the 'can't pay'.

The bank handed out stupid mortgages without doing the proper checks so they gambled on people. The gamble didn't pay off, why should they get to walk away with all their chips while the other party get striped?

Indeed, why should the borrower get off scot free?