Media sympathetic coverage/agenda with evictions

jackal

Another example today of the mainstream media's very predictable reporting on any case to do with eviction.

Headline: Couple evicted from rented Dublin property in their pyjamas 'left homeless with no clothes' - See more at: http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/couple-evicted-from-rented-dublin-property-in-their-pyjamas-left-homeless-with-no-clothes-30541264.html

The article is full of subjective drivel, quotes from the couple in question, and of course a socialist TD chiming in that evictions should be outlawed.

Little mention that:

They were notified in November 2010 that their tenure was being terminated because the house was being put up for sale.

They have appeared in court a number of times and were told they would be jailed if they did not evacuate the house.

GavMan

Did this guy really go down to the shops for phone credit and cigs in his stocking feet?

On the one hand I find myself saying, would it really have killed the Sheriff to simply come into the house, ask the women to get dressed and then for her to leave? Then on another, I have a feeling that if they didn't use shock and awe to get them out, they would have taken the piss and not left.

Also, they turned down the offer of free accommodation so I have very little sympathy for this pair

lima

There seems to be a lot of hostility for these people which may be warranted but the fact is there are 1000's of people not paying their mortgages for years getting away with the same kind of thing and there is no one kicking up a fuss about that..

murphaph

Is anyone kicking up a fuss about this?

Barely There

On all the news reports it's very quickly skimmed over that they've ignored court orders to vacate the premises and then they spend about 5 minutes reporting on how the poor awl cretors were tossed out of their home in their pyjamas at 7.30am.
Then audio clip is played with the old biddy whinging how they've been 'failed by the State'. Old geezer chimes in with 'the justice system in this Country is a joke'.

Funnily enough, I'd agree with him - there should be a lot more of these evictions taking place up and down the country.

lima

murphaph wrote: »

Is anyone kicking up a fuss about this?

http://www.thejournal.ie/coyne-castleknock-pensioners-eviction-1639300-Aug2014/

Lot's of "that’s life when you rent"

But when there's mention of a poor old homeowner failing to pay their mortgage there's anger towards the bank and lobby groups are kicking up a fuss.

josip

Do they have friends that they can stay with for a while rather than "sleep in a van"?

murphaph

lima wrote: »

http://www.thejournal.ie/coyne-castleknock-pensioners-eviction-1639300-Aug2014/

Lot's of "that’s life when you rent"

But when there's mention of a poor old homeowner failing to pay their mortgage there's anger towards the bank and lobby groups are kicking up a fuss.

A few comments does not a fuss or otherwise make.

rawn

They have had plenty of time to find accommodation but they refuse to move outside the area, even though they can't find anywhere to accept rent allowance. Plenty of places outside Dublin with great transport access to Dublin that would be perfectly affordable and probably a great deal nicer than any place they'd get here on RA. The bank has been refusing their rent cheques for months, they can clearly afford a hotel. They also have family nearby, which is why they want to stay in the area. No chance they'll be on the streets and they know it, it's all for sympathy. I feel sorry for them losing their home I really do, it sucks, but at the end of the day, they're only tenants, it's not their property, and the homeowner has been delayed in paying off his debts thanks to them. They need to stop blaming the State due to bad advice from Ruth Coppinger, who has been egging them on the whole time.

murphaph

The landlord has gone into receivership and the bank's receiver is the one pushing ahead with the eviction. It's not clear to me if he went bust before or after the eviction proceedings began.

gaius c

Seems they got refused for legal aid. I wonder if it's because they have means that they are not disclosing?

rawn

They had sunk a lot of money into building their own house while renting that one, and wound up selling it (i think) so they prob still have some money from that, as well as all the unaccepted rent cheques since December.

lima

murphaph wrote: »

A few comments does not a fuss or otherwise make.

There's no scientific definition of Fuss so comments on a tabloid website could constitute fuss!

L1011

Some media outlets are letting them make unchallenged claims that the bailiff 'broke the law' now. *They* broke the law, I don't think the bailiff did.

murphaph

lima wrote: »

There's no scientific definition of Fuss so comments on a tabloid website could constitute fuss!

Cut to the chase. Your point was that nobody was making waves about poor renters being turfed out but that people like "New Beginnings" etc. are making waves on behalf of defaulting mortgage holders. The fact is however that there are left wing politicians making waves and throwing shapes on behalf of tenants being evicted, even in this very case. There are just fewer renters than owner occupiers maybe, so the stories of over holding tenants facing eviction "woes" are fewer and farther apart?

MouseTail

rawn wrote: »

They had sunk a lot of money into building their own house while renting that one, and wound up selling it (i think) so they prob still have some money from that, as well as all the unaccepted rent cheques since December.

Disclosed on Drivetime their previous house reposessed by ACC.

rawn

MouseTail wrote: »

Disclosed on Drivetime their previous house reposessed by ACC.

That's awful. Couldn't imagine pouring my heart and soul into building a home only to have the bank take it off you. It still doesn't excuse the fact that they think the house they've been evicted from somehow belongs to them. Every article I read about it focuses on the fact that they were in pj's and are going to "sleep in a van". What happened to all the rent they must have saved? They were getting RA so I assume the rent was €700 p/m x 8 months = €5600. Plenty of hotel rooms and B&B's for that price. I am so much less sympathetic to their predicament because it seems all they want is sympathy!*

*and to keep the house that isn't theirs.

gaius c

murphaph wrote: »

Cut to the chase. Your point was that nobody was making waves about poor renters being turfed out but that people like "New Beginnings" etc. are making waves on behalf of defaulting mortgage holders. The fact is however that there are left wing politicians making waves and throwing shapes on behalf of tenants being evicted, even in this very case. There are just fewer renters than owner occupiers maybe, so the stories of over holding tenants facing eviction "woes" are fewer and farther apart?

The previous thread in this very sub-forum was an eye opener as to the differing attitudes when it's tenants being evicted versus mortgage payers being evicted.
They do need to leave and there's almost certainly holes in their story but some of the bile directed their way in that thread was quite vicious.

There are just fewer renters than owner occupiers maybe

That's almost certain but there are also fewer PPR households in arrears than people renting (& liable to be removed after 28 days if they stop paying) so why the special treatment for the much smaller group?

There are actual lobby groups campaigning for people not paying for their accommodation to stay in it or get debt write-offs at the expense of everybody else and nobody bats an eyelid. I don't see an equivalent lobby group for renters.

murphaph

Yet they have no sympathy for the landlord. According to the IT:

Mr Byrne (Counsel for ACC Bank) said the refusal of the Coynes to move out meant the landlord’s debts were increasing month by month.

So basically it was, screw him, we're staying put. A load of contradictory nonsense as well about sleeping with family/van/shelter/park bench...I am 100% sure this couple will not be sleeping in anything other than a private house this evening. They are obstinate in the extreme if you ask me, almost worse than a defaulting mortgage holder because their actions are causing additional distress to an individual, their former landlord, whereas a defaulting mortgage holder causes financial distress to a bank/state at large, so the unfair burden is at least spread around a bit.

MouseTail

MouseTail wrote: »

Disclosed on Drivetime their previous house reposessed by ACC.

15 years ago?


I read this link this morning: http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/couple-evicted-from-rented-property-will-spend-tonight-in-a-van-30541264.html

Which seems to have been completely changed. Earlier, it said that their 37 year old son also lived with them, and had a quote that they had applied to 15 properties since they were told they had to move.

When I was apartment hunting earlier this year, and I'm sure anyone else who has rented recently can attest to this, I was trying 5-10 places per week. It took about 6 weeks to find somewhere.

What exactly makes these people so special and different to the rest of us that they deserve such special treatment? I can only imagine that the people who jump to the defence of this case are of a similar ilk who expect everything for nothing.

murphaph

gaius c wrote: »

I don't see an equivalent lobby group for renters.

Nobody stopping over holding tenants from forming a lobby group is there?

gaius c

murphaph wrote: »

Nobody stopping over holding tenants from forming a lobby group is there?

They'd be laughed out of town. That's my point.

MouseTail

murphaph wrote: »

Nobody stopping over holding tenants from forming a lobby group is there?

Indeed, and Threshold get State funding, my understanding is lobby groups for mortgagees are not in reciept of such funding. This is a red herring in any case, arrears are falling, and will continue to fall as the economy recovers. The arrears are not forgiven, but either capitalised or warehoused.

gaius c

MouseTail wrote: »

Indeed, and Threshold get State funding, my understanding is lobby groups for mortgagees are not in reciept of such funding. This is a red herring in any case, arrears are falling, and will continue to fall as the economy recovers. The arrears are not forgiven, but either capitalised or warehoused.

You're honestly drawing an equivalence between a group defending tenant's legal rights to a group advocating taxpayers money be spent on wealth transfers to those who purchased too much?

lima

murphaph wrote: »

Cut to the chase. Your point was that nobody was making waves about poor renters being turfed out but that people like "New Beginnings" etc. are making waves on behalf of defaulting mortgage holders. The fact is however that there are left wing politicians making waves and throwing shapes on behalf of tenants being evicted, even in this very case. There are just fewer renters than owner occupiers maybe, so the stories of over holding tenants facing eviction "woes" are fewer and farther apart?

I'm not chasing anything.

There's general hostility towards renters in Ireland and that link was evidence of it. There are plenty of people who are disgusted with renting/renters but refuse to pay their mortgages and feel they are entitled to either stay in their house or get a write down or both.

My point is that there should be far more anger about the people not paying their mortgages but everyone seems to turn a blind eye to them

murphaph

Neither should be state funded. Tenants should fund their own tenants' associations and property owners/landlords should do likewise. At least there is an Irish Property Owners Association, which is funded entirely from subscriptions, no such association on the tenants' side...they have the state funded threshold I suppose. Why can't landlords get state funding to support them when they need assistance with delinquent tenants?! It's unfair I tells ya!

In actual fact "Threshold" should be tenant funded, just like the equivalent organisations over here.

Ken.

Is their any landlord here who would rent to these people after all their shenanigans?. I'd be looking at them thinking what if I want to sell up in a year or 2 and get rid of them. They've created a problem of their own doing. Not unless I was desperate for a tenant would I consider them.

I wonder could that have been one of the reasons as to why they couldn't find a new place?.

murphaph

lima wrote: »

I'm not chasing anything.

There's general hostility towards renters in Ireland and that link was evidence of it. There are plenty of people who are disgusted with renting/renters but refuse to pay their mortgages and feel they are entitled to either stay in their house or get a write down or both.

My point is that there should be far more anger about the people not paying their mortgages but everyone seems to turn a blind eye to them

I'm angry about them. Lots of people on this forum are angry about them. You're angry about them. It simply isn't true that "everyone seems to turn a blind eye to them".

I don't believe there's a general hostility towards renters either. How do you deduce that exactly? Are people generally hostile towards you when they find out that you rent your home?

MouseTail

gaius c wrote: »

You're honestly drawing an equivalence between a group defending tenant's legal rights to a group advocating taxpayers money be spent on wealth transfers to those who purchased too much?

Both are advocacy groups. I have no problem with Threshold being funded, If tenants want another lobby group, they should form one.

JohnBee

This is a perfect example of the welfare recipient's world view.

As a tax payer, economics is the primary factor in deciding where you live and a perfect example are the many commuter towns around Dublin.

Welfare recipients such as the Coynes seem to think that they should be exempt from normal economic rules and should be "entitled" to live where they choose irrespective of cost. Given that they had a number of years to find a place, they well had enough time. The report that rent in the area is now 1400 per month probably wouldn't have applied if they had moved when they got first notice.

Zamboni

I've no sympathy for renters or mortgagees alike who either don't pay their accommodation costs or don't have a legal claim to the accommodation that they inhabit.

No eviction by a sheriff takes place without a long protracted hulabaloo. These clowns have had ample time to source alternative accommodation/state services.
These clowns were even offered FREE housing from some generous fool in the US.

Poor old Rabogroup. They just want out of this godforesaken hell hole.