Government to pay mortgage arrears *Mod Note in Opening Post*

bjork

stevedublin wrote: »

good luck with that - you'll need it!

Good Times MK2 is on the way . I might have showed a bit of restraint the last time and lived within my means


This time > Not a ****ing hope of me doing that. I'll be partying like it's 1999.

The_Conductor

Villa05 wrote: »

This thread is 50+ pages long. It should be only 2 posts. The reply being- That's mad Ted. We could not seriously make that mistake again

People like to navel gaze- and the Irish have a special blame culture- and refusal to accept responsibility for our own actions. Someone else is always to blame.

Yes- its mad. Yes- Dougal could do better at summing up the situation than an Oireachtas committee who have spent 20million so far- and will probably spend many times this, before they wind down, in some years time.

Thats mad Ted. Indeed.

gaius c

hopgog wrote: »

That's why I am says people should give back the keys go bankrupt and get a free social house so they will be contributing like the rest that get free homes

It's like whackamole here.

75% of borrowers in arrears are in employment. You might have heard of a thing called "renting". They will be able to pay for their own accommodation.

bjork

If the government is going to pay off my mortgage, I can now redirect my earnings to pay for the apartment in Bulgaria.


Edit: When the crash comes>> I'll claim my main residence is in Bulgaria.


I'm getting the hang of this now
Lessons have been learned

_Kaiser_

gaius c wrote: »

It's like whackamole here.

75% of borrowers in arrears are in employment. You might have heard of a thing called "renting". They will be able to pay for their own accommodation.

That's very true.. this notion that eviction = homeless is just completely untrue!

Eviction = you rent like many thousands of others, either privately and/or with assistance (rent allowance) if you qualify/need it. You may have to rent in a different area in line with your means but that's life and again, something that tenants do all the time!

But no-one is ending up "out on the street" over this unless they refuse to face reality and make alternative arrangements before it gets to that point.

hopgog

gaius c wrote: »

It's like whackamole here.

75% of borrowers in arrears are in employment. You might have heard of a thing called "renting". They will be able to pay for their own accommodation.

If you have 50k debt to get rid it's better to go on dole and bankrupt to get rid of it and get social housing.

You need to work out if dole/children allowance and social house and no debt leaves you with more money a month and to a lot of people struggling it does.

The_Morrigan

hopgog wrote: »

If you have 50k debt to get rid it's better to go on dole and bankrupt to get rid of it and get social housing.

You need to work out if dole/children allowance and social house and no debt leaves you with more money a month and to a lot of people struggling it does.

hopgog I'm gonna be honest here and say this line of discussion is not really suitable, advising people to weigh up the options of strategic default and adding to the already overstretched social welfare regime in this country is not constructive discussion - if you have nothing of value to add to this discussion, then please don't post.

jmayo

Just back from two week holiday and thankfully was not viewing this.

The only words I can summon are "I can't fooking believe it".

When will the lunacy end in this country.

I am tired how some terms have been hijacked by the debt welchers and their hangers on.
Struggling mortgage holders are not those not paying mortgages, often in default for years, but actually those living a subsistence lifestyle in order to pay their mortgages.

Now it seems acting responsibly and prudently is to be punishable in vested interest dominated Ireland.

I can just imagine the ghosts of 1916 and The War of Independence wondering what the fook were their sacrifice in aid of ?

Yeah lets celebrate 1916 with a massive screwing of the people who actually contribute to the state.

<Mod Snip>
The only way we, those people who actually try and act responsibily and pay our way, can actually make our voices heard is if we STOP acting responsibility.

After this why should anyone continue to pay ?
The water charges debalce showed that if people shout loud enough then they are heard.
Well it is now time for the responsible to maybe finally stop funding the madness.

on_my_oe

And now it becomes clear - David Hall.

Since his ideas are being considered by the Finance Department, I'd like some of mine put forward for review too. Ones that promote personal responsibility.

Still I guess the publicity makes his followers believe he is the messiah.l


Experts divided over controversial plan to 'bail out' debtors

snubbleste

https://twitter.com/karldeeter/status/591539983997132800

Where's my 80% off nama? :eek:

worded

There was a time when the only people who bought properties were professionals.

I remember in the boom a car sterio installer / fitter getting a mortgage. There was a dog washing service fellow who did similar.

When the crash happened and people started washing their own dogs and and making do with the car sterio they had these two couldn't la their mortgages.

Am I to pay for these two people's assets / houses now? They could temp afford the house and now have little chance to keep their asset without help.

When does a family home become a family home? After a year of payments? Two years?

Why does ireland have the highest defaulters in Europe? 13% paying 0 !

I had to laugh at a previous poster, where is my Nama. Where is my Nana ? Grow up.

Where is my free gaff? The govt should give everyone a free gaff to be fair.

Election time. I want a house, I want someone else to work and pay for the roof over my head.

Shameless

hopgog

worded wrote: »

There was a time when the only people who bought properties were professionals.

I remember in the boom a car sterio installer / fitter getting a mortgage. There was a dog washing service fellow who did similar.

When the crash happened and people started washing their own dogs and and making do with the car sterio they had these two couldn't la their mortgages.

Am I to pay for these two people's assets / houses now? They could temp afford the house and now have little chance to keep their asset without help.

When does a family home become a family home? After a year of payments? Two years?

Why does ireland have the highest defaulters in Europe? 13% paying 0 !

I had to laugh at a previous poster, where is my Nama. Where is my Nana ? Grow up.

Where is my free gaff? The govt should give everyone a free gaff to be fair.

Election time. I want a house, I want someone else to work and pay for the roof over my head.

Shameless

Go for a social income and you can have a free gaff.

gaius c

worded wrote: »

There was a time when the only people who bought properties were professionals.

I remember in the boom a car sterio installer / fitter getting a mortgage. There was a dog washing service fellow who did similar.

When the crash happened and people started washing their own dogs and and making do with the car sterio they had these two couldn't la their mortgages.

Am I to pay for these two people's assets / houses now? They could temp afford the house and now have little chance to keep their asset without help.

When does a family home become a family home? After a year of payments? Two years?

Why does ireland have the highest defaulters in Europe? 13% paying 0 !

I had to laugh at a previous poster, where is my Nama. Where is my Nana ? Grow up.

Where is my free gaff? The govt should give everyone a free gaff to be fair.

Election time. I want a house, I want someone else to work and pay for the roof over my head.

Shameless

Yeah, professionals never default on their mortgages like...

worded

gaius c wrote: »

Yeah, professionals never default on their mortgages like...

My point is that a lot of people feel entitled to house ownership.

Just because you got a mortgage deposit together and paid for one or two years doesn't mean you can just stop repayments and expect others to pay it for indefinitely.

It you had a run of bad luck for a year or two ok, but beyond that you need a reality check if you expect to keep he asset when paying zero.

The honest working poor are busting their b0llox to keep a roof over their heads and now expected to pay people mortgages? Fcuk that. All the while paying the highest childcare fees in the world.

This is the final straw. Total bullsh1t

It you havnt paid your mortgage for 4+ years its time to upskill, rent a room(s), get two jobs, move to the country, emigrate, do what ever, but don't expect anyone to pay your mortgage for you after you had a few years to get yourself together.

De banks got der bailout where's mine? You had 4 years to sort things out, how long do you expect?

The_Conductor

While its perfectly understandable that people feel very strongly about this- lets tone down the rhetoric a bit guys.

goz83

I am angered reading this. Firstly, there are the strategic defaulters, who, for the most part, could afford to pay most, if not all their mortgage each month, but who are not checked on, or who may have just left their otherwise secure jobs until the moment they get bailed out, or go bankrupt, both having similar medium term outcomes.

Then there is the tax payers money going to cover these debts. WTF myself and my wife bought and moved into our house in 2008. A very modest 3 bed semi-d in north dublin subs, where I grew up. We could afford the mortgage back then, with 2 kids, without any money worries. We could even afford a week away to spain, or italy once a year and maybe a weekend away in ireland. We could afford to go out for a meal once every other week and could go the cinema too.

Now, it's a genuine struggle and stress levels are high. So, what happened? Notice I haven't mentioned any mortgage arrears, or defaulting. We are paying the debt we took on, with poor financial advice, but it is our debt and we pay it, which is about 70% of the income. My wife is a teacher and im self employed. Her income has been hit hard. The pension levy (stealth tax/wage cut) alone is twice her actual pension contribution at circa €300 pm. We have 4 children with a fifth on the way. We watch what we spend, which is very little. We rarely go out. Due to an injury, my business is just about paying for itself and had a very low income to begin with, but we survived to this point. All the extra pressures are becoming too much. We want to pay our way, but I have to say that if more pressure is put on us, we will end up being one of these bailed out people talked about.

The Government is weak. Let the banks fix this mess and restructure loans responsibly. They are supposed to be the responsible professionals. Yes, people did borrow more than they could even afford when they borrowed, but the banks were literally throwing the cash at everyone. Few people have the foresight to consider 3-4 in the future, let alone 30-40 years. At one stage, I received no less than 3 phone calls with offers for car loans from my bank and other institutions I Had never even heard of. I place most of the blame on the banks, but I accept that I signed the paerwork. I don't regret that, because rent rates are pretty much the same as the mortgage rate being paid in the area. My family needed a home and we could afford it comfortably until the excrement hit the fan.

Dob74

worded wrote:

My point is that a lot of people feel entitled to house ownership.

Without rent control the only way of living in a home is to buy it. Since house inflation was consistent from the 70's til 06 it made financial sense to buy a home. Now we are tied to a low inflation ecb model and have not adjusted our laws to suit. Without rent controls buying your own home is the safest way of financing a roof over your head.

As it goes for paying someone else's mortgage. Rules and laws need to be put in place. If you have a semi in Mullingar and can't pay the 300k mortgage on it but you could with a debt right no problem. But if you have a house in South Dublin or a Large house. You should have to downsize to have debt forgiveness.
We need new laws politicians need to step up. Fine Gael won the last election by promising debt forgiveness for people who bought between 04 and 08. Going from 33% to 39% in a week before the election.
The old farts in the media never stopped complaining about stamp duty. When young people where getting screwed with vat. 13.5% of your mortgage is going to pay it. Now they have to pay more tax again with RPT. Surely some of this should be written off against your taxes. Young people are right to immigrate, tax the young and give to the old is what this country is all about.

sadie06

goz83 wrote: »

Yes, people did borrow more than they could even afford when they borrowed, but the banks were literally throwing the cash at everyone..

With all due respect, having more children than you can afford is as much of a questionable decision as borrowing more than you can afford. Estimated cost of raising a child from birth to 18 is €200,000!

We would be in a similar position to you with one good income and one supplementary income. We would have loved to have had a third child, and a large part of the reason we didn't was the issue of affording to provide for another child and keeping everything afloat.

Again, I really don't mean any offence, but you spelled out your family situation so I feel it's open for comment. You speak of the extra pressures adding to your financial burden as being external pressures, all foisted on you by the government, but it is fair to say that a good deal of the extra pressure on you is caused by the size of your family.

Bob24

sadie06 wrote: »

With all due respect, having more children than you can afford is as much of a questionable decision as borrowing more than you can afford. Estimated cost of raising a child from birth to 18 is €200,000!

We would be in a similar position to you with one good income and one supplementary income. We would have loved to have had a third child, and a large part of the reason we didn't was the issue of affording to provide for another child and keeping everything afloat.

Again, I really don't mean any offence, but you spelled out your family situation so I feel it's open for comment. You speak of the extra pressures adding to your financial burden as being external pressures, all foisted on you by the government, but it is fair to say that a good deal of the extra pressure on you is caused by the size of your family.

All of this is correct ... but I think the main point is that (at least according to his post) he is not blaming anyone else for his current situation and has taken full responsibility cutting back on everything he can to keep up with the mortgage.

If any tax money (included his tax money) is being used to help distressed borrowers, there should be very clear guarantees that people in a similar situation to his but who instead let their mortgage go into arrears are not getting anything. Taking his money to help them would be extremely unfair.

sadie06

Bob24 wrote: »

If any tax money (included his tax money) is being used to help distressed borrowers, there should be very clear guarantees that people in a similar situation to his but who instead let their mortgage go into arrears and not getting anything. Taking his money to help them would be extremely unfair.

I see where both you, and he are coming from, and wish my comment was about person X rather than an actual poster, but I feel compelled to comment further. The biggest change about to effect this posters future circumstances is the addition of a fifth child, which in today's climate has to be considered an extremely large family.

I have my own reasons for hoping that those who sat back and willingly defaulted making no effort to dig themselves out are somehow excluded from any bailout, and I agree with all that the poster said in theory. I am just pointing out that family planning can have as big, if not bigger impact on your financial security than over-borrowing, especially as they grow older.

Sala

Are We still talking about what's in the papers or has It been announced? Sorry I can't find it anywhere that suggests the scheme is finalised

The_Morrigan

Folks, please stop with the personalised posts.

on_my_oe

Sala wrote: »

Are We still talking about what's in the papers or has It been announced? Sorry I can't find it anywhere that suggests the scheme is finalised

Originally it was a 'blind item' in the newspapers.

Then it became clear that I t's a submission from IMHO (David Hall) to the Finance Department on how they think the arrears crisis should be dealt with.

Hopefully someone from the Finance Department read this thread and made it clear it's a non-runner. If not, the water protests will look like a genteel tea party in comparison to the furore this will stir up if implemented

Bob24

on_my_oe wrote: »

If not, the water protests will look like a genteel tea party in comparison to the furore this will stir up if implemented

It definitely should, but I am not so sure it would happen.

In my opinion the things that made the water protests that big are:
1) the fact that everyone in the country will have to pay (taxpayer or not) - huge poll of potential protesters
2) the fact that the collection/allocation of the funds is very transparent and easy to understand (everyone will have a clearly identified bill with their name and will know that money is going to Irish Water)
3) the fact there is an identified enemy- and bashing "government quangos" and "inefficient public servants" is always popular with a number of people, no matter whether it is justified or not
4) the fact that if fits into the "anti-austerity" agenda of a number of political organisations - which are therefore providing invaluable support to ensure protests keep happening and get media exposure

Now if you look at the same factors in relation to the mortgage proposal:
1) Only taxpayers would be financially impacted. People not paying taxes wouldn't be that interested in protesting.
2) This would come from the not so clear general taxation system - people would be not reminded by regular bills they are paying for this thing and would have no clue how much it is personally costing them.
3) In that case the "enemy" of the protest would be distressed borrowers. Vilifying them definitely wouldn't work as well as vilifying IW (say a civil servant is a time wasters and many people will cheer; say a distressed borrower has a responsibility for taking unsustainable debt and could possibly make more efforts, and you will be called heartless).
4) No political organisation would be backing-up the movement so that it can get as much media exposure and sustain that long; as none of them would gain any benefit in doing that.

quadrifoglio verde

Dob74 wrote: »

Without rent control the only way of living in a home is to buy it. Since house inflation was consistent from the 70's til 06 it made financial sense to buy a home. Now we are tied to a low inflation ecb model and have not adjusted our laws to suit. Without rent controls buying your own home is the safest way of financing a roof over your head.

As it goes for paying someone else's mortgage. Rules and laws need to be put in place. If you have a semi in Mullingar and can't pay the 300k mortgage on it but you could with a debt right no problem. But if you have a house in South Dublin or a Large house. You should have to downsize to have debt forgiveness.
We need new laws politicians need to step up. Fine Gael won the last election by promising debt forgiveness for people who bought between 04 and 08. Going from 33% to 39% in a week before the election.
The old farts in the media never stopped complaining about stamp duty. When young people where getting screwed with vat. 13.5% of your mortgage is going to pay it. Now they have to pay more tax again with RPT. Surely some of this should be written off against your taxes. Young people are right to immigrate, tax the young and give to the old is what this country is all about.

Do you have a source for this promise by fg. I find it hard to believe that a centre right party running for election for government when we were under the control of the imf would make such stupid promises back in 2011.

If their are to be write offs paid by the gov. The only way is debt for equity swaps and that equity can be sold on in the future.

goz83

sadie06 wrote: »

With all due respect, having more children than you can afford is as much of a questionable decision as borrowing more than you can afford. Estimated cost of raising a child from birth to 18 is €200,000!

We would be in a similar position to you with one good income and one supplementary income. We would have loved to have had a third child, and a large part of the reason we didn't was the issue of affording to provide for another child and keeping everything afloat.

Again, I really don't mean any offence, but you spelled out your family situation so I feel it's open for comment. You speak of the extra pressures adding to your financial burden as being external pressures, all foisted on you by the government, but it is fair to say that a good deal of the extra pressure on you is caused by the size of your family.

No offense taken. However, I totally disagree with the estimate of the cost raising a child, especially when you already have a couple. The cost depends on what children need, as opposed to what parents think they need. If I were to consider a child as a 200k cost, I would be childless. For this kind of money to be spent, you would be starting off with the €1500 push chair, €600 car seat, expensive everything and private schools. Everything would be brand new and nothing reused. This is not the way I parent. The first baby chair I bought 12 years ago is still there, in perfect condition. The same goes for the car seat (although a second one was needed, as well as a couple of boosters). Toys and clothes get passed along until they are no longer any use. My kids want for nothing, but are not spoilt and are certainly not deprived.

I grew up as child number 3 of 4. I was born in the early 80s. My dad drove trucks and my mother stayed home. I don't think it cost the equivalent of €800,000 to raise us. Kids are brought into families and the extra cost is worked out as you go along.

If you found yourself expecting, I am guessing you would have that child and keep it and figure it out. That's what most people do. While its prudent to consider the finances, I think it is cold to consider children as a mathematical equasion of ones income. Only yesterday, my wife was telling me about a colleague who commented that she couldn't afford to have any kids, even though both her and her husband are professionals in their mid thirties, with no mortgage. €100k was the figure thrown around. But, the same woman changes her car every 2-3 years, goes away for the summer every year and gets her nails,mtan and hair done every week. I appreciate there may be slight exaggeration to what I was told, but if a couple of professionals with no mortgage can't see that their own expensive lifestyle is their reason for crossing out having children, then I am so very glad that children, for the most part, are not planned by the size of a pay cheque and the numbers pulled out of someones bum. So, I will spend a million raising my kids. Better start doing the lotto :eek:

Or, I can continue being wise with how I spend money and enjoy my "very large family" for as long as I am able, without stressing too much about finances. In the end, it'll work out, but I think it is disgraceful that people who are doing their very best are being punished. That was my point, but somehow, the size of my family became the focus, rather than the truth, which is all the cuts to pay and increases in expenses, such as energy, water charges, house tax and what not. I hope that clears up what I was originally saying.

Villa05

goz83 wrote:

No offense taken. However, I totally disagree with the estimate of the cost raising a child, especially when you already have a couple. The cost depends on what children need, as opposed to what parents think they need. If I were to consider a child as a 200k cost, I would be childless. For this kind of money to be spent, you would be starting off with the €1500 push chair, €600 car seat, expensive everything and private schools. Everything would be brand new and nothing reused. This is not the way I parent. The first baby chair I bought 12 years ago is still there, in perfect condition. The same goes for the car seat (although a second one was needed, as well as a couple of boosters). Toys and clothes get passed along until they are no longer any use. My kids want for nothing, but are not spoilt and are certainly not deprived.

If I could thank your entire post a million times! A joy to read

The_Morrigan

Folks could you keep within the remit of the forum please, the cost of raising a child is more suited to parenting, not the topic at hand. This is the second warning on this vein of discussion. There will not be a third.

sadie06

Ulster Bank move to reach out to those not communicating withe them. Interesting to say the least.



http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0427/696970-ulster-bank/

The_Morrigan

sadie06 wrote: »

Ulster Bank move to reach out to those not communicating withe them. Interesting to say the least.



http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0427/696970-ulster-bank/

There is already a live thread on this, please don't cross post.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057420256