The Kingston story: Bidders fail to pay up for auctioned cows

Bass Reeves

Or somebody might buy a bit of value

Mooooo

Once the land covers whatever was left of the debt after the cattle sale the bank would be happy. If that figure is below the average per acre youd be surprised. But As the neighbour said all you can do is your best to make sure something similar doesn't happen inside your own gate. Bad situation all round really

Markcheese

Its sad for the whole family, but if you "can't" lose it , dont bet it...
The fact they tried,and went for it should stand to them, but cant put something down as collateral (to get cheap credit ) ,and keep it when things go totally wrong.

I assume the more expensive farm repossessions are ,the more expensive secured farm credit will be..

Sam Kade

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Or somebody might buy a bit of value

Could end up being misery if your man is trying to move back in there now imagine the amount of hassle the new owners will get.

Bass Reeves

Sam Kade wrote: »

Could end up being misery if your man is trying to move back in there now imagine the amount of hassle the new owners will get.

I think people often overestimate this issue. I think it really depends on the situation and what may have happened there. Contractors, workers and business's who may have lost money money in a windup may well decide they have lost enough and try to recover some of there losses by doing work for new owners,

I think in Ireland we have a hang up going back to evictions relating to landlords. However there is a huge difference where an owner of a business, house or land puts that up as collateral so as to get cheaper credit or to get a riskier loan than they should and some one that is evicted due to an unfair rent

You have to remember with borrowing money that things can go wrong, it may cost you more to expand that you expected, assets you may have decided to offload may not make the return you assumed. How many people in business assumed that bank share's that they owned would sort the rainy day, how many farmers failed to get planning on sites or they could collapse in value like post the 2008 crash.

Compare the situation in this case to a landlord using the quasi legal methods at his disposal to remove a tenant from his house so that the rent can be increased to a higher rate.

jaymla627

Bass Reeves wrote: »

I think people often overestimate this issue. I think it really depends on the situation and what may have happened there. Contractors, workers and business's who may have lost money money in a windup may well decide they have lost enough and try to recover some of there losses by doing work for new owners,

I think in Ireland we have a hang up going back to evictions relating to landlords. However there is a huge difference where an owner of a business, house or land puts that up as collateral so as to get cheaper credit or to get a riskier loan than they should and some one that is evicted due to an unfair rent

You have to remember with borrowing money that things can go wrong, it may cost you more to expand that you expected, assets you may have decided to offload may not make the return you assumed. How many people in business assumed that bank share's that they owned would sort the rainy day, how many farmers failed to get planning on sites or they could collapse in value like post the 2008 crash.

Compare the situation in this case to a landlord using the quasi legal methods at his disposal to remove a tenant from his house so that the rent can be increased to a higher rate.

It's quiet strange that at least one of his unsecured creditors hasn't brought bankruptcy proceedings against Kingstown, he can play the victim all he wants but he's making a fool of himself at this stage and talk about high court actions against the bank is laughable where is the finance for this coming from if he hasn't got a pot to piss-in

kerry cow

You won't bully the banks as you saw what went on in South dublin with thar solicitor family and bank of Ireland or the big farm in the 90's in done gal where the brothers were turfed out .The bank will get there Way in the end and it is very foolish of any one to take matters in to their own hand unless it is agreed with the bank .he will pay the full price and even though his agreed monthly repayment was small , he gave them the fingure and all his creditor suppliers were maxed out .
You'd sell the car to pay the bank and plenty of stock he had .what was he thinking .
Even at times of tight cash I will try my best to make bank repayments and keep talking to them .They are bigger than I .

cute geoge

I also can not fathom that the kingstons did not sell the herd themselves last year when prices were dear before they were foreclosed.I heard peter had some health problems but his non action was completely insane when the gun was put to his head

patsy_mccabe

If he had sold the herd, machinery, whatever it took, he could have probably held on to the land. I say probably as I don't know the full amount owed.

Farmer Ed

Lads the thing is none of us know for sure what went on and it's not really helping anyone that we even keep discussing this. It can't be easy for anyone to have the bank take their farm. And OK I'm sure there are a lot of people out there who have had the bank take their houses. But quite frankly by speculating on the personal circumstances of people in this situation on a public fourm like this is to say the least distasteful.

kerry cow

There's no speculation .It was all over the papers and TV .did you not see farmer ed .I am just saying I would have handled the same situation by bending earlier to the bank .They have the power do you not agree ?

Farmer Ed

kerry cow wrote: »

There's no speculation .It was all over the papers and TV .did you not see farmer ed .I am just saying I would have handled the same situation by bending earlier to the bank .They have the power do you not agree ?

Maybe there was a promise of an investor who could possibly have saved the business but never materialised? Maybe there was some other plan that just didn't work Out? Thing is none of us no and even if we did it is not going to change anything now anyway. It is not a happy story for all involved. That's all we can say for sure. How any of us may or may not have dealt with it really doesn't really change anything. Just hope none of the family never read this. They must be under enough pressure without us telling them what they should have done.

kevthegaff

Farmer Ed wrote:

Maybe there was a promise of an investor who could possibly have saved the business but never materialised? Maybe there was some other plan that just didn't work Out? Thing is none of us no and even if we did it is not going to change anything now anyway. It is not a happy story for all involved. That's all we can say for sure. How any of us may or may not have dealt with it really doesn't really change anything. Just hope none of the family never read this. They must be under enough pressure without us telling them what they should have done.

Agree fully ed sensitive subject. A thread possibly with banks/interest rates, loan structures, interest only would probably be a good idea.

mahoney_j

kevthegaff wrote: »

Agree fully ed sensitive subject. A thread possibly with banks/interest rates, loan structures, interest only would probably be a good idea.

This thread should be locked and scraped ,regardless of circumstances involved which have been published and other things a lot of us here know we all need to remember a farmer lost his livelihood and will now likely loose his land .put yourself in his shoes .i can't imagine nor never want to go thru anything like that .

MIKEKC

mahoney_j wrote: »

This thread should be locked and scraped ,regardless of circumstances involved which have been published and other things a lot of us here know we all need to remember a farmer lost his livelihood and will now likely loose his land .put yourself in his shoes .i can't imagine nor never want to go thru anything like that .

He lost his livelihood because he borrowed too much money, and spent too much time keeping fit. With that size of a business he should have no trouble keeping fit

Bass Reeves

jaymla627 wrote: »

It's quiet strange that at least one of his unsecured creditors hasn't brought bankruptcy proceedings against Kingstown, he can play the victim all he wants but he's making a fool of himself at this stage and talk about high court actions against the bank is laughable where is the finance for this coming from if he hasn't got a pot to piss-in

Unsecured creditors are usually the last to pull the trigger, secured creditors only usually move when repayments fall seriously behind. Unsecured creditors usually try to work an outcome as going legal costs money. Generally they have the weapon of not continuing to provide a service but often have to live with awaiting payment 6-18 months in arrears in cases where there are issue's

Farmer Ed wrote: »

Lads the thing is none of us know for sure what went on and it's not really helping anyone that we even keep discussing this. It can't be easy for anyone to have the bank take their farm. And OK I'm sure there are a lot of people out there who have had the bank take their houses. But quite frankly by speculating on the personal circumstances of people in this situation on a public fourm like this is to say the least distasteful.

It is a good man that learns from his own mistakes however and I am being very dispassionate here it a lot cheaper to learn from someone's elses. I not being smart about it rather if we do not discuss cases like this we cannot learn. Some of it gets close to the bone but in general we should try not to be personnel about it.

Farmer Ed wrote: »

Maybe there was a promise of an investor who could possibly have saved the business but never materialised? Maybe there was some other plan that just didn't work Out? Thing is none of us no and even if we did it is not going to change anything now anyway. It is not a happy story for all involved. That's all we can say for sure. How any of us may or may not have dealt with it really doesn't really change anything. Just hope none of the family never read this. They must be under enough pressure without us telling them what they should have done.

I really have to take issue with this IMO no investor would touch such a case. You would have to put up serious money and remain unsecured. You would be brain dead to seriously consider it. You would have to put up nearly 2 million with associated risk for a return of maybe less than bank lending rates. I have always heard when you go into a deal with other unless the Patsey is across the table look in the mirror.

mahoney_j wrote: »

This thread should be locked and scraped ,regardless of circumstances involved which have been published and other things a lot of us here know we all need to remember a farmer lost his livelihood and will now likely loose his land .put yourself in his shoes .i can't imagine nor never want to go thru anything like that .

I can empathize with him but that should not stop us from looking at the issue involved. What have we all learned.......the main this we all know now is if you fight the banks you are f@@ked what ever chance you have it is to keep you eye on the ball and work thought the issue. Do not over extend... sh!t happens! and you need to pay the money back.

Sam Kade

MIKEKC wrote: »

He lost his livelihood because he borrowed too much money, and spent too much time keeping fit. With that size of a business he should have no trouble keeping fit

If only he could have kept his finances as fit.

To the posters that dont agree with speculation the man himself isn't very pushed about keeping things hushed up.

Farmer Ed

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Unsecured creditors are usually the last to pull the trigger, secured creditors only usually move when repayments fall seriously behind. Unsecured creditors usually try to work an outcome as going legal costs money. Generally they have the weapon of not continuing to provide a service but often have to live with awaiting payment 6-18 months in arrears in cases where there are issue's



It is a good man that learns from his own mistakes however and I am being very dispassionate here it a lot cheaper to learn from someone's elses. I not being smart about it rather if we do not discuss cases like this we cannot learn. Some of it gets close to the bone but in general we should try not to be personnel about it.



I really have to take issue with this IMO no investor would touch such a case. You would have to put up serious money and remain unsecured. You would be brain dead to seriously consider it. You would have to put up nearly 2 million with associated risk for a return of maybe less than bank lending rates. I have always heard when you go into a deal with other unless the Patsey is across the table look in the mirror.



I can empathize with him but that should not stop us from looking at the issue involved. What have we all learned.......the main this we all know now is if you fight the banks you are f@@ked what ever chance you have it is to keep you eye on the ball and work thought the issue. Do not over extend... sh!t happens! and you need to pay the money back.

Actually he told me himself about 3 years ago in a passing conversation about growing a business idea, that getting outside investment was in his opinion the only way to go. I honestly believe he must have had some plan at the back of his mind. I barely know the man but I don't think it is right for any of us to cast judgement.

OK so we have all least a lesson. If you borrow money and your plans don't work out, you could end up in trouble. End of story. We all know that. Why on earth do we have to go on and on and on about this. Lesson learnt.

Bass Reeves

Farmer Ed wrote: »

Actually he told me himself about 3 years ago in a passing conversation about growing a business idea, that getting outside investment was in his opinion the only way to go. I honestly believe he must have had some plan at the back of his mind. I barely know the man but I don't think it is right for any of us to cast judgement.

OK so we have all least a lesson. If you borrow too much money and your plans don't work out, you could end up in trouble. End of story. We all know that. Why on earth do we have to go on and on and on about this. Lesson learnt.

I changed that slightly for you. We all borrow money at times thing do not work out but because we have allowed for these issue we can survive. We take out life assurance and health insurance in case things go away that way.

And if in the end it all goes belly up there is no point fighting the system. We know this not just from this case but other vases outside the farming scene. You may be better off selling your own stock and equipment so as to maximize the return and so that in the end you may have something left.

Any farmer that has not learnt anything from this has his head in the sand.

Farmer Ed

Bass Reeves wrote: »

I changed that slightly for you. We all borrow money at times thing do not work out but because we have allowed for these issue we can survive. We take out life assurance and health insurance in case things go away that way.

And if in the end it all goes belly up there is no point fighting the system. We know this not just from this case but other vases outside the farming scene. You may be better off selling your own stock and equipment so as to maximize the return and so that in the end you may have something left.

Any farmer that has not learnt anything from this has his head in the sand.

There are guys on other threads here every day of the week boasting about all the investments they are making and how clever they are. Tbh some of them I honestly believe are making a lot of the stuff up. I sat beside someone like that in junior infants. Thankfully he grew out of it. But the point I am trying to make is that by and large people who grow their farms to such a level.(even on a fictional online fourm) are looked up to. But theres a very fine line between quick growth and going broke. The faster the growth the greater the risk. Lesson learnt. Please move on.

Sam Kade

http://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/craden-hill-herd-family-ordered-to-hand-over-farm-by-high-court/

There's a high court injunction against them now after they attemped to take over the farm.

bullnuts

Farmer Ed wrote: »

Actually he told me himself about 3 years ago in a passing conversation about growing a business idea, that getting outside investment was in his opinion the only way to go. I honestly believe he must have had some plan at the back of his mind. I barely know the man but I don't think it is right for any of us to cast judgement.

OK so we have all least a lesson. If you borrow money and your plans don't work out, you could end up in trouble. End of story. We all know that. Why on earth do we have to go on and on and on about this. Lesson learnt.

On one post you say respect his privacy and on another you quote him

blackdog1

Sam Kade wrote:

There's a high court injunction against them now after they attemped to take over the farm.

I'm hearing acc might be in trouble here. If you look at the article it says the Kingstons are gonna sue acc in a civil case. I'd say let the whole thing play out before people comment

Farmer Ed

bullnuts wrote: »

On one post you say respect his privacy and on another you quote him

Just trying to make the point that we don't have a clue what was going on. One thing for sure he didn't set out to end up in this situation. So please surely they have enough to deal with without us waving or fingers and telling them what went wrong. I don't think anyone sets out to be in this situation.

This is turning in to a public hanging..

Sam Kade

blackdog1 wrote: »

I'm hearing acc might be in trouble here. If you look at the article it says the Kingstons are gonna sue acc in a civil case. I'd say let the whole thing play out before people comment

Yes, let's ignore any article about them from now on. We should also close the thread as well.

whelan2

Sam Kade wrote: »

Yes, let's ignore any article about them from now on. We should also close the thread as well.

I blame kovu . She resurrected it

Mrs cockett

blackdog1 wrote: »

I'm hearing acc might be in trouble here.

Happy Days:

Sam Kade

whelan2 wrote: »

I blame kovu . She resurrected it

Yes she's 100% to blame watch out Kovu Peter is watching you

Never wrestle with pigs

Just see an old rerun on tv from their farm. What happened after? Did they get to retain it or was it sold off in bits and pieces?

whelan2

Never wrestle with pigs wrote: »

Just see an old rerun on tv from their farm. What happened after? Did they get to retain it or was it sold off in bits and pieces?

When was farmer ed banned?