Why aren't banks chasing her

jimmycrackcorm

The OP wants to know why the bank isn't chasing the debt.

One rational reason is if the bank balance to be PTSB then the mortgage may well be one of the non performing loans that they will simply sell off. Why bother chasing it when a vulture fund will come after it, and indeed won't be any about chasing the guarantee by the parent also.

I don't think the mother should necessarily be overly concerned about the guarantee anyway as the only likely outcome from chasing that would be a lien on her own house applicable for probate.

the_syco

CeilingFly wrote: »

I certainly wouldn't be worried about them coming after your mother - banks can be quite sensible too and know that moving after a guarantor of her age will never produce a good result.

If the house was bought in 2002, I'd say that the mortgage will be one of many that will be sold to a vulture fund who won't give two fcuks about the age of the mother, and will move in to take both houses.

CeilingFly

the_syco wrote: »

If the house was bought in 2002, I'd say that the mortgage will be one of many that will be sold to a vulture fund who won't give two fcuks about the age of the mother, and will move in to take both houses.

You don't know the lender, you don't know the circumstances, you don't know deatails of the mortgage, yet you assume that it will be worst case scenario.

You also read far too much into sensationiast media who haven't an iota of what they are saying - journalism is gone as a real trade in exchange for the most sensationalist headline you can write - to hell with the truth.

Debt management firms or as sensationist media like to call them "vulture funds" are far easier to deal with and far quicker to do a deal for all parties to exit.

These funds have been in the market for years and still its very rare to see them in courtrooms - any chance the sensationist media would check on that? (no, because thery couldn't write a hysterical headline for such a story)

Also, the OP's sister has a solicitor involved, so would not be considered not co-operating.

Squatter

Dev84 wrote: »

Banks are cnuts.

And people who stubbornly refuse to address their delinquent mortgages are saints

CeilingFly

Dev84 wrote: »

Banks are cnuts.

In another thread you said that your bank allowed you vary your mortgage and repay arrears over a period of time.

If they were cnuts, they would have simply gone th direct repossession route, but becasue the are not cnuts, they did a deal with you.

The cnuts as I told, you are the strategic defaulters that are one of the primary causs of the high variable rates in this country - with normalised rates you wouldn't have arrears. Vent yir anger at the strategic defaulters you are subsidising.

Bob24

CeilingFly wrote: »

I'll have a wild guess you are from Dublin.

Things are different in rural areas. Some times one parent will do a favour for a child that the other parent will never know about.

I know what you mean, but there is favour and favour. If it means engaging the couple’s financial responsibility for 100000 euros without telling your spouse/partner about it, I still think it’s wrong no matter what. It is only acceptable to me if spouses/partners manage their finances separately and the one doing it is able to take the potential hit from their own funds with no expectation that it will have any impact on the other one down the line.

Is anyone in the family interested in buying the house from your sister?