PTSB selling mortgages to vulture funds

Sin City

chrismon wrote: »

€800 in arrears and your mortgage was sold?
That's crazy, the media was reporting it would be people not paying for 3+ years.

Media have it wrong then

Its any loan that is in arrears for any period of time

Sin City

Question is what will they do for homes in negative equity

The banks were reluctant to repossess those with parties that would engage as they were not worth talking

however if smart bought the loans at a discount they wont be as accommodating

CeilingFly

Hennesm wrote: »

I have 7 months left so I suppose it all depends on what there version of up to date is . Once they say you are in arrears they can envoke whatever fees they want and they can impose a higher interest rate once I’m in arrears , which technically I am . This is not how they sold it to the media but I’m quite sure the government knows .

They cannot change the basic terms and conditions of your mortgage.

Rate will be as set out in your mortgage.



Start have been managing "bought" loans for a couple of years and I've seen no issues being raised by people. That suggests that they are better than ptsb in managing difficulties that arise.

CeilingFly

Turbohymac wrote: »

Very good ceilingfly. You seem well informed on start. I wonder how you would feel towards ptsb if you have been through months of trying to sort out basic issues and with a solicitor and pip also very frustrated on my side. There are many people that currently feel very angry and annoyed..thanks for advice but I Actually do have a right to rant.. most people do

I'm not saying you can't rant. I ranted about kbc for years.

But if you are asking questions on askaboutmoney, don't rant there as its more an information site to find answers and they are very strict on the style of posting.

But its good to rant on boards.

Personally I think this is good for people as you are dealing with a company that specialises in issues whereas ptsb/ulster / kbc etc did not have many staff that understand issues and they mostly followed a script.

hanaimai

Hennesm wrote: »

I have 7 months left so I suppose it all depends on what there version of up to date is . Once they say you are in arrears they can envoke whatever fees they want and they can impose a higher interest rate once I’m in arrears , which technically I am . This is not how they sold it to the media but I’m quite sure the government knows .

There's a rule that they can't charge anything extra on arrears so I wouldn't be worrying about any additional fees or the like. As CeilingFly has said, Start are not a vulture fund. They are a retail credit firm which is subject to the exact same rules and regulations as banks. They can only repossess as a last case resort and only where the borrower is not co-operating i.e. not paying, not engaging, not willing to enter a restructure etc. And even then you will be well informed that you've been classed as not co-operating and you can start co-operating at any time. The borrowers posting here all sound like they are paying and keeping to the terms of their agreement so they have nothing more to be concerned about now than they did when PTSB owned the mortgage.

CeilingFly

Sin City wrote: »

Question is what will they do for homes in negative equity

The banks were reluctant to repossess those with parties that would engage as they were not worth talking

however if smart bought the loans at a discount they wont be as accommodating

Smart will do deals. If house is in serious negative equity you could get a "walk away" deal. Companies like this have no issue doing deals on an individual basis. Banks are always reluctant as it opens the floodgates and everyone will want the deal someone else got.

Personally I think the only losers are the strategic defaulters as Smart will not pussyfoot around them like the banks do and will add more and more legal fees to their accounts.

And rightly so.

Remember, if there were not 40,000+ strategic defaulters (that's a low estimate) the banks would not have had to go down this route.

OU812

Hope those of you caught up in the tracker fraud who have been sold on, are sueing them

Earleybird

CeilingFly wrote: »

Smart will do deals. If house is in serious negative equity you could get a "walk away" deal. Companies like this have no issue doing deals on an individual basis. Banks are always reluctant as it opens the floodgates and everyone will want the deal someone else got.

Personally I think the only losers are the strategic defaulters as Smart will not pussyfoot around them like the banks do and will add more and more legal fees to their accounts.

And rightly so.

Remember, if there were not 40,000+ strategic defaulters (that's a low estimate) the banks would not have had to go down this route.

Moral hazard. That's the problem. It's easy to bash the banks but it's a sad indictment that all the talk is of people being thrown out of their houses. Why should people deserve to stay in their homes if they don't pay their mortgage!? If you rented and didn't pay for 12 months there wouldn't be the same public sympathy. I find it ridiculous. My sympathies to those genuinely struggling but the legal system is to blame here. If repossession laws were similar to those in the rest of Europe it would at least offer definitive clarity.

Hennesm

Earleybird wrote: »

Moral hazard. That's the problem. It's easy to bash the banks but it's a sad indictment that all the talk is of people being thrown out of their houses. Why should people deserve to stay in their homes if they don't pay their mortgage!? If you rented and didn't pay for 12 months there wouldn't be the same public sympathy. I find it ridiculous. My sympathies to those genuinely struggling but the legal system is to blame here. If repossession laws were similar to those in the rest of Europe it would at least offer definitive clarity.

We are paying ! I have paid them at least €200000 in mortgage payments . I have had a horriffic few months and am still paying what I can whilst looking for work again and caring for 4 children . I'm not asking for charity , just a little respect and loyalty for the years I have banked with them . My current account is with them too . It's a scary time for me and for a lot of other people it would seem . The bank has misled its customers and the general public about this sale . Bearing in mind it's partially publically owned , that's unfair

CeilingFly

Hennesm wrote: »

We are paying ! I have paid them at least €200000 in mortgage payments . I have had a horriffic few months and am still paying what I can whilst looking for work again and caring for 4 children . I'm not asking for charity , just a little respect and loyalty for the years I have banked with them . My current account is with them too . It's a scary time for me and for a lot of other people it would seem . The bank has misled its customers and the general public about this sale . Bearing in mind it's partially publically owned , that's unfair

I reckon you'll find start far better than ptsb to deal with.

Notice how there are loads of complaints about banks but few if any about the likes of start in their current guise.

Earleybird

Hennesm wrote: »

We are paying ! I have paid them at least €200000 in mortgage payments . I have had a horriffic few months and am still paying what I can whilst looking for work again and caring for 4 children . I'm not asking for charity , just a little respect and loyalty for the years I have banked with them . My current account is with them too . It's a scary time for me and for a lot of other people it would seem . The bank has misled its customers and the general public about this sale . Bearing in mind it's partially publically owned , that's unfair

You have my sympathy, and I hope you find a resolution in the near future. I don't know your circumstances nor the banks and their dealing with you. But you mention loyalty, charity and publically owned. Are you suggesting that grace should be given to everyone that asks for it and has a current account for a few years, and sure what odds it's the public that ponied up? That's just wrong. I've been paying a mortgage for years, at rates it could be argued are too high relative to European peers. The reason for this is because I'm underwriting non-payers. Why should I keep paying if there is "loyalty" to be shown?

Hennesm

Earleybird wrote: »

You have my sympathy, and I hope you find a resolution in the near future. I don't know your circumstances nor the banks and their dealing with you. But you mention loyalty, charity and publically owned. Are you suggesting that grace should be given to everyone that asks for it and has a current account for a few years, and sure what odds it's the public that ponied up? That's just wrong. I've been paying a mortgage for years, at rates it could be argued are too high relative to European peers. The reason for this is because I'm underwriting non-payers. Why should I keep paying if there is "loyalty" to be shown?

As I said I don't want charity but a warning would've been nice, I had a branch meeting last week . An explanation as to why my €2900 remaining mortgage is being dumped after I have paid it in full and on time for over 191/2 years and yes some loyalty to me as a customer . That's not too much to ask for after all the fees I have paid as a customer over the years . Let me be clear I am not asking for a write off I am asking my lender to deal with me as a person and take into account the unnecessary stress they cause .

If you are paying a higher rate it's not necessarily because of non payers and more than likely because of the banks greed? As has been the cause of the whole bond holders and austerity fiasco . The European central lending rate is at an all time low . They can afford to give better rates but don't . They write off business loans, restructure buy to let's and then blame Europe for everything .
So that what we get now is a nation of people who no longer have any empathy and look to justify sharp practice as it may lead to a lower mortgage rate in 18 months ???

CeilingFly

Hennesm wrote: »

As I said I don't want charity but a warning would've been nice, I had a branch meeting last week . An explanation as to why my €2900 remaining mortgage is being dumped after I have paid it in full and on time for over 191/2 years and yes some loyalty to me as a customer . That's not too much to ask for after all the fees I have paid as a customer over the years . Let me be clear I am not asking for a write off I am asking my lender to deal with me as a person and take into account the unnecessary stress they cause .

If you are paying a higher rate it's not necessarily because of non payers and more than likely because of the banks greed? As has been the cause of the whole bond holders and austerity fiasco . The European central lending rate is at an all time low . They can afford to give better rates but don't ?

If you only have €2900 balance, then there is zilch to be concerned about. Start are actually quite reputable and only take issue with people who don't engage.

They will 100% abide by any agreement you have and if you need a new agreement, they will do one.

Where they differ is in those who refuse to engage and act quickly to conclude such loans. Whereas the banks took years to act.


As for non payers being the reason for high rates - its the primary reason two banks looked at the Irish market and walked away.

A recent repossession case in Dublin 6 had legal costs of over €200,000, debt of €900,000, house value €700,000. No payments for 6 years. Guess who pays the €400,000 shortfall? Yep, all the other customers of that bank.

And the bailout story doesn't wash - this has mostly been paid back with interest. Except for anglo and Irish nationwide. And remember, the bailout allowed the banks deal with arrears properly. Without the bailout a hell of a lot of mortgages would be with vulture funds a long time ago.

But with a minuscule balance and an agreement, you have absolutely nothing to be concerned about.

Btw, its quite normal for banks to sell books of mortgage debt. But usually the bank still manages it and you don't see any difference. My mortgage is with kbc, but its owned by a German pension fund who purchased the Phoenix 2 loan book when kbc offered it for sale.

Does it concern me? Not in the least as they have to abide by Central bank regulations. And they are very consumer friendly

smelly sock

Earleybird wrote: »

You have my sympathy, and I hope you find a resolution in the near future. I don't know your circumstances nor the banks and their dealing with you. But you mention loyalty, charity and publically owned. Are you suggesting that grace should be given to everyone that asks for it and has a current account for a few years, and sure what odds it's the public that ponied up? That's just wrong. I've been paying a mortgage for years, at rates it could be argued are too high relative to European peers. The reason for this is because I'm underwriting non-payers. Why should I keep paying if there is "loyalty" to be shown?

So you believe that interest rates will fall now that these loans have been sold off?

CeilingFly

smelly sock wrote: »

So you believe that interest rates will fall now that these loans have been sold off?

Explain how the two banks (ptsb & BOI) with the biggest strategic defaulter and arrears problems have the highest standard variable rates for current customers whereas the bank with the lowest problem loans (AIB) have the best rates for current variable rate customers

Earleybird

smelly sock wrote: »

So you believe that interest rates will fall now that these loans have been sold off?

Interest rates across all Irish banks have been reducing for a while now, and a higher percentage of performing loans on a balance sheet certainly allows more flexibility. That doesn't necessarily mean they will continue to fall though. While repossession laws continue to heavily favour the house owner it will be near on impossible for the banks here to continue reductions without running long term risk. The maths just doesn't work. Hence why there are no new entrants to be seen.

The obsession in this country with owning property to create wealth inevitably means that people overextend and/or get too greedy when credit is available but what we've seen is that they're unwilling to shoulder the cost in the event of a downturn. As previously said in this thread the cost of non performance from one is burdoned on those that continue to pay.

As an aside, I think the Central Bank rules limiting the level of income and LTV provides decent protection to another meltdown when house prices do start declining.

Hitman3000

Part of the bundle sold by PTSB were 1050 performing loans. Goes against the narrative that it's only deflauters and those that won't engage. RTE news if anyone wants to check.

Scanners2

CeilingFly wrote: »

Explain how the two banks (ptsb & BOI) with the biggest strategic defaulter and arrears problems have the highest standard variable rates for current customers whereas the bank with the lowest problem loans (AIB) have the best rates for current variable rate customers

Aib were more innovative with restructure resolutions and managed to get their split mortgages with no arrears classed as performing loans. They have actively engaged with third party non profit organisations to help people go from mortgage to rent allowing them to stay in their homes and committed to providing the finance for this scheme. Aib are working smarter. Aib seem to be working with customers. It's the whole carrot and stick argument.

smelly sock

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Part of the bundle sold by PTSB were 1050 performing loans. Goes against the narrative that it's only deflauters and those that won't engage. RTE news if anyone wants to check.

Can they sell on a loan if the customer is sticking to the terms of the contract?

Scanners2

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Part of the bundle sold by PTSB were 1050 performing loans. Goes against the narrative that it's only deflauters and those that won't engage. RTE news if anyone wants to check.

These pdh's prob have btl's as well so the whole lot has to be sold. I stand to be corrected on this.

Scanners2

Earleybird wrote: »

Interest rates across all Irish banks have been reducing for a while now, and a higher percentage of performing loans on a balance sheet certainly allows more flexibility. That doesn't necessarily mean they will continue to fall though. While repossession laws continue to heavily favour the house owner it will be near on impossible for the banks here to continue reductions without running long term risk. The maths just doesn't work. Hence why there are no new entrants to be seen.

The obsession in this country with owning property to create wealth inevitably means that people overextend and/or get too greedy when credit is available but what we've seen is that they're unwilling to shoulder the cost in the event of a downturn. As previously said in this thread the cost of non performance from one is burdoned on those that continue to pay.

As an aside, I think the Central Bank rules limiting the level of income and LTV provides decent protection to another meltdown when house prices do start declining.

Were these long term non performing loans written off by banks years ago?

CeilingFly

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Part of the bundle sold by PTSB were 1050 performing loans. Goes against the narrative that it's only deflauters and those that won't engage. RTE news if anyone wants to check.

If you have a btl that has had issues and also have a pdh with no issues. Both the btl and pdh loans are included.

This thread has the info
https://www.askaboutmoney.com/threads/which-ptsb-mortgages-have-been-sold.209145/

CeilingFly

smelly sock wrote: »

Can they sell on a loan if the customer is sticking to the terms of the contract?

Yes they can and always have been able to do so. It's called securitisation. Quite normal even if there were no issues.

My mortgage is with kbc. It is part of a group of loans bundled and sold to a German pension fund about 7 years ago. Kbc still manage the loan and except that I know how this works, I probably wouldn't know that the loan is owned by someone else.

Its not the exact same as the ptsb sale, but such potential sale is written in the terms of the mortgage.

Scanners2

CeilingFly wrote: »

Smart will do deals. If house is in serious negative equity you could get a "walk away" deal. Companies like this have no issue doing deals on an individual basis. Banks are always reluctant as it opens the floodgates and everyone will want the deal someone else got.

Personally I think the only losers are the strategic defaulters as Smart will not pussyfoot around them like the banks do and will add more and more legal fees to their accounts.

And rightly so.

Remember, if there were not 40,000+ strategic defaulters (that's a low estimate) the banks would not have had to go down this route.

How do you know this?

smelly sock

Scanners2 wrote: »

How do you know this?

Regardless of if they do deals most people who have had their mortgages sold wont be in a position to stump up a guge chunk of cash.

CeilingFly

Scanners2 wrote: »

How do you know this?

Because I've been watching developments in this area and have had my own 9 year fight with kbc over a tracker. - Which I finally got back in March.

A close friend had issues with ulster which are ongoing and colleagues have had issues with BOI which only got sorted recently.

So I keep tabs on the market and it gets discussed ad nauseum at meetups, barbecues, weddings and funerals

Scanners2

Scanners2 wrote: »

How do you know this?

Strategic defaulters? Just curious.

smelly sock

Scanners2 wrote: »

Strategic defaulters? Just curious.

I personally dont think there are as much strategic defaulters or people just not bothering to pay as the banks amd certain areas of the media would have us believe.

Scanners2

CeilingFly wrote: »

Because I've been watching developments in this area and have had my own 9 year fight with kbc over a tracker. - Which I finally got back in March.

A close friend had issues with ulster which are ongoing and colleagues have had issues with BOI which only got sorted recently.

So I keep tabs on the market and it gets discussed ad nauseum at meetups, barbecues, weddings and funerals

That does not explain how you know or estimate there is an astonishing 40000 strategic defaulters!

Scanners2

Scanners2 wrote: »

That does not explain how you know or estimate there is an astonishing 40000 strategic defaulters!

I think the discussion in relation to default or strategic default needs to be expanded to why this is happening? There is an very simplistic view been taken on this issue. Would you agree?