Strokestown **Mod Note in Post #4461**

ohnonotgmail

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

The evictions which took place in the 1800s when landlords' demands got too high for people to afford were also "legal and legitimate" at the time, which is what spurred widespread, eventually successful campaigns to change the law - and ultimately led to the Irish independence movement.

Exactly. the law has been changed. It is now very difficult to get an eviction order. According to the independent article this has been in court since 2009. 9 feckin years. Things have swung too far the other way.

gandalf

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

The evictions which took place in the 1800s when landlords' demands got too high for people to afford were also "legal and legitimate" at the time, which is what spurred widespread, eventually successful campaigns to change the law - and ultimately led to the Irish independence movement.

And your point is? The guy at the centre of this took a loan out as an adult and then behaved like a immature kid and didn't pay it off. He brought this on his own head. Both situations are NOTHING alike.

gandalf

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Lads unless you're actually trying to outdo each other with childish and stupid commentary the ex peeler as you call him was assualted photos have been posted online look for them if ye want and as for a hug off his mammy very difficult considering she's dead. Whatever the rights and wrongs of ignoring the eviction notice or the associated debts heavy handed evictions in a rural setting is going to inflame the local community.

FFS if they broke the guys leg you'd have a point. He got a grazed knee, he wasn't assaulted he was attempting to block a legal possession of a property by the Bank who owned it because of the debtors inability to meet his commitments.

The eviction from the evidence presented was in no way heavy handed. It is fallacious in the extreme to suggest it was.

Wheeliebin30

So it would appear Sinn Féin lied in the Dail claiming they were violently assaulted?

How do they get away with making bogus claims.

FredFunk

I don't think the poor unfortunates that got turfed out in the 1800s, had a loan out for the equivalent of a Land Rover.

gandalf

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

So it would appear Sinn F lied in the Dail claiming they were violently assaulted?

How do they get away with making bogus claims.

Maybe because it was because their fragile republican ego got bruised?

Omackeral

Mad_maxx wrote: »

British or Irish is just a description of someone's nationality, loyalists or republican is political.

Yeah I know. That was my actual point.

Frank Castle

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

So it would appear Sinn Féin lied in the Dail claiming they were violently assaulted?

How do they get away with making bogus claims.

I mean that's every politician ever, we would be here for centuries if you want to start calling out politicians for making bogus claims and lying.

Plumbthedepths

gandalf wrote:

FFS if they broke the guys leg you'd have a point. He got a grazed knee, he wasn't assaulted he was attempting to block a legal possession of a property by the Bank who owned it because of the debtors inability to meet his commitments.

There are also photos circulating of his face. As I said carry out a heavy handed eviction in a rural environment alot of local people are going to get p*ssed off and sympathy is going to be afforded towards those being evicted even if it's not warranted. Own goal comes to mind.

This woman is gas! https://www.facebook.com/anna.kavanagh.102/videos/10216334853631270/?epa=SEARCH_BOX

Bonzo Delaney

Deleted User wrote: »

This woman is gas! https://www.facebook.com/anna.kavanagh.102/videos/10216334853631270/?epa=SEARCH_BOX

Parked up there in Lucan at the park car park of the slip at the spa hotel down at mc donalds

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This woman is gas! https://www.facebook.com/anna.kavanagh.102/videos/10216334853631270/?epa=SEARCH_BOX

What in the holy hell...... Hot takes from the car park beside the maxol in Lucan.

MrMusician18

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

The evictions which took place in the 1800s when landlords' demands got too high for people to afford were also "legal and legitimate" at the time, which is what spurred widespread, eventually successful campaigns to change the law - and ultimately led to the Irish independence movement.

Oh ffs, would you actually learn your history. There are NO parallels between this and the past. In the past the peasantry were cleared off the land they were renting because it was more profitable to farm animals. With these evictions the peasantry were struggling to feed themselves and were trying their best in horrifying conditions.

In this case the owner mortgaged his property to invest in something else and had been living there at least 9 years in major arrears. Not only that but he has a history of burning his creditors (ACC, BoI car finance, local quarry) and underpaying taxes. Nothing at all similar. At all.

Trying to claim parallels shows you up for what you always have been on this forum, a far left agitator with an agenda.

facehugger99

Naos wrote: »

No joke - klaaaz stated this was just one of a number of horrific injuries sustained by the man.

Brave little solider.

weldoninhio

Deleted User wrote: »

This woman is gas! https://www.facebook.com/anna.kavanagh.102/videos/10216334853631270/?epa=SEARCH_BOX

I liked when she said "em" x 100,000,000,000

gandalf

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

There are also photos circulating of his face. As I said carry out a heavy handed eviction in a rural environment alot of local people are going to get p*ssed off and sympathy is going to be afforded towards those being evicted even if it's not warranted. Own goal comes to mind.

Again it wasn't heavy handed. The guy obstructed a lawful eviction what did he expect? Surely a retired Guard should have known better.

weldoninhio

weldoninhio wrote: »

I liked when she said "em" x 100,000,000,000

And that she’s got the phone turned wrong way around!

runawaybishop

gandalf wrote: »

Again it wasn't heavy handed. The guy obstructed a lawful eviction what did he expect? Surely a retired Guard should have known better.

I'd say he knew exactly what he was doing, trying to drum up support on the back of 'abuse'.

runawaybishop

[Deleted User] wrote: »

And that she’s got the phone turned wrong way around!

While I do not condone violence normally anyone recording video in portrait mode should be shot in the face with big balls of sh1te.

Skylinehead

gandalf wrote: »

And your point is? The guy at the centre of this took a loan out as an adult and then behaved like a immature kid and didn't pay it off. He brought this on his own head. Both situations are NOTHING alike.

Wouldn't bother, patricks MO in this thread is to jump in, make a post that's utterly irrelevant, and maybe, maybe come back in 3 days and do it all again.

nthclare

runawaybishop wrote: »

While I do not condone violence normally anyone recording video in portrait mode should be shot in the face with big balls of sh1te.

Lol oh my oh my...

That's the spirit, or yellow snowball's

theguzman

I think that all farm repossessions should be halted and instead there should be a new Land Act with indebted Farms instead transferred to a new state owned land commission, farmers would keep their homes and farms allowing them to repay whatever money was owed over a longer period of time if necessary. Delinquent debtors would lose their farms and the land commission appoint new young farmers (under 35) to have a chance to work the land and buy it out also in multi-generation loans if necessary. This was how the vast majority of family farms today came into existence as these deals were done to get farms off British Landlords in the times of British rule.

gandalf

theguzman wrote: »

I think that all farm repossessions should be halted and instead there should be a new Land Act with indebted Farms instead transferred to a new state owned land commission, farmers would keep their homes and farms allowing them to repay whatever money was owed over a longer period of time if necessary. Delinquent debtors would lose their farms and the land commission appoint new young farmers (under 35) to have a chance to work the land and buy it out also in multi-generation loans if necessary. This was how the vast majority of family farms today came into existence as these deals were done to get farms off British Landlords in the times of British rule.

So the taxpayer pays the banks then. Great idea except where does the cash come from given that some of the debtors have been skipping out paying their tax as well?

If people aren't paying there is a mechanism already there and the farms can be redistributed by selling them.

The one change I'd propose is that residential and farming (business) loans be separated and don't allow business loans be taken out against residences. That way if the farmer is a bad businessman and racks up debts or "forgets" to pay taxes the farm can be repossessed and sold expunging the debts without turfing the family out on the street.

MrMusician18

gandalf wrote: »

So the taxpayer pays the banks then. Great idea except where does the cash come from given that some of the debtors have been skipping out paying their tax as well?

If people aren't paying there is a mechanism already there and the farms can be redistributed by selling them.

The one change I'd propose is that residential and farming (business) loans be separated and don't allow business loans be taken out against residences. That way if the farmer is a bad businessman and racks up debts or "forgets" to pay taxes the farm can be repossessed and sold expunging the debts without turfing the family out on the street.

I'd agree with this. No farm loan should be offered to a farmer where the collateral offered includes the farmhouse or family home. If a new subdivision and folio is required, so be it.

I don't think even this would fully stop this kind of BS however.

theguzman

theguzman wrote: »

I think that all farm repossessions should be halted and instead there should be a new Land Act with indebted Farms instead transferred to a new state owned land commission, farmers would keep their homes and farms allowing them to repay whatever money was owed over a longer period of time if necessary. Delinquent debtors would lose their farms and the land commission appoint new young farmers (under 35) to have a chance to work the land and buy it out also in multi-generation loans if necessary. This was how the vast majority of family farms today came into existence as these deals were done to get farms off British Landlords in the times of British rule.

Why should farms be put up on a pedestal?

If Im living in the city and don't pay the mortgage on a fairly ordinary semi-d then I will be getting the boot sooner or later. (Particularly if I do not engage with the bank)

emo72

weldoninhio wrote: »

I liked when she said "em" x 100,000,000,000

Just for balance, count "em" when Leo is talking next time. You will be surprised.

gandalf

MrMusician18 wrote: »

I'd agree with this. No farm loan should be offered to a farmer where the collateral offered includes the farmhouse or family home. If a new subdivision and folio is required, so be it.

I don't think even this would fully stop this kind of BS however.

No but it would remove the whole emotive side of the family are being turfed out of their home argument. This should be the case for all business loans, the primary family resident should not be allowed as collateral against the loan including buying rental properties.

simongurnick

gandalf wrote: »

Again it wasn't heavy handed. The guy obstructed a lawful eviction what did he expect? Surely a retired Guard should have known better.

3 or 4 lads pinning one guy to the ground. A security firm from outside the state. Are you mad? The gaurds should have arrested the heavies.

simongurnick

simongurnick wrote: »

3 or 4 lads pinning one guy to the ground. A security firm from outside the state. Are you mad? The gaurds should have arrested the heavies.

Security firm from outside the state.....
People are really showing their racist tendencies on this thread!!

simongurnick

bubblypop wrote: »

Security firm from outside the state.....
People are really showing their racist tendencies on this thread!!

nothing racist at all. Point is they have no right to engage in these activities in Ireland.

gandalf

simongurnick wrote: »

3 or 4 lads pinning one guy to the ground. A security firm from outside the state. Are you mad? The gaurds should have arrested the heavies.

If someone is resisting and trying not to move it's amazing how many people you need to shift them. The guards did arrest some of the heavies, the thugs from Sunday morning that is.

Again it was a lawful eviction and from the video the contractors were actually quite restrained with the trespassers.

emo72

bubblypop wrote: »

Security firm from outside the state.....
People are really showing their racist tendencies on this thread!!

I'd say that's because it's nigh on impossible to get people from inside the state to do it.

gandalf

simongurnick wrote: »

nothing racist at all. Point is they have no right to engage in these activities in Ireland.

Yes they did, it's already been pointed out you do not need a PSA license to carry out evictions based on a High Court order. Stop making stuff up.

Don’t farmers get grants! Add this to a business that underpaid VAT to the tune of €177,000 and you’ve got one wealthy farmer. Now, why should the taxpayers be expected to bail him out?
I do agree that family homes associated with farms should be exempt from repossession as long as efforts are made to keep up repayments on any loan/mortgage on it.

simongurnick

simongurnick wrote: »

nothing racist at all. Point is they have no right to engage in these activities in Ireland.

They do. Freedom of work & travel for all EU members..... They are still in the EU.
& has been pointed out many many times.... They don't need to be security.

simongurnick

gandalf wrote: »

If someone is resisting and trying not to move it's amazing how many people you need to shift them. The guards did arrest some of the heavies, the thugs from Sunday morning that is.

Again it was a lawful eviction and from the video the contractors were actually quite restrained with the trespassers.

nonsense.

simongurnick

bubblypop wrote: »

They do. Freedom of work & travel for all EU members..... They are still in the EU.
& has been pointed out many many times.... They don't need to be security.

they're not working, they're assaulting people

McMurphy

bubblypop wrote: »

Security firm from outside the state.....
People are really showing their racist tendencies on this thread!!

Get up the yard with your racist bolloxology.

If you say someone is from outside the jurisdiction, it's hardly racism. Ffs.

simongurnick

simongurnick wrote: »

3 or 4 lads pinning one guy to the ground. A security firm from outside the state. Are you mad? The gaurds should have arrested the heavies.

Did you miss the bit where, once he was outside the gate and had spoken to the Garda (obviously not liking what was said) he threw himself onto the ground again!

hynesie08

simongurnick wrote: »

3 or 4 lads pinning one guy to the ground. A security firm from outside the state. Are you mad? The gaurds should have arrested the heavies.

you ever see someone being arrested/removed from a nightclub? usually there is 2 or more people involved. And if they're pinning him to the ground because they believe he will cause them or the building damage, that's not heavy handed. I've seen nothing in the videos that crosses the reasonable force line.

gandalf

bubblypop wrote: »

They do. Freedom of work & travel for all EU members..... They are still in the EU.
& has been pointed out many many times.... They don't need to be security.

Let me preempt his response "but but they were Loyalists" ROFLOL

There is never going to be a united Ireland with the sectarian attitudes exhibited by some in this thread and on social media because of this whole saga.

simongurnick

Deleted User wrote: »

Did you miss the bit where, once he was outside the gate and had spoken to the Garda (obviously not liking what was said) he threw himself onto the ground again!

So if someone assaults me, but then i flop to the ground after, it eradicates the previous assault?

simongurnick

gandalf wrote: »

Let me preempt his response "but but they were Loyalists" ROFLOL

There is never going to be a united Ireland with the sectarian attitudes exhibited by some in this thread and on social media because of this whole saga.

they could be from the vatican and it still wouldnt excuse their actions

simongurnick

hynesie08 wrote: »

you ever see someone being arrested/removed from a nightclub? usually there is 2 or more people involved. And if they're pinning him to the ground because they believe he will cause them or the building damage, that's not heavy handed. I've seen nothing in the videos that crosses the reasonable force line.

well, other opinions clearly differ..including some folks that gave them the response they deserved.

simongurnick

simongurnick wrote: »

So if someone assaults me, but then i flop to the ground after, it eradicates the previous assault?

What assault? Silly old men (ageism and sexism, I know) trying to prevent workers carrying out their legal duties isn’t assault.

hynesie08

simongurnick wrote: »

well, other opinions clearly differ..including some folks that gave them the response they deserved.

you mean the lads who broke all the laws you're accusing these lads of? but that's ok isn't it? cause they're Irish?

gandalf

simongurnick wrote: »

nonsense.

Yes you do utter a lot of that.

Really everyone espousing the whole assault fallacious story should really be embarrassed for themselves. There was not an assault, the people were evicted. Even the sound of the word isn't pleasant, it's not supposed to be a pleasant experience. They had a choice to avoid it, they were given plenty of notice but they decided to hang around. Maybe they like men handling them roughly I don't know.

A bloody grazed knee and it's William of Orange and the Battle of the Boyne all over again. Pathetic and ridiculous.

simongurnick

Deleted User wrote: »

What assault? Silly old men (ageism and sexism, I know) trying to prevent workers carrying out their legal duties isn’t assault.

I thought they weren't old?

simongurnick

gandalf wrote: »

Yes you do utter a lot of that.

Really everyone espousing the whole assault fallacious story should really be embarrassed for themselves. There was not an assault, the people were evicted. Even the sound of the word isn't pleasant, it's not supposed to be a pleasant experience. They had a choice to avoid it, they were given plenty of notice but they decided to hang around. Maybe they like men handling them roughly I don't know.

A bloody grazed knee and it's William of Orange and the Battle of the Boyne all over again. Pathetic and ridiculous.

Old wounds run deep. Whoever planned this either didn't consider those implications or more likely didn't give a ****e. But where are they now? Residents back in the house, still no money paid back and a PR nightmare for KBC. Clowns.

mynamejeff

a simple bit of interning seems to reveal that he group supporting the morgage defaulter are from he west of Ireland but not local

there re multiple videos from ACT the anti corruption taskforce biased in the mayo area . thier usual MO is to harass and and intimidate the familys of judges and other civil servants who draw their ire and are no stranger to video editing to suit thier narrative

The like of stephen manning(integerty ireland ) joe doocey (who is still in jail afaik) and the ex gardai who it seems is a ex garda rather than a retired garda having been dismissed.

have a google of these nutters and see if you like .