The McNamaras, €2.9M debt write-off, some deal!

quokula

Property prices have recovered since the crash - if the house is worth 500k now then they didn't buy it for 3 million. They took that 3 million and spent it on other things, including gambling and property speculation. This really shouldn't see the same sort of leniency as someone who took a mortgage on a family home in good faith and later hit difficulties.

malinheader

martingriff wrote: »

I am not doing either but anyone can go for the Personal Insolvency Process and in that people get to keep thrown home.

Now if you want to talk about in this process they should be made sell there house and downsize then yes I agree with you. I am sorry if you aggrieved to hear it is not just for the rich.

I think you know what's wrong with this case in particular. I am well aware that anyone can go through the insolvency process. How many ordinary people who do come out with such a great outcome.

Portsalon

lawred2 wrote: »

aye it does keep a half million euro house in the family which will ultimately benefit their children..

As will the Belvedere College education that the kids(s) are getting - without Frank and Teresa bothering to pay the fees.

rafatoni

Portsalon wrote: »

As will the Belvedere College education that the kids(s) are getting - without Frank and Teresa bothering to pay the fees.

How are the kids still allowed to go to private school if they arent paying the fees??:eek:

SteM

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

Why can't you sell the large home and move to a smaller one as many people who have little debt or a normal proportion of debt have and do quite happily. The sense of entitlement.

I guess they couldn't because it wasn't theirs to sell. They owe money on it and the selling cost wouldn't have covered the debts and the cost of a smaller home.

lawred2

Portsalon wrote: »

As will the Belvedere College education that the kids(s) are getting - without Frank and Teresa bothering to pay the fees.

the gaff not out in Meath?

suicide_circus

blanch152 wrote: »

Yes.

The left-wing parties - Sinn Fein, PBP - have been leading the campaign against vulture funds and against people being thrown out of their homes. This McNamara case, like the Pamela Flood one before it, and Twink, and the couple in Killiney are the ones who are benefitting.

Ultimately the taxpayers lost on the Fianna Fail bailout, the bank shareholders lost on the bailout, the bondholders lost (but less than they should have) on the bailout, but those like the McNamaras and others who got to keep their houses (are you watching Ivan Yates) without paying their debts are the ones who stuffed the taxpayer.

While the taxpayers lost out, the worst affected are the next generation who see higher house prices because those who won't pay aren't evicted and higher interest rates because the banks can't their money back if someone doesn't pay their mortgage.

bingo, frank and teresa owe mary lou and rbb a vote

atticu

Hoboo wrote: »

OUTRAGE!!!!!!

Best of luck to them. If anything it will help others in the same situation. I'm not sure why anyone should be sickened (other than jealousy at the thoughts of someone getting more than them)

What would happen if everyone in Ireland who has a mortgage stopped paying?

Asking for a friend.

jjmcclure

is_that_so wrote: »

No idea, story just states the €500K family home is their main asset now and it also says other properties were sold to get out of what they imagined as "temporary" financial difficulties.

I know the house, 500k is not accurate. The site alone (probably 2 to 3 acres) is worth twice that for development.


Not bothered about them getting the debt forgiveness, however the house valuation intrigues me. It cant be accurate. Detached houses in the area in a good estate are 500k

source

There is a fundamental misunderstanding of what the personal insolvency process is in this thread. The Personal Insolvency Act was introduced to keep people in their homes. There are 3 different types.

Debt Relief Notice: For unsecured debts under €35,000

Debt Settlement Arrangement: For unsecured debts of any amount, which the borrower will pay an affordable portion of their income towards for either 5 or 6 years – Balance after this time is written off

Personal Insolvency Arrangement: For both secured and unsecured debt, as with the DSA above the borrower pays towards the debt for 6 to 7 years based in their income and situation and split amongst their credits based on the % of the total debt the creditor holds. A sustainable long-term arrangement is put in place on their home which they will pay over an agreed term. The balance of any unsecured debt is written off after the 6 or 7 year term. I think there is an upper limit of €3m but can’t recall off the top of my head.

A Personal Insolvency Practitioner (PIP) will manage this for the borrowers and if they cannot come to an agreement with the creditors, then they can appeal to the Courts (which is what happened in this case) and the Court makes a decision based on the facts of the case.

The borrowers have to commit to a full financial review and the PIP will calculate how much they can afford to put towards the debt based on calculated reasonable living expenses. EG. A couple with no children is only allowed €1,486 a month outside their debt to live on, a single adult is allowed €1,050.48 a month, expenditure can go above this in certain circumstances (medical costs, second vehicle (necessary) etc.) but a case needs to be made to the creditors and in this case the Courts to support the expansion of the living expense guidelines. The reasonable living expense guidelines are set by the Insolvency Service of Ireland as are the rules around expanding same.

In this case there were a number of properties which resulted in the debt accruing, the borrowers agreed to sell all but their home, and the balance of the debt on the other properties, if they weren’t all cross secured) would have been unsecured residual debt, which is why they are writing off the debt.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

Yes.

The left-wing parties - Sinn Fein, PBP - have been leading the campaign against vulture funds and against people being thrown out of their homes. This McNamara case, like the Pamela Flood one before it, and Twink, and the couple in Killiney are the ones who are benefitting.

Ultimately the taxpayers lost on the Fianna Fail bailout, the bank shareholders lost on the bailout, the bondholders lost (but less than they should have) on the bailout, but those like the McNamaras and others who got to keep their houses (are you watching Ivan Yates) without paying their debts are the ones who stuffed the taxpayer.

While the taxpayers lost out, the worst affected are the next generation who see higher house prices because those who won't pay aren't evicted and higher interest rates because the banks can't their money back if someone doesn't pay their mortgage.

Do you think Theresa and Frank ever voted People Before Profit? Would you ever stop promoting the FF/FG system of government responsible for this kind of thing? you're not helping, well you're helping things remain the same or worsen.
Those kinds of movements are for working people who might lose their house and become homeless over thousands in debt not chancers getting millions written off. Post for the Irish taxpayer for once, be honest on this. You're being part of the problem on this with the spin that those responsible for the society we have, who make the policies, are mere passengers when things kick off but guardians of the people when their economy does well for them.

Portsalon

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Do you think Theresa and Frank ever voted People Before Profit?

Give that Frankie once ran for the Pee Dees, I think that's about as likely as you making an intelligent observation, Mattie lad.

James Brown

Portsalon wrote: »

Give that Frankie once ran for the Pee Dees, I think that's about as likely as you making an intelligent observation, Mattie lad.

Aren't you the lad accused me of always commenting after you post even though I never had and you're new?
Missed the point, but don't let that put you off. Now go on out and play in the garden.

AlanG

What is annoying about the information reported is that they appear to have been in trouble for a very long time but still sent their kids to private school instead of trying to live to the level they could afford.

martingriff

malinheader wrote: »

I think you know what's wrong with this case in particular. I am well aware that anyone can go through the insolvency process. How many ordinary people who do come out with such a great outcome.

What are they getting that others who go through the process are not. They get to keep there house (which I do not think is right) which is 1 of the reason personal insolvency process was developed. Now if you can show me them getting over and above what can be got then yes I will be with you.

But the idea that they are going through something because of who they are that Joe Soap can't is wrong.

martingriff

AlanG wrote: »

What is annoying about the information reported is that they appear to have been in trouble for a very long time but still sent their kids to private school instead of trying to live to the level they could afford.

That's not new in fairness many of the well to try to show they are still in the society.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Do you think Theresa and Frank ever voted People Before Profit? Would you ever stop promoting the FF/FG system of government responsible for this kind of thing? you're not helping, well you're helping things remain the same or worsen.
Those kinds of movements are for working people who might lose their house and become homeless over thousands in debt not chancers getting millions written off. Post for the Irish taxpayer for once, be honest on this. You're being part of the problem on this with the spin that those responsible for the society we have, who make the policies, are mere passengers when things kick off but guardians of the people when their economy does well for them.

The taxpayer is paying for everyone who keeps their house and doesn't pay their debts. That is wrong.

The person staying in the house is keeping up prices for the next generation. That is wrong.

The banks not being able to get back their money is keeping up interest rates for the next generation. That is wrong.

People like them living in houses being supported by the taxpayer when so many are homeless and renting. That is wrong.

Left-wing parties who are supposed to protect the homeless and the renters leading the charge to look after the likes of McNamara. That is wrong.

Fine Gael not having the courage to face down the misinformed and mistaken left-wing agenda. That is wrong.

People absolving Fianna Fail of responsibility because it all stems from their bailout. That is wrong.

Posters knee-jerk defending Sinn Fein and the other left-wing parties as you do. That is wrong.

martingriff

blanch152 wrote: »

The taxpayer is paying for everyone who keeps their house and doesn't pay their debts. That is wrong.

The person staying in the house is keeping up prices for the next generation. That is wrong.

The banks not being able to get back their money is keeping up interest rates for the next generation. That is wrong.

People like them living in houses being supported by the taxpayer when so many are homeless and renting. That is wrong.

Left-wing parties who are supposed to protect the homeless and the renters leading the charge to look after the likes of McNamara. That is wrong.

Fine Gael not having the courage to face down the misinformed and mistaken left-wing agenda. That is wrong.

People absolving Fianna Fail of responsibility because it all stems from their bailout. That is wrong.

Posters knee-jerk defending Sinn Fein and the other left-wing parties as you do. That is wrong.

Agree with you completely but no party will touch the eviction problem (that is to allow normal eviction like every other country) with a ten foot pole as they know there will be mass protest and such from those who shout the loudest

Portsalon

blanch152 wrote: »

The taxpayer is paying for everyone who keeps their house and doesn't pay their debts. That is wrong.

The person staying in the house is keeping up prices for the next generation. That is wrong.

The banks not being able to get back their money is keeping up interest rates for the next generation. That is wrong.

People like them living in houses being supported by the taxpayer when so many are homeless and renting. That is wrong.

Left-wing parties who are supposed to protect the homeless and the renters leading the charge to look after the likes of McNamara. That is wrong.

Fine Gael not having the courage to face down the misinformed and mistaken left-wing agenda. That is wrong.

People absolving Fianna Fail of responsibility because it all stems from their bailout. That is wrong.

Posters knee-jerk defending Sinn Fein and the other left-wing parties as you do. That is wrong.

It's the culture and the era of the parasite - (as we can see every day in compensation claims too).

No one is ever personally responsible for anything any more. It's always someone else's fault, generally either the gubberment's or the bankers'.

Harry Palmr

I look forward to the sob story on the LLS.

chicorytip

What income have they earned over the last twelve years? Why was a record of this and a statement of current means not published as well as any evidence of mortgage repayments having been made? They are both people who appear to have the capability to make a good living from their respective occupations. I would have some compassion if they were making genuine attempts to discharge their debts unlike Ronan Ryan and Pamela Flood who are just a pair of shameless chancers.

James Brown

Portsalon wrote: »

It's the culture and the era of the parasite - (as we can see every day in compensation claims too).

No one is ever personally responsible for anything any more. It's always someone else's fault, generally either the gubberment's or the bankers'.

A lot of truth there. But do you think it's down to parties on less than 5% more than the sitting government/policy makers?
Was it that Gino lad wrote off the millions for these chancers? Was it People before profit made the legislation? :rolleyes:
Anyway the topic is these chancers getting millions written off and Blanch blaming SF/PBP and you deflecting from it

Harry Palmr wrote: »

I look forward to the sob story on the LLS.

No doubt wax dummy Barry Egan from the Indo will be out for a dinner party in their 'modest' but gorgeous house to discuss how hard the privileged have it.

Portsalon

Matt Barrett wrote: »

No doubt wax dummy Barry Egan from the Indo will be out for a dinner party in their 'modest' but gorgeous house to discuss how hard the privileged have it.

That's more like it Matt! Glad to see that you're upping your game. Keep up the good work.

Portsalon

Matt Barrett wrote: »

A lot of truth there. But do you think it's down to parties on less than 5% more than the sitting government/policy makers?
Was it that Gino lad wrote off the millions for these chancers? Was it People before profit made the legislation? :rolleyes:
Anyway the topic is these chancers getting millions written off and Blanch blaming SF/PBP and you deflecting from it

There's always a lot of truth in my posts Matt. What you really meant to say is that one of my posts vibrated at a frequency that was in harmony with the way that you think about things. I'm confident that, as you continue to mature, you'll find yourself, however reluctantly, seeing things more and more my way!

(I was a spotty left winger when I was in college too, you know! )

James Brown

Portsalon wrote: »

There's always a lot of truth in my posts Matt. What you really meant to say is that one of my posts vibrated at a frequency that was in harmony with the way that you think about things. I'm confident that, as you continue to mature, you'll find yourself, however reluctantly, seeing things more and more my way!

(I was a spotty left winger when I was in college too, you know! )

This says more about you than me

AndrewJRenko

is_that_so wrote: »

They are likely to be cash only for the rest of their lives.

I wouldn't count on it. What's the odds that Frank's difficulties in get foreign royalty payments will miraculously be solved shortly after the deal is agreed, and they'll be back in clover again soon.

Portsalon

Matt Barrett wrote: »

This says more about you than me

Or, as Nelson Mandela Chairman Mao always said, Ní thagann ciall roimh aois.

AndrewJRenko

blanch152 wrote: »

Left-wing parties who are supposed to protect the homeless and the renters leading the charge to look after the likes of McNamara. That is wrong.

Fine Gael not having the courage to face down the misinformed and mistaken left-wing agenda. That is wrong.

People absolving Fianna Fail of responsibility because it all stems from their bailout. That is wrong.

Posters knee-jerk defending Sinn Fein and the other left-wing parties as you do. That is wrong.

Just in case you missed it, there are no left wing parties in Government. You seem to have misdirected your anger.

10000maniacs

Morrisseeee wrote: »

The latest sweet deal for the elite is > Frank McNamara and Theresa Lowe.
They had "what appears to be an incredible deal will see €2.9m in debts written off".
"..Mr Justice McDonald sided with the couple."

It makes me very mad to see this kinda stuff happening, a sweet deal for some and for others you're thrown out on the street, house gone.

Wow, a €2.9 Million write-off is no small feat. And I make shoes for clowns.

James Brown

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Just in case you missed it, there are no left wing parties in Government. You seem to have misdirected your anger.

This is the delusion:

Fine Gael not having the courage to face down the misinformed and mistaken left-wing agenda. That is wrong.

After generations of FF/FG government any poor societal/policies are the fault of the current FF/FG government not defending the great unwashed from the whims of parties, many of which on less than 5%. It's ridiculous.