4 adults now sleeping under a bridge after not paying their mortgage

breezy1985

Sage Square Kettledrum wrote: »

When I read the article I had to double check that their surnames weren't Cash...

Was cash that fella camping outside his house pretending to be homeless because they were taking his mansion and leaving him with one of the dumps he was renting to poor people?

owlbethere

The original post or the heading for this post is wrong imo:

4 adults sleeping under a bridge after not paying for the or mortgage

The mortgage was never in the names of all the 4 adults. No one there owns that mortgage to pay it. The mortgage was owned by the father/grandfather. I presume he was paying it off since he took out the loan? I presume at this stage, the interest on the loan piled up and they are not able to service the debt. According to the article there was a high court case in February for repossessing the home. I presume the place was a family home. How many years or decades has been a family home? We are also in the middle of a pandemic since March. How are they supposed to tidy up decades of family life in a home and secure accommodation elsewhere in the middle of a pandemic, at a time when people need to reduce their close contacts to keep themselves well and safe? House hunting and moving would require meeting people and contact with people and risks of viral infection. Good god boards.ie some of you need to get down from the safety net of your high horses and cut them some slack.

Overheal

Trolls live under bridges.

Littlehorny

These people are not even loan defaulters, they are just a bunch of entitled squatters.
The Independent would want to cop on to these types of stories from brain dead leeches.

suicide_circus

Would they have squatter's rights?

Quin_Dub

seamus wrote: »

I think it's simpler than that tbh. The court should just refuse to allow a case to proceed if the defendent is not represented. So they appoint a free legal aid solicitor whose job it is to advise the defendent, or to stand before the court and declare that the defendent has been made aware of the details of the case and has officially refused representation.

This would apply whether the bank is taking your house, or your neighbour is suing because your tree fell over onto his roof.

Don't disagree on support in court at all , but the access to information/support is needed long before it gets to that stage.

If people sat down with an expert in the early stages and had the various options and potential outcomes explained to them it might avoid a whole lot of court cases and grief later.

sbsquarepants

breezy1985 wrote: »

Was cash that fella camping outside his house pretending to be homeless because they were taking his mansion and leaving him with one of the dumps he was renting to poor people?

No, it was one of our ethnic minority gems and some of her hell spawn, who decided to go sleep in a police station rather than spend any of their ill gotten gains on something as pointless as rent.

banie01

suicide_circus wrote: »

Would they have squatter's rights?

Nope, for many reasons but the main one being to claim adverse possession, one must be in possession of said property.
They were lawfully evicted and are no longer in possession of the property.

Also other reasons such as not being in possession for 12yrs and there being an actionable lien on the property.

sbsquarepants

suicide_circus wrote: »

Would they have squatter's rights?

Now see this is the kind of positivity these people need.



In just 12 short years they could own that bridge:D

BattleCorp

owlbethere wrote: »

The original post or the heading for this post is wrong imo:

4 adults sleeping under a bridge after not paying for the or mortgage

The mortgage was never in the names of all the 4 adults. No one there owns that mortgage to pay it. The mortgage was owned by the father/grandfather. I presume he was paying it off since he took out the loan? I presume at this stage, the interest on the loan piled up and they are not able to service the debt. According to the article there was a high court case in February for repossessing the home. I presume the place was a family home. How many years or decades has been a family home? We are also in the middle of a pandemic since March. How are they supposed to tidy up decades of family life in a home and secure accommodation elsewhere in the middle of a pandemic, at a time when people need to reduce their close contacts to keep themselves well and safe? House hunting and moving would require meeting people and contact with people and risks of viral infection. Good god boards.ie some of you need to get down from the safety net of your high horses and cut them some slack.

Have a read-up on the type of mortgage. There was nothing to be paid on it until the person died. Then the choice is to pay the outstanding balance from the sale of the house or have the family pay the outstanding balance. Neither of those was done so out they go.

They knew about this for 5 years. They knew this day was coming for a long time and did fcukall about it. They lived there free for five years. Not much sympathy from me to be honest.

BattleCorp

suicide_circus wrote: »

Would they have squatter's rights?

No. 12 years or something like that I think. Plus the bank were actively trying to reclaim the property for a number of years.

sbsquarepants

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Now see this is the kind of positivity these people need.



In just 12 short years they could own that bridge:D

Brilliant!

weldoninhio

Foxhound38 wrote: »

Read the article there this morning, as it's all over social media.


My initial reaction upon seeing the headline was one of sympathy (I still have some sympathy for them on a human level - it's a crap situation they are now in) but having read and reread the article, unless I'm missing something there were 4 adults living in that house (himself, 2 29 year old sons and one of their girlfriends), and the mortgage was €52,700. Repossession would not have taken place unless no attempt was made to service the debt, which at the amount it's at should have been very managable between 4 people even assuming that they are all on the dole.

Maybe I'm missing something here but what did they think was going to happen? I do really hope they get a roof over their heads but how is this anyone elses fault?

“I’m freezing. I don’t know what to do. My heart his breaking,” he added.

While his gob****e son sits beside him in a pair of shorts :D:D

WesternZulu

Every single one of them looks significantly older than their stated age!

weldoninhio

Dempo1 wrote: »

Good points however I noticed the actual debt seems to have arisen from the Father's decision to take out a life mortgage (basically borrow on the equity, repaid on death etc).

Yes I do sympathise but find it hard to understand why four adults couldn't pay off what is an astonishingly low mortgage amount, mother of God, even if they were all on basic welfare the monthly payments could have been met on this amount.

More alarming is the fact any home could be permitted to be reposssesd for such a small amount let alone in the middle of a pandemic.

Whats the alternative? Let bums stay in houses for free??

whisky_galore

WesternZulu wrote: »

Every single one of them looks significantly older than their stated age!

That's what happens when you party too hard, kids.

Hard to see anyone on welfare getting a mortgage unless the ltv was way way down

Look, everyone has issues at some stage. Financial, physical or mental. With those issues comes stress, depression and pressure. We as a society have a joint responsibility not only to plan for ourselves and our families but those that need genuine assistance.

That said, all adults and appear to have made zero effort. Under a bridge? Walk into a Garda station, freephone the homeless emergency number and you will be accommodated for the night. Another group of the world will cover us forever brigade.

Limpy

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Hard to see anyone on welfare getting a mortgage unless the ltv was way way down

Look, everyone has issues at some stage. Financial, physical or mental. With those issues comes stress, depression and pressure. We as a society have a joint responsibility not only to plan for ourselves and our families but those that need genuine assistance.

That said, all adults and appear to have made zero effort. Under a bridge? Walk into a Garda station, freephone the homeless emergency number and you will be accommodated for the night. Another group of the world will cover us forever brigade.

Under a bridge, in a car with 5 kids ect. It gets news, it gets clicks. More clicks = more politicians jumping on your case. More calls to social departments = move faster up the housing lists ect.

weldoninhio

seamus wrote: »

I think it's simpler than that tbh. The court should just refuse to allow a case to proceed if the defendent is not represented. So they appoint a free legal aid solicitor whose job it is to advise the defendent, or to stand before the court and declare that the defendent has been made aware of the details of the case and has officially refused representation.

This would apply whether the bank is taking your house, or your neighbour is suing because your tree fell over onto his roof.

It's not their house though.

breezy1985

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Hard to see anyone on welfare getting a mortgage unless the ltv was way way down

Look, everyone has issues at some stage. Financial, physical or mental. With those issues comes stress, depression and pressure. We as a society have a joint responsibility not only to plan for ourselves and our families but those that need genuine assistance.

That said, all adults and appear to have made zero effort. Under a bridge? Walk into a Garda station, freephone the homeless emergency number and you will be accommodated for the night. Another group of the world will cover us forever brigade.

They said that they couldn't get through to the homeless helpline due to a technical issue. I know it's covid and all but surely you could still call to them at the door and get some sort of help

jmayo

osarusan wrote: »

As an aside, just compare the IT and Indo articles to see the chasm in quality between the two. The Indo is such a f**king rag.

The IT is now also a rag.
They shouldn't be covering this shyte in the first place.

Oranage2 wrote: »

The father should have dressed his kids in school uniforms and had them sleep in a Garda station.

It is pushing to claim she is 36 never mind under 18.

Pkiernan wrote: »

Wow. Not much sympathy here!

Why the fook should we have smypathy for people who have freeloaded and now are claiming the poor mouth no doubt to con themselves up the housing list, ahead of more deserving people.

A lot of people in Ireland that pay their way, do their best to raise their families as best they can, are fooking sick and tired of leeching fookers with their hands out for more handouts.

G'way to fook will ya.

Widdensushi

weldoninhio wrote: »

“I’m freezing. I don’t know what to do. My heart his breaking,” he added.

While his gob****e son sits beside him in a pair of shorts :D:D

Trying to get his vitamin d

weldoninhio

owlbethere wrote: »

The original post or the heading for this post is wrong imo:

4 adults sleeping under a bridge after not paying for the or mortgage

The mortgage was never in the names of all the 4 adults. No one there owns that mortgage to pay it. The mortgage was owned by the father/grandfather. I presume he was paying it off since he took out the loan? I presume at this stage, the interest on the loan piled up and they are not able to service the debt. According to the article there was a high court case in February for repossessing the home. I presume the place was a family home. How many years or decades has been a family home? We are also in the middle of a pandemic since March. How are they supposed to tidy up decades of family life in a home and secure accommodation elsewhere in the middle of a pandemic, at a time when people need to reduce their close contacts to keep themselves well and safe? House hunting and moving would require meeting people and contact with people and risks of viral infection. Good god boards.ie some of you need to get down from the safety net of your high horses and cut them some slack.

A lifetime loan releases equity from the house to you, and then when you die the bank gets the house. You get to live there rent free until you die, whether thats another 1 year or another 30 years.

Looks like these people thought, ah sure we can still live in the banks house now, if they even lived there with the grandfather. The grandfather had effectively sold it to the bank when he took the equity.

Chalk McHugh

Limpy wrote: »

Under a bridge, in a car with 5 kids ect. It gets news, it gets clicks. More clicks = more politicians jumping on your case. More calls to social departments = move faster up the housing lists ect.

Simple as that. It's as blatant a ploy as any scoundrel could come up with. He/she who shouts loudest gets looked after quickest in this land of milk and honey for all sorts of wasters. Gravy train express will pick these chancers up at the Bridge and next stop is Brand Spanking New House Station.

super_furry

So it's not their house, it was never their house and they've been living there rent-free for five years. Plenty of time to come up with a deposit for a house.

Quin_Dub

Dempo1 wrote: »

Good points however I noticed the actual debt seems to have arisen from the Father's decision to take out a life mortgage (basically borrow on the equity, repaid on death etc).

Yes I do sympathise but find it hard to understand why four adults couldn't pay off what is an astonishingly low mortgage amount, mother of God, even if they were all on basic welfare the monthly payments could have been met on this amount.

More alarming is the fact any home could be permitted to be reposssesd for such a small amount let alone in the middle of a pandemic.

Well exactly , they should have been ejected 5 years ago.

As others have pointed out , it has never been their house. The bank have been the sole owners of that property since 2007.

The Grandfather sold the house to the bank in 2007 but the terms of the agreement was that he could live there until he died.

He died in 2015 , the house now belongs to the bank.

End of story.

It's also not "such a small amount" - even the original €53k was probably more than the house was ever worth.

At best that house would get around €40k on the open market today so the amount is at a minimum about 150% of the market value.

nj27

WesternZulu wrote: »

Every single one of them looks significantly older than their stated age!

I don’t want to be unkind, but they’re not all there on first inspection.

BattleCorp

super_furry wrote: »

So it's not their house, it was never their house and they've been living there rent-free for five years. Plenty of time to come up with a deposit for a house.

They don't seem to be the type of people who 'come up with a deposit for a house'.

dundalkfc10

Why would they sleep under a bridge beside a river?

I could think of 100 warmer places to sleep than that.

BattleCorp

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

Why would they sleep under a bridge beside a river?

I could think of 100 warmer places to sleep than that.

Attention seeking. It worked for Margaret Cash so they think it'll work for them. Which it probably will.