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

amadangomor

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

Strange how that is never questioned. That is a staggering number.

Thousands are articles questioning the homeless crisis and the government, not one questioning the charities.

Surely there is a gap in the market for some proper balanced reporting of the issues in Ireland?

The extreme left right ons have taken over the media. The answer is definitely not the far right loons either.

Someone with a bit of sense to start a balanced online newspaper that gets to the heart of issues would get a sub from me.

Spanish Eyes

Are they out from under the bridge and have they got a council house yet. Dying to know.

4Ad

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Are they out from under the bridge and have they got a council house yet. Dying to know.

Soon I'd say...

'The squeaky wheel gets most oil'

katiek102010

To the op you have your facts wrong.

The original owners of the property parents or grandparents owned the house. Took out maybe 30-40% equity release back in celtic tiger days. Made a will and left remaining 70-80% to son.

When they die son moves in with his kids believing house to be his. Vulture fund come along going nó your parent borrows 10k in 2006 to do the windows and now to get us to give your house back you owe us 50k + Which is now more than the property is worth so you are squatters and get out

Not that they wouldn't pay a mortgage they couldn't

osarusan

katiek102010 wrote: »

To the op you have your facts wrong.

The original owners of the property parents or grandparents owned the house. Took out maybe 30-40% equity release back in celtic tiger days. Made a will and left remaining 70-80% to son.

When they die son moves in with his kids believing house to be his. Vulture fund come along going nó your parent borrows 10k in 2006 to do the windows and now to get us to give your house back you owe us 50k + Which is now more than the property is worth so you are squatters and get out

Not that they wouldn't pay a mortgage they couldn't

Grandfather died intestate, grandfather received 52700 in loans.


You have no idea what you are talking about.

katiek102010

myshirt wrote: »

A house in St Mary's park is worth next to near fxck all. These guys didn't engage at all, there's no doubt about that. It's through a lack of skillset to be able to manage basic life challenges and tasks, and through not giving a bollix. It's self destructive and we've seen it too many times.

You are talking 300 quid a month tops. With the right help they absolutely could have managed their way through this. There are very complex problems at play here though; it's terribly sad in a lot of ways.

Nevertheless, always bemuses me to see the amount of people knocking one out to the misfortunes of lower socioeconomic classes. We see the same in Britain. We've seen the same since the dawn of time nearly. Tell the people with the pitchforks that the people with the torches are out to **** them over, and tell the people with the torches that the people with the pitchforks are trying to take them. Then kick back and relax.

The Brit gets sacked, replaced with a foreigner who'll work cheaper and on less favorable terms; the owners pocket the profit; and then Brit blames the foreigner. The Brit sits back and watches Benefits Street, but never tunes into Tax Dodger Street. And in Ireland, the response is always "those fucckers on Welfare pulling a fast one again". Never looking at the bigger issues, and who is really causing the bigger amount of damage here.

These equity release loans should be banned in my view, especially when they are targeting people with low financial literacy, and even more so when the intrinsic value of the property is more than the market value. And that's the case here. It's gouging, and I doubt the man who took the loan grasped that. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. I have staff on my payroll in the 40-60 grand bucket and they haven't a clue either. We don't do financial literacy in this country. Look at our public sector and the influence of unions. Packed with overinflated cost, wages, and pensions.

My sister knows that younger guy. He does love under the bridge but he is never short of cans on Parnell Street. He seems happy enough, he's well fed.

I have had to deal with many victims of equity release companies. Nasty b*****D's.

Worked with social services in the UK. Back in the day women couldn't have bank accounts so many houses were in the sole name of the husband.

Years later when they are in their 90s, trying to stay at home and they do equity release to have adaptations eg bathroom downstairs etc. Husband then still has to go into care, next thing is equity release company are trying to kick an old dear out in her 90's.

The interest charged is also outrageous, the initial release figure is often doubled in a very short time. Often clauses written in say eg the initial loan figure is X % of property value at the time of release. On repayment it is either the initial loan figure plus interest or X% plus interest, whatever is greater.

The interest rates would give wonga and the likes heart failure

Melanchthon

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If it means fulfilling a requirement to get a job? Robbery, Investment. Calls it what ya like.

It's absolute robbery because the course should cost considerably less unless they have put up prices a significant amount in the last several years.
Think I paid 110 a few years ago.

katiek102010

katiek102010 wrote: »

I have had to deal with many victims of equity release companies. Nasty b*****D's.

Worked with social services in the UK. Back in the day women couldn't have bank accounts so many houses were in the sole name of the husband.

Years later when they are in their 90s, trying to stay at home and they do equity release to have adaptations eg bathroom downstairs etc. Husband then still has to go into care, next thing is equity release company are trying to kick an old dear out in her 90's.

The interest charged is also outrageous, the initial release figure is often doubled in a very short time. Often clauses written in say eg the initial loan figure is X % of property value at the time of release. On repayment it is either the initial loan figure plus interest or X% plus interest, whatever is greater.

The interest rates would give wonga and the likes heart failure

Are you suggesting they charge 5000% Annual interest because thats what it works out with Wonga? That equates to a loan of 10K acruing interest of half a million PER YEAR

katiek102010

katiek102010 wrote: »

To the op you have your facts wrong.

The original owners of the property parents or grandparents owned the house. Took out maybe 30-40% equity release back in celtic tiger days. Made a will and left remaining 70-80% to son.

When they die son moves in with his kids believing house to be his. Vulture fund come along going nó your parent borrows 10k in 2006 to do the windows and now to get us to give your house back you owe us 50k + Which is now more than the property is worth so you are squatters and get out

Not that they wouldn't pay a mortgage they couldn't

You just either pulled that out of your arse or you are one of those that believes whatever they are told without any critical thought process

Wanderer78

Thank God, we managed to keep our housing safety nets in place!

suicide_circus

NIMAN wrote: »

Thats a real pet hate of mine about the media in Ireland.

There is never hard questions asked, for fear of being attacked. Back when there was no such thing as Covid or Brexit, homelessness was the staple diet of the media, never off the airwaves. But they were always falling over themselves to say how it was terrible for these poor 10,000 people, but they took everything at face value and never asked a single question that could be seen as controversial, such as "why are 50% of offer of housing turned down", etc.

Ireland's a small country. Journalists dont want to close the door on a potential career move into the charity industry by asking hard questions and media organisations don't want to alienate charities who provide them with ad revenue.

Lillyfae

4Ad wrote: »

Did I once hear on the radio that there was either 17 or 24 Homeless organisations in Dublin ??
Could be wrong.
If so it seems really badly planned.

Not to mention people who want to buy houses for themselves to live in are being outbid by the Council and homeless agencies, and HAP pushing up the cost of rent. Complete joke.

ThunbergsAreGo

Lillyfae wrote: »

Not to mention people who want to buy houses for themselves to live in are being outbid by the Council and homeless agencies, and HAP pushing up the cost of rent. Complete joke.

Or those paying astronomical rents, who have less protection than those housed by the council and might have to move at any moment

Wanderer78

Lillyfae wrote: »

Not to mention people who want to buy houses for themselves to live in are being outbid by the Council and homeless agencies, and HAP pushing up the cost of rent. Complete joke.

the availability of credit is the ultimate decider of the price of housing

Lillyfae

Wanderer78 wrote: »

the availability of credit is the ultimate decider of the price of housing

The housing agencies and councils have budgets, not credit.

Wanderer78

Lillyfae wrote: »

The housing agencies and councils have budgets, not credit.

our property markets have become a train wreck largely due to the availability of credit to the market in its entirety, we still havent addressed this issue

banie01

Lillyfae wrote: »

The housing agencies and councils have budgets, not credit.

Which means they can often outbid those relying upon credit and subject to the central bank rules and limits.
That places an artificial floor on housing prices that can be easily breached by the Agencies and makes housing unaffordable for the low income yet mortgage approved.

Lillyfae

banie01 wrote: »

Which means they can often outbid those relying upon credit and subject to the central bank rules and limits.
That places an artificial floor on housing prices that can be easily breached by the Agencies and makes housing unaffordable for the low income yet mortgage approved.

That was my original point

katiek102010

banie01 wrote: »

Which means they can often outbid those relying upon credit and subject to the central bank rules and limits.
That places an artificial floor on housing prices that can be easily breached by the Agencies and makes housing unaffordable for the low income yet mortgage approved.

We are on waiting list for a couple of years for housing. We have just been outbid twice for houses recently. Found out after 1st council had bought it.

2nd house we were looking at I rang council said look we have scraped together deposit and got mortgage approval. Explained what happened with first house said we were looking at x house. Limited houses available in our budget they bought 2nd one too.

A friend was in similar situation (neighbouring council). They pulled out when she rang so we thought they would do the same. They had still driven up the price of hers by 10k

sbsquarepants

Wanderer78 wrote: »

the availability of credit is the ultimate decider of the price of housing

Not quite - the availability of money is the decider. The house is worth what potential buyers are willing and able to pay, doesn't make any difference if that money is borrowed, budgeted or a just handed over by rich parents. All that matters is that it is there to cover the tab when required.

Wanderer78

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Not quite - the availability of money is the decider. The house is worth what potential buyers are willing and able to pay, doesn't make any difference if that money is borrowed, budgeted or a just handed over by rich parents. All that matters is that it is there to cover the tab when required.

i do agree, but you will find, in many cases, possibly the majority, its ultimately the access to credit

sbsquarepants

Wanderer78 wrote: »

i do agree, but you will find, in many cases, possibly the majority, its ultimately the access to credit

Certainly was in my case!


I'm not sure on the actual number but i read before that since the crash and the new mortgage rules, there is a huge proportion of sales now for cash with no mortgage involved. I do actually think the new rules are a good idea overall, but it has often had the effect of just pricing ordinary people out while the wealthy cash in a bond or sell some shares and motor on regardless.


It's a tricky one, because it's hard to argue that the wealthy should not be able to spend their money however they see fit, but it's also not right that ordinary working people can't buy a house to live in "because they can't afford it" and then force them to pay maybe double the mortgage in rent.


I think the only thing that can fix it is a massive building spree - we've been promised one for donkeys years (and the last one went really well:D)

seamus

katiek102010 wrote: »

When they die son moves in with his kids believing house to be his. Vulture fund come along going nó your parent borrows 10k in 2006 to do the windows and now to get us to give your house back you owe us 50k + Which is now more than the property is worth so you are squatters and get out

Aside from the rest of your nonsense, it is not possible to owe a lender more than twice what you borrowed.

It's a common law principle which requires that the maximum arrears you can accrue is the initial amount of the loan. So if you borrow €10k, the maximum arrears you can build up on that is €10k, so the most you can owe is €20k.

Of course, some less scrupulous lenders will skirt around this, and unlicenced lenders will ignore it.

But a court won't enforce it.

Wanderer78

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Certainly was in my case!


I'm not sure on the actual number but i read before that since the crash and the new mortgage rules, there is a huge proportion of sales now for cash with no mortgage involved. I do actually think the new rules are a good idea overall, but it has often had the effect of just pricing ordinary people out while the wealthy cash in a bond or sell some shares and motor on regardless.


It's a tricky one, because it's hard to argue that the wealthy should not be able to spend their money however they see fit, but it's also not right that ordinary working people can't buy a house to live in "because they can't afford it" and then force them to pay maybe double the mortgage in rent.


I think the only thing that can fix it is a massive building spree - we've been promised one for donkeys years (and the last one went really well:D)

ah its a mess alright, but i suspect credit is still really the problem, those that can get access to it, can dominate the market, which includes major investment funds.

of course we need to increase supply, but that to must be done carefully and with a degree of intelligence also, its not all houses we need!

charlietheminxx

seamus wrote: »

Aside from the rest of your nonsense, it is not possible to owe a lender more than twice what you borrowed.

It's a common law principle which requires that the maximum arrears you can accrue is the initial amount of the loan. So if you borrow €10k, the maximum arrears you can build up on that is €10k, so the most you can owe is €20k.

Of course, some less scrupulous lenders will skirt around this, and unlicenced lenders will ignore it.

But a court won't enforce it.

This isn't true of equity release loans as far as I know. If you borrow €50k today with Seniors Money, you will owe €132,957 in 20 years. I never realised it was the case but someone in my family took one out.

Here's the link so you can see for yourself:

https://www.seniorsmoney.ie/new-loans/lifetime-loan-calculator/

Bear in mind, the amount of equity you can release is more stringently controlled now, which it wasn't before. It racks up fast to the full value of the property.

seamus

charlietheminxx wrote: »

This isn't true of equity release loans as far as I know. If you borrow €50k today with Seniors Money, you will owe €132,957 in 20 years. I never realised it was the case but someone in my family took one out.

Here's the link so you can see for yourself:

https://www.seniorsmoney.ie/new-loans/lifetime-loan-calculator/

Bear in mind, the amount of equity you can release is more stringently controlled now, which it wasn't before. It racks up fast to the full value of the property.

That's a fair point. The accruing interest on this kind of loan is not "arrears".

dartboardio

Yep completely agree with OP here , no ones fault but their own. You can't not pay debt and presume you will get away with it... then call the businesses/companies kicking you out the bad ones?


Don't understand it. People pretending landlords are evil for kicking tenants out after going without rent payments for months :S

Not paying debts have consequences it's very clear. Why should everyone else make sure/attempt to have their bills paid on time.

It clearly states on all letters aswell if you do not pay you could lose your home. pretty self explanatory


Absolutely understand people lose jobs and fall on hard times, but they generally don't kick people out that try / make an agreement re payments. Only if u had a '**** you' attitude and didn't even bother attempting.

Wanderer78

dartboardio wrote: »

Yep completely agree with OP here , no ones fault but their own. You can't not pay debt and presume you will get away with it... then call the businesses/companies kicking you out the bad ones?


Don't understand it. People pretending landlords are evil for kicking tenants out after going without rent payments for months :S

Not paying debts have consequences it's very clear. Why should everyone else make sure/attempt to have their bills paid on time.

It clearly states on all letters aswell if you do not pay you could lose your home. pretty self explanatory


Absolutely understand people lose jobs and fall on hard times, but they generally don't kick people out that try / make an agreement re payments. Only if u had a '**** you' attitude and didn't even bother attempting.

'behind every bad borrower, lies a bad lender'!

Lillyfae

Lillyfae wrote: »

Not to mention people who want to buy houses for themselves to live in are being outbid by the Council and homeless agencies, and HAP pushing up the cost of rent. Complete joke.

I went out to a womans house to fix her PC a while ago. Big 3-bed semi detached house. I said something like "The mortgage for this place must be a fair whack". She goes, "Oh im only renting it. 300 a month and HAP takes care of the rest".

I'm not exaggerating, her living room was bigger than my entire apartment. God knows what her HAP payment must be. Big house in leafy suburb.

I'm all for helping people who need it, but the system is broken.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

I went out to a womans house to fix her PC a while ago. Big 3-bed semi detached house. I said something like "The mortgage for this place must be a fair whack". She goes, "Oh im only renting it. 300 a month and HAP takes care of the rest".

I'm not exaggerating, her living room was bigger than my entire apartment. God knows what her HAP payment must be. Big house in leafy suburb.

I'm all for helping people who need it, but the system is broken.

How much di you charge her after that :D:D:D $$$$$$$$$$$$$$