What think ye of Harkin?
Ixelles said
Answer;- Trying not to, shes out of her depth with that statement and her argument is not sound, its one of those "We’re entitled because we’re worth it "arguements.
What were these people doing before they bought a property? Did they seek advice about the market (probably not outside of their friends and family) did they walk into the bank and sign where told? (Probably).
Lifes hard, shes obviously out of her depth and a lot of the people who bought are f***ed, hard lessons all round.
A statement from the banks could read…“We look forward to the day when us banks can move people from variable rates to fixed rates when it suits us.”
Populist muppet.
Linky-link?
Again people looking for an each way bet. With no downside consequences to their financial deciaions. Would they in tern be preapred to pay extar to the bank if prevailing rate went above their agreed fixed rate -of course not.
Agreed
Not really relevant once you have already taken out a mortgage and owe a fixed amount of money
Largely by the government.
Same as they always did. The attitude out there that ‘we’ the taxpayer now own they banks, and that they should now facilitate the ordinary man in the street, is hugely flawed. Now more than ever the bank needs to be ruthless. It was loose lending practice that got us into this mess in the first instance. If they bank allows people to switch without penalty, they forego that income. As an ‘owner’ of the bank, I want to see a return on investment, not giving away discounts and loose lending because Joe average wants a loan but has no income or a poor credit history.
Oh sweet I’d like my deposit account moved to a 10% rate please. I’m worth it chaps.
I would also like the loss in pension fund reinstated please
I just don’t get this at all- I feel sorry for the people who volutarily decided to go fixed in the hope that they would be laughing at those eijits who went variable, but it was their choice.
Is this not akin to asking for the money you spent on the 3.15 at Fairyhouse back as it did not win?
I wonder could I have the breakage penalty back that I paid a few months ago when rates started to come down? Ok, so it has paid for itself in the meantime but this call (made by others including Willie O’Dea i think) is as jcsmith said, populist muppetry.
Acknowledge Personal responsibility.
Use your vote.
So, it’s either the third world war or letting people out of fixed rate mortgages?
There’s nothing stopping people changing from fixed to variable as it stands, it just costs money.
This is just some cheap populism that cannot be backed up as it would further sink the banks…
If it comes through, all it means is that banks will stop offering fixed rates because there would be no incentive for them to do so.
While this might seem like a good idea now, if interest rates shoot back up in 2-3 years time, it will be a disaster. People who can see the rates going up will not be able to do anything about it.
So if this does go through it is yet another short term victory in exchange for long term pain.
But when rates go up can’t we just force the banks to allow us all to switch to ultra low fixed rates. We are entitled after all. 
How about the people on SVRs agree to have their rate bumped up a little to counteract the lowering of rates for those that are fixed rates. This might give an indication of the solidarity that these guys have for one another, obviously, if rates shoot up then the fixed raters will be subsidising the SVRs. 
Harkin has an election coming up in two months and has Declan Ganley breathing down her neck , nuff said really 
It is not the duty of the state to bail people out of their gambling debts which is all the fixed vs variable argument amounts to .
The thornier issue of dealing with ultra long mortgages lurks on the horizon somewhere , it will have to be tackled AFTER we ban mortgages over 25 or max 30 years and ban IO mortgages on PPRs outright .
Then we will have to look at something for those on 30 year plus / 30 year plus IO mortgages .
First we must wait until we are near the bottom and then see if the bad bank has a few shekels left to underwrite a surrender and regrant scheme . If you are on a repayment mortgage of 25 years or less already then nothing can or should be done for you .
If you also bought some Bulgarian tat then tough titty .
OK, I give up, I’ve argued against this nonsense, but it’s obvious that the populist brainless dolts running this godforsaken island are eventually going to screw this up, so get on with it.
Now, can I just suggest one tiny amendment to the legislation.
Anyone who avails of the get out clause should be charged a “untrustworthy contract breaker” premium. So, your rate will fluctuate along with ECB rates (as you seem to want) but as an untrustworthy person you’ll be hit with an additional 5% levy on your new interest rate.
Simples.
-Rd
And it must be entered on your property title in the Land Registry for the duration of your mortgage in case you try it again
The problem is when Ireland becomes an unreliable place to do business we call get charged an “untrustworthy contract breaker” premium in the form of investment going elsewhere and higher borrowing rates for the government/banks.
Very simple, when there isn’t a once in a lifetime, pan-global economic doomsday going on, with all developed economies in deep recession, contracts get enforced. When there is a once in a lifetime, pan-global economic doomsday going on, with all developed economies in deep recession, you lighten up a little.
Are you concerned that people will be unable to spot the difference?
This depression is a Gordian Knot. The rigid religious enforcement of human cultural constructs called “contracts” is the problem. Time to put the over-zealous application of contracts to the sword.
Like almost every other human construct, contracts are a good thing in moderation. But treating them as a law of physics in a situation like this is immoderate to the point of suicide.