IPC looks to sue banks and policymakers over collapse

independent.ie/business/iris … 50050.html

I’m going suing my parents for the pocket money they gave me as a kid, I’ve always expected to have money in my pocket since then because of their actions.

These people sicken my s**t, they walked into these same banks looking to increase their wealth by borrowing. They milked it in the sunshine days & now It’s someone else’s fault!

Will the people of this country ever just take responsibility for their own actions & lets us move on.

Probably not.

The people of this country DO take responsibility for their actions. And if bank directors continue to have their way, we’ll be taking responsibility for others’ actions for years to come as well.
This legal move is a step in the right direction to allocating blame for our collapse where it rightly belongs: with the moneylenders.

This blame is not just one sided, the reason being they didnt have to take the money. :unamused:

Did you borrow money to invest in property?

Shocker alert - legal advisers advise that they should take a legal case…

+1… The Banks & Government did not line up each and everyone of us outside these banks to go in and get this money they should not have given us. These mini developers were greedy & made a bad call. In my opinion, they should just have to live with it now and not impose court cases on the state (taxpayers). When the majority of taxpayers walked past these banks in the first place

I agree that people who borrowed have to face up to their debts.
However, cases like this are the only attempt so far to hold people to account for the sorry mess.
Dragging some people through the courts is probably going to be cheaper than a tribunal and might, just might, act as a deterrent to future misbehavior.

As ridiculous as this is on a macro level, it may be beneficial in that a few findings of liability against the banks where illegal practices were used may set a few precedents and establish some rules in the game where there have been none and still are none and help sinificantly to avoid or delay a repeat for the madness of 2006. There are certainly some cases of misselling, illegal collusion, outright fraud, or impropriety and it might be good for a few of then to get a good airing, hopefully with the bank fighting tooth and nail and pushing toward individual employee culpability as well as borrower liability for their actions, that way we get to see the whole farce laid open and some good may come of it.
I think 98% of cases will be baseless, but that 2% could be good to air.

irishexaminer.ie/ireland/cal … 49091.html

Fair enough. But I presume anyone involved in such a case will not be eligible in the future for any form of credit as they are demonstrably too stupid to make decisions about it themselves!!!

I think that those people that were given 100% mortgages and had no assets were definitely recklessly lent to. In any other period in Irelands economic history these people would NOT have been given a loan. The banks lending practices should have been reined in my the government - but the govt. were, as we all know, just as greedy as the bankers and were after all that lovely stamp duty/VAT etc. so they could pay us all off/buy elections.

The only problem is who pays for all of this recklessness if it’s found to be the case.

People, it’s “reckless”…

The government should counterclaim against each and every one of them for taking out stupid loans which they are not paying back, thus causing the banking collapse.

If the State was culpable (by lack of regulation and encouragement) then the State will have to pay.

Oh… eh… wait a minute.


What is?

Who’s on first base?

A shopkeeper in Monaghan who found himself with an empty shopping centre tried that one on and lost.

Very few cases involved a reckless lender browbeating Giuseppi Soap , in most cases Giuseppi asked for it in the manic climate of the day.

We cannot legislate for every variation on stupidity, either before or after the fact. :frowning:

The taxpayer of course, who else 8-

To be fair he was trying to get covered as a “consumer” under the Consumer Legislation for a €30m loan!

If banks don’t have to do any bona fides on the borrowers ability to repay - then what’s the point of them?

As the disgraced banker Mike Soden says, getting Bank of Ireland to €100Bn took 100 year and they went from that to €200Bn in 4 during the bubble and as the bould Bill Black says the guaranteed way to grow your company quickly is through fraud.

So if banks during the bubble were only concerned with quantity and not quality of loan volumes - where’s the culpability?