Noonan tells IBRC to sell off rest of its loans


#1

Noonan tells IBRC to sell off rest of its loans - -> rte.ie/news/business/2014/04 … brc-loans/


#2

As against extracting value for the taxpayer over time the budget numbers this year will be a little easier.

On the plus side the cost of the Anglo bail-out has fallen.


#3

I wish they’d tell us how much they actually got so far in total. It’s hardly commercially sensitive.


#4

I find it really depressing this continued focus on “cost to the tax payer”. Even at this stage.

This was never the issue to my mind - it was only a window through which we might see the extent of the real misappropriation of wealth going on.

What is “~64 billion total cost to the tax payer” (that is quickly looking like it will only have been a temporary cost)?

Let’s run some rough hypothetical numbers. Ok, Anglo was focused on developers, but let’s look at the bigger picture of what was going on, and looks set to continue unaltered:

— In 2006, there were 114,600 new mortgages issued. Let’s say 60% of them were to FTB’s.

Now, for your typical “starter” house in say Cabra, what is the difference between giving a loan to a young person for 317,000 euro (as they cost at the top of the boom) over 35 years, vs giving them a loan for 140,000 euro (as they cost after the bust) over 20 years, as the typical repayment period accustomed by our parent’s generation?

At 4%, the first loan will cost ~600K over its lifetime. The second loan at the same rate will cost ~200K over its lifetime.

So, how much extra is being extracted in one year’s business from these young FTB’s? Around 68,760 x 400K = ~ 27.5 Billion.

Remember these mortgage contracts are readily securitised, monetised, and what have you.

So, sure, if everyone keeps going on about how we need to pay the precious taxpayer back, there is no real problem there.

But we really have learned not a fucking thing - even on this forum by and large.


#5

Roc,

Just so I’m clear in what you’re saying here. You think it makes no odds to the tax payer or society what the bailout costs as it’s just cash sloshing around in our economy and at the end of the day it’s just a bit of misappropriation?


#6

I think he’s saying that focusing on the past is taking away from focusing on the future. We can’t do anything about the past, and we’re not doing anything about the future.

100% agree with capping mortgage terms to 20 years.


#7

@conork, I’m saying the taxpayer “bail-out” was a poultice applied to treat a certain break-out of a cancer.

As per my post above, I am much more concerned about the theft of the lives of upcoming generations in this country through mortgaging them to the hilt, and twisting that rent-rack for all its worth.

… Brought about by the increasing commoditisation (and engineering) of invested rights over plots of land and property, and peoples’ labour bundled up as mortgage contracts.

… Facilitated by the core gombeenism at the heart of political-economic life in this country.

From the start, the taxpayer “bail-out” was about keeping that cancer alive. Sure, it also kept the patient alive, but I had thought it had focused attention on the under-lying cancer. But seemingly not… In particular, if all taxpayer funds put into the bail-out are paid back in full and with interest, that can only mean one thing - that the cancer is as strong as it ever was.


#8

From twitter

Retweeted by Jill Kerby
l m lynch ‏@lmlynch 58m

@DonnellyStephen Sit-in protest NOW on at KPMG Dublin by IBRC mortgage holders over sale of homeloans to unregulated vulture funds!!!


#9

It was on the radio earlier. These folk ain’t happy they could’nt bid for their own mortgages as it now turns out that those mortgages not taken over by any of the funds are now going to be allowed to bid for individually. So that’s upset them…but too late.

Also on the news earlier was Danske are selling off their property book (or was it repossessed properties) asap as they feel the market in Ireland is ripe for the pucking


#10

Well of course not, you don’t get to bid to buy back your own debts at a discount, the moral hazard should be obvious. Where on earth did this notion come from? And where are these people (many of whom presumably are or are in danger of being in arrears if they’re in NAMA portfolios) supposed to get this money up front???


#11

They’re ordinary mortgages. See Elish O’Hanlon’s article - Stephen Donnelly has been banging the drum on this

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=50546&p=762307&hilit=Stephen+Donnelly#p762307

he could give Drummer a run in the “picking numbers out of my hole” contest


#12

rte.ie/news/business/2014/05 … e-holders/
Ten IBRC mortgage holders who are protesting against their loans being sold are staging a sit-in in liquidator KPMG’s Dublin offices.
The protesters said in a statement that they are representing former Irish Nationwide Building Society mortgage holders who have become embroiled in the IBRC liquidation.


#13

IBRC to repay €13bn debt by Q3 - John Walsh -> irishexaminer.com/business/i … 71363.html


#14

So what is the net effect here?

Is any cash coming back to the exchequer or will it be used to wipe out the balance of what was once was the promissory notes debt of 31bn?