The woman on the late debate last night whose loan was sold to a vulture fund mentioned that her husband retrained in something, wanted to start a business in it, but there was no point as the value of the business would go to the bank. They would now be applying for bankruptcy in 2 weeks time.
The establishment’s policy succeeded in that they prevented mass repossessions which
kept a lid on societal chaos that mass bankruptcies might have caused
That would be Carly Bailey who’s got a lot of airtime this week. She’s vice chair with the Soc Dems and is based in Firhouse, Sth Dub.
On TV3 Monday night with Yates/Cooper she spoke about her mortgage arrears troubles over the years. Lost her house in Cavan and now rents. 1 of her gripes was that she now has nothing to leave to her kids because the bank wouldn’t cut a good enough deal
I know from meeting these people there’s always gaps in their story when you ask the sort of follow up questions that RTE and Irish Times never ask ‘and the refinancing in 2005 that was for?..a Bulgarian ski apartment ah ok’
But that’s beside the point. The right thing to do in 2009 was to destigmatise bankruptcy. Someone responsible should have appeared on TV saying ‘you can only keep your house if you keep up the payments, we’ll let you start from zero easily if you can’t. You won’t be doing both’
Some expenses that landlords face are indeed the Government’s fault, for example the portion of mortgage interest that is not recoverable as a tax expense, uniquely for a business expense and which means that many landlords end up paying tax on a loss. And there is a real point about the property tax. While Mr Kean notes that such a tax exists in every developed property market it is not often the case that the tax is payable wholly by the property owner. Usually the occupants of a house pay the tax (they, after all, are the ones receiving the local services that the tax is supposed to pay for).– Yours, etc,
Of course, the real crisis at present concerns families who are struggling to pay mortgages on their homes. In comparison, landlords do not expect or deserve any particular sympathy for the failure of their speculative investments. But neither do they deserve to be made scapegoats and to be taxed more and more on their ever- increasing losses. – Yours, etc,
When this era in Irish history is researched in years to come, people will look back with some amusement at how landlords who made investments that went wrong were given such a hearing, bailed out in some cases and still left with assets etc, some pocketing rent while paying nothing.And all the while cheered on by most politicians over the airwaves and encouraged by charlatans posing as white knights under the guise of charitable foundations.
obviously, those benefitting are more incentivised to write and skew the consensus; so let’s have a Pin effort to write to the Irish Times. There’s too much sanctimony here lately and not enough “evangelising”, Michael McGrath won’t be reading read this thread
So, if this statement is correct and the Legal and Regulatory protection is not altered ‘one little bit’ this whole ruse is just a method for Hall and friends to finally crystalise their write down now. Before prices are finally in excess of 2007 levels in which case only a truely moronic Irishman would accept they can still be in ‘negative equity’ and a special case over and above every other housebuyer who comes to the market, then and now. Hall and co. must feel time is not on their side now, eventually Paddy will have to wake up.
While McGrath of Fianna Fail, the man who aspires to be the next Minister of Finance is interviewing splendidly by actually campaigning to cost the taxpayer more money by giving the private buyers more leverage in negotiations. If only we had an opposition in this country.
Good article by Dearbhail McDonald in today’s Indo where she references Morgan Kelly on arrears, defaults and the resentment of those trying to get on the ladder/paying their their mortgages pressreader.com/ireland/iris … 9162256518
True. If my telecoms provider, or car loan provider, sent me a poorly written demand for information - I think I’d get the hump too. I’d refer them to the contracts they already signed with me. And if they needed extra information to comply with new legislation I’d expect them to request it in a courteous manner, and to not request info they already have and are too lazy to dig out of their own files.