Wasn’t there some high court judgement that stopped the private schools booting out students for non-payment of fees?
I don’t understand this ruling.
Why would they effectively pay over €11K in rent for just three weeks accommodation? (Unless they were certain of retaining possession.)
Barrister Kevin Pidgeon, who appeared for the so-called vulture fund, told the court that Tanager, following a decision of Judge Jacqueline Linnane in the Circuit Court not to grant the couple a stay, had written to former TC presenter Ms Flood and Mr Ryan telling them it intended to execute its re-possession order.
It’s not 11k for 3 weeks. The Judge told them to make sure they paid the mortgage as it fell due i.e. monthly
Why would they even make that one payment if moving in 3 weeks anyway?
I suspect they will hold up and have the anti-eviction brigade outside like that time in Dalkey a few years ago
My mistake - it’s the monthly - not weekly payment due.
Still wonder why they’d continue to pay it? Are they expecting a complete write-off of ten years arrears? And to be allowed to continue as if nothing happened?
Why wouldn’t everyone do the same?
@HiFi, don’t apply logic to this legal battle.
It would indeed be irrational for this couple to hand over €3K+ as they walked out the door, after failing to pay a single installment towards their mortgage for seven years while they were in the house.
This is a legal battle where the courts are on their side although the law is on the side of the vulture fund I.e. the judges will tie themselves in knots to avoid giving the lenders their legal rights I.e. the collateral. I doubt the judge believes they will pay up but she had to impose that condition.
Either this couple will come back into court, having failed to pay any contribution to their mortgage, and repeat all the same nonsense or they will pay a contribution to the mortgage because they think that this would help them keep the house long term. In neither case will they give up possession quietly
Of course they’ll pay the latest mortgage installment during this 3 week hiatus. It’ll look good for their case and will give the Judge more leeway in giving them another favourable decision when they’re back in again.
Make no mistake about it, these 2 are going nowhere, they’ve won the lotto with this decision
Even the Indo can sense the absurdity here. Which would be worse - a system which worked like this in all cases or a system that only favoured celebrities? (I use the term very loosely, to mean anyone who might get to sit on the Late Late sofa)
The Indo couldn’t bring itself to mention the most famous and wealthy of all our bankrupts, AJF O’Reilly who sold Castlemartin and a magnificent holiday home in Glandore to satisfy his creditors.
Permanent TSB will get €264 million for the debts. The borrowers involved owe the bank a total of €506 million secured on 1932 properties.
Some 1,422 of the loans are secured on private homes while 510 are tied to buy-to-let properties.
The deal cuts the proportion of bad loans on Permanent TSB’s books to 7 per cent from 10 per cent.
High-profile restaurateur Ronan Ryan has said the reason he did not make repayments for several years on his €1.2m mortgage debt was that none were required under an agreement he entered into to sell the home that he shares with his wife, former Miss Ireland Pamela Flood.
He has also claimed he did not receive appropriate advice before he consented to a vulture fund getting possession of the property.
After hearing from both sides, Mr Justice Garrett Simons said he would give judgment on the appeal on October 7.
He continued a stay on Tanager executing the possession order until then. “This is a difficult case. I need time to consider the submissions of both parties,” he said.
Aye, tis a poser all right
At least Sir Anto had the sense to know when to throw in the towel.
And whilst I’m sure it was an easier decision given the wealth of his wife, he could just as easily have used her wealth to obstruct proceedings in the same manner as these ‘celebs’.
Not unless they end up keeping the house with a write off.
But even then, the older I get the more I realise that time really is the most valuable commodity of all.
Living mortgage free for 10 years sounds great, but the problem is they are 10 years older with 10 less years to start afresh.
I know a number of people who hit the wall back in the recession.
The ones that came out of it best are those who handed the keys back to the bank, went to the UK, did 12 months penance and returned free and clear of debt.
The fact that they were able to begin again was only part of the benefit, the biggest advantage was that the threatening bank letters and court cases stopped.
10 years of this level of stress is no joke and will undoubtedly take it’s toll on any individual in that position (not that I’m sympathising with anyone who voluntarily decides this course of action).
Many of my clients couldn’t declare bankruptcy given the implications such action would have on their jobs (accountants/legals etc.). Most wished they could.
Celebrity couples are in the half-penny place. Here’s a couple who are walking away from > €6M. debts to Ulster Bank . And they keep their home although the bank claims it is “beyond their reasonable living accommodation needs”.
I thought the personal insolvency arrangements were only for debts under 3 million Euro. It seems this couple invested in lands for which they couldn’t get planning permission and which I assume are now simply agricultural value .
If courts are this generous to debtors, the vulture funds must be wondering whether they will even collect 10 cents on the euro on the NPLs they bought from NAMA.
We can tell our grandchildren about the days when banks would give Millions of Euro to a retired Garda for gambling and then the politicians stepped in so the banks couldn’t get repaid.
Not one mention explaining the ultimate costs to the proles of this compo culture, and the precedents set for next time. Be they British or Irish taxpayers it is still a waste of scarce economic resources.
Rise of debt write-offs: How hundreds are seeking deals as they battle to save their homes
Another interesting aspect of recent court decisions is that a debtor’s advancing age does not necessarily militate against their PIA being approved.
In the case of Mr McNamara and Ms Lowe a judge dismissed objections by Tanager that they would be 78 and 75 respectively when their new mortgage term ends.
The judge noted there was no retirement age for musical directors or barristers and pointed out that singer Burt Bacharach was in his 90s and had recently performed a series of concerts in Dublin.
In another case an arrangement was approved for a woman who will be 90 by the time her mortgage term ends. She was able to show she could cover the payments from her pension.
The judge knows very well that many barristers can struggle to eek out a living even during the money years