Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 493 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Receiver appointed to Priory Hall development in Dublin
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2013 12:41 pm 
Offline
Property Magnate

Joined: Jan 14, 2009
Posts: 695
buddygunz wrote:
The other apartment owner gets nothing and carries their 200K of negative equity and mortgage repayments.


And quite likely contributes to the inevitable bail out of the lending institution who have been instructed to write off the debt.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Receiver appointed to Priory Hall development in Dublin
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2013 1:32 pm 
Offline
Too Big to Fail
User avatar

Joined: Mar 7, 2012
Posts: 3356
Location: Lovely Leitrim
buddygunz wrote:
So say two people buy an apartmnet in 2007 for 350K
One buys in Priory Hall
Another in some other developement
Come 2011 and both are in negative equity. The priory hall place is potentially worth nothing so say 300K of negative equity. The other apartment owner has 200K of negative equity.
The Priory Hall owner refuses to contribute to their mortgage the past two years whilst they are housed for free by the Council.
They now have all of the debt written off, saving them two years of mortgage repayments and 200K+ of negative equity.
The other apartment owner gets nothing and carries their 200K of negative equity and mortgage repayments.


Welcome to Ireland and its PR politics.

_________________
If Monday was a browser it'd be IE.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Receiver appointed to Priory Hall development in Dublin
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2013 1:37 pm 
Offline
Under CAB Investigation

Joined: May 7, 2009
Posts: 1614
http://www.longfordleader.ie/news/local ... -1-5184808

A resident from Gleann Riada on Newstalk at lunchtime. They should be a special case too.....

_________________
"People are always blaming their circumstances for what they are. I don't believe in circumstances. The people who get on in this world are the people who get up and look for the circumstances they want, and, if they can't find them, make them" (G B Shaw)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Receiver appointed to Priory Hall development in Dublin
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2013 1:46 pm 
Offline
Too Big to Fail
User avatar

Joined: Apr 20, 2009
Posts: 4772
Location: location location
Evil_g wrote:
buddygunz wrote:
The other apartment owner gets nothing and carries their 200K of negative equity and mortgage repayments.


And quite likely contributes to the inevitable bail out of the lending institution who have been instructed to write off the debt.


The other apartment owner has the benefit of 'their' roof over their head and the ability to be able to sell it on in the future, the priory hall residents, for the most part, also contribute to the nations coffers. This is an exceptional, albeit unfortunate, situation, I think we all know it's not an elaborate construct to beat the NE trap. As far as I know the residents were looking to transport their mortgages to other properties, so presumably taking NE with them. I don't begrudge them.....but as I said before, as far as the government are concerned, it's a risky precedent

_________________
I dream of a better tomorrow, a place where chickens can cross roads and not have their motives questioned


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Receiver appointed to Priory Hall development in Dublin
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2013 2:00 pm 
Offline
Under CAB Investigation

Joined: Jun 24, 2010
Posts: 2043
Location: Dublin 12
Homemaker wrote:
Evil_g wrote:
buddygunz wrote:
The other apartment owner gets nothing and carries their 200K of negative equity and mortgage repayments.


And quite likely contributes to the inevitable bail out of the lending institution who have been instructed to write off the debt.


The other apartment owner has the benefit of 'their' roof over their head and the ability to be able to sell it on in the future, the priory hall residents, for the most part, also contribute to the nations coffers. This is an exceptional, albeit unfortunate, situation, I think we all know it's not an elaborate construct to beat the NE trap. As far as I know the residents were looking to transport their mortgages to other properties, so presumably taking NE with them. I don't begrudge them.....but as I said before, as far as the government are concerned, it's a risky precedent

+1 Homemaker.
This is not about NE - which most of the Priory Hall folk would probably be in had the place been built anyway right.
If the boom had kept booming, but the true state of their dwellings been sussed, their apartments would be still worth nothing.
This is 'guilt money' from a state that has plenty regulations, plus fat fees from applications to regulators - but no actual regulation - pure and simple.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Receiver appointed to Priory Hall development in Dublin
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2013 2:26 pm 
Online
Nationalised
User avatar

Joined: Apr 1, 2010
Posts: 10820
Kids playing marbles in Gleann Riada ...


_________________
"Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future" – Niels Bohr


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Receiver appointed to Priory Hall development in Dublin
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2013 5:08 pm 
Offline
Nationalised
User avatar

Joined: Jan 4, 2013
Posts: 17351
Location: To the right of the decimal place
So the government is on the hook for

1) The entire mortgage amount of every owner
2) The cost of giving the residents new mortgages (even if they wouldn't now qualify)
3) The cost of refurbing the block

Cheapest apartment bailout in the world!

_________________
— Try, fail, understand, win. —


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Receiver appointed to Priory Hall development in Dublin
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2013 5:14 pm 
Offline
Too Big to Fail
User avatar

Joined: Mar 7, 2012
Posts: 3356
Location: Lovely Leitrim
Mantissa wrote:
So the government is on the hook for

1) The entire mortgage amount of every owner
2) The cost of giving the residents new mortgages (even if they wouldn't now qualify)
3) The cost of refurbing the block

Cheapest apartment bailout in the world!


4) Cost of providing security on existing site?

_________________
If Monday was a browser it'd be IE.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Receiver appointed to Priory Hall development in Dublin
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2013 5:18 pm 
Offline
Too Big to Fail

Joined: Jan 12, 2008
Posts: 4081
Location: California
Mantissa wrote:
So the government is on the hook for

1) The entire mortgage amount of every owner
2) The cost of giving the residents new mortgages (even if they wouldn't now qualify)
3) The cost of refurbing the block

Cheapest apartment bailout in the world!


Im not totally u0 to speed on Priory Hall but from what I understand some very fundamental building codes were ignored entirely. The state is the body responsible for regulation and enforcement. The architect/builder is responsible for execution. So ultimately the state failed in its task of ensuring that developments come up to the standard required and finds itself on the hook. It's not disimilar to a case in which the police beat the shite out of someone for no good reason and the state is sued by the victim. Of course there should be consequences for the cops involved, as there should for the architect. But the states responsibility is clear. This principle is evident no matter what area of the property catastrophe one examines. The banks should have been regulated properly, the CB should have had a better understanding of what was going on, the economists in the DoF should have known enough to avoid an asset bubble...etc. That they didn't leaves the state exposed and responsible.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Receiver appointed to Priory Hall development in Dublin
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2013 5:20 pm 
Offline
Planning Tribunal Attendee

Joined: Jun 14, 2008
Posts: 1489
Location: ZimbabwEire
NegativeEquity wrote:
Mantissa wrote:
So the government is on the hook for

1) The entire mortgage amount of every owner
2) The cost of giving the residents new mortgages (even if they wouldn't now qualify)
3) The cost of refurbing the block

Cheapest apartment bailout in the world!


4) Cost of providing security on existing site?


Reminds me of this...

Image

_________________
"In a nation ruled by swine, all pigs are upwardly mobile—and the rest of us are fucked until we can put our acts together: not necessarily to win, but mainly to keep from losing completely. We owe that to ourselves and our crippled self-image as something better than a nation of panicked sheep."
—Hunter S Thompson-The Great Shark Hunt, 1979


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Receiver appointed to Priory Hall development in Dublin
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2013 5:57 pm 
Offline
Under CAB Investigation

Joined: Jan 25, 2007
Posts: 1806
ditch dweller wrote:
[
Im not totally u0 to speed on Priory Hall but from what I understand some very fundamental building codes were ignored entirely. The state is the body responsible for regulation and enforcement. The architect/builder is responsible for execution. So ultimately the state failed in its task of ensuring that developments come up to the standard required and finds itself on the hook. It's not disimilar to a case in which the police beat the shite out of someone for no good reason and the state is sued by the victim. Of course there should be consequences for the cops involved, as there should for the architect. But the states responsibility is clear.

Actually the state has no responsibility.

They did not and sill do not have responsibility. They designed the system specifically to ensure that was the case.
The architect here also had no responsibility - a moral duty perhaps but no legal responsibility. The architect merely gave a worthless piece of paper when asked for a worthless piece of paper- that is what he was asked for and that is what satisfied the purchaser's solicitor and the bank who would be loaning to the purchaser. The system allowed for one single person to be responsible for all of this: tom mcfeeley's construction company. The system did what it was meant to do however- protect the state from liability.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Receiver appointed to Priory Hall development in Dublin
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2013 8:23 pm 
Offline
Of Systemic Importance

Joined: Aug 4, 2007
Posts: 5294
Location: Ahernistan
superman wrote:
ditch dweller wrote:
[
Im not totally u0 to speed on Priory Hall but from what I understand some very fundamental building codes were ignored entirely. The state is the body responsible for regulation and enforcement. The architect/builder is responsible for execution. So ultimately the state failed in its task of ensuring that developments come up to the standard required and finds itself on the hook. It's not disimilar to a case in which the police beat the shite out of someone for no good reason and the state is sued by the victim. Of course there should be consequences for the cops involved, as there should for the architect. But the states responsibility is clear.

Actually the state has no responsibility.

They did not and sill do not have responsibility. They designed the system specifically to ensure that was the case.
The architect here also had no responsibility - a moral duty perhaps but no legal responsibility. The architect merely gave a worthless piece of paper when asked for a worthless piece of paper- that is what he was asked for and that is what satisfied the purchaser's solicitor and the bank who would be loaning to the purchaser. The system allowed for one single person to be responsible for all of this: tom mcfeeley's construction company. The system did what it was meant to do however- protect the state from liability.



Exactly !

The state isn't responsible for people speeding, they aren't responsible even though they have a Garda Traffic Corp part of whose duties are to catch offenders.

The Offenders are responsible for the offence, that's why their called offenders !

You can argue the toss over whether the Gardai, i.e. the Enforcers could do better, but they are never responsible for offences actually happening.

_________________
"Mr Kelly said Ireland’s “reputational capital” had been damaged by “chancers” such as ex-Anglo Irish Bank chairman Seán FitzPatrick, who had been abetted by “buffoons” such as former financial regulator Patrick Neary, Minister for Finance Brian Lenihan and the Taoiseach." - Irish Times 13th Jan 2009

"If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to be a horrible warning." (Catherine Aird)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Receiver appointed to Priory Hall development in Dublin
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2013 8:32 pm 
Offline
IMF'd

Joined: Sep 13, 2007
Posts: 31841
Location: Tullamore
fishfoodie wrote:
The state isn't responsible for people speeding, they aren't responsible even though they have a Garda Traffic Corp part of whose duties are to catch offenders.

The Offenders are responsible for the offence, that's why their called offenders !

You can argue the toss over whether the Gardai, i.e. the Enforcers could do better, but they are never responsible for offences actually happening.

I'm not sure it's analagous.

The state outlaws speeding, setting speeding limits and enforces that with the Gardai and the courts.

The state outlaws living in fire traps and enforces building regs with, er, um, gee... looks like it doesn't. In a way, it's a corollary of why no bankers have gone to jail. Light touch = non-existent. It is an abrogation of responsibility and, like the bank situation, largely a political construct, so, er, we all get to pay for it...

_________________
"It is impossible to design a system so perfect that no one needs to be good."

So long and thanks for all the fish.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Receiver appointed to Priory Hall development in Dublin
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:04 pm 
Offline
Of Systemic Importance

Joined: Aug 4, 2007
Posts: 5294
Location: Ahernistan
yoganmahew wrote:
fishfoodie wrote:
The state isn't responsible for people speeding, they aren't responsible even though they have a Garda Traffic Corp part of whose duties are to catch offenders.

The Offenders are responsible for the offence, that's why their called offenders !

You can argue the toss over whether the Gardai, i.e. the Enforcers could do better, but they are never responsible for offences actually happening.

I'm not sure it's analagous.

The state outlaws speeding, setting speeding limits and enforces that with the Gardai and the courts.

The state outlaws living in fire traps and enforces building regs with, er, um, gee... looks like it doesn't. In a way, it's a corollary of why no bankers have gone to jail. Light touch = non-existent. It is an abrogation of responsibility and, like the bank situation, largely a political construct, so, er, we all get to pay for it...


Have you ever driven over the speed limit & not been caught YM ?

Of course you have, whose fault was it ? Should we disband the Traffic Corp, should Alan Shatter resign ?

No system of enforcement is perfect, & building inspection is just another example. The CIF had a cunning plan for the Government which obviated the need for recruiting hundreds more building inspectors & instead had Arch & Engineers self-certifying. It turned out to not always be a great idea, but the Blame lies with the people who signed off on this building knowing full well that it was unsafe. Thousands of building were built safely during the boom, & they were self-certified too.

Special cases always make for bad law, & the this is a perfect example.

_________________
"Mr Kelly said Ireland’s “reputational capital” had been damaged by “chancers” such as ex-Anglo Irish Bank chairman Seán FitzPatrick, who had been abetted by “buffoons” such as former financial regulator Patrick Neary, Minister for Finance Brian Lenihan and the Taoiseach." - Irish Times 13th Jan 2009

"If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to be a horrible warning." (Catherine Aird)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Receiver appointed to Priory Hall development in Dublin
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:37 pm 
Offline
Of Systemic Importance

Joined: Jun 9, 2008
Posts: 7098
If the architects and engineers certified something they knew to be incorrect, there'd be a claim against their PI. The certification was so heavily qualified as to make it meaningless. You can't blame them. Are they going to stand up as a lobby and shout "hey Mr. Government, our clients are maybe breaking the law". Would they hell. Back to the planners and regulators.

_________________
“Don't ask the barber if you need a haircut—and don’t ask an academic if what he does is relevant.” Nassim Nicholas Taleb


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 493 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ps200306 and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  

Click for Latest Posts LATEST POSTS Click for Forum List FORUMS   

Follow, Retweet @dailypinster

  

Pyramid Built, Is Better Built!