Victor Registered User
#1

Folks, always get independent advice.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2009/1204/1224260044281.html

Parents may lose family home after son fails to repay loans
MARY CAROLAN

A MOTHER of four may lose her Co Dublin home after she transferred it to her son “out of love and affection” in order to raise funds for the family building firm, which later collapsed.

The Educational Building Society (EBS) has sought possession of the house at Bancroft Crescent in Tallaght of Rosaleen Rogers (62) and her husband Patrick over their son’s failure to repay more than €225,000 in loans secured on the house, the High Court heard yesterday.

ACC Bank may also seek to register judgment orders for some €440,000 – obtained against Paul Rogers and his father over debts of their building company, Barnroe Ltd – against the house

Ms Rogers claims she and her husband transferred the family home to Paul in 2002, when it was valued at €350,000, on the basis that it would be returned to them a year later, but that never happened.

In evidence yesterday, Ms Rogers said she was reluctant to put her home “on the line” as it “was all we had” but felt pressurised by her son and husband to agree to the transfer.

Ms Rogers said she later told solicitor Fiona Murray during a 20- minute meeting at her home in May 2002 that she wanted something in writing saying she would get her home back within 12 months. Ms Murray had said that was “a good idea” and had written up a document to that effect, which Ms Rogers said she understood Paul was to sign.

Ms Rogers described as “lies” assertions by Ms Murray that she advised Ms Rogers and her husband against the transfer and to seek independent legal advice.

Paul told her a year later he knew nothing about any document concerning return of the house, Ms Rogers said. She later learned he had failed to make repayments of loans and she had said to him: “Where am I now? I’ve no home.” She later ceased talking to him because there was “no point” – he didn’t want to know and was unwell with bipolar disorder. A house where he lives was the subject of a repossession order, she added.

In proceedings that opened yesterday before Mr Justice Michael Hanna, Ms Rogers was suing her son Paul; Ms Murray, practising as Fiona Murray solicitors, Donore Avenue, South Circular Road, Dublin; and the EBS. She wants either to have the house transferred back to her and her husband or, alternatively, damages.

Paul Rogers has entered no appearance in the case. Ms Murray, who is alleged to have acted for Paul Rogers, his parents and the EBS in matters relating to the house, denies all the claims against her.

Denying any liability, the EBS pleads it, acting in good faith, lent Paul Rogers €190,000 secured on the house after being told he had purchased it for €220,000.

#2

Heard about this on the radio yesterday, really fail to see why it merits national coverage.

5 people have thanked this post
robd Registered User
#3

amacachi said:
Heard about this on the radio yesterday, really fail to see why it merits national coverage.


I have to say I agree.

Look it's a bad thing that anyone is going to loose a home but unfortunately it's warranted in this case. The mother has only herself to blame as she is responsible for her own actions.

You'd hope that at the least the media attention would cause a few people considering such a decision to wise up. People have short memories though.

ztoical Registered User
#4

amacachi said:
Heard about this on the radio yesterday, really fail to see why it merits national coverage.


+ 1 sorry they are going to lose their home but it's their own fault. Honestly reads like the mother is looking for a loop hole to keep the house after the gamble of using it to help the business failed.

Fozzie Bear Registered User
#5

I can understand to a point where the mother is coming from but like others its seems a fairly straight forward case to me. She legally signed away her home and should/will unfortunately loose it as a result. The bank are well within their rights to take it.

If it were any of us and we went to our mother for help she would give us the clothes off her back being a typical mother. I feel angry with her son (and the husband too) as they seem to have taken advantage of the mother. It's harsh that she is going to end up without a home at this stage of her life and all because she just wanted to help her child and undoubtedly did not fully realise what the outcome could be. To be in her 60's and now potentially homeless must be nothing short of an absolute nightmare.

I'd also have massive doubts about the solicitor and what she advised the mother to do. It looks like the solicitor was acting more for the son then the mother and she may have, "forgotten" shall we say, the exact events and advise she gave the mother.......

Zamboni Registered User
#6

I hope she loses the house and get damages from the son and solicitor.

Kipperhell Registered User
#7

ztoical said:
+ 1 sorry they are going to lose their home but it's their own fault. Honestly reads like the mother is looking for a loop hole to keep the house after the gamble of using it to help the business failed.


I feel sorry for anybody in a similar situation but also can't see how she can argue about the loss. I think it will be hard to think that a lawyer didn't warn her or that she was as naive not to think of the possible outcome in the case of non-repayment of any loan by her son while he legally owned the house.

terenc Registered User
#8

Hard to know what shes at up to, it was a family business and surly the family weren't that thick not to know that their home was not at risk if the loan wasn't paid.

ressem Registered User
#9

terenc said:
Hard to know what shes at up to, it was a family business and surly the family weren't that thick not to know that their home was not at risk if the loan wasn't paid.


You'd be surprised. The banks are looking for personal guarantees from directors, in addition to the claims on clubs assets, who are trying to get even small loans for GAA /amateur soccer & rugby clubs. And not all directors are savvy enough to tell the banks to get stuffed.

They just look at the optimistic view, just like all the parents who acted as guarantor for their kids homes.

twanda Registered User
#10

I cannot see why this is even being entertained in the courts?? More taxpayers money being wasted.
OP, the parents already lost the family home when they signed on the dotted line......

Diarmuid Registered User
#11

What a great son!

Senna Registered User
#12

A lot more cases like this will be in the courts soon, parents going guarantor for their kids apartments etc. There will be plenty of parents losing their home place.

In this case, does it sound like the son hasn't made payments since 2002? A lot of these cases up in court now (more so repossessions) are relating to non-payment since well before the bubble burst.

Victor Registered User
#13

Diarmuid said:
What a great son!
If you read the article, he is unwell.

emty Registered User
#15

Victor said:
If you read the article, he is unwell.


If you read the article the mother said he is unwell.That does not mean it is true.
And if it is true,it begs the question of why the mother would have signed the house over in the first place.

Having said all that,I do feel sorry for all concerned.

Want to share your thoughts?

Login here to discuss!