Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Whos going to blow the lid..

Options
  • 03-10-2008 10:05am
    #1
    thetyreman
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 451 ✭✭


    I wonder who is going to blow the lid on the banks that are renting back propertys to people who have defalted on there mortgages,who is going to make it public,David macwilliams,Eddie hobbs or someone.Seemingly it is more common than we are led to beleive.
    Someone was saying that there is some lay against a finiancial instution(lender)becomeing the landlord of a property,is this true anybody...


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    CtrlSource
    Registered Users Posts: 825 ✭✭✭CtrlSource


    Renting back the same property to the owner they repossessed from?!


  • Options
    #3
    thetyreman
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 451 ✭✭thetyreman


    CtrlSource wrote: »
    Renting back the same property to the owner they repossessed from?!
    Yea///


  • Options
    #4
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    I thought this was standard, especially where there were children involved.

    What's so shocking about it - the bank gets the property and the person gets to stay in their home.

    Sounds like a very fair and equitable solution for the defaulter to me. Very humanist.

    Even if a bank isn't technically allowed to be a landlord, I'm sure there are tricks which can be used to get around this - such as leasing all of their repossesed properties to an umbrella company, who in turn sublet it back to the original owner.


  • Options
    #5
    CtrlSource
    Registered Users Posts: 825 ✭✭✭CtrlSource


    Bastard banks!


  • Options
    #6
    thetyreman
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 451 ✭✭thetyreman


    seamus wrote: »
    I thought this was standard, especially where there were children involved.

    What's so shocking about it - the bank gets the property and the person gets to stay in their home.

    Sounds like a very fair and equitable solution for the defaulter to me. Very humanist.

    Even if a bank isn't technically allowed to be a landlord, I'm sure there are tricks which can be used to get around this - such as leasing all of their repossesed properties to an umbrella company, who in turn sublet it back to the original owner.
    I didnt sat there was anything wrong with it,but i wouldnt say it was humanist,dont forget the difference between what te mortgage was and the rent thats paid will be added on the mortgage in the end,i dont think they are reposseing as such,but are just comeing to a deal with the owners about payments...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Gillo
    Registered Users Posts: 5,566 ✭✭✭Gillo


    CtrlSource wrote: »
    Bastard banks!

    Would you rather see a family thrown out on the street and made homeless??


  • Options
    #8
    jhegarty
    Registered Users Posts: 6,438 ✭✭✭jhegarty


    wow , banks not kicking children out on the street.... something has to be about this....


    I suggest we ask the banks to kick them all out on Christmas eve....


  • Options
    #9
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    thetyreman wrote: »
    I didnt sat there was anything wrong with it,but i wouldnt say it was humanist,dont forget the difference between what te mortgage was and the rent thats paid will be added on the mortgage in the end,i dont think they are reposseing as such,but are just comeing to a deal with the owners about payments...
    Perhaps. But if the bank are arranging a less punitive repayment schedule for the owners, what's wrong with that?

    You're basically complaining that someone gets to pay less on their mortgage than they had to when they were crippled with debt? What would be the better solution, write off the debt? Doesn't happen I'm afraid.

    In this country it's very difficult, in fact nigh on impossible to run away from your debts. Defaulting on a loan leaves a big black mark on your credit history that's way worse than things like missed repayments and the like. Even if you declare bankruptcy, you won't necessarily get to run away from your debts - the court usually organises a repayment schedule so that most, if not all of your debtors get their money one way or another.

    If the banks are pre-empting this and simply making someone's life a little easier, how is that bad?


  • Options
    #10
    The_Conductor
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 32,279 Mod ✭✭✭✭The_Conductor


    In all fairness we urgently need to revisit Irish bankrupcy laws. Its unfair that commercial and other legal entities can declare bankruptcy and walk away from their debts (or negotiate to payback a fixed amount per Euro owed- like the 75c in the Euro that John F Supple Construction in Cork is attempting to get banks to agree to (front page of today's Examiner)). There is no equity- private individuals should have a commensurate fallback that commercial entities have (as is the case in most other countries). We need reform of bankruptcy law.


Advertisement