UK bailiffs to given extra powers to "kick down doors". Could it happen in Ireland?

Run_to_da_hills

Under new powers introduced by the current UK Government your home will no longer be immune from being entered by bailiffs, with new powers given to "private contractors" to remove debtors who prevent belongings being seized. ("Private Contractors", want to be cops, bouncers, thugs and ex cons :eek: )

Under English law the home was always protected from bailiffs but under new laws allowable under legislation already passed by Parliament but not yet enacted, bailiffs would be given the right to restrain or pin down householders.

Debt collectors are projecting a huge increase in business in 2009 as tens of thousands of people experience financial problems during the forthcoming recession.

The UK Council of Mortgage Lenders has forecast that 75,000 homes will be repossessed next year and hundreds of thousands of people are expected to be pursued for unpaid debts.

Currently the law provides that bailiffs can break into people's homes when the owner is suspected of being inside, but this may be altered.

The UK Government insists that any new powers would be overseen by an industry watchdog. Bailiffs would also be barred from searching people's pockets or forcibly removing jewelry.

The UK Government insists that any new powers would be overseen by an industry watchdog. Bailiffs would also be barred from searching people's pockets or forcibly removing jewellery. However, welfare charities yesterday attacked the plans.

The Isish Government shouldn't dare even think of allowing this considering the abount of cash that was handed out by the banks during the boom years un checked by the financial regulator IE 100% loans etc.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5375668.ece

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

IT's a bit of a touchy subject, although I wouldn't like to be man handled like that, if you get a loan and put collateral down, then why should the contract not be followed through by the other party?

It's a bit harsh, but it's what happens when people live out of their means

keefg

I think this is way over the top.

Bailiffs have enough powers as it is and all they need to do is call the local police to back them up if they are blocked entry into a premises.

I think this is a much better way to deal with things because as the op says, there are too many goon & thugs involved in this game and it will soon become a mess when courts try to judge on claims from people looking for compo because of "unnecessary force" used by bailiffs.

Run_to_da_hills

Jamal Narrow Drop wrote: »

IT's a bit of a touchy subject, although I wouldn't like to be man handled like that, if you get a loan and put collateral down, then why should the contract not be followed through by the other party?

It's a bit harsh, but it's what happens when people live out of their means

Where do they draw the line? Could they eventually allow these guys kick down your door over an unpaid toll, speeding or parking fine?

keefg

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Where do they draw the line? Could they eventually be allowed kick your door down over an unpayed toll or parking finel?

Good point, if this does happen I can see a lot more people defending their home & property from these goons.....and where will that lead? Armed bailiffs???

It's a nasty spiral.

stovelid

keefg wrote: »

Good point, if this does happen I can see a lot more people defending their home & property from these goons.....and where will that lead? Armed bailiffs???

It's a nasty spiral.

Tanks, boiling oil and moats around disputed properties.

Awesome.

I'm going to default on my mortgage right this minute.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Where do they draw the line? Could they eventually allow these guys kick down your door over an unpaid toll, speeding or parking fine?

Now you're talking crap...

What you guys don't seem to understand is that the person in question has taken out a loan, with a bank or other, cannot pay back the loan which they used to buy the house or car and that is being reposessed by the bank in order to repay the loan.

I am sure this is not done after the first payment is lost.

The terms and conditions are set out prior to the person getting any loan. While I don't agree with chucking somebody out on the streets, I also don't agree with taking out loans with no intention of paying for them, the said loans then get wrote off as bad debts, a few years down the line the banks have so much bad debt that they call on the government to help, the government then go to all the taxpayers of the country and take money for their wages in order to keep the banks stable and keep the economy afloat... Oh look, it's a global economic crisis.

Tell me who's right now?

Another thing. Can somebody link or come up with some hard evidence of courts hiring "goons and thugs" to carry out this job? Highly doubtful.

TwoShedsJackson

Ahhh it's a Christmas POLICE STATE thread from rtdh!!!

311

Repossessing devalues everything ,Imagine how much the banks loose when people can't remortgage their house /negative equity, people who are otherwise fine with the banks.

trout

I prefer my CT threads in CT ... lightly dusted with nutmeg and cinnamon.

daveharnett

Given that many of the founders of our country would have advocated the tarring and feathering of overzealous bailiffs, I can't see such measures being implemented here in a hurry.

phantom_lord

hopefully. poor people need to pay their debts imo.

Dave!

I hope it does happen. I hope they kick down all our doors and fit us with electronic tracker chips, and take our pictures and issue us with ID cards and then go off to their illuminati meeting to listen to our phone conversations.

loobylou

Jamal Narrow Drop wrote: »

Now you're talking crap...
.

No he's not. If you ever watched The Bailiffs programme on TV you would see that probably most of the calls they make are for unpaid parking fines. The local councils in the UK hire private bailiffs to collect outstanding fines and taxes.

GAAman

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The Isish Government shouldn't dare even think of allowing this

Fúck the Isish, man what about us Irish?!!!! :P:D

Run_to_da_hills

Jamal Narrow Drop wrote: »

Now you're talking crap....

I am NOT talking crap. Debt collectors are private contractors hired by customers to collect monies owed to them from third parties. These would include financial institutes, private customers or government agencies.

The customer can work on a no fee no foal basis or the debt collecting firm can buy the "Debt" from the customer at a considerably reduced rate giving the baliff a more an incentive to chase after the cash.

Jamal Narrow Drop wrote: »

What you guys don't seem to understand is that the person in question has taken out a loan, with a bank or other, cannot pay back the loan which they used to buy the house or car and that is being repossessed by the bank in order to repay the loan.

Many have taken out loans from unregulated greedy financial institutes that shouldn't have been allowed to hand out loans in the 1st place.

Jamal Narrow Drop wrote: »

The terms and conditions are set out prior to the person getting any loan. While I don't agree with chucking somebody out on the streets, I also don't agree with taking out loans with no intention of paying for them,

Not everyone had the intention of loan default when they signed on the dotted line, many have been laid off work and you will see a lot more of this.

Jamal Narrow Drop wrote: »

Another thing. Can somebody link or come up with some hard evidence of courts hiring "goons and thugs" to carry out this job? Highly doubtful.

You are not exactly going to get Mr Nice guy taking on this job. These same guys will probably be licensed by the UK Government to carry Tazer guns and pepper spray for "self defense".

gline

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The Isish Government shouldn't dare even think of allowing this considering the abount of cash that was handed out by the banks during the boom years un checked by the financial regulator IE 100% loans etc.

Why wouldnt they? lol
If its passed in UK, there is a high chance it will happen here, a lot of places we get loans from here is run by UK companies, even some of the debt collection places are too.
As recession gets worse companies gotta pull in as much cash as possible, why not do this by reclaiming what "technically" is rightfully theirs if you put it up as collateral.

Darragh29

Our own private security industry was regulated over the last few years and you can still see the scum of the earth standing at pub doors now, so regulation hasn't had much of a positive effect in this country. My own local has a gimp on the door who was charged with and convicted of assaulting a patron a few years back.

All this proposed legislation will do is up the ante when it comes to dealing with bailiffs. If it ever came in over here, on the back of the banks being baled out, we'd see riots on the streets along the lines of what is happening in Athens. I'd be the first out on the street if they even tried it...

In any event, this would not be possible in Ireland due to our constitution stating:

Article 40.5. The dwelling of every citizen is inviolable and shall not be forcibly entered save in accordance with law.

I don't ever see a situation arising where the state could provide for bailiffs kicking down your door unless it was on foot of a court order...

tony 2 tone

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

I am NOT talking crap.

Am I the only one who imagines RTDH stamping his feet while saying that?

Run_to_da_hills

gline wrote: »

Why wouldn't they? lol
If its passed in UK, there is a high chance it will happen here, a lot of places we get loans from here is run by UK companies, even some of the debt collection places are too..

Chalk it down and it will spread right across the European superstate.

They will be kicking doors down left right and center for offenses carried out on foreign soil. It will be like something out of Charles Dickens. :eek:

AckwelFoley

Fortunatley we are not subjects of that rancid bitch the queen like gerry adams and co, so we're safe.

Highsider

Just one more step towards the americanisation of Europe

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

I FVCKING HOPE IT CAN HAPPEN!

Fvcking freloaading hippies commersialists!

Toiletroll

snyper wrote: »

Fortunatley we are not subjects of that rancid bitch the queen like gerry adams and co, so we're safe.

Lol - The Canadians thought they were safe.. Now look...

Canada no longer a democracy
The vermin have come out of the woodwork. Now that Canada’s Parliament has been suspended, it should now be obvious to everyone, Canada is not a democracy. It never was. It is a colony that has a single person, the Queen, sitting on top as the head of state.

It’s been run for the benefit of a few business interests. It only pretends to protect the people. Canada has no land base as Ongwehonwe never gave up anything. Turtle Island and its resources belong to us.

On December 4th 2008 Canada’s Parliament was “prorogued”. In other words, the pretense of representative government of the colony was dissolved. Prime Minister, Stephen Harper presented a bogus budget to Parliament. He wanted to cut corporate taxes, slash social, education and health programs. He even wanted to cut off the election subsidies to the parties. It was outrageous. He knew it would be rejected. His party was outnumbered. Next Monday, December 8th, he would have had to face a vote of “non-confidence”, lose and then step down. Then another election would have been called with just about the same result as the last one. Harper would have had another minority government. Canadians have spoken. They don’t him to have too much power.

The other parties, the Liberals, New Democratic and Bloc Quebec, decided to form a coalition, which was legal according to their colonial structure. It made sense. It followed Canadian cultural precedent. It has to have been anticipated by Harper and whoever pulls his strings.

What was the real plan? The Governor General of Canada, Michaele Jean, had been sent to Europe to be near whoever pulls the strings of her boss, Queen Elizabeth. The Governor General was called back “suddenly” to fulfill this colonial metaphor about being a single head of state, the “maharajah” who reigns over her subjects in Canada. Harper asked the Governor General to discontinue Parliament for eight weeks [or more].

The Prime Minister can indefinitely extend his term of office if he can create the “need” for it. It was a measure meant to take care of emergencies – like war. It was not meant to allow a prime minister to assume dictatorial power, or to do an end run around the discussions that should take place when people living in widely separate places with different needs have to work together. Canada’s chaotic state is a sign that differences are coming out and their system cannot deal with it.

During this time Harper does either as he’s told or as he pleases according to the secret clique that’s pushing him. In the meantime, Harper has set up meetings across Canada to rile up the people into a frenzy of anger, pitting everybody against each other. His remarks about the people in Quebec have been particularly offensive and meant to start fights. Is he trying to break up Canada? Or is he just trying to create a “pretext” for martial law? Is it a coincidence that the military conducted exercises to prepare for this eventuality just two weeks ago? Why have there been so many problems lately with the police who are freely killing, shooting and assaulting innocent people? This has been happening everywhere involving city police, provincial police, RCMP, CBSA and CSIS [secret service]. Are they trying to normalize violence?

It’s been called an “economic crisis”. Then what’s the excuse for setting up a totalitarian regime? Unless the time has come for someone to cash in! Should Harper and his “counsel of foreign advisors” decide that the situation has gotten “out of hand”, he could maintain martial law indefinitely. This would give him time to bring everybody and everything under control. His backers can then “take the money and run”.

As it stands Harper can be sent around the world to make deals to sell off our resources, and then pocket the money. Who can stop him? It’s time for people to do some serious thinking about the real meaning of “democracy”. There has to be some real consultation with the people, which he doesn’t want.

It is totally absurd that someone in England can rule Onowaregeh, Turtle Island, through their nominee, the “prime minister”. Equality failed for the colonists because in their hierarchical system they want a “prime” minister, governor general, queen or a Don to sit on top and dictate to everybody. In the beginning the colonists looked at our Great Law constitution and tried to create a model with some of the principles of equality and everyone having a voice. It did not work because of their refusing to create a balance of power.

The colonizers have no choice but to see the land our way if they want to save themselves. Today there is no caretaking as access to our resources is being dictated by outsiders who represent the colonizers, who want to dig out everything and cart it away, leaving us to cope with the toxic waste. Colonizers will not find balance as long as they have imperial thinking that uses a single person as “head of state” or a CEO to run the corporation.

The megalomaniacs think they can control the world and do anything they please with impunity. It’s based on mathematical formulas where only a few people are in control and get the benefits. The psychotics separate themselves from the people and the natural environment. This cannibalistic structure is being shaken.

It is supposedly the international position that everyone is a custodian of the land. What is the reality? The whole economy of Canada and the U.S. has been based on greed and expansion for the business viability for a few. New technology pushes this idea along. In the long run this can’t work because we are not looking after our mother as one earth where we all have to stay rooted. So it’s coming to an end. We have lots of challenges. We have to learn how to achieve balance and a way of life that respects us, our land and everything on it. The bosses of the colonizers must be forced to let go of their greed. Is this possible?

As it looks, the Queen and the oligarchs have no further use for their colonists here in their present state. They used their natural energies and labor to build something false for themselves. They controlled their minds. In fact, they enslaved them and took all the products for themselves. Now they are taking them to a new level of bondage. Canada has expired as they thought they knew it. We Ongwehonwe were spared because we always resisted. So all they got from us was our resources. We still have our minds and our basic relations with the land and with each other.

Stephen Harper can do whatever he pleases because he is being protected by?- the “mob”? It’s obvious he does not care about the decaying infrastructure or crumbling programs that are falling apart. They were always meant to be short term until they finished taking what they wanted. The squabbling colonists and their puppeteers have to get off our backs. They have to go back to the original relationship with us as the owners of the land and the colonizers as our “visitors”.

The North American Union NAU is the next totalitarian step. The oligarchs are going to amalgamate the land of the Indigenous people of the colonial entities of Mexico, U.S. and Canada. They want a free flow of commerce to benefit a few capitalists. They want to tighten their grip on the people and get rid of human rights. Everybody has to resist this potential slavery. We demand that they leave their destructive and grasping schemes behind and move toward a proper and legal relationship with us.

To save yourselves, Canadians, you have to take on our basic principles of equality, everybody having a voice, taking care of the land, living peacefully and respecting us and each other.

Story originally featured on Canadian Content on Monday December 8, 2008

URL="http://www.canadiancontent.net/commtr/canada-longer-democracy_935.html"]source[/URL

gline

Darragh29 wrote: »

Our own private security industry was regulated over the last few years and you can still see the scum of the earth standing at pub doors now, so regulation hasn't had much of a positive effect in this country. My own local has a gimp on the door who was charged with and convicted of assaulting a patron a few years back.

All this proposed legislation will do is up the ante when it comes to dealing with bailiffs. If it ever came in over here, on the back of the banks being baled out, we'd see riots on the streets along the lines of what is happening in Athens. I'd be the first out on the street if they even tried it...

In any event, this would not be possible in Ireland due to our constitution stating:

Article 40.5. The dwelling of every citizen is inviolable and shall not be forcibly entered save in accordance with law.

I don't ever see a situation arising where the state could provide for bailiffs kicking down your door unless it was on foot of a court order...

can the constitution not be changed? or "bent"
Im sure they will think of some loophole to get the money or goods back of borrowers that cant pay

Capt'n Midnight

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Where do they draw the line? Could they eventually allow these guys kick down your door over an unpaid toll, speeding or parking fine?

Don't forget how quickly the €2 M50 toll goes up to €146

If they can already call the police then we don't need to give them extra powers.

Who is responsible for paying for fixing the door on the same day ?

Does anyone know the maximum legal interest rate in this country ?
if could you please post it , and then everyone will see just how scary the prospect of letting the same sort of people kick in your door and sell off stuff at whatever price they want to :mad:

gline

one thing i dont get.
If baliffs have permission in UK to break your door down to get money/possesions off you, do you not have legal right also to "defend" your home?

Run_to_da_hills

gline wrote: »

one thing i dont get.
If baliffs have permission in UK to break your door down to get money/possesions off you, do you not have legal right also to "defend" your home?

They would try to sue you if they got injured in the process of gaining entry or if you tried to defend yourself in this country.

Highsider wrote: »

Just one more step towards the Americanization of Europe

It wouldn't happen in America unless Obama removes the right to the 2nd ammendment to bear arms. This is more like something synonymous with the storm troopers of Nazi Germany.

Darragh29 wrote: »

In any event, this would not be possible in Ireland due to our constitution stating:

Article 40.5. The dwelling of every citizen is inviolable and shall not be forcibly entered save in accordance with law.

I don't ever see a situation arising where the state could provide for bailiffs kicking down your door unless it was on foot of a court order...

You may be yet surprised, article 40.5 may not hold water if Lisbon 2 gets pushed through. :eek:

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

loobylou wrote: »

No he's not. If you ever watched The Bailiffs programme on TV you would see that probably most of the calls they make are for unpaid parking fines. The local councils in the UK hire private bailiffs to collect outstanding fines and taxes.

LOL...

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Not everyone had the intention of loan default when they signed on the dotted line, many have been laid off work and you will see a lot more of this.
You are not exactly going to get Mr Nice guy taking on this job. These same guys will probably be licensed by the UK Government to carry Tazer guns and pepper spray for "self defense".

Probably...

People still need to pay up... hiding in their homes is no escape.

There are payment protection plans there for cases where customers lose their income.

The customer should no better than go to a dodgy company for a loan, their own fault in my opinion.

Toiletroll

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

They would try to sue you if they got injured in the process of gaining entry or if you tried to defend yourself in this country.

It wouldn't happen in America unless Obama removes the right to the 2nd ammendment to bear arms. This is more like something synonymous with the storm troopers of Nazi Germany.
You may be yet surprised, article 40.5 may not hold water if Lisbon 2 gets pushed through. :eek:

Wouldnt be a good thing to loose at all! :mad:

Opens other doors............. Non debt related tbh on the bigger picture

dotsman

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

You may be yet surprised, article 40.5 may not hold water if Lisbon 2 gets pushed through. :eek:

Can you please point to the specific text of the Lisbon Treaty which would override Article 40.5? Otherwise, I would kindly ask you to withdraw that remark. We've had far too much Bull$hit rumours regarding Lisbon already.


With regards Article 40.5, it wouldn't apply in this case as it clearly states "save in accordance with law". The very topic of this discussion is that the ability to enter a person's home will be legalised (ie - become law).

Personally, I'm for it in theory. I am a firm believer that one should fulfill their contractual duties and repay their debts where at all possible.

However, I would have concerns over the practicality of such actions. Who would regulate it? Exactly what rights would the bailiff have? Exactly what rights would the bad debtor have? I could see a lot of complaints arising from this (ie "The bailiff needlessly damaged the property" or one side accusing the other of assault - as I would imagine that these actions are likely to cause tempers to flare on both sides).

PeakOutput

pay up or lose out

if they dont pay back their loans then there is someone else somewhere suffering because of it be it a share holder or an emplyoee who has to be laid off because they are not making enough money

in theory this dosnt seem like a problem to me but obviously the devil is in the details

Tar.Aldarion

Luckily we'll all be dead due to RFID tags byt the time this happens anyway.

gline

gline wrote: »

one thing i dont get.
If baliffs have permission in UK to break your door down to get money/possesions off you, do you not have legal right also to "defend" your home?

you mean the banks home

BigUnit

PeakOutput wrote: »

pay up or lose out

if they dont pay back their loans then there is someone else somewhere suffering because of it be it a share holder or an emplyoee who has to be laid off because they are not making enough money

Very thoughtful, indeed. Wait until they come knockin' on your front dur.

Toiletroll

BigUnit wrote: »

Very thoughtful, indeed. Wait until they come knockin' on your front dur.

I agree. He ate the farts

Boston

Jamal Narrow Drop wrote: »

Now you're talking crap...
What you guys don't seem to understand is that the person in question has taken out a loan, with a bank or other, cannot pay back the loan which they used to buy the house or car and that is being reposessed by the bank in order to repay the loan.

I am sure this is not done after the first payment is lost.

No, you're the one talking crap... You can get referred to the ballifs for many reasons include non-payment of bills. A direct debit goes through too early and before you know it you'll get a letter from a debt collecting agent. There are numerous examples of this happening with the likes of NTL and Smart Telecom.

Run_to_da_hills

dotsman wrote: »

Can you please point to the specific text of the Lisbon Treaty which would override Article 40.5? Otherwise, I would kindly ask you to withdraw that remark. We've had far too much Bull$hit rumours regarding Lisbon already.


With regards Article 40.5, it wouldn't apply in this case as it clearly states "save in accordance with law". The very topic of this discussion is that the ability to enter a person's home will be legalised (ie - become law).

Here.

Öйú¹€³§Æð¶¨Á¿ Ìî·ìǹ²úÆ·µÄÆð¶¨Á¿¿ÉÉÌÒé¡£¶ÔС³§¶øÑÔ£¬Ã¿¸ö¶¨µ¥µÄ×ܽð¶î±ÈÿÖÖúÆ·µÄÊýÁ¿¸üΪÖØÒ
ª¡£Èô´ïµ½Æð¶¨Á¿£¬¿Í»§¿É¶©¹º²»Í¬ÖÖÀàµÄÌî·ìǹ»ò»õºÅ¡£Ñ¯
¼ÛʱÇë¸æÖª»õºÅºÍÊý
Á¿¡£¶¨»õÊýÁ¿Ð¡ÓÚÆð¶¨
Á¿£¬µ¥¼Û»á¸ü¸ß¡£»¶Ó*´¹Ñ¯¡£¶[/B]¨ÖÆ ÈκÎÌî·ìǹ
ÖÖÀàµÄ²úÆ·¾ù¿É¶¨ÖÆ¡£Èô¿Í»§Ï붨ÖƲ
úÆ·£¬Ç뽫ËùÐè²
úÆ·µÄÕÕƬÒÔ .jpg µÄ¸ñʽ·¢ ×ÓÓʼþÖÁÎÒ˾¡£ÈôÎÒ˾Í
øÒ³ÉÐÎ޴˲úÆ·£¬ÎÒ˾Ҳ¿ÉÕÒµ½¸Ã²úÆ·²¢¹©»õ¡£

Stick with the Devil you know (Irish Constitution) than the Devil you don't know.. (EU Constitution)

K-9

dotsman wrote: »

Can you please point to the specific text of the Lisbon Treaty which would override Article 40.5? Otherwise, I would kindly ask you to withdraw that remark. We've had far too much Bull$hit rumours regarding Lisbon already.


With regards Article 40.5, it wouldn't apply in this case as it clearly states "save in accordance with law". The very topic of this discussion is that the ability to enter a person's home will be legalised (ie - become law).

Personally, I'm for it in theory. I am a firm believer that one should fulfill their contractual duties and repay their debts where at all possible.

However, I would have concerns over the practicality of such actions. Who would regulate it? Exactly what rights would the bailiff have? Exactly what rights would the bad debtor have? I could see a lot of complaints arising from this (ie "The bailiff needlessly damaged the property" or one side accusing the other of assault - as I would imagine that these actions are likely to cause tempers to flare on both sides).

I was going to reply to him there. Seriously, don't waste your time!

Run_to_da_hills

Seanies32 wrote: »

I was going to reply to him there. Seriously, don't waste your time!

Irish Constitution VS EU Constitution.

http://www.wiseupjournal.com/?p=339

K-9

You are so obsessed with the Conspiracy with the YES Vote, you have missed the REAL Conspiracy, the NO VOTE!

Donald-Duck

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Irish Constitution VS EU Constitution.

http://www.wiseupjournal.com/?p=339

A 9/11 conspiracy website? You just dig yourself deeper holes

Run_to_da_hills

Donald-Duck wrote: »

A 9/11 conspiracy website? You just dig yourself deeper holes

9/11 was "created" by the global powers to help condition an environment based on fear that all countries throughout the globe would eventually submit to "RFID" biometric passports. (EU & Ireland since October 2006). Countries that refuse to comply to these "conditions" are alienated and considered opponents against this so called "War on Terror". :rolleyes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biometric_passport

Re Lisbon, Article 40.3.1 and Article 40.3.2 it dose not take much to figure it out that the EU is trying to pulling the wool over our eyes. We have a watertight Irish Constitution and we should keep it that way.

Donald-Duck

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

9/11 was "created" by the global powers to help condition an environment based on fear that all countries throughout the globe would eventually submit to "RFID" biometric passports. (EU & Ireland since October 2006). Countries that refuse to comply to these "conditions" are alienated and considered opponents against this so called "War on Terror". :rolleyes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biometric_passport

Re Lisbon, Article 40.3.1 and Article 40.3.2 it dose not take much to figure it out that the EU is trying to pulling the wool over our eyes. We have a watertight Irish Constitution and we should keep it that way.

Thats right, I hope santi bought you some nice presents this year

Latchy

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The UK Council of Mortgage Lenders has forecast that 75,000 homes will be repossessed next year and hundreds of thousands of people are expected to be pursued for unpaid debts..

The UK Government insists that any new powers would be overseen by an industry watchdog. Bailiffs would also be barred from searching people's pockets or forcibly removing jewelry.

Industry watchdogs are very good at watching .Bailiffs I can see will have a harder job trying to remove jewelry .

Run_to_da_hills

Donald-Duck wrote: »

Thats right, I hope santi bought you some nice presents this year

I already voiced my opinion on Santa in the CT forum.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055447699

K-9

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

9/11 was "created" by the global powers to help condition an environment based on fear that all countries throughout the globe would eventually submit to "RFID" biometric passports. (EU & Ireland since October 2006). Countries that refuse to comply to these "conditions" are alienated and considered opponents against this so called "War on Terror". :rolleyes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biometric_passport

Re Lisbon, Article 40.3.1 and Article 40.3.2 it dose not take much to figure it out that the EU is trying to pulling the wool over our eyes. We have a watertight Irish Constitution and we should keep it that way.

But this was supposed to happen with Nice!

Run_to_da_hills

Seanies32 wrote: »

But this was supposed to happen with Nice!

But wasn't the old Devil dressed up in new clothes and renamed "Lisbon". :rolleyes:

K-9

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

But wasn't the old Devil dressed up in new clothes and renamed "lisbon". :rolleyes:

Oh, the one were this is a box to tick No?

Rather undermines the CT.

Red Sleeping Beauty

There's "UK" (read: English) mortgage companies that have been giving out mortages fo years knowing that the people wouldn't be able to pay them back ergo they'd end up repossesing the houes.

It's a fucking disgrace, the majority of the people will whinge about someone on benefits or the dole without realising who's the real scroungers and gangsters.

Latchy

Indeed, All those people are going to have to rehoused /live someplace .

They cant all live on the streets