State intervention on mortgages - Proposal

irishh_bob

those who cannot sell are simply not lowering thier price enough , i myself sold an appartment in budapes in the past twelve months which i originally bought in 2005 , i had to endure loosing tens of thousands of euros on the joint but i realised that i was involved in a dud property market in a dud economy and i just bit the bullett , the end result is i now have a very modest mortgage , i realise ireland is not hungary but the principal is the same regardless of the adress

Tea drinker

helimachoptor wrote: »

You mean like the banks paying for their own mistakes:rolleyes:

They should pay for their mistakes. More should be in jail, along with plenty of politicians and developers. But that's a whole other thread.
I think it must be illegal to transfer their bad debts to me when I had no connection to their private businesses.

Back on topic: it's silly to think that stealing money from me to give to people in negative equity is fair or morally defensible. Some people need to get over themselves and their victim complex. They bought at a price they could afford and should be happy to have a nice house. Others like me had to live in "dead money" accomadation. We all made our choices, it's not like mine didn't cost me money.
We need to accept that NOTHING can be done for these people. We simply cannot afford to bury more vital money in the housing market to relieve people who are largely not in great difficulty. It will take time but the system will correct itslef, this pain is aprt of the correction.
These mortgages are a private contract which has nothing to do with me. I am already considering how to take a legal challenge regarding NAMA/the banks, further exploitation of my finances would see me remove my taxes from the country.

If you feel strongly about these people setup a charity in their name.
But keep your hands out of my pockets. Don't forget that many distressed mortgage holders happily charged rack rent when they could get it, be careful of what cause you pick.

Tea drinker

yoshytoshy wrote: »

lol .. ,

I know of plenty of people who worked very hard to get deposits ,bought houses and work hard to pay for them.
They seen their parents in the family home ,with no mortgage and the freedom to enjoy life.
I very much doubt ,people like this worked hard so they could be wreckless. .

Not a thing wrong with that, but some people got caught in the property bubble, and did pay over the odds. It's unfortunate, and it's not like I don't have sympathy for them.

yoshytoshy wrote: »

Theres been twenty nine suicides related to mortgage debt lately ,have a lol at that.

Right.
Perhaps you could call Bertie Ahern, maybe they were talking down the economy? I think now you are starting to understand why people like Max Keiser refer to some of these banks as Financial terrorists. It's entirely possible more people have died through the banking and property sham than did on Sept 11.

But why stop there? How many will die through our poor heathcare - even worse now as we have to pay for NAMA? This is a real problem.

Look, when people could have done something about this no one wanted to listen. All we had from RTE and a lot of newspapers was property propaganda, and "Doomsayers" were laughed away.
Where are these people now? Will they take any responsibility for these deaths? Will they take any responsibilty for their own debts?

jmayo

69 wrote: »

The State/Taxpayer/Homeowners seems to be bailing out all the big movers in the proerty/banks fiasco everbody except the homeowners who were suckered into taking out massive loans to pay the inflated prices. No before anyone says they didn't have to buy them please think about where they were supposed to live if they didn't. The alternative was to rent a property whose rent was indexed off the high property price anyway so wasn't going to be a cheaper alternative. A bit of a Hobson's choice there.

Anyway what is done is done and high-horse attitudes will not solve anything. What's needed now is a solution going forward not smarty-pants "I told you so" by people who in truth were just lucky not to find themselves in the same situation. Needing a home and buying it just before the bubble took off does not make you a financial wizard so spare us all your false wisdom.

Now I have a proposal for discussion that applies only to principle residences, not investment or rental properties. My idea is that the State sets up an independent valution body that can give a realistic current market value for any home. Then the State takes over any mortgage amount above that value leaving the owner with an effective 100% mortgage on a property worth exactly what is owed. This will end the horror for the many thousands of householders who are in a massive negative equity situation and are suffering wage cuts etc. There would be a clawback clause effective for 10 years that states "Any profit on the sale of the house above the official calculated value at the time of State intervention would be refundable to the State."

This proposal is probably far from perfect but it is better than what the Govt have come up with so far which is precisely feck all.

Opinions on a postcard please.

One question:
where will the money come from, the taxpayers no doubt ?
Will it be the same magical pot that the public sector will get their pensions, increments paid out of ?

You mention that the government will get clawback on any profits made within ten years, what about the losses, who pays for those ?

As I said on another thread where do the bailouts stop.
Last week some people lost a few quid at the bookies, so should they get a little bailout, because I personnally believe that your proposal is equally as ludicrous.

Even if we had the money there is no way in hell people should get bailed out for their decisions.
It sets a very dangerous precedent.

This whole mindset even dates back to FG's stupid proposal of rewarding Eircom investors and taxi plate owners who lost money on their investments.
Sadly ff have taken it a step further and rewarded an entire morally corrupt now insolvent industry, banking.
Whatever about some banks being of systemic importance to the functioning of a normal economy, house ownership is not.

Hagar

It's funny to hear people moaning about losing money on property in Budapest, that's is the sort of property speculation that I have no sympathy for, someone else talking about landlords having difficulty renting, again they are property speculators who won't get my sympathy. My proposal was for ordinary people living in their only property, their home. Do we want to see these people out on the streets? How will that help the economy? How will that help society as a whole?

It would be interesting to see how much the proposal would cost and juxtapose it with the bailouts to the banks also being funded by the taxpayer. It seems that the people who are powerless to stop themselves being fleeced to prop up the banks are venting their bile against their fellow taxpayers who need their help.

ei.sdraob

69 wrote: »

It's funny to hear people moaning about losing money on property in Budapest, that's is the sort of property speculation that I have no sympathy for, someone else talking about landlords having difficulty renting, again they are property speculators who won't get my sympathy. My proposal was for ordinary people living in their only property, their home. Do we want to see these people out on the streets? How will that help the economy? How will that help society as a whole?

It would be interesting to see how much the proposal would cost and juxtapose it with the bailouts to the banks also being funded by the taxpayer. It seems that the people who are powerless to stop themselves being fleeced to prop up the banks are venting their bile against their fellow taxpayers who need their help.

how would they be out on the street?

we have this thing called rent supplement as part of welfare net


worst comes to worst and you loose your home (no one has yet since there's a ban on evictions, and its next to impossible for banks to evict someone out of primary place of residence)
you get the state to pay your rent


your idea completely ignores that if someone does hit the rocks a safety net is in place (despite the country being bankrupt) to help you out

and you wont end up on the street

actually i would be interested in seeing a single example of someone ending up on the streets in this recession due to them not paying their mortgage


you whole idea is based around a large strawman

Hagar

Strawman? Nice term, what exactly does it mean in this context?

Are there thousands of mortgage payers in arrears?
Are homes being repossessed or about to be repossessed?
Are more people reaching the end of their financial rope every month?

Link.

ei.sdraob

69 wrote: »

Strawman? Nice term, what exactly does it mean in this context?

Are there thousands of mortgage payers in arrears?
Are homes being reposessed?
Are more people reaching the end of their financial rope every month?

Link.

you tell me

you started this thread but have not posted a single figure to backup your argument for a bailout

please tell us:

* how much will the taxpayer have to fork out?
* how many mortgages are in arrears?
* how many homes were repod?
* home primary places of residences were repod?
* how many people exactly ended up on a street despite having a good welfare net?


* where will the money come from?

please do indulge us :mad:

next you be telling us (like that crowd on Frontline) to bail your behind out or more developers would commit suicide

Hagar

The money will come from the taxpayer as always. That is obvious. Same as it does to pay for everything from Medical cards to Govt Jets.

I don't have exact figures, how would I have?
The Govt don't seem to want to publicise the scale of the problem but that doesn't mean it's not there.
If you read the last link you would have seen some indication of the way things are going. The Govt forced a 12 month non-repossession moratorium on the lenders. AFAIK that is almost up, what will happen then?

ei.sdraob

69 wrote: »

The money will come from the taxpayer as always.

omg :mad: and you dont see a problem with that?


should Sean F. and the likes be also helped out?
i mean his a "little" behind on his mortgage?
hes a good honest man who never hurt anyone!
no one held a gun to poor Sean and told him to buy a large house :P


where do you draw the line? what about moral hazard??

whats there to prevent people deliberately getting large loans that they cant afford and then milking the system?

whey should welfare and public services be cut to bailout people who made bad mistakes


im sorry but yours is a terrible idea, sure while we at it why dont we give everyone in Ireland a 500 euro bill

Hagar

I did specify that I was only concerned about family homes not second or subsequent properties. The rest can swing in the wind as far as I'm concerned.

KerranJast

69 wrote: »

I did specify that I was only concerned about family homes not second or subsequent properties. The rest can swing in the wind as far as I'm concerned.

Seanie Fitz has a family home. He has debts. Should the taxpayer pay so he can keep that?

Fighting Irish

If i knew i'd get bailed out, i would have bought a house

Hagar

KerranJast wrote: »

Seanie Fitz has a family home. He has debts. Should the taxpayer pay so he can keep that?

I think you will find that the bauld Seanie and the other cute hoors own nothing. My guess is that all their assets were tranferred to family and friends free and clear of all debts a long time ago.

ei.sdraob

69 wrote: »

I think you will find that the bauld Seanie and the other cute hoors own nothing. My guess is that all their assets were tranferred to family and friends free and clear of all debts a long time ago.

his innocent until proven guilty

under your scheme the "cute whoors" like him will also get bailed out


you haven't answered me this yet

how would a family end up on the street in a country where there's a large welfare net and rent supplement

ignoring for a minute that no judge would evict a family from their PPR

Hagar

Married + no children + ex-selfemployed + unpaid mortgage = Fall through the social net.

IrishTonyO

69 wrote: »

Married + no children + ex-selfemployed + unpaid mortgage = Fall through the social net.

Not correct, even if ex-self employed they are entitled to JSA and mortgage interest supplement

ei.sdraob

69 wrote: »

Married + no children + ex-selfemployed + unpaid mortgage = Fall through the social net.

how many people have fallen thru the welfare net in this manner? why would the above not qualify for rent allowance


your proposing wasting billions more euros and cant backup your proposal with any figures?

Hagar

I'm not sure how far the JSA allowance and MI supplement will go towards maintaining any sort of basic living standard and paying a, say, €100,000 mortgage. I don't think it will cover much of it all.

ei.sdraob wrote: »

your proposing wasting billions more euros and cant backup your proposal with any figures?

I've already said I can't quantify the figures but I'd be more than interested to know how you came up with "billions".

Anyway folks it's only a proposal for discussion, if it doesn't fly, big deal, we all enjoyed the debate. Didn't we?

ei.sdraob

69 wrote: »

I'm not sure how far the JSA allowance and MI supplement will go towards maintaining any sort of basic living standard and paying a, say, €100,000 mortgage. I don't think it will cover much of it all.

erm if your evicted (once again no way in hell would a judge rule to evict anyone out of their PPR) you dont have to pay a mortgage as you would be declared bankrupt by a judge


why should anyone pay someone else's mortgage?

anymore

IrishTonyO wrote: »

Not correct, even if ex-self employed they are entitled to JSA and mortgage interest supplement

Fomer self emplyed are means tested and limit is so low that even if you have modest assets you will be rejected , i.e after SW officials have put you through a degradaing investiagtion.

IrishTonyO

anymore wrote: »

Fomer self emplyed are means tested and limit is so low that even if you have modest assets you will be rejected , i.e after SW officials have put you through a degradaing investiagtion.

I am ex-selfemployed. And yes you do have to go to interview, but I didn't find it degrading. The limits are quiet low however if you have other assets beside your family home, then you do not need help with your mortgage, liquidate some of your assets.

ei.sdraob

the country is already helping out property owners thru various schemes

* rent supplement was 511million in 2009

then theres

* mortgage interest relief
* mortgage interest suppliments
* stamp duty exemptions
* section 23
* renewal write offs
* rent a room relief


jebus the list goes on


the state should be cutting its expenditure not increasing it

if institutions stop buying irish bonds (400million a week) then overnight you will find how poor the country really is

Hagar

ei.sdraob wrote: »

* mortgage interest relief Not everyone qualifies
* mortgage interest suppliments Not everyone qualifies
* stamp duty exemptions Not everyone qualifies (not taxing somebody is not exactly the same as giving them cash, they are just being allowed keep their own money)
* section 23 Aimed at Investors / buy to rent
* renewal write offs Aimed at investors?
* rent a room relief Aimed at investors

Please attach no importance to me using bold text, it was handier than multiple quotes.

erm if your evicted (once again no way in hell would a judge rule to evict anyone out of their PPR) you dont have to pay a mortgage as you would be declared bankrupt by a judge

The point was made that there was a social net that would prevent people ending up on the streets, I pointed out it would not be adequate to keep up a mortgage so net or no net you will be out on the street if you fall victim to the current difficulties. It's a bit disingenuous to point out that if you are turfed out you have no mortgage to pay. It's also inaccurate as the debt still stands regardless of the persons living arrangements. In the case of bankruptcy the only way out is to fully discharge the debt, until you do you can never own another asset or have a bank account or credit card.

Judges don't make the laws they just impartially enforce them. Yes they will evict people, they will have no choice. Yes the will grant all the leeway the law allows but in the end the banks will legally get their pound of flesh. Generally though to save themselves the public shame and legal expense people just move their stuff out of the house and drop the keys in the bank/building society letter box when the finally admit defeat.

ei.sdraob

69 wrote: »

Please attach no importance to me using bold text, it was handier than multiple quotes.

The point was made that there was a social net that would prevent people ending up on the streets, I pointed out it would not be adequate to keep up a mortgage so net or no net you will be out on the street if you fall victim to the current difficulties. It's a bit disingenuous to point out that if you are turfed out you have no mortgage to pay. It's also inaccurate as the debt still stands regardless of the persons living arrangements. In the case of bankruptcy the only way out is to fully discharge the debt, until you do you can never own another asset or have a bank account or credit card.

Judges don't make the laws they just impartially enforce them. Yes they will evict people, they will have no choice. Yes the will grant all the leeway the law allows but in the end the banks will legally get their pound of flesh. Generally though to save themselves the public shame and legal expense people just move their stuff out of the house and drop the keys in the bank/building society letter box when the finally admit defeat.

how once again can anyone in this country endup on the street?

get of it

no one held a gun to these peoples heads and said "you must buy a house"

tech77

Tea drinker wrote: »

They should pay for their mistakes. More should be in jail, along with plenty of politicians and developers. But that's a whole other thread.
I think it must be illegal to transfer their bad debts to me when I had no connection to their private businesses.

Back on topic: it's silly to think that stealing money from me to give to people in negative equity is fair or morally defensible. Some people need to get over themselves and their victim complex. They bought at a price they could afford and should be happy to have a nice house. Others like me had to live in "dead money" accomadation. We all made our choices, it's not like mine didn't cost me money.

^This.
What happened to capitalism/the free market and its inherents risks.
What happened to taking personal responsibility for your decisions.
The "systemic importance of the banks" line in the case of NAMA is one thing - but this would be taking the pi$$.

yoshytoshy

ei.sdraob wrote: »

how once again can anyone in this country endup on the street?

get of it

no one held a gun to these peoples heads and said "you must buy a house"

Why are you so angry at mortgage holders ?

I can't understand your logic of providing people with rent allowance ,so as to create a bigger class devide in this country

What happens to all these families as they get older ,they'll need pensions and a place to live aswell.

We should make sure that as many people have houses as possible ,so in thirty years time ,we're not in an even bigger hole.

ei.sdraob

yoshytoshy wrote: »

Why are you so angry at mortgage holders ?

I can't understand your logic of providing people with rent allowance ,so as to create a bigger class devide in this country

What happens to all these families as they get older ,they'll need pensions and a place to live aswell.

We should make sure that as many people have houses as possible ,so in thirty years time ,we're not in an even bigger hole.

sure why dont we just give everyone a free house

yoshytoshy

ei.sdraob wrote: »

sure why dont we just give everyone a free house

Or rent allowance even :pac:

ei.sdraob

yoshytoshy wrote: »

Or rent allowance even :pac:

yes theres this pot of gold just lying around in a field over there, go fetch it like a good lad