29 property suicides leave State unmoved

Amhran Nua

More grim fallout from the property bubble collapse, taking a toll in human lives this time...

Twenty-nine deaths by suicide can be directly linked to the turmoil in the construction and property sector but dozens more deaths among small investors, homeowners and construction industry workers linked to financial despair have gone unreported.

David Mellon, of the Irish Property Council believes the human misery inflicted by the collapse in the property and construction industry is incalculable and the Government is doing nothing to protect the sanctity of the family home.

He predicted that by the time the economy recovers, hundreds will have taken their own lives because they have been plunged into a financial abyss from which they can see no way out.

"We are talking about people who invested in property, people who earned their livelihood from it in many forms; builders, plasterers, plumbers, developers and large and small investors.

"They are now facing financial disaster, bankruptcy and destitution.there are teachers, gardai, lawyers all caught in the crossfire. They are in a suffocating despair."

He says that the seven-person board of the Irish Property Council had personal knowledge and the names of 29 suicide victims that can be directly attributed to turmoil in the property and construction sector.

"I was talking to one family who lost a husband and a brother and they have been simply torn apart. It's hard for people to talk about, to go public about what has happened. They want to protect their children and some are simply too shocked. They haven't come to terms with it."

He has personal experience of the human cost of the disintegration of the construction industry. He lost a friend to suicide a year ago while another had to be talked out of taking his own life.

"There are other cases too. I was having a pint with a friend of mine and he got a text from an employee. My friend was in shock and he showed me the message. It read: 'I cannot come into work tonight. My brother killed himself today. He had no work for his trucks.' This man wasn't an investor. He wasn't a speculator. He wasn't anything other than a man trying to make a living," said Mr Mellon.

Property developer and suicide campaigner Noel Smyth has revealed that a 24-hour helpline set up by suicide charities three months ago is now receiving between 2,500 and 3,000 calls a month -- many of them from people being ruthlessly pursued for money.

"They would be classified as high-risk calls, in other words someone who already has a suicide ideation or they may have actually planned a suicide," Mr Smyth told the Sunday Independent.

"Definitely the age profile of people with suicidal thoughts is changing and that is a reflection of financial worries. Many are in difficulties with property, with bank loans, with the Revenue."

Meanwhile, a financial tsunami is heading toward thousands of first-time buyers and investors who took out "interest-only" loans at the height of the property boom.

Thousands of these loans will now revert to capital repayment loans and are on properties already deep in negative equity.

Around 14 per cent of the 158,098 mortgages approved in 2007 were for interest-only products. Many lenders offered "interest-only" holidays of two or three years.

Similarly 15 per cent of the 110,300 loans approved in 2008 were also interest only.

It means tens of thousands of people, particularly first-time buyers, will have severe difficulties meeting repayments when the interest-only period comes to an end before the end of the year.

Respond, the housing agency, told the Sunday Independent they have received calls from many distressed homeowners whose mental health is being affected.

Aoife Walsh of Respond said: "There is a crisis out there which is taking a human toll. The Irish Banking Federation have renegotiated the mortgages of 30,000 householders. We are very fearful for a lot of people out there.

"I have been receiving from [calls] people in difficulty who are at the end of their tether fearing their home will be repossessed. They are displaying worrying depressive tendencies. Their mental health is being put under pressure and there are immense pressures on families.

"It is having an impact on marriages which is not being taken into account. The social implications are enormous. The screw is being turned on marriages and the family unit and that is going to have far reaching consequences for Irish society for years to come," Ms Walsh said.

Developer Noel Smyth said he has been shocked at the huge number of calls received by a free 24-hour helpline (1800 247100) set up by his organisation Turning the Tide of Suicide in conjunction with the suicide charity Console.

I'm not a professional counsellor by an means, but I'd say to people in this much trouble - you aren't alone, you have the sympathies of the overwhelming majority of people, and it will get better as time goes on. Contact that number or the Samaritans, 1850 60 90 90, theres nothing that can't be dealt with at the end of the day.

ei.sdraob

I find it utterly disgusting that some people (as per previous frontline) are using these suicides as a way to lobby the government for a "bailout"

another way of saying "give us money for our mistakes or there will be more deaths"

sickening :mad:

stepbar

There are genuine cases but you can put a lot of it down to greed and stupid financial mistakes. The Irish property council are a crowd of pests. I had to laugh at the pair of goms on the frontline last week. They were very coy about what they 'actually' wanted to happen.

fontanalis

stepbar wrote: »

There are genuine cases but you can put a lot of it down to greed and stupid financial mistakes. The Irish property council are a crowd of pests. I had to laugh at the pair of goms on the frontline last week. They were very coy about what they 'actually' wanted to happen.

What are the proposals to help people in negative equity? Most of the people who bought to make quick money seem to want to resume the game of pass the parcel with the box of ****.

Amhran Nua

fontanalis wrote: »

What are the proposals to help people in negative equity? Most of the people who bought to make quick money seem to want to resume the game of pass the parcel with the box of ****.

A good start might be to allow people to sell their houses and carry over the difference to a new mortgage, returning a little mobility to people who might for example have kids on the way but are stuck in a shoebox.

godtabh

Amhran Nua wrote: »

A good start might be to allow people to sell their houses and carry over the difference to a new mortgage, returning a little mobility to people who might for example have kids on the way but are stuck in a shoebox.

So a 40 year mortgage turns into a 60 year one?

Firetrap

When I see this being printed in the rag that is the Sindo, first thing I think of is "what's the agenda?"

billybigunz

Is it any different than when people make the wrong decisions in life with their work, relationships.

Amhran Nua

godtabh wrote: »

So a 40 year mortgage turns into a 60 year one?

Well no, lets say they took out a €350,000 mortgage on a one bed apartment. They have €50,000 paid off, and can sell it for €150,000. That means they would owe the bank €150,000 (I'm ignoring interest for the sake of simplicity). They could probably get a decent two bed or even a three bed house a bit further out for €200,000 these days, so they would then owe the bank €350,000 again but have an actual home they can live in for a few decades if they need to. Unsuitable living conditions and people trapped by negative equity are a real problem, and its only going to multiply in the coming years. Would the government allow something like this to be legislated for, given the massive fire sales that would take place across the country almost immediately?

Interesting commentary on the story btw, I hadn't any idea that this Irish Property Council were angling for a taxpayer funded reduction in their loans, a bad idea on so many levels its not even funny. Thats why I love the internet, you get to the bottom of things pretty quickly.

How Strange

First off, that paper is a rag and anything in it should be taken with a large pinch of salt.

Don't forget that particular newspaper printed article after article telling people to keep buying, buy more property, invest in property in Ireland and abroad. They were one of the vested interests. And now they print this article which really is bizarre.

Linking suicides to negative equity is really morally dubious and you have to ask yourself who is behind this article.

It's actually kind of disgusting and I think it does a great damage to the genuine associations who work with depressed, vulnerable and suicidal people without any agenda of their own.

hinault

The Sindo are the bottom of the barrel.

They have been waffling on about the recession for the last year.
Brendan O Connor, Marc Coleman, Carol Hunt and now Alison O Riordan have been bemoaning the passing of the Celtic Tiger.

Many of their articles have suggested that the "middle classes" need to be bailed out.

These were the same middle classes, whom the Sindo gushed about "going to New York on shopping trips" and who lauded "BT2, Harvey Nichols and all the other emporia for bringing 'brand choice' to the Irish consumer".
The very same Sindo that now bemoans the passing of all that and will use suicide to further their point of view.

My heart bleeds for them and the constituency that those clowns claim to represent.
Hypocrits all.

Amhran Nua

How Strange wrote: »

Linking suicides to negative equity is really morally dubious and you have to ask yourself who is behind this article.

There was a well known property developer in Galway that hung himself over his debts last year, as I recall - I don't think the article is factually incorrect.

silverharp

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Well no, lets say they took out a €350,000 mortgage on a one bed apartment. They have €50,000 paid off, and can sell it for €150,000. That means they would owe the bank €150,000 (I'm ignoring interest for the sake of simplicity). They could probably get a decent two bed or even a three bed house a bit further out for €200,000 these days, so they would then owe the bank €350,000 again but have an actual home they can live in for a few decades if they need to. Unsuitable living conditions and people trapped by negative equity are a real problem, and its only going to multiply in the coming years. Would the government allow something like this to be legislated for, given the massive fire sales that would take place across the country almost immediately?

Interesting commentary on the story btw, I hadn't any idea that this Irish Property Council were angling for a taxpayer funded reduction in their loans, a bad idea on so many levels its not even funny. Thats why I love the internet, you get to the bottom of things pretty quickly.

If the purpose of the article echoed your sentiments at the start, i'd fully concur, people should be encouraged to seek help if they feel the whole thing has gotten away from them but maybe there is an agenda by the paper and the group behind the article.

As for your suggestion, its very risky, contracts can be defaulted on but bring in a gov. mandate to amend them and one ends up on a slippery slope. It might also end up depressing the price of apartments further and increasing the price of family homes which would then effect the prices that new first time buyers would have to pay. There is no cost free way of helping out one group without impacting on another group.

If the gov wanted to do something it should get rid of stamp duty which would bring down the transaction costs. It might even free up family properties as older people could trade down wothout being taxed in the process.

How Strange

Amhran Nua wrote: »

There was a well known property developer in Galway that hung himself over his debts last year, as I recall - I don't think the article is factually incorrect.

But that's not to say it's factually correct either. It's what's sometimes referred to as the mother with child in her arms argument. It's deliberately manipulative because no-one can deny that people have committed suicide as a result of financial stress but that doesn't mean it's as endemic as the article suggests.

I also think that absolute rag and waste of ink and paper is using something like suicide for questionable reasons. As another poster said it's new agenda is to save the debt ridden middle class and absolve them of their debt brought about by 15 years of rampant capitalistic greed.

As I said before it undermines all good work done by the agencies and organisations which help people cope with financial debt, depression or suicide.

Amhran Nua

Silverharp2 wrote: »

As for your suggestion, its very risky, contracts can be defaulted on but bring in a gov. mandate to amend them and one ends up on a slippery slope. It might also end up depressing the price of apartments further and increasing the price of family homes which would then effect the prices that new first time buyers would have to pay. There is no cost free way of helping out one group without impacting on another group.

Its just putting something into practise that should be standard anyway, if the payments are still affordable and the family gains a better home as a result, why not? I don't think it would particularly end up depressing the price of apartments as families can live in larger apartments as well as houses. It might reduce the price of the shoeboxes, but thats all to the good and inevitable anyway to be honest.

Silverharp2 wrote: »

If the gov wanted to do something it should get rid of stamp duty which would bring down the transaction costs. It might even free up family properties as older people could trade down wothout being taxed in the process.

I don't think you get taxed CGT on changing your PPR?

How Strange wrote: »

It's deliberately manipulative because no-one can deny that people have committed suicide as a result of financial stress but that doesn't mean it's as endemic as the article suggests.

It wouldn't seem that unlikely, in fairness. I think the idea of "thousands" of people committing suicide is a bit ludicrous alright. The intention of the article as I posted it would be to underline the tremendous cost of the shambles brought about largely by the government and banks, and not just in financial terms. That the group putting this forward might have shady motivations (which I've just found out) doesn't reduce that message.

How Strange wrote: »

As I said before it undermines all good work done by the agencies and organisations which help people cope with financial debt, depression or suicide.

There are at least two seperate charities mentioned in the article.

How Strange

David Mellon, of the Irish Property Council believes the human misery inflicted by the collapse in the property and construction industry is incalculable and the Government is doing nothing to protect the sanctity of the family home.

Irish Property Council, according to their website is a professional organisation set up to provide a cogent voice to the people engaged in the property business in Ireland, including builders, developers and investors.
Now, IMO, whatever credibility that article may have had is shot to bits. Here is a guy who was involved in selling these overpriced homes to these people and now he wants government interference to protect 'the sanctity of the family home'.

Personally, I find the popular theme of 'blame the government, take the responsibility away from me' very unnerving. People have to take personal responsibility for the choices they made and now that the good times are over it means they have to negotiate their way through this debt and manage it.

What I find distasteful about this article is the underlying threat that people will commit suicide if they aren't bailed out and this threat is delivered by an organisation for property developers. There are hundreds of thousands people trying to find ways to cope with their debt. They are doing it using agencies such as MABS and of course they are under great pressure and stress and their marriages and family lives are suffering but they are taking responsibility.

I find the article disrespectful to them. I also think it's disrespecful to the families of people who have had family members who committed suicide. It's almost trivialising suicide by saying if the government takes on the personal debt of these people they won't have to resort to suicide.

Because they quoted two charities working with suicide in the article gives the impression it's a serious piece of journalism when in fact it's manipulative and wholly disingenuous.

silverharp

Amhran Nua wrote: »

I don't think you get taxed CGT on changing your PPR?

was thinking of stamp duty, which is a substantial cost if one wants to trade down a bedroom or 2

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Its just putting something into practise that should be standard anyway, if the payments are still affordable and the family gains a better home as a result, why not? I don't think it would particularly end up depressing the price of apartments as families can live in larger apartments as well as houses. It might reduce the price of the shoeboxes, but thats all to the good and inevitable anyway to be honest.

if the banks want to do it I have no problem with it, but they maybe taking on more risk. The couple now have more costs while their income is the same for instance. It would have to be a commercial proposition which may work for some people if their incomes have risen in the meantime, junior doctors and the like, or a single person with negetive equity now has a partner that can accelerate the payments.

Amhran Nua

Silverharp2 wrote: »

was thinking of stamp duty, which is a substantial cost if one wants to trade down a bedroom or 2

Thats a good point.

Silverharp2 wrote: »

if the banks want to do it I have no problem with it, but they maybe taking on more risk. The couple now have more costs while their income is the same for instance. It would have to be a commercial proposition which may work for some people if their incomes have risen in the meantime, junior doctors and the like, or a single person with negetive equity now has a partner that can accelerate the payments.

While the example I gave was a bit laboured, I think the general idea has a lot of merit. As long as it remains within a reasonable margin of their previous payments, or equal to same, it should be doable.

The concept hinges on the fact that you can buy a lot more for a lot less these days, so the end result should be the same costs but a better quality of living, while smaller/lower quality places fall in price rapidly. The bank loses nothing (in fact it gains extra payments), the people moving gain, and the taxpayer doesn't pay a red cent for it. It would affect a lot of people, but probably not enough to have a significant impact on the market for family homes (which is a lot bigger than the market for shoeboxes).

Once the market stabilises, or reaches bottom, the mechanism wouldn't be needed any more since negative equity would be much less of a problem.

spockety

An utterly disgusting use of the dead.

Does anyone really think this property council's primary objective is to prevent finance related suicides? My hole.

nachoman

How Strange wrote: »

I also think that absolute rag and waste of ink and paper is using something like suicide for questionable reasons. As another poster said it's new agenda is to save the debt ridden middle class and absolve them of their debt brought about by 15 years of rampant capitalistic greed.

right on!

Dannyboy83

"I have been receiving from [calls] people in difficulty who are at the end of their tether fearing their home will be repossessed. They are displaying worrying depressive tendencies. Their mental health is being put under pressure and there are immense pressures on families.

"It is having an impact on marriages which is not being taken into account. The social implications are enormous. The screw is being turned on marriages and the family unit and that is going to have far reaching consequences for Irish society for years to come," Ms Walsh said.

None of the landlords I've had to deal with in the last 7 years of renting gave a flying fcuk about the impact their greed was having on young families or marriages or the family unit or Irish society.

So now the shoe is on the other foot and your life ambition of extorting money from young families to live in a shoebox has collapsed in front of you.

Excuse me if I don't shed a tear.

Let Darwin do his work we will be better off, this is some crap to be putting in a newspaper. Do we want to start comparing suicide rates? What about the unemployed who wont ever get jobs if we keep throwing billions into NAMA tryin to put a floor under property prices?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWlz1IKWfw4

fontanalis

Amhran Nua
I find your title to be emotional blackmail unless it's not your opinion you should put it in quotation marks. How do you/they not know the state isn't moved? How do you measure this movement?
Seeing Mellon on The Frontline I have to say David Davin Power was right they want to restart the game of pass the bag of sh!t.

Amhran Nua

fontanalis wrote: »

Amhran Nua
I find your title to be emotional blackmail unless it's not your opinion you should put it in quotation marks. How do you/they not know the state isn't moved? How do you measure this movement?

You can find it whatever way you like, its copied verbatim directly from the newspaper headline.

shoegirl

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

None of the landlords I've had to deal with in the last 7 years of renting gave a flying fcuk about the impact their greed was having on young families or marriages or the family unit or Irish society.

So now the shoe is on the other foot and your life ambition of extorting money from young families to live in a shoebox has collapsed in front of you.

Excuse me if I don't shed a tear.

I have to say there is a point in this. A lot of self-payers in the private rented sector are the forgotten ones, yet still paying over and above. Plus high rents did ransom a lot of families terrified of rents rising at rates of 20% a year as they did between 1998 and 2001. There were a lot of people who didn't care how their policies impacted others and now there is a lot of crying wolf.

The organisation is being very exploitative in using property related debt as the sole problem behind these suicides. Most people who kill themselves do so for a multiplicity of reasons, not just one. There is rarely in any case any concrete evidence of what those reasons were. It is deeply unfair to those left behind to suggest that if somebody had "bailed" out their loved one that all would have been well. A lot of others lead tough lives too in the current climate. There are hundreds of homeless on the streets around Ireland who are not committing suicide en masse so why suggest that these other folk are?

I don't want to trivialise those who might have, its just plain wrong for a lobby group to use it to bully the govt into more bailouts for people who have hurt a lot of others in the process of exploiting them.

lucy2010

Im sorry but am I alone in seeing the fact of Suicide here. These people have been in such a rut they felt no other option left apart from suicide. Such a loss of life when others are holding this country to ransom for millions & are able to walk away scot free. In the next town down there have been 3 debt-suicides in the last 3 weeks .. Not for millions for a few thousand - Yet they felt there was no other way out of it .

D3PO

lucy2010 wrote: »

there have been 3 debt-suicides in the last 3 weeks .. Not for millions for a few thousand - Yet they felt there was no other way out of it .

thats absolute speculation. How do you know that was the reason ? I dont want to treat the topic as trivial and its going to be a very emotive subject but government policy cannot be determined either by speculation or even in the event of this being true the minority, not can bailouts.

Somebody who commits suicide is clearly not in the right frame of mind. If something like being in debt is being attributed to pushing them over the edge it could be argued that something else at some other time would have casued this action to happen anyway.

There are more people killed on the roads than being attributed to suicide due to debt. Should we all lobby the government to ban cars .....

Im sorry if this isnt comining across as sympathetic and I wouldnt wish this to happen to anybody but its wrong to use this as a lobby for bailouts

billybigunz

Big deal, there are 10 suicides every week in this state for all kinds of reasons.

bladespin

lucy2010 wrote: »

Im sorry but am I alone in seeing the fact of Suicide here. These people have been in such a rut they felt no other option left apart from suicide. Such a loss of life when others are holding this country to ransom for millions & are able to walk away scot free. In the next town down there have been 3 debt-suicides in the last 3 weeks .. Not for millions for a few thousand - Yet they felt there was no other way out of it .

That's pure speculation, as mentioned, people suicide for all kinds of reasons, high on that list is depression (possibly caused by debt issues).
The problem therfore isn't financial, it's medical and communal.

gurramok

126 people commited suicide between July and Sept last year, it makes you think about this topic.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/0325/breaking59.html

kmick

"blah blah blah..leaves State unmoved."

Of course the State is unmoved its not your mammy or your cousin Fred who you go out with every Saturday night. It a cold faceless badly run corporation that frankly does not give a damn.

lucy2010

D3PO wrote: »

thats absolute speculation. How do you know that was the reason ? I dont want to treat the topic as trivial and its going to be a very emotive subject but government policy cannot be determined either by speculation or even in the event of this being true the minority, not can bailouts.

Somebody who commits suicide is clearly not in the right frame of mind. If something like being in debt is being attributed to pushing them over the edge it could be argued that something else at some other time would have casued this action to happen anyway.

There are more people killed on the roads than being attributed to suicide due to debt. Should we all lobby the government to ban cars .....

Im sorry if this isnt comining across as sympathetic and I wouldnt wish this to happen to anybody but its wrong to use this as a lobby for bailouts

From the suicide notes they left ....

billybigunz

People leave notes saying they don't want live because of unrequited love but you don't see newspapers campaigning for a change in the law to stop this.

bladespin

lucy2010 wrote: »

From the suicide notes they left ....

You actually saw these notes?

D3PO

lucy2010 wrote: »

From the suicide notes they left ....

yes because the family of 3 different people showed you these notes ? or because you asked them the reason I mean that wouldnt be beyond calis to ask.

:rolleyes:

excuse me if I dont believe this, but Im too busy looking at the pigs flying outside my window :rolleyes::rolleyes:

lucy2010

bladespin wrote: »

You actually saw these notes?

No I didnt..

lucy2010

D3PO wrote: »

yes because the family of 3 different people showed you these notes ? or because you asked them the reason I mean that wouldnt be beyond calis to ask.

:rolleyes:

excuse me if I dont believe this, but Im too busy looking at the pigs flying outside my window :rolleyes::rolleyes:

I give up - I wish you all the best. But christ show a bit of respect for people who have committed suicide because of these problems. I wish none of you the ill fortune of getting caught up in debt & god forbid you might become part of a close knit small community who actually share their problems. I know 2 guys sisters & 1s mother & my sympathies are with them .

billybigunz

So what do you suggest we do to stop such suicides? Debt forgiveness?

bladespin

lucy2010 wrote: »

I give up - I wish you all the best. But christ show a bit of respect for people who have committed suicide because of these problems. I wish none of you the ill fortune of getting caught up in debt & god forbid you might become part of a close knit small community who actually share their problems. I know 2 guys sisters & 1s mother & my sympathies are with them .

My uncle recently committed suicide, he didn't do it because he was in debt, he did it because he suffered from depression brought about by a failing business and financial commitments, he was in hospital at the time for this, he died as a result of negligent care and a god awful disease not the economy, people so close this always look for something or someone else to blame.

spockety

lucy2010 wrote: »

I give up - I wish you all the best. But christ show a bit of respect for people who have committed suicide because of these problems. I wish none of you the ill fortune of getting caught up in debt & god forbid you might become part of a close knit small community who actually share their problems. I know 2 guys sisters & 1s mother & my sympathies are with them .

I think you have misunderstood the sentiment of the thread up until the point you first posted.

People have a great deal of sympathy for those who are left behind by suicide, whether it's related to financial worries or not. What some people here have taken issue with is that the Irish Property Council have taken ownership of this suicide issue in a bid to garner sympathy and support for their campaign to have some sort of bail out for low level developers and investors brought in. It's an absolutely disgusting use of those who have died in this way, and they should be absolutely ashamed of themselves.

saltandpepper10

you cant but have sympathy for anyone who feels this is there only way out.some of these people created vast amounts of jobs and also paid massive amounts of tax as well.so i for one hope it doesnt happen anyone else and may those 29 poor souls rip

hinault

spockety wrote: »

I think you have misunderstood the sentiment of the thread up until the point you first posted.

People have a great deal of sympathy for those who are left behind by suicide, whether it's related to financial worries or not. What some people here have taken issue with is that the Irish Property Council have taken ownership of this suicide issue in a bid to garner sympathy and support for their campaign to have some sort of bail out for low level developers and investors brought in. It's an absolutely disgusting use of those who have died in this way, and they should be absolutely ashamed of themselves.

Exactly.
Well said.

No one is being disrespectful to those who have, sadly, taken their own lives.

It is the IPC's cynical use of these losses which people have an issue with.

D3PO

lucy2010 wrote: »

I give up - I wish you all the best. But christ show a bit of respect for people who have committed suicide because of these problems. I wish none of you the ill fortune of getting caught up in debt & god forbid you might become part of a close knit small community who actually share their problems. I know 2 guys sisters & 1s mother & my sympathies are with them .

if you actually read my posts you will see that I have clearly pointed out that I wouldn't wish this upon anybody. Having respect for the dead and accepting a campaign that is shamelessly using such an emotive topic to drive an agenda are two different things.

iguana

Did anybody else think of this when they read that article;

Our ex-Glorious Leader, Bertie Ahern wrote:

Sitting on the sidelines, cribbing and moaning is a lost opportunity. I don't know how people who engage in that don't commit suicide because frankly the only thing that motivates me is being able to actively change something,

http://www.finfacts.com/irelandbusinessnews/publish/article_1010514.shtml

hinault

iguana wrote: »

Did anybody else think of this when they read that article;
http://www.finfacts.com/irelandbusinessnews/publish/article_1010514.shtml

Another despicable comment from Ahern.

theg81der

Sorry and ignore if this has already been said -

"to protect the sanctity of the family home." I think they are trying to lay the ground for a constitutional case, which in my opinion is a good idea. Government and Banks played all the (however stupid) people like fiddles and I`m all for responsibility but not if the only other option is suicide.

If you are in this position and thinking about suicide - please don`t and don`t worry about the leave and never return bit - I don`t believe this - the country will fall to sh*t, morgage companies will go under, everything is to messed up for anyone to look for a needle in a hay stack!

alejandro1977

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Thats a good point.


While the example I gave was a bit laboured, I think the general idea has a lot of merit. As long as it remains within a reasonable margin of their previous payments, or equal to same, it should be doable.

The concept hinges on the fact that you can buy a lot more for a lot less these days, so the end result should be the same costs but a better quality of living, while smaller/lower quality places fall in price rapidly. The bank loses nothing (in fact it gains extra payments), the people moving gain, and the taxpayer doesn't pay a red cent for it. It would affect a lot of people, but probably not enough to have a significant impact on the market for family homes (which is a lot bigger than the market for shoeboxes).

Once the market stabilises, or reaches bottom, the mechanism wouldn't be needed any more since negative equity would be much less of a problem.

It would be a lot simpler for them to rent out their shoebox to a single person/couple and rent a semi-d for themselves further out. This obsession with owning the roof over one's head is what got us into this mess. Changing the basics of contract law and debt is not the way to go about it.

Amhran Nua

alejandro1977 wrote: »

Changing the basics of contract law and debt is not the way to go about it.

Contracts get changed all the time, with the mutual agreement of all parties involved, as do mortgage agreements. Debt law in Ireland is a holdover from the nineteenth century, plenty of countries have looser regulations in that area than us and the roof hasn't fallen in for them, it just means the banks have to complete due diligence, which they should have been doing in the first place. It's not really related to the suggestion I was making anyway since it didn't involve debt forgiveness, just debt transfer.

alejandro1977

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Contracts get changed all the time, with the mutual agreement of all parties involved, as do mortgage agreements. Debt law in Ireland is a holdover from the nineteenth century, plenty of countries have looser regulations in that area than us and the roof hasn't fallen in for them, it just means the banks have to complete due diligence, which they should have been doing in the first place. It's not really related to the suggestion I was making anyway since it didn't involve debt forgiveness, just debt transfer.

You've completely ignored the substantive point. Why do they need to own their house? What's wrong with renting?

Your suggestion requires moving the debt to a property worth less than the debt. Do you really think that banks and those who fund them [bond investors] would be in favour?

What kind of due diligence are you talking about?
Specifically what kind of looser regulations do they have?


This suggestion really is Junior Cert stuff; sometimes "imaginative" proposals are merely daft and unworkable.

Amhran Nua

alejandro1977 wrote: »

You've completely ignored the substantive point.

I'm not sure why you related debt law and contract law to the point I was making then.

alejandro1977 wrote: »

Why do they need to own their house? What's wrong with renting?

Mortgage plus interest plus larger rent on a new place than they can get on their own place, minus their income from renting (assuming they can rent it out at all, its a renters market), plus their loss of benefits due to renting out their PPR, generally won't work out as well as just continuing to pay what they were paying before, but on a larger property. Depending on the individual situation of course.

alejandro1977 wrote: »

Your suggestion requires moving the debt to a property worth less than the debt. Do you really think that banks and those who fund them [bond investors] would be in favour?

The poor oul' bond holders are in danger of usurping the EU in terms of last stand justifications to object to things at this stage. Bond holders don't have a say in the finer grained day to day running of the banks, they are basically big depositors. Would they be happier that the banks are taking more money in than they would otherwise? I would assume so.

alejandro1977 wrote: »

What kind of due diligence are you talking about?

Making sure that people are able to repay the loans before handing them out, insisting on large deposits, you know, all the stuff they should have done so we wouldn't end up with the lurching NAMA monstrosity.

alejandro1977 wrote: »

Specifically what kind of looser regulations do they have?

You can make a start here, and do the rest of the research for yourself.

Debtors flee Irish bankruptcy laws

DEVELOPERS, financiers and prominent businessmen are seeking domicile in the United Kingdom and elsewhere in a bid to avoid Irish bankruptcy laws, according to legal sources.

The Irish Independent has learned that several high profile builders and executives have secured or are in the process of establishing residency in Britain where bankrupts can avail of a "fresh start" in less than two years compared with Ireland's cumbersome 12-year term under the 1988 Bankruptcy Act.

The spectre of relocation raised its head earlier this week when National Irish Bank informed the Commercial Court that financier Niall McFadden, whom it is suing for €6.3m, had relocated to London.

Several legal sources in London and Dublin have confirmed that they have advised on relocation or have received queries from individuals about the benefits of moving to another European country where bankruptcy procedures are perceived to be more "user friendly".

The bank, in a written submission, said it feared Mr McFadden -- who put together a €28m deal to purchase 'Buy and Sell' back in 2007 and which has subsequently been sold on -- had relocated to London for the purpose of European Insolvency Regulations and in an attempt to avail of "a perceived more debtor-friendly" bankruptcy procedure.

Loathed

The practice of forum shopping, where litigants seek domicile in another EU country to protect their assets, has been trail blazed by wealthy husbands in divorce and warring parents in contested custody battles.

Now, large borrowers indebted to banks are seeking domicile outside of Ireland in a bid to avoid our bankruptcy regime which is loathed by creditors and debtors alike.

"Ireland's bankruptcy laws serve no one," said Gavin Simons, partner and head of Corporate Restructuring and Insolvency at law firm BCM Hanby Wallace.

Mr Simons, who represented secured creditors in developer Liam Carroll's Zoe Group which last night went into official liquidation, said that Ireland's personal insolvency regime needs to be reformed.

Last week's renewed Programme for Government includes a commitment to create a new system of personal insolvency regulations that will allow for a statutory, non-court-based debt-settlement regime.

alejandro1977 wrote: »

This suggestion really is Junior Cert stuff; sometimes "imaginative" proposals are merely daft and unworkable.

Given that your master stroke was for them to "move out and rent", along your clear lack of understanding of basic bankruptcy and financial regulation as well as common contract law, I'll take that as a compliment to be honest.

These people who joined boards in March 2010 certainly are a punchy lot, thats the third one in a week that has stirred it up in Accom/prop.

alejandro1977

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Mortgage plus interest plus larger rent on a new place than they can get on their own place, minus their income from renting (assuming they can rent it out at all, its a renters market), plus their loss of benefits due to renting out their PPR, generally won't work out as well as just continuing to pay what they were paying before, but on a larger property. Depending on the individual situation of course.

hmmm you do realise that in normal property markets rental yield is related to property value? If it's impossible to rent out a city centre property it'll be pretty difficult to get a reasonable sale price for the shoebox. How can they can get this larger house for the same price despite it renting for a larger amount? This is the greatest issue I have with your proposal.

Or do you have another proposal to allow this hypothetical family sell an apartment that no one wants to rent? A National Shoebox Management Agency?

The benefits of renting out their PPR- you mean tax relief? That's a fairly small portion of one's mortgage payments; and is dependent on the Gov. If the Gov wants to free up the rental market they can level the playing field for people trapped by Negative Equity. (You have also left Stamp Duty out of your detailed calculations).

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Making sure that people are able to repay the loans before handing them out, insisting on large deposits, you know, all the stuff they should have done so we wouldn't end up with the lurching NAMA monstrosity.

"insisting on large deposits" - your proposal involves a bank giving out a loan greater than the value of the new property... so that's a negative deposit... I'm all for proper due diligence and hefty deposits - so less of the sarcasm please.

Amhran Nua wrote: »

You can make a start here, and do the rest of the research for yourself.



Given that your master stroke was for them to "move out and rent", along your clear lack of understanding of basic bankruptcy and financial regulation as well as common contract law, I'll take that as a compliment to be honest.

Quoting a speculative Sindo article as research... :rolleyes: How precisely does this fit into your proposal to allow ordinary families (rather than the developers cited above) move out of their shoebox apartment?

You have made a proposal to turn the norms of lending upside down; I have simple stated that's it's not practical. I don't consider it a "Master Stroke" - I don't consider it a panacea - I simply think it's the most practical solution for those in Negative Equity - several friends and acquaintances have rented out their places as they know they can't sell - they are getting on with life and it don't need some convoluted Bank/Government Solution that would be ripe for corrupt banking practices as it relies on new unsecured loans (you haven't addressed that).