Number of mortgages in arrears hits new peak of 14pc

Rabidlamb

New figures from Moody's seem to show the problem getting worse.

http://www.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/property-mortgages/number-of-mortgages-in-arrears-hits-new-peak-of-14pc-3139249.html

ONE in seven mortgage holders is now in arrears, according to calculations by a leading ratings agency.

Large numbers of these homeowners are understood to be avoiding getting into talks with their banks on restructuring their mortgages.

Moody's also said house prices would fall another 20pc.

The rating agency said its calculations show 14pc of residential mortgage holders are now in arrears, which works out at 107,000 households. This is a new peak, it said.

Figures released by the Central Bank last month showed 10.2pc of mortgage holders were three months or more behind on their payments.

"The steep decline in house prices since 2007 has placed the majority of borrowers deep into negative equity," it said.

"Irish house prices have already fallen by 49.9pc between September 2007 and April 2012, and Moody's expects that house prices will fall a further 20pc from today's levels."

Central Bank figures show that there are 764,138 mortgages in the market.

Last month, the Central Bank said 77,630 mortgage accounts were in arrears for 90 days or more in March. On top of this, another 38,658 mortgage holders have an agreement from their bank to lower their monthly repayments.

Moody's said yesterday that 5.5pc of mortgage accounts were a year or more behind on repayments in April. This works out at 42,027 mortgage holders.

The 360-plus day delinquent loans (which are used as a proxy for defaults) shot up from 4.23pc of the outstanding portfolios at the start of the year.

Moody's bases its figures on a basket of mortgage accounts that have been packaged together and sold on to investors. These mortgages are still serviced by the originating banks.

The ratings agency's arrears figures tend to be more up to date than the data produced by the Central Bank. The Central Bank figures tend to concur with the ratings agency's a few months later, financial experts said.

At what point to the government identify this as a crisis, where are solutions or is it still being faffed around at committee level.
The most worrying stat here is "The 360-plus day delinquent loans (which are used as a proxy for defaults) shot up from 4.23pc of the outstanding portfolios at the start of the year."

The_Conductor

That they reckon house prices have at least another 20% to fall (from today's prices) speaks volumes, ignoring everything else. With 14% of mortgages now in delinquency, and another 20% fall in house prices imminent- its amazing that the government seem to have no cognisance of just how much trouble the country is in. We can go on and on about mutualising the bank debts- however the elephant in the room that is being ignored- is personal debts.

The EU this week implored the government to speed up reform of the personal insolvency laws- while this will doubtless help people personally- it adds another millstone to the taxpayers neck.

Things don't add up- regardless of how you try to play with the figures and with statistics.

The previous day- the EU/IMF troika said enough has been done vis-a-vis public sector numbers- that we are not capable of functioning on lower numbers- yet, on the same hand they want to chop social welfare and public sector pay- while loading taxes on the selfsame people.........

It sort of beggars the question- how far away from public revolt are the people of Portugal and Ireland- and why has so little public unrest manifested itself in either country thus far?

StillWaters

Saying there is another 20% fall to go is meaningless. The property Market has fractured, and in some areas, for some types of housing, there could be > 40% to go, you couldn't give them away, some areas (family homes in major urban areas) are stabilising.
Headlines like this make it appear ALL property is 20% overvalued which is clearly not true.

bjak

Its because we are operating an Irish solution to an Irish problem.

Can any poster point to another modern economy or society which has 12-year bankruptcy rules or where lenders not alone seem totally afraid to enforce their security when a borrower is in default but successive government policy is adding to the difficulty.

If the current situation persists, I believe that the level of defaults can only increase unless and until there are major disincentives to do so.

I have huge sympathy for those who find themselves in vast debt because they simply wanted to house their families not become property magnates. I am particularly concerned at the repercussions of the can pay but wont pay brigade who see the current weakness as an opportunity.

Say I am in huge negative equity but not in arrears at present. I would foresee having to work many years just to get my net worth back to zero - in fact it may be getting further away as house prices fall further. If I either fully stop paying or make occasional mortgage repayments, how long will it take the banks to get to me if there are 90,000 cases ahead of me? In the meantime I can save like crazy and if they ever repossess my house in who knows how many years time, I should have a serious fund together. Where are the measures to make that scenario to my detriment rather than my benefit?

A further consideration is that we do not and in my view cannot have a properly functioning lending market. Bank lack of capitalisation through past and ongoing losses is certainly a colossal factor. Other than tokenism, why would Irish banks lend at present to either homebuyers or business given that they have such difficulty enforcing their security on the debt. If you were a lender watching this unfold, what % deposit would you require? I imagine its a case of "God help you" if you want to borrow to start or expand a business.

What incentive is there for any new entrant to set up a banking business in Ireland in these circumstances. If we want to restart the economy, rather than go further down the current financial death spiral we have to start repossession & sale together with urgently enacting new debt/bankruptcy legislation.

As private mortgage debt is effectively non-recourse, if that continues then banks will have to seek very substantial equity input by aspiring borrowers. Of course, that will reduce the amounts available for borrowing and depress the property market further. Who could have seen it coming?

Lantus

smccarrick wrote: »

Things don't add up- regardless of how you try to play with the figures and with statistics.

Agreed, the figures are just crazy as to a functioning economy in any real sense of the word.

smccarrick wrote: »

It sort of beggars the question- how far away from public revolt are the people of Portugal and Ireland- and why has so little public unrest manifested itself in either country thus far?

Thats an easy(er) one to respond to. A persons desire to take to the streets and 'revolt' in whatever sense that may be interpreted is in relation to their hope that they have for the future and the fear of their own circumstances and what they perceive they have to lose.

I think we still have a hope that things will work out ok but more importantly we are still for the majority a priviledged race of people with luxury's and commodoties to keep us safe warm and comfortable.

It's hard to say what the tipping scale would be but I'd say a combination of factors woud have to be factored in as we are a resilient people.

think loss of mobile phone, car fuel poverty, no tv, can't heat house during winter, unable to replace old or worn clothes, not able to buy food on a regular basis for a huge amount (50%+) of 'regular' people. It would be severe changes that would take a person to the point where they believed that they had little more to lose and that there was no real hope such that direct action was their only and last recourse.

Monty Burnz

The terror of repossessions is going to bury us all. People need to get over the famine mentality and realise that repossessions are necessary for a functioning market, and that we are all going to end up paying for the 'won't pay' thieving mob as well as the 'can't pay' folks who were just unlucky or foolish.

Bishop_Donal

Lantus wrote: »

Agreed, the figures are just crazy as to a functioning economy in any real sense of the word.



Thats an easy(er) one to respond to. A persons desire to take to the streets and 'revolt' in whatever sense that may be interpreted is in relation to their hope that they have for the future and the fear of their own circumstances and what they perceive they have to lose.

I think we still have a hope that things will work out ok but more importantly we are still for the majority a priviledged race of people with luxury's and commodoties to keep us safe warm and comfortable.

It's hard to say what the tipping scale would be but I'd say a combination of factors woud have to be factored in as we are a resilient people.

think loss of mobile phone, car fuel poverty, no tv, can't heat house during winter, unable to replace old or worn clothes, not able to buy food on a regular basis for a huge amount (50%+) of 'regular' people. It would be severe changes that would take a person to the point where they believed that they had little more to lose and that there was no real hope such that direct action was their only and last recourse.

Well said. Quite a number of people in this country are not that badly impacted by the recession at all (so far anyway). Realistically if you tried to book any of the top Dublin Restaurants for 8pm tonight you simply wouldn't get in at this stage. That's certainly not a country that's in universal recession. It clearly represents a substantial cohort of the Irish population.

Then there is another cohort who are trying to keep up appearances & who simply don't want to show their position by taking to the streets.

We'll only see protests when austerity really starts to impact on a widespread basis.

The_Conductor

Lantus wrote: »

think loss of mobile phone, car fuel poverty, no tv, can't heat house during winter, unable to replace old or worn clothes, not able to buy food on a regular basis for a huge amount (50%+) of 'regular' people. It would be severe changes that would take a person to the point where they believed that they had little more to lose and that there was no real hope such that direct action was their only and last recourse.

• Loss of mobile phone
• Car fuel poverty
• No TV
• Lack of heating
• Unable to replace old or worn clothes
• Difficulty buying food

You do know that a significant number of people- in work, with jobs- are already experiencing much of this? Most people are prioritising- and heating and clothes are now pretty much discretionary expenditure- car trips are already severely curtailed (as evidenced by the figures from the revenue commissioners on fuel duties), tv- well numbers of licences have fallen, as have subscriptions to Sky (and its ilk). Food- those with children are prioritising their children for food- and making do with whatever is over.

These are people in fulltime employment.

If your criterion are an indication of what the tipping point might be- well, we're at it.........

Of those in employment- over 200,000 (including significant numbers in the public sector) qualify for family income support.........

The sums don't add up- and people, average people, are enduring remarkable hardships that no-one dreamt of only a short while ago.

If we add property tax, water rates, increases in VAT and excise, an increase in the social tax and other stealth taxes to the mix- a volatile situation becomes wholly untenable.

Heating and new clothes- are now a luxury that many people are doing without- and but for the mild winter we had- I'm sure we'd have had many deaths around the country........

Lantus

Monty Burnz wrote: »

The terror of repossessions is going to bury us all. People need to get over the famine mentality and realise that repossessions are necessary for a functioning market, and that we are all going to end up paying for the 'won't pay' thieving mob as well as the 'can't pay' folks who were just unlucky or foolish.

I would take issue with the picture you paint of people being either lazy or plain stupid/reckless.

Almost every economist and political leader was touting the line that the gravy train would go on forever. (if you were brave or intelligent enough to suggest that it couldn't then the most charasmatic and trusted leader of all time Bertie Ahern suggested you should suicide yourself for even thinking it!)

So I think people were optomisitc, typically in full work and had no fears about spending hugely on massive mortgages. No one I knew at the time would even dare talk down the economy and the politically correct phrase banded around by middle and senior managment was 'soft landing' which if chanted in sufficient numbers would generate a calming effect (even though no one even knew of or had even seen what this mythical 'soft landing' beast was.)


There are a lot of peole in a terrible situation becase we all believed in free market economies and that our leaders knew what they were doing. I would say only a minority were engaged in really reckless spending. The rest of us were engaged in what we believed to be normal economic activity. People do have a responsibility and I think after what has happened the trust we place in any political leader will be questioned hard. Ultimatley we may all think a lot more for ourselves and thats a good thing in the long run.

The_Conductor

Bishop_Donal wrote: »

Well said. Quite a number of people in this country are not that badly impacted by the recession at all (so far anyway). Realistically if you tried to book any of the top Dublin Restaurants for 8pm tonight you simply wouldn't get in at this stage. That's certainly not a country that's in universal recession. It clearly represents a substantial cohort of the Irish population.

Then there is another cohort who are trying to keep up appearances & who simply don't want to show their position by taking to the streets.

We'll only see protests when austerity really starts to impact on a widespread basis.

Studies have shown that pensioners (ironically) are thus far the only category of people to not be affected by the recession. Getting a booking for 8PM on a Saturday night isn't a good measure of a recession being significant or otherwise- most restaurants run at a loss other than on Saturdays and Sundays- and a single bad Saturday or Sunday can be the difference between breaking even or making a significant loss on any given week.......

Yes- there are lots of people still capable of living the good life- but there are significant portions of the populations- who are gainfully employed, as opposed to being on social welfare, who are suffering badly.

Monty Burnz

Bishop_Donal wrote: »

Well said. Quite a number of people in this country are not that badly impacted by the recession at all (so far anyway). Realistically if you tried to book any of the top Dublin Restaurants for 8pm tonight you simply wouldn't get in at this stage. That's certainly not a country that's in universal recession. It clearly represents a substantial cohort of the Irish population.

I imagine a lot of those people in the top restaurants are people who realise they don't have to pay their mortgage any more, don't care if they ultimately lose their negative-equity house in some years time, and are living in the lap of luxury - rent and mortgage free - for a few years.

Bishop_Donal

smccarrick wrote: »

Studies have shown that pensioners (ironically) are thus far the only category of people to not be affected by the recession. Getting a booking for 8PM on a Saturday night isn't a good measure of a recession being significant or otherwise- most restaurants run at a loss other than on Saturdays and Sundays- and a single bad Saturday or Sunday can be the difference between breaking even or making a significant loss on any given week.......

Yes- there are lots of people still capable of living the good life- but there are significant portions of the populations- who are gainfully employed, as opposed to being on social welfare, who are suffering badly.

I'm not suggesting for one second that no-one is impacted by the recession. The initial question that was posed wonders why we are not seeing more protest on the streets.

In my opinion it's because quite a few people are still living a comfortable life in this country, and equally there are others who don't want to admit they are under pressure.

Media always focus on the negative because it's sensationalist. Remember if 14% of mortgages are in arrears (coincidentally the same as our unemployment number), that 86% are uptodate with their payments. You can see the glass half full or half empty.

All that said, by the time the current budget deficit is closed to an acceptable level (or indeed worse still by the time the structural deficit is eliminated to the levels outlined in the Fiscal Compact), I think far more people will really feel the pinch, and then it might even become fashionable to get out on the streets and kick up a bit.

Monty Burnz

Lantus wrote: »

I would take issue with the picture you paint of people being either lazy or plain stupid/reckless.

Where did I suggest people were lazy? People buying at the peak of the bubble, and those who bought even as it burst like the famous Alison O'Riordan, were pretty stupid. That's just a fact.

Lantus wrote: »

Almost every economist and political leader was touting the line that the gravy train would go on forever.

Again, that's nonsense - loads of reputable sources were saying property was severely overvalued. If people chose to listen to the economists employed by vested interests, that's just further stupidity.

Bishop_Donal

Monty Burnz wrote: »

I imagine a lot of those people in the top restaurants are people who realise they don't have to pay their mortgage any more, don't care if they ultimately lose their negative-equity house in some years time, and are living in the lap of luxury - rent and mortgage free - for a few years.

It's certainly possible that some are, but I wouldn't agree that it's 'a lot'.

For the record, I'm a firm believer that people living in 'the lap of luxury' who are not paying their mortgages should be removed from their homes. I am not in favour of widespread evictions (no point in removing people from bog standard homes in my view). However, I think it is really disappointing that the Mortgage Arrears Resolution Strategies being trotted out by the Regulators office don't differentiate between regular 'Joe Soaps' and people who chose to live in large period residences in D4 and D6. Ineptitude seems to be a prerequisite / core competency requirement to become the Financial Regulator in Ireland.

Caseywhale

Both of my brothers who are reasonably well off, have just stopped paying their mortgages. One is a solicitor and the other is fairly high up in finance (very close to the banks too), so they know what they are doing financially and legally.
They tell me that the harder you make life for the banks, the better the deal you will get. If you are a good bet to the banks, you will get nothing when the help comes.
They already got another sibling a great deal on a mortgage settlement.
I'm only sorry that I overpaid mine for years to get it paid off quicker. Now I keep my money in an account where the interest is much higher on the savings. Though I dont have the nerve to not pay the mortgage.

I asked them are they not afraid of unforeseen consequences and the answer is that the worst that will happen is that you pay off the mortgage as it is anyway. They have diverted all the mortgage money into high interest bank accounts and are actually earning interest on the money. All of us are on trackers, since they came out.

And I know a lot of people who are doing that too, who could well afford to be paying their mortgages.

PS. There is no mechanism at all for taking them off the trackers even if they arent paying the mortgages. They have analysed it to death with both legal and financial brains and are safe. So they actually make a profit by saving instead of paying the mortgages. The bro was way ahead of the game years ago when he first looked at trackers and advised us all to get on them.

Monty Burnz

Bishop_Donal wrote: »

It's certainly possible that some are, but I wouldn't agree that it's 'a lot'.

You wouldn't agree with an unspecified quantity?

Bishop_Donal wrote: »

For the record, I'm a firm believer that people living in 'the lap of luxury' who are not paying their mortgages should be removed from their homes. I am not in favour of widespread evictions (no point in removing people from bog standard homes in my view).

Why not? You think it's fair that others have to rent bog standard homes while they stay in theirs for free? Perhaps those who aspire to bog standard homes shouldn't be expected to pay their own rent and to keep others in homes they can't even aspire to buy?

who_ru

The Govt says no to repossessions - as long as this is the case then prices will continue to fall in general.

Not even Buy To Let stuff is being repo'd.

Bishop_Donal

Monty Burnz wrote: »

You wouldn't agree with an unspecified quantity?

Why not? You think it's fair that others have to rent bog standard homes while they stay in theirs for free? Perhaps those who aspire to bog standard homes shouldn't be expected to pay their own rent and to keep others in homes they can't even aspire to buy?

Where did I say it was fair?? Read it again.

Nonetheless, 2 reasons:

1.) There is no market for them. Banks are bust, can't lend to anyone else to buy them, and not enof cash buyers around.

2.) They'll end up in Social Housing, which will ultimately have to be paid for by the taxpayer (if they can't meet the mortgage on a bog standard 300k home, they won't be able to pay the rent either). It's just moving the chairs around on the Titanic, except it costs money to move them.

As for your comment re: 'a lot', I drew an inference from that that you meant a high percentage (but I acknowledge that you weren't very specific and that you could have meant anything!).

Monty Burnz

Bishop_Donal wrote: »

1.) There is no market for them. Banks are bust, can't lend to anyone else to buy them, and not enof cash buyers around.

There is a market for them. There is a smaller market for them at current prices, but plenty of people are waiting to buy.

Bishop_Donal wrote: »

2.) They'll end up in Social Housing, which will ultimately have to be paid for by the taxpayer (if they can't meet the mortgage on a bog standard 300k home, they won't be able to pay the rent either).

Or they will just have to rent. Why assume social housing? Just because you can't afford your bubble mortgage doesn't mean you can't afford rent.

Bishop_Donal wrote: »

It's just moving the chairs around on the Titanic, except it costs money to move them.

You would be restoring some measure of fairness and market efficiency.

Bishop_Donal wrote: »

As for your comment re: 'a lot', I drew an inference from that that you meant a high percentage (but I acknowledge that you weren't very specific and that you could have meant anything!).

Indeed I did.

Zamboni

Caseywhale wrote: »

Both of my brothers who are reasonably well off, have just stopped paying their mortgages. One is a solicitor and the other is fairly high up in finance (very close to the banks too), so they know what they are doing financially and legally.
They tell me that the harder you make life for the banks, the better the deal you will get. If you are a good bet to the banks, you will get nothing when the help comes.
They already got another sibling a great deal on a mortgage settlement.
I'm only sorry that I overpaid mine for years to get it paid off quicker. Now I keep my money in an account where the interest is much higher on the savings. Though I dont have the nerve to not pay the mortgage.

I asked them are they not afraid of unforeseen consequences and the answer is that the worst that will happen is that you pay off the mortgage as it is anyway. They have diverted all the mortgage money into high interest bank accounts and are actually earning interest on the money. All of us are on trackers, since they came out.

And I know a lot of people who are doing that too, who could well afford to be paying their mortgages.

PS. There is no mechanism at all for taking them off the trackers even if they arent paying the mortgages. They have analysed it to death with both legal and financial brains and are safe. So they actually make a profit by saving instead of paying the mortgages. The bro was way ahead of the game years ago when he first looked at trackers and advised us all to get on them.

:eek::mad:
The order of emotions I felt reading that post.
Hopefully Caseywhale will come back and let us know they were all with Ulster Bank...

indiewindy

Caseywhale wrote: »

Both of my brothers who are reasonably well off, have just stopped paying their mortgages. One is a solicitor and the other is fairly high up in finance (very close to the banks too), so they know what they are doing financially and legally.
They tell me that the harder you make life for the banks, the better the deal you will get. If you are a good bet to the banks, you will get nothing when the help comes.
They already got another sibling a great deal on a mortgage settlement.
I'm only sorry that I overpaid mine for years to get it paid off quicker. Now I keep my money in an account where the interest is much higher on the savings. Though I dont have the nerve to not pay the mortgage.

I asked them are they not afraid of unforeseen consequences and the answer is that the worst that will happen is that you pay off the mortgage as it is anyway. They have diverted all the mortgage money into high interest bank accounts and are actually earning interest on the money. All of us are on trackers, since they came out.

And I know a lot of people who are doing that too, who could well afford to be paying their mortgages.

PS. There is no mechanism at all for taking them off the trackers even if they arent paying the mortgages. They have analysed it to death with both legal and financial brains and are safe. So they actually make a profit by saving instead of paying the mortgages. The bro was way ahead of the game years ago when he first looked at trackers and advised us all to get on them.

both your brothers are disgrace's, though I would have my doubts about getting away with it unless facts of the case were made public, they are making it harder for those honest people who are struggling to pay their mortgages. What they are doing should be condemned. Shame on them

lima

Caseywhale wrote: »

Both of my brothers who are reasonably well off, have just stopped paying their mortgages. One is a solicitor and the other is fairly high up in finance (very close to the banks too), so they know what they are doing financially and legally.
They tell me that the harder you make life for the banks, the better the deal you will get. If you are a good bet to the banks, you will get nothing when the help comes.
They already got another sibling a great deal on a mortgage settlement.
I'm only sorry that I overpaid mine for years to get it paid off quicker. Now I keep my money in an account where the interest is much higher on the savings. Though I dont have the nerve to not pay the mortgage.

I asked them are they not afraid of unforeseen consequences and the answer is that the worst that will happen is that you pay off the mortgage as it is anyway. They have diverted all the mortgage money into high interest bank accounts and are actually earning interest on the money. All of us are on trackers, since they came out.

And I know a lot of people who are doing that too, who could well afford to be paying their mortgages.

PS. There is no mechanism at all for taking them off the trackers even if they arent paying the mortgages. They have analysed it to death with both legal and financial brains and are safe. So they actually make a profit by saving instead of paying the mortgages. The bro was way ahead of the game years ago when he first looked at trackers and advised us all to get on them.

I hope they get whats coming to them, they are scum of the earth for doing that.

Caseywhale

lima wrote: »

I hope they get whats coming to them, they are scum of the earth for doing that.

They are playing the game to increase their own chances of winning. Everybody does it. Nothing wrong with it if you arent breaking the law.

Monty Burnz

Caseywhale wrote: »

They are playing the game to increase their own chances of winning. Everybody does it. Nothing wrong with it if you arent breaking the law.

They are breaking civil law though, surely - they are not performing according to commitments made in contracts they signed.

Caseywhale

Monty Burnz wrote: »

They are breaking civil law though, surely - they are not performing according to commitments made in contracts they signed.

Im sure if they were breaking any law they would be taken to task on it.
They have even told the banks what they are doing and have said if the bank wants to do a deal they are welcome to make an offer. Otherwise take them to court. There is nothing hidden about their actions. I know a good few people doing this. Once one starts doing it, word gets around and their friends start doing it.
I couldnt do it though. I hate conflict and would rather all my affairs were above board. But usually, if i can twist a situation to my advantage I will.

the groutch

agree with above comments that there are those who CAN pay, but just won't.
as long as you have the government's blanket guarantee (where have we heard that before? :rolleyes:) to not have any properties repossessed, there's no incentive at all for people beyond a certain level of earning power to make repayments at all.
and while most actually have a conscience , there's a significant proportion that will do whatever they think they can get away with.

StillWaters

The government have been very slow in commencing the personal insolvency bill, and until that happens, I have no doubt there are lots of people like Casey's brothers who take advantage of the inability of the banks to act against the won't pays as opposed to the can't pays. And IMO they make up a sizeable minority of the arrears stats.

All one needs to do currently is make one mortgage payment a year, and the PPR is safe. It makes total financial sense to bank the remaining 11 months in a high performing deposit account and pay arrears at lowly tracker rates. Add to the mix the bank may well do a deal if you have wads of cash to offer them and are fecking them round with repayments.

lima

As a non homeowner recently returned to Ireland after living abroad - and who missed the madness of the tiger - I find it disgusting that some people believe they can act like that and not pay their way that they fully agreed to when they purchased mortgages from the banks. I'm sure you shook the banks hand when you got the money!

And don't say they conned you into taking out a large mortgage, you were the one who believed Ireland was a good enough country to be worth paying e450k for a 2br apartment in Donabate. Even during the boom it was a damp, boring place, and you believed the Sunday Independent etc. hyped up version of Ireland being paradise, somewhere similar to Sweden, Switzerland or Sydney.

With all this 'won't pay' s*it going on I am terrified about buying my first property (because I believe they are just about worth their value now), since I don't know whats going to happen with all these corrupt citizens refusing to commit to their payments.

It's bad enough paying extra taxes to pay for Irish peoples collective mistakes, but to pay even more taxes to pay for someone else's mortgage who over-extended themselves (or even someone who can well afford but won't?!)

I'm innocent in all of this, I contributed nothing towards this, I even came home and added a new job to the list of employed people, yet I may be the one to suffer at the end of the day...

Rabidlamb

indiewindy wrote: »

both your brothers are disgrace's, though I would have my doubts about getting away with it unless facts of the case were made public, they are making it harder for those honest people who are struggling to pay their mortgages. What they are doing should be condemned. Shame on them

lima wrote: »

I hope they get whats coming to them, they are scum of the earth for doing that.

Morally speaking both of you are correct but appealing to peoples sense of fairplay means very little once the figures don't stack up.
My neighbour, unemployed since 2008, had his first years mortgage covered under a PPI scheme that he took out knowing the exact future date he was to be laid off.
Once the year was up he was in receipt of MIS but made no additional contribution of his own.
He's been through MABS & entered MARP but has continued to make no payments.
About a year ago he thought he'd struck a deal with the Council to purchase the home but that fell through due to lack of funds.
He's asked that the bank just take the home but they continue to push for payment breaks & interest only periods.

TL;DR Neighbour living rent free the past 4 years & looking like it will be another 4.

RATM

lima wrote: »

As a non homeowner recently returned to Ireland after living abroad - and who missed the madness of the tiger - I find it disgusting that some people believe they can act like that and not pay their way that they fully agreed to when they purchased mortgages from the banks. I'm sure you shook the banks hand when you got the money!

And don't say they conned you into taking out a large mortgage, you were the one who believed Ireland was a good enough country to be worth paying e450k for a 2br apartment in Donabate. Even during the boom it was a damp, boring place, and you believed the Sunday Independent etc. hyped up version of Ireland being paradise, somewhere similar to Sweden, Switzerland or Sydney.

With all this 'won't pay' s*it going on I am terrified about buying my first property (because I believe they are just about worth their value now), since I don't know whats going to happen with all these corrupt citizens refusing to commit to their payments.

It's bad enough paying extra taxes to pay for Irish peoples collective mistakes, but to pay even more taxes to pay for someone else's mortgage who over-extended themselves (or even someone who can well afford but won't?!)

I'm innocent in all of this, I contributed nothing towards this, I even came home and added a new job to the list of employed people, yet I may be the one to suffer at the end of the day...

Lima I'm in pretty much a similar boat to you. I'm 34 and set up my own business a year ago and am thinking of taking on my first employee in October. I'm also thinking about buying in the next 12-24 months. But I'm looking around me at what is coming down the road and all I see is myself paying higher taxes to pay for the mistakes of others. I am lucky to be in a position where I don't need to emigrate but am thinking I might as I don't want any part of what is looking likely is going to happen. As usual in Ireland we reward mediocrity and punish success and the exact same is going to happen in this property debacle- those of us who knew it was a bubble and avoided buying are going to end up paying for those who are refusing to pay for their mistakes.

There is one way the govt could prevent the 'won't pays'- instead of letting them stay in their houses they should build social housing flats for them on greenfield sites outside the M50. There is no way a solicitor is going to accept a 2 bedroom flat out in the middle of nowhere so the very threat of that will ensure the 'won't pay' will become the 'will pay to avoid embarrassment in their social circle'.

Mr. Loverman

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Where did I suggest people were lazy?

Actually I would argue laziness was a factor for some people.

Most of the people I know who bought during the bubble did little to no research as to whether they are making a good or bad decision. They only sought advice from the bank and family members. I know you could argue they didn't realise the advice they were getting was false or poor, but even askaboutmoney would link to thepropertypin every now and then, so decent advice was quite easily available.

I remember being at a party maybe five years ago and a girl who works in the bank telling everyone "now is the time to buy" and I was the only person there asking "why is now the time to buy?" (At that stage I was firmly in the "Ireland is ****ed" camp). She didn't have an answer to my question. I appeared to be the only one who thought this was funny.

Monty Burnz

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

Actually I would argue laziness was a factor for some people.

Most of the people I know who bought during the bubble did little to no research as to whether they are making a good or bad decision. They only sought advice from the bank and family members. I know you could argue they didn't realise the advice they were getting was false or poor, but even askaboutmoney would link to thepropertypin every now and then, so decent advice was quite easily available.

I remember being at a party maybe five years ago and a girl who works in the bank telling everyone "now is the time to buy" and I was the only person there asking "why is now the time to buy?" (At that stage I was firmly in the "Ireland is ****ed" camp). She didn't have an answer to my question. I appeared to be the only one who thought this was funny.

Well yes, this is totally true. The biggest financial decision you will ever make, and the only question many (most?) people asked was in the bank - 'what's the most I can borrow?'. Because reading about this stuff is 'boring'. A few hours reading could have saved them hundreds of thousands of euros. Astonishing stuff.

Mr. Loverman

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Well yes, this is totally true. The biggest financial decision you will ever make, and the only question many (most?) people asked was in the bank - 'what's the most I can borrow?'. Because reading about this stuff is 'boring'. A few hours reading could have saved them hundreds of thousands of euros. Astonishing stuff.

Also interesting is how difficult it is for people to accept responsibility for their actions. It has led me to read lots of psychology, e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases

MysticalRain

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

Actually I would argue laziness was a factor for some people.

Most of the people I know who bought during the bubble did little to no research as to whether they are making a good or bad decision. They only sought advice from the bank and family members. I know you could argue they didn't realise the advice they were getting was false or poor, but even askaboutmoney would link to thepropertypin every now and then, so decent advice was quite easily available.

I remember being at a party maybe five years ago and a girl who works in the bank telling everyone "now is the time to buy" and I was the only person there asking "why is now the time to buy?" (At that stage I was firmly in the "Ireland is ****ed" camp). She didn't have an answer to my question. I appeared to be the only one who thought this was funny.

Things haven't changed much since the downturn, judging by what I hear from a family member of mine who works as a solicitor doing conveyancing these days. Apparently she finds it quite difficult to convince here clients to hire an structural engineer to evaluate a property before buying it. This despite all the horror stories of pyrite, houses built on flood plains, and generally shoddy Celtic Tiger era building work.

These are of course the same kinds of people who will try to sue their own solicitor at the drop of a hat if anything goes wrong with the purchase. You would think that people would put a bit more thought into it before making the biggest financial transaction of their entire lifetime.