Thinking about giving keys back to the bank..

LegacyUser

I'm probably posting this in the wrong place but I'm sure it will be moved if so!

My situation is as follows:

I live in the UK. I've a house in Ireland which is in negative equity. The rent is not covering the mortgage. To make matters worse the tenant is not paying the rent. It's a right mess basically. I should have kicked the tenant out ages ago. It wouldn't be easy to rent the house in the area where the house is.

Ideally I'd like to move home to Ireland over the next year as I've a business idea and want to set up my own company. I was recently in with the bank explaining my predicament but they said the mortgage has to be paid. I just cannot cope with the stress of all this especially with all the outstanding rent. I would be a lot happier if the house was just gone.

I know if I give back the house I'd probably never get a mortgage in the future. It won't stop me from setting up a company but it may be a problem setting up a company bank account.

I just can't cope with all this stress. Has anyone any ideas of what I can do? Any help would be greatly appreciated. I do understand others are in this situation though.

Neyite

Moving to Accommodation & Property

djimi

I presume you are aware that handing back the keys to the bank does not make the mortgage go away; you are still liable for the difference between what you owe and what the bank sell the place for?

Have you discussed the option of interest only payments on the mortgage for a while until you get yourself sorted? The general consensus seems to be that the bank do not want to have to deal with your house and that they will be open to making a deal that allows you more time to sort your affairs.

Also you need to get the issue with the tenant sorted. There is a very strict process that must be followed to the letter if you want to evict a tenant, but if they have stopped paying the rent then you really need to start proceedings to have them removed. Its not necessarily going to be a quick process; if they dig in their heals it may take a year to get sorted, so you are better to get the wheels in motion now.

handlemaster

would agree with the last poster . Get the tenant out first. Go to PTRB or what ever but get them out and quick. look at renting the house to a local housing agency or council if possible. If not rent it privately. go to accountant and tell them the situation that you are in ( they might big MIGHT charge you less). see what you will have after taxes are paid on the rent received. Then go to the bank tell them this is what you can afford and offer to pay that amount. The period of the mortgage could also be extended. Maybe view your options with the personal insolvency law that has come into place. You are based in the UK so if you are potentially bankrupt that could be an option. After 12 months your depts would be cleared. But that is only if you are genuniely bankrupt.

Best of luck. Remember it is only money keep the head up ! !

the_syco

Get rid of the tenant.

As for giving the keys back, the bank can f**k you over if they want.
You owe €300k, house is now worth €200k, bank sells it for €170k, and you'll still owe the bank the €130k balance. Or the bank could sell it for €70k, and you'll owe the bank €230k, etc.

Oh, and are the bills in your name, or the tenants name? Unpaid bills in tehir name follow them, but if they're in your name, you'll have to pay the bils when you get the tenant out.

Finally, if you're using an Estate Agent to manage the property, check with your solicitor if you can bring a legal case against the EA for negligence, and if so, tell the EA either they get the tenant out, or you sue the EA for whatever.

NIMAN

Being in negative equity is not a good enough reason for the bank I'm afraid.

Nor is the fact that rent doesn't cover the mortgage. When I owned a rental property, I had to add money every month to make up the mortgage.

You don't say if you can afford to pay the mortgage or not. In the banks eyes, you can either afford the mortgage or you can't. It sounds harsh but this is how the bank will look at it. There are lots of people in the country who are in negative equity but can afford to pay their repayments.

If you decide to 'hand the keys' back, is there a possibility that it might affect your ability to set up a business here? Would there not be a black mark on your credit rating?

Either way I hope it works out for you.

fasttalkerchat

NIMAN wrote: »

If you decide to 'hand the keys' back, is there a possibility that it might affect your ability to set up a business here? Would there not be a black mark on your credit rating?

Since he would still owe the difference after the sale of the house it would probably stop him getting a personal loan.

NIMAN

I was thinking of the Personal Insolvency legislation when it comes in.

I would guess we will see large numbers trying to declare themselves bankrupt to get out of their massive mortgage debts, but I am sure that this will have a major effect on them trying to get credit again for a long time.

The_Conductor

No credit cards etc for 5 years- and a bad credit record following you around for a further 5?

OP- as everyone else here has said- first step is get the tenant out. Focus on this issue step by step- forget about melodrama such as handing the keys back at the bank- deal with the issue logically- and the first logical step is get the tenant the hell out of there.

StillWaters

smccarrick wrote: »

No credit cards etc for 5 years- and a bad credit record following you around for a further 5?

OP- as everyone else here has said- first step is get the tenant out. Focus on this issue step by step- forget about melodrama such as handing the keys back at the bank- deal with the issue logically- and the first logical step is get the tenant the hell out of there.

I thought it was 7 years under the Personal Insolvency legislation. If I were you OP, as you are already in the UK, I'd be looking at their bankruptcy laws. Much cleaner and quicker.

skinsuit

If you live in the UK why not apply for bankruptcy in the UK?

This will take 12 months to complete. This time next year you can return to Ireland with a clean bill of financial health and the bank will have to absorb the losses involved in your property sale in which you will have zero interest.

Search for Steve Thatcher online, he seems to be pretty clued into the minutiae of the process. Good luck.

lima

skinsuit wrote: »

If you live in the UK why not apply for bankruptcy in the UK?

This will take 12 months to complete. This time next year you can return to Ireland with a clean bill of financial health and the bank will have to absorb the losses involved in your property sale in which you will have zero interest.

Search for Steve Thatcher online, he seems to be pretty clued into the minutiae of the process. Good luck.

Screw that, pay your debts.

riclad

GET tenant out, you have to follow the law,step by step, register tenant with prtb.Ie give,notice,by registered letter.
How much is house in ne,20, percent,40 per cent?
you,d need to say ,loan is say 150, house is worth 90k,
ie give more info to get more detailed advice.
bank will likely let you sell house,even if sale price is say 90k, loan is 115k.
wont let you sell house .if value is say 90k,loan,is 160k.
Every case is different.And bank also looks at your present income ,assets ,
savings,etc which you have to give ,if you want to get permiision to sell the house.
ie bank looks at ,how much can you pay,? on remaining loan balance.
I dont see how you can apply for bankruptcy if you have a good income in the uk,
but i,m not a financial expert.
theres loads of people living in eire, house is in ne 50 per cent,
they are still paying the full mortgage.
I read in the paper. some article by david mcwilliams, banks may have a veto,
ie if most of your debt is to a bank, 60 per cent approx, they may have a say,or be able to stop you going into personal bankruptcy, i think the details of the new law are still being discussed ,worked out.

skinsuit

lima wrote: »

Screw that, pay your debts.

Why? Some sense of bizarre moral rectitude; stiff upper lip whilst the OP's life is in tatters for the next 30 years?

Every Irish citizen has paid (and will pay) €14,000 each to bail out our banks.
Why would you NOT declare bankrupt?

lima

skinsuit wrote: »

Why? Some sense of bizarre moral rectitude; stiff upper lip whilst the OP's life is in tatters for the next 30 years?

Every Irish citizen has paid (and will pay) €14,000 each to bail out our banks.
Why would you NOT declare bankrupt?

Because he has a job and can clearly afford to live, he is just trying to get rid of a bad investment that he took off his own will. Now he is trying to squirm out of his duties to fulfil his obligations.

He owes money and he should pay. I was dilligent with my outlook on the world during the boom and didnt buy, so because of that I should help bail out some f**ker who wants to not pay his dues from a didgy investment?

It makes me sick.

skinsuit

riclad wrote: »

I dont see how you can apply for bankruptcy if you have a good income in the uk,
but i,m not a financial expert.


The OP is insolvent; i.e he clearly cannot meet his obligations to his creditors. This is enough to petition the courts for bankruptcy, the granting of which would be a formality.

skinsuit

lima wrote: »

Because he has a job and can clearly afford to live, he is just trying to get rid of a bad investment that he took off his own will. Now he is trying to squirm out of his duties to fulfil his obligations.

He owes money and he should pay. I was dilligent with my outlook on the world during the boom and didnt buy, so because of that I should help bail out some f**ker who wants to not pay his dues from a didgy investment?

It makes me sick.

Your problem lies with bailing out the banks not bailing out the OP and people like him. If the former had never happened, the latter would be inconsequential to you.

You are angry at the wrong party.

D3PO

skinsuit wrote: »

riclad wrote: »

I dont see how you can apply for bankruptcy if you have a good income in the uk,
but i,m not a financial expert.


The OP is insolvent; i.e he clearly cannot meet his obligations to his creditors. This is enough to petition the courts for bankruptcy, the granting of which would be a formality.

theres nothing in the opening post that indicated the OP is insolvent. Until I read otherwise Ive no sympathy for him/her.

If they are talking about starting a new business that to me says they have startup capital for it. Which means they have money to pay but havent been.

Pay your bills.

kippy

Being in negative equity/the rental income not covering the mortgage, are not reasons to default on your mortgage.
As mentioned here, handing the keys back doesn't make things any better. You go from having a potential asset/income and a debt to having nothing and a debt. Especially in the climate where the banks generally want to make it as straightforward for you as possible to hang onto the property.
I'd also add there may be implications for your ability to start a business also.

lima

skinsuit wrote: »

Your problem lies with bailing out the banks not bailing out the OP and people like him. If the former had never happened, the latter would be inconsequential to you.

You are angry at the wrong party.

I don't like people using this economic situation to get things for free either, debt forgiveness is disgusting and it skews normal working capitalism.

This person should pay his obligations. That goes for the everyone

StillWaters

lima wrote: »

debt forgiveness is disgusting and it skews normal working capitalism.

On the contrary. Some form of bankruptcy /debt forgiveness would be a feature of all capitalist societies, look at non recourse mortgages in the US, or the much more lax bankruptcy regime in the UK. It encourages entreupeurship and risk taking.

lima

StillWaters wrote: »

It encourages entreupeurship and risk taking.

I take your point, and it is fine for entrepreneurship but a lot of these people wanted to make a quick buck by purchasing property, now look where it has left us..

riclad

From what i,ve heard bout new insolvency law, you,ll only be allowed
a limited income, i understand ,its awful to have a house,say worth,1ook, loan 200k, The rent wont cover loan ,you are in ne ,ie its hard to sell it.
You have the option of going to interest only payment.
I believe the banks should say if you sell it, we,ll take off x per cent of the loan.
Remember ,the banks were bailed out by the government,
we,ll be paying the debt for 40 years.
THE banks are writing off some debts right now, but each case is unique.I know someone got about 18 per cent write off, btl loan.
This person works abroad, is not declaring bankruptcy,just put house up for sale.
IF i buy a house for 200k in athlone i,m stupid, but the bank is stupid to lend me 190k, on the basis of prices will rise ,and the rent no way covers the loan,
ie bank lend on btl was reckless and stupid.
ONCE prices dropped x amount of people had difficulty paying the loan ,and are trapped by negative equity.

lima

riclad wrote: »

From what i,ve heard bout new insolvency law, you,ll only be allowed
a limited income, i understand ,its awful to have a house,say worth,1ook, loan 200k, The rent wont cover loan ,you are in ne ,ie its hard to sell it.
You have the option of going to interest only payment.
I believe the banks should say if you sell it, we,ll take off x per cent of the loan.
Remember ,the banks were bailed out by the government,
we,ll be paying the debt for 40 years.
THE banks are writing off some debts right now, but each case is unique.I know someone got about 18 per cent write off, btl loan.
This person works abroad, is not declaring bankruptcy,just put house up for sale.
IF i buy a house for 200k in athlone i,m stupid, but the bank is stupid to lend me 190k, on the basis of prices will rise ,and the rent no way covers the loan,
ie bank lend on btl was reckless and stupid.
ONCE prices dropped x amount of people had difficulty paying the loan ,and are trapped by negative equity.

Another one blaming the banks for peoples collective STUPID decisions on buying property.

Why should I, as someone who pays tax, and who didn't buy a property as I knew Ireland wasn't the paradise people thought, have to help bail you people out, all the while having no choice but to buy an overinflated house thats not going down in value because the govt won't let the banks reposess them?

If the banks were allowed to sell the houses then it wouldnt be so bad I guess, but letting someone off e200k is ridiculous. Maybe up to e50k if they are truley screwed but this op guy could well afford it he just wants to get rid of a bad investment.

lima

riclad wrote: »

ONCE prices dropped x amount of people had difficulty paying the loan ,and are trapped by negative equity.

How could someone suddenly not afford to pay the agreed mortgage sum , just because their house went down in value? If anything their repayments went down because of lower interest rates??

Just because your house costs less doesn't give you the right to stop paying the loan, you agreed to it, you need to pay it off.

kippy

riclad wrote: »

ONCE prices dropped x amount of people had difficulty paying the loan ,and are trapped by negative equity.

People dont have "actual" difficulty in paying the loan unless their own financial circumstances changed (losing a job,paycuts etc etc)

D3PO

lima wrote: »

Why should I, as someone who pays tax, and who didn't buy a property as I knew Ireland wasn't the paradise people thought, have to help bail you people out, all the while having no choice but to buy an overinflated house thats not going down in value because the govt won't let the banks reposess them?

.

you have a choice. You don't have to buy an overinflated house you can rent.

lima

D3PO wrote: »

you have a choice. You don't have to buy an overinflated house you can rent.

I currently rent, Sorry I mean if I wanted to buy a house I'd have no choice..

Ipso

skinsuit wrote: »

Why? Some sense of bizarre moral rectitude; stiff upper lip whilst the OP's life is in tatters for the next 30 years?

Every Irish citizen has paid (and will pay) €14,000 each to bail out our banks.
Why would you NOT declare bankrupt?

And you will pay extra for any house some one decides they no longer want/can pay for.

riclad

I Don,T think he has the option to go bankrupt, as he,s working full time in the uk.
Theres many btl investors, their income has gone down, the rent doesnt fully over mortgage. Unless you can afford to pay surplus, after sale,
you can,t sell the house.You have to get permission from bank to sell the house.
They will require full info re your ,income, savings etc before they give permission.
UNless you are bankrupt ,the bank will always pursue you for outstanding debt.
They will make sure you can afford to pay the surplus ,after house sale,
i believe they, may write off x amount ,depending on your income,savings.
iT SOUNDS more like he feels fed up,eg i,m paying a 150k, loan on a house thats worth
80k.

jmayo

skinsuit wrote: »

Why? Some sense of bizarre moral rectitude; stiff upper lip whilst the OP's life is in tatters for the next 30 years?

Every Irish citizen has paid (and will pay) €14,000 each to bail out our banks.
Why would you NOT declare bankrupt?

And with the shi* you propose some of us will be paying a lot more than €14,000.
Should I and my family thank you for that proposal ? :mad:

skinsuit wrote: »

Your problem lies with bailing out the banks not bailing out the OP and people like him. If the former had never happened, the latter would be inconsequential to you.

You are angry at the wrong party.

No his/her problem I would bet is in bailing anyone out.
Because, and try and get this little salient point into your head, it will cost him/her yet more money.

It is unbelievable how some people fail to realise that "bailouts" cost taxpayers and indeed citizens money.
The only one benefiting from personal bailouts is the person getting it.

At least with the bailout of some banks (note I didn't say all) the country benefitted to an extent.
I know some would argue that, but a country losing it's systemic banks overnight would be in total chaos and turmoil.

And as for being angry at certain parties.
Maybe, like me, the poster is angry at people like you who are so willing to make me pay more for other people's financial decisions.
:mad:

Ipso

jmayo wrote: »

And as for being angry at certain parties.
Maybe, like me, the poster is angry at people like you who are so willing to make me pay more for other people's financial decisions.
:mad:

I know its hard to believe but it does seem that there are a lot of people out there who don't understand how the country works from the point of view of where the government gets their money.

mrmitty

Arguing that people "were stupid" to purchase homes during the bubble is redundant. A euphoric frenzy was intentionally created by the leadership class in this country with the aid of the media with the sole purpose of deceiving and feeding false information to the general public.
There was a mass effort to deceminate false and misleading information to the public and many, many financially illiterate citizens were duped. This misinformation is still being spread by some of the Irish 'news' papers. The Irish independant is, for example still trying desperately to reignite this mania and should be held to account.
Were I in negative equity, (like many including the OP) and restrained from living my day to day life in comfort, I'd have no reservations about renegotiating the terms of a loan contract which clearly would have been entered into because of the fraudulent or deceptive practices of our banks, media and our government.

mrmitty

Jurg wrote: »

Lazy scumbag. Pay your bills !

Nice!!

lima

mrmitty wrote: »

Arguing that people "were stupid" to purchase homes during the bubble is redundant. A euphoric frenzy was intentionally created by the leadership class in this country with the aid of the media with the sole purpose of deceiving and feeding false information to the general public.
There was a mass effort to deceminate false and misleading information to the public and many, many financially illiterate citizens were duped. This misinformation is still being spread by some of the Irish 'news' papers. The Irish independant is, for example still trying desperately to reignite this mania and should be held to account.
Were I in negative equity, (like many including the OP) and restrained from living my day to day life in comfort, I'd have no reservations about renegotiating the terms of a loan contract which clearly would have been entered into because of the fraudulent or deceptive practices of our banks, media and our government.

Yeah whatever. Always someone else s fault.

_Kaiser_

Let's have a quick review shall we...

- OP has a rental property he wants to hand back
- Currently lives in the UK with plans to move back and start a business

Doesn't sound like he's in real financial difficulty there - more like he's sick of dealing with his tenant and is more concerned about the impact the fallout of that will have on his new business idea :rolleyes:

Bankruptcy is (or should be) intended as a last resort for people who have no other choices available to them having already exhausted all options of paying their debt... not for someone who just wants to walk away from a choice he freely made and which hasn't worked out for him.

Sorry OP, but you made your choices and you have to live with the consequences - like an adult! - not expecting the taxpayer (of a country you no longer live in I might add!) to pick up the bill just because your dream of becoming a property magnate didn't work as planned.

Pay your bills!

mrmitty

lima wrote: »

Yeah whatever. Always someone else s fault.

It's not just someone else's fault.
It's yours, mine , the OP's and anyone who tolerates this banana republic.
So get off your high horse and do something constructive to put an end to this pay to play BS.
Fix the systemic problem, (cause) not the negative equity (effect).

_Kaiser_

mrmitty wrote: »

It's not just someone else's fault.
It's yours, mine , the OP's and anyone who tolerates this banana republic.
So get off your high horse and do something constructive to put an end to this pay to play BS.
Fix the systemic problem, (cause) not the negative equity (effect).

Sure..

Step 1 - Make people who CAN pay but just don't WANT to pay (as in this case by all accounts) settle their debts in full.. even if it takes them the rest of their lives to do so!

I got the calls every fortnight too telling me I'd been "pre-approved" for hundreds of thousands of euro for a mortgage. The difference is I said no.

Here's part of a post I made over in this thread that might help you understand why...

1. Although a Dub born and bred, I must've been passed over for the "must own a house/apartment, must get on property ladder, renting is dead money" gene that got the country into this mess (alongside the thought that you too can become a property magnate of course)

This means that, while sure I wouldn't MIND having my own property, it has to fulfil a number of criteria first.

(a) It has to be somewhere where I want to live, not just can afford to. I spent most of 2011 doing a 1000 km weekly commute to work and while it was motorway 95% of the way and only took about an hour door-to-door, the running costs of doing that are ridiculous - plus it IS nice being home (now) before 5pm

(b) Related to the above, it has to be near work yes but also my friends, family, decent shops, facilities etc. I've no interest in living in the back-end of
nowhere with 500 others in a half-finished housing estate with the nearest shop being maybe 10/20 mins drive away.

(c) I have to be able to afford it. By this I mean being able to make the repayments without simply ending up with no life and working only to pay off the mortgage. Not for me thanks. Plus I don't think the prices have hit bottom anyway what with the situation created by NAMA stockpiling property, the artificial floor in the rental market as a result of RA etc

But in the end, I suppose my primary reason is that I just don't have this Irish NEED to own my own place. I do think that the rental market needs serious reform though and a shift away from the Irish model of short-term tenancies of a year or two (on average) to one where 5/10/20 year arrangements are the norm like even up North and in Europe so that you CAN make your accommodation a home as opposed to the laughable setup where the house-proud landlord whinges about putting a feckin nail in a wall to hang a picture and hums and haws about changing the color scheme etc - yet still expects the tenant to cough up the inflated rent on time anyway.

We have a lot of things we need to do in this country, but still obsessing about property isn't it.

djimi

mrmitty wrote: »

It's not just someone else's fault.
It's yours, mine , the OP's and anyone who tolerates this banana republic.
So get off your high horse and do something constructive to put an end to this pay to play BS.
Fix the systemic problem, (cause) not the negative equity (effect).

Ands whats your solution to this problematic system exactly? How you do you propose fixing it?

Victor

Jurg wrote: »

Lazy scumbag. Pay your bills !

No need for comments like this.

mrmitty wrote: »

Nice!!

Constructive posts only please.

Moderator

the groutch

the op sounds like a case of won't pay rather than can't pay, and should face up to his responsibilities. at the end of the day nobody put a gun to his head to force him to buy the property.

lima

mrmitty wrote: »

It's not just someone else's fault.
It's yours, mine , the OP's and anyone who tolerates this banana republic.
So get off your high horse and do something constructive to put an end to this pay to play BS.
Fix the systemic problem, (cause) not the negative equity (effect).

I've given up with this ****hole and I'll be bringing up kids in another country.

mrmitty

lima wrote: »

I've given up with this ****hole and I'll be bringing up kids in another country.

Then why are you concerned about the OP's position?



Ps. I haven't lived in Ireland in more than a quarter century but I still feel responsible to an extent because I did not speak out louder and with more conviction back then.
I was in the process of purchasing a house in 2001 in Galway but decided then that prices were overly inflated. Luckily, I had the benefit of being able to view the Irish property market in perspective and it was easy to see that property in Galway which was commanding higher prices that similar property's in world class major city's was over priced.
I cannot however imagine how people who did not have the benifit of this perspective and who were refused access to reasonable and pertinent information (price history) could possibly determine price or value.
It's absurd to think that this information was withheld and it's even more absurd to think that these people, the home buyers should be chained for life to properties because of this.
Afterall, It's no crime to wish better for ones self and ones family. The only crimes committed were and still are by those VI's.

mrmitty

djimi wrote: »

Ands whats your solution to this problematic system exactly? How you do you propose fixing it?

The solution is going to be a complex long term process.
Debt forgiveness in exchange for equity, lowering of interest rates (if possible).
Sharing of burden by banks and homeowners.
VI's need to be held accountable. Where's the perp walk? Or should we just give up and conceded that Ireland is a total farce?

_Kaiser_

mrmitty wrote: »

Then why are you concerned about the OP's position?



Ps. I haven't lived in Ireland in more than a quarter century but I still feel responsible to an extent because I did not speak out louder and with more conviction back then.
I was in the process of purchasing a house in 2001 in Galway but decided then that prices were overly inflated. Luckily, I had the benefit of being able to view the Irish property market in perspective and it was easy to see that property in Galway which was commanding higher prices that similar property's in world class major city's was over priced.
I cannot however imagine how people who did not have the benifit of this perspective and who were refused access to reasonable and pertinent information (price history) could possibly determine price or value.
It's absurd to think that this information was withheld and it's even more absurd to think that these people, the home buyers should be chained for life to properties because of this.
Afterall, It's no crime to wish better for ones self and ones family. The only crimes committed were and still are by those VI's.

But you're contradicting yourself here...

You've just said that you were set to buy a house in Ireland but took another look at it and decided against it. Now unless you had access to a crystal ball, I don't see why anyone else couldn't have done what you did - ESPECIALLY when prices got to truly ridiculous levels!

You chose not to go ahead with it, in the same way as the OP (and thousands like him) did. That's fair enough - but complaining now because your choice hasn't worked out (as the OP - and again many like him - is doing) and worse, expecting someone ELSE to now pick up the tab for this decision, is where the problem lies.

And yes, I'm afraid that if it means that it takes him/them the rest of his life to pay that debt then that's what he does - because you can be damn sure that if the bubble hadn't burst he'd still be happily sitting on his "investment" without a care for anyone less fortunate.

_Kaiser_

mrmitty wrote: »

The solution is going to be a complex long term process.
Debt forgiveness in exchange for equity, lowering of interest rates (if possible).
Sharing of burden by banks and homeowners.
VI's need to be held accountable. Where's the perp walk? Or should we just give up and conceded that Ireland is a total farce?

There should absolutely be NO "debt forgiveness" for those who gambled and lost, no more than there should have been for the banks/builders in the first place, and contrary to what seems to being advocated here, 2 wrongs don't magically make a right.

What needs to happen is lenders need to work with their clients (forced to if necessary) to restructure payments to realistic levels according to that individual's circumstances - but under no circumstance should that money just be "written off" or "forgiven" because the debt won't actually disappear you know.. it'll just be passed on to the bank's other customers (which in the case of almost all of ours is who?... yes, the taxpayer!)

The only ones who should share the burden is the bank itself and the person who owes the debt. My name isn't on the mortgage after all, nor can I decide to move in to that house if I wanted to so why should I end up paying for it??

I do agree on one point though - this country is pretty much a lost cause at this stage. Between teachers/publicans/lawyers playing statesmen, most of the decision making now being out of our hands anyway (thank you Europe!), and the Irish attitude to politics/civic responsibility not extending beyond "well what are you going to do for ME?!", I can't ever see there being real change in this country.

riclad

I think there should be some forgiveness ,in cases where someone puts the house up for sale,gives all financial info to bank, and has a lower income,difficulty in paying the full loan.
And is in some financial hardship, and it could be monitored for fairness by some independent body.eg MABS.
I,M not saying someone on 75k income, can just go to bank, and say,here,s the keys,
house is worth,100k,my loan is 200k, please write off 65k.I,ll sell the house.
Theres people already getting 100 per cent forgiveness now,
by going to the uk.

mrmitty

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

But you're contradicting yourself here...

You've just said that you were set to buy a house in Ireland but took another look at it and decided against it. Now unless you had access to a crystal ball, I don't see why anyone else couldn't have done what you did - ESPECIALLY when prices got to truly ridiculous levels!

You chose not to go ahead with it, in the same way as the OP (and thousands like him) did. That's fair enough - but complaining now because your choice hasn't worked out (as the OP - and again many like him - is doing) and worse, expecting someone ELSE to now pick up the tab for this decision, is where the problem lies.

And yes, I'm afraid that if it means that it takes him/them the rest of his life to pay that debt then that's what he does - because you can be damn sure that if the bubble hadn't burst he'd still be happily sitting on his "investment" without a care for anyone less fortunate.

If you read my post correctly you'll see what my crystal ball is and no, there is no contradiction in my post.

Further to my post I'd argue that there is no meeting of the minds in these contracts because on side , the buyer has pertinent information withheld (sales history) and therefore these contracts should not be enforceable
.
The only people I'd like to see in shackles are the people who were the architects of this ponzi scheme.
Again, how many of them are held accountable?
The wink, wink, nod, nod culture in Ireland is despicable IMO.

mrmitty

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

There should absolutely be NO "debt forgiveness" for those who gambled and lost, no more than there should have been for the banks/builders in the first place, and contrary to what seems to being advocated here, 2 wrongs don't magically make a right.

What needs to happen is lenders need to work with their clients (forced to if necessary) to restructure payments to realistic levels according to that individual's circumstances - but under no circumstance should that money just be "written off" or "forgiven" because the debt won't actually disappear you know.. it'll just be passed on to the bank's other customers (which in the case of almost all of ours is who?... yes, the taxpayer!)

The only ones who should share the burden is the bank itself and the person who owes the debt. My name isn't on the mortgage after all, nor can I decide to move in to that house if I wanted to so why should I end up paying for it??

I do agree on one point though - this country is pretty much a lost cause at this stage. Between teachers/publicans/lawyers playing statesmen, most of the decision making now being out of our hands anyway (thank you Europe!), and the Irish attitude to politics/civic responsibility not extending beyond "well what are you going to do for ME?!", I can't ever see there being real change in this country.

And respectfully I'd argue that it's attitudes like yours that if left unchallenged will guarantee many more generations of of Irish to be condemned to subjugation.

cookie1977

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

There should absolutely be NO "debt forgiveness" for those who gambled and lost, no more than there should have been for the banks/builders in the first place, and contrary to what seems to being advocated here, 2 wrongs don't magically make a right.

What needs to happen is lenders need to work with their clients (forced to if necessary) to restructure payments to realistic levels according to that individual's circumstances - but under no circumstance should that money just be "written off" or "forgiven" because the debt won't actually disappear you know.. it'll just be passed on to the bank's other customers (which in the case of almost all of ours is who?... yes, the taxpayer!)

The only ones who should share the burden is the bank itself and the person who owes the debt. My name isn't on the mortgage after all, nor can I decide to move in to that house if I wanted to so why should I end up paying for it??

I do agree on one point though - this country is pretty much a lost cause at this stage. Between teachers/publicans/lawyers playing statesmen, most of the decision making now being out of our hands anyway (thank you Europe!), and the Irish attitude to politics/civic responsibility not extending beyond "well what are you going to do for ME?!", I can't ever see there being real change in this country.

I'd agree with some of what you say but that debt forgiveness in some situations is valid. Say a person looses their PPR/PDH and they have no money. Bank sells home and there's still an outstanding balance. If it's shown that the owner cannot pay and payment would lead to penal servitude then the overhang should be forgiven. Let the person start again. There's no more that can be down to them.

Re politics. Why not enter yourself (honest question that). Also a proportional representation system with a list system would stop the parish politics substantially

riclad

I THINK the new personal insolvency bill is there, to help, people whose income has dropped drastically and who owe say 200k,
to get back to a normal life ,assuming they give the house back to the bank,
I expect the banks will try and make it so ,the rules will be very
strict ,to stop it being used as a strategic default.
ie you,ll be allowed to hold onto a car ,tools of the trade ,eg plumbers tools etc.You wont be able to hold onto other assets ,or savings, over x amount.
Why would the bank write off, 100k, say house is worth 100, my loan
is 200k, my salary is 45k, loan is buy to let.
Can I just SELL house and forget ,about the balance?
The taxpayer can,t afford it, at present 95 per cent irish banks are owned by the government.
Maybe they could bring in a rule ,if your income has reduced by x per cent ,loan is x , you are in negative equity by 70 per cent,
IF you sell house ,bank will write off x per cent,
eg you,d still owe 80 per cent of balance , bank writes off 20 per cent money owed.