Glut of repossessed houses could depress prices ‘by up to 25%’

gaius c

The_Conductor wrote: »

Some communities seem to think its normal to burn them down when their inhabitants die........

Think of the pros. House prices would go up!

cookie1977 wrote: »

I think you'll agree for the most part Spider is correct

Where does that link suggest renters don't vote?
I'm involved at local level and one of the things that renting families get in touch with constituency offices about is making sure their voting address is transferred in time for the next elections.
And let me tell you, candidates are getting earfuls from this vastly increased group of voters.

lima

The Spider wrote: »

I'm not hostile towards renters at all, what annoys me is when someone renting a place looks on it as anything other than that, it's not theirs talking about greedy landlords is nonsense, it's like me renting a movie and talking about how greedy xtravision is, it's like staying in a centrally located hotel and complaining about the price, you'll get a cheaper one by the airport.

A mortgage is a service, however I'd question the bank being entitled to the rest, the bank took as much a risk lending the money as the borrower did getting it, therefore the burden is both the banks and the borrowers, bank gets the house, that'll be the end of it.

What annoys me is when someone walks into a bank and asks for a mortgage, knowing that if they cannot pay their property will be sold and they will be liable for the rest, and then complains that 'the banks forced me to take a loan'. It's not theirs, talking about a greedy bank is nonsense. It's like me buying a car on hire purchase, not making repayments and talking about how greedy the car financier is.

Your last paragraph is nonsense, and is the weak argument that I hear all the time. It is a weak excuse. If the bank took such as risk, then they would be demanding a share of the profit had the property gone up in value.

Cuddlesworth

cookie1977 wrote: »

Ask and yee shall receive:

http://www.scsi.ie/news_reports/tenure_mix

This is the same crowd that released 1 month ago, a statement that prices had increased country wide by 20% because of the survey they did. Ignoring the reality that such surveys are now useless with the PPR. Show me one that isn't from such a vested interest.

Balmed Out

cookie1977 wrote: »

I think you'll agree for the most part Spider is correct

I presume you missed a lot of posts or something.

jay0109

cookie1977 wrote: »

I meant about the stats.

I didn't think I'd need to explain that.

The make up of renters is a side issue to his bigger point on why renters should be treated differently to Mortgage holders.

The Spider

jay0109 wrote: »

The make up of renters is a side issue to his bigger point on why renters should be treated differently to Mortgage holders.

I'm really not going to go into it but some people are really naive if they can't see that a mortgage holder or house owner is always going to be treated differently to someone on a years lease in an area.

They have an active interest in their community, they're there for the long haul, so any politician going door to door in the local elections, knows that the people he has to keep happy are the people who are going to be living in the area for a long time, as opposed to the bunch of lads sharing a house on a years lease.

jmayo

marathonic wrote: »

Yeah, because the stress of having to pay rent due to the fact that the houses you can afford aren't up to your quality standards is the same as the stress endured due to severe negative equity and unaffordable mortgages.

It's a sad state of affairs when people appear to be sitting back hoping that a family with two young children gets thrown out of their homes so that prices drop and they can afford a house of a slightly higher quality.

Not so long ago somewhere around here, not sure if actually in this thread, in reply to my comment about people in mortgage diffilculty expecting debt writeoffs/downs, bankruptcy and jingle mail, I was told it is every man for themselves.

Well then if that is the attitude of a lot of the people who are hugely in debt then why shouldn't people who want to buy have the attitude that those in huge arrears who aren't paying or can't pay their mortgages be turfed out so they get a house at a better price.

As for listening to sob stories on radio or in the media, frankly I have reached the stage where I couldn't give a cr**.
I don't know these people and I would firmly believe they wouldn't exactly be crushed if it was the other way around.

If I hear some poor parent whose child is dying or died then I would have a lot of sympathy.
If I hear about some poor sod who has battled cancer for years and is leaving behind a family I have sympathy.
But someone who is in self imposed debt and who really expects the rest of us to pay for it.
Forget it.

And trust me the ones shouting loudest to date have been shown to be the most reckless.
Or maybe some around here forgot about the elderly "poor" couple being hounded out of their home in Dalkey whilst they had another 20 odd rental properties, or the "poor" stud farmer from Kildare battling the bailiffs or the ex fianna fail backroomer developer who tried to stop "the foreigners" of Allsop auctioning properties.
For every poor put upon family I would bet I can find more than one reckless and greedy borrower.
Much like the sacred cows of the emergency services and front line staff are draggged out to excuse the public service as a whole, the same is being done in order to get debt forgiveness and debt absolution for those who got burnt in the greed of the celtic bubble.

Even around here some of the most vocifereous proponents of solving the mortgage debt issue by writeoffs, writedowns, little or no repossessions, etc around here are actually in major debt.
Funny that isn't it.

Villa05

dinnyirwin wrote: »

There are both landlords and normal householders in trouble with their mortgages.
Despite popular belief landlords can only charge what the market will allow them to. Any business will charge as much as the market will allow. That is the nature of running a business. Landlords already have the cards stacked against them with unfair taxes and charges, but these, when the market allows will be passed on to the end customer - as with any other business.

Agree with your entire post. my response ref: landlords was to the suggestion that people who want a normal market are greedy.

When there is a distorted market the market rent distorted.

lima

The Spider wrote: »

I'm really not going to go into it but some people are really naive if they can't see that a mortgage holder or house owner is always going to be treated differently to someone on a years lease in an area.

They have an active interest in their community, they're there for the long haul, so any politician going door to door in the local elections, knows that the people he has to keep happy are the people who are going to be living in the area for a long time, as opposed to the bunch of lads sharing a house on a years lease.

Nonsense, I've had well more convos with my fellow renter neighbors than I have seen my owner neighbors ever having with us or their fellow owner neighbors.

Why do you assume renters are not in it for the long hall, or that they don't care about their neighborhood? Not all of us were gallivanting students from down the country partying it up in Rathmines. I am a Dubliner, living in D6 in a quiet settled area of inner-suburb, I vote, my gf is a member of the local library etc.

Heisenberg1

So many people on this thread wishing hardship on others. I think it's time to face facts for some posters on here who are looking to buy looks like you missed the boat. For property prices the only way is UP!. Best of luck renting.

jay0109

Heisenberg1 wrote: »

So many people on this thread wishing hardship on others. I think it's time to face facts for some posters on here who are looking to buy looks like you missed the boat. For property prices the only way is UP!. Best of luck renting.

The next crash can't be far away now with that rhetoric back in vogue

The Spider

lima wrote: »

Nonsense, I've had well more convos with my fellow renter neighbors than I have seen my owner neighbors ever having with us or their fellow owner neighbors.

Why do you assume renters are not in it for the long hall, or that they don't care about their neighborhood? Not all of us were gallivanting students from down the country partying it up in Rathmines. I am a Dubliner, living in D6 in a quiet settled area of inner-suburb, I vote, my gf is a member of the local library etc.

I'm sure you are, and I'm sure there's others, however the majority are transient and move from place to place, even you yourself have constantly said you're looking to buy which means you intend on moving out of the area.

Renters never see themselves as renting for the rest of their lives, the whole of this thread shows that, demanding repos to buy cheaper houses.

Fact is if I was a politician canvassing I'd be more interested in the interests of the settled house owners than the people renting, purely from a survival point of view, if they vote for me and I'm not seen doing anything for them, well I can kiss my job goodbye next time around.

lima

Heisenberg1 wrote: »

So many people on this thread wishing hardship on others. I think it's time to face facts for some posters on here who are looking to buy looks like you missed the boat. For property prices the only way is UP!. Best of luck renting.

Typical troll response from someone in Negative Equity :rolleyes:

You are the type of person that ensures that hardship will be wished on the 'mortgage class' in Ireland. There was no boat to begin with, just the set of events the govt wanted have now happened. Some people are panicking and buying, most of these are people in their 60's transferring equity from banks into bricks. But honestly the bad quality of property in Dublin means that not a lot is lost for a person who is looking for a house to live in, as opposed to an amateur landlord looking for a quick buck.

There is no luck involved in renting by the way, the only people looking for luck is people in negative equity who owe a lifetime of money to banks due to bad investments. I in the meantime live a high quality of life in an affluent inner-suburb, cycle to work, don't need a car, same a chunk every month, etc. etc. oh why am I even responding :rolleyes:

Heisenberg1

lima wrote: »

Typical troll response from someone in Negative Equity :rolleyes:

You are the type of person that ensures that hardship will be wished on the 'mortgage class' in Ireland. There was no boat to begin with, just the set of events the govt wanted have now happened. Some people are panicking and buying, most of these are people in their 60's transferring equity from banks into bricks. But honestly the bad quality of property in Dublin means that not a lot is lost for a person who is looking for a house to live in, as opposed to an amateur landlord looking for a quick buck.

There is no luck involved in renting by the way, the only people looking for luck is people in negative equity who owe a lifetime of money to banks due to bad investments. I in the meantime live a high quality of life in an affluent inner-suburb, cycle to work, don't need a car, same a chunk every month, etc. etc. oh why am I even responding :rolleyes:

Negative equity ?? You don't know me or my circumstances but I can assure you I am far far from negative equity. I was merely making an observation from vast amount of people who post on this thread and the utter horse sh### that's is said. As I said before enjoy renting and stop wishing hardship and misery on others let it go you missed the boat. I like you live in affluent area of SCD and too cycle to work and I have a nice car and beautiful home.

Cuddlesworth

Heisenberg1 wrote: »

So many people on this thread wishing hardship on others. I think it's time to face facts for some posters on here who are looking to buy looks like you missed the boat. For property prices the only way is UP!. Best of luck renting.

Damm straight. When are people going to get it into their heads that renting is dead money. And paying back loans is for chumps.

lima

Heisenberg1 wrote: »

Negative equity ?? You don't know me or my circumstances but I can assure you I am far far from negative equity. I was merely making an observation from vast amount of people who post on this thread and the utter horse sh### that's is said. As I said before enjoy renting and stop wishing hardship and misery on others let it go you missed the boat. I like you live in affluent area of SCD and too cycle to work and I have a nice car and beautiful home.

I do enjoy renting

I pay close to what I would in interest and I same up to e1500 per month into a savings account, I could never afford to live on my road as most of the houses are 1m+ so I'm really happy and enjoy it

Good for you though, especially if you are not in negative equity. You appear to be far older than me so I hope to be comfortable like that someday.

As for people who live in houses for free and dont pay back their loans, I spit on them

lima

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Damm straight. When are people going to get it into their heads that renting is dead money. And paying back loans is for chumps.

The_Morrigan

lima wrote: »

I do enjoy renting

I pay close to what I would in interest and I same up to e1500 per month into a savings account, I could never afford to live on my road as most of the houses are 1m+ so I'm really happy and enjoy it

Good for you though, especially if you are not in negative equity. You appear to be far older than me so I hope to be comfortable like that someday.

As for people who live in houses for free and dont pay back their loans, I spit on them

lima cut it out, comments like that are inflammatory and you are well aware of it. This is a very emotive topic for a lot of people who are struggling day to day with mortgages and other bills because life has dealt them a bad hand.

Heisenberg1

lima wrote: »

I do enjoy renting

I pay close to what I would in interest and I same up to e1500 per month into a savings account, I could never afford to live on my road as most of the houses are 1m+ so I'm really happy and enjoy it

Good for you though, especially if you are not in negative equity. You appear to be far older than me so I hope to be comfortable like that someday.

As for people who live in houses for free and dont pay back their loans, I spit on them

Wow you must be paying some amount to rent on that road with those sort of prices.

The Spider

Heisenberg1 wrote: »

Wow you must be paying some amount to rent on that road with those sort of prices.

Probably Orwell Park, with it's giant redbrick million plus houses, what's the rent on one of those, 6 grand a month, no wonder Lima's looking for repossessions to knock the prices down!

The_Valeyard

at house viewing couple weeks ago. Crazy demand for 4beds i D15. Very worrying for trying to buy a house.

lima

The Spider wrote: »

Probably Orwell Park, with it's giant redbrick million plus houses, what's the rent on one of those, 6 grand a month, no wonder Lima's looking for repossessions to knock the prices down!

It's 1/3rd of a house!!

The_Conductor

Heisenberg1 wrote: »

So many people on this thread wishing hardship on others. I think it's time to face facts for some posters on here who are looking to buy looks like you missed the boat. For property prices the only way is UP!. Best of luck renting.

Trolling is not appreciated.
If you intend to post in this forum please read, and comply with, the forum's charter.

Heisenberg1

The_Conductor wrote: »

Trolling is not appreciated.
If you intend to post in this forum please read, and comply with, the forum's charter.

I'm not trolling I am making an observation after reading page after page of nonsense. I posted earlier on in this thread and I certainly wasn't trolling.

moxin

The_Valeyard wrote: »

at house viewing couple weeks ago. Crazy demand for 4beds i D15. Very worrying for trying to buy a house.

Offhand, aren't 4 beds rare in D15 constituting a small % of the overall stock? Though you haven't said which suburb, it might explain the demand. Can you elaborate on said house, is it in good nick or a dive? I suspect the former.

MysticalRain

So if I was to summarise this thread in a nutshell:

* A house is an asset, and if a homeowner is struggling to pay for, then paying back the loan should be optional.
* Renting a house is a service, and if a renter is struggling to pay for it, they should suck it up.

* Renters should live within their means by downsizing and/or moving further away from where they work if they can’t afford to live in a good area.
* Homeowners shouldn't be asked to live within their means by selling the house, downsizing, moving to a cheaper area, renting, living in council house, and paying of their balance of their debt.

* Renters knew exactly what they signed up for in a distorted property market rigged in favour of bankers, developers, and vulture investors. So they should suck it up.
* Naïve homeowners are merely helpless victims of a distorted property market rigged in favour of bankers, developers, and vulture investors. So they should be entitled to a bailout at the expense of renters and FTB’s.

* Renters don’t give a damn about their neighbours or wider neighbourhood.
* Homeowners apparently do, perhaps as one might speculate, because said homeowners expect those same neighbours to pay their mortgages for them.

* A typical homeowner in negative equity is apparently under huge stress despite the fact that they are unlikely to ever sell their house to release the equity from it. Ditto for stress related to mortgage payments, even though many of those home owners would actually be paying more if they were renting at the moment.
* A renter struggling under ever-increasing rents, sub-par accommodation and potential eviction at the end of every month is apparently living a stress-free existence relative to the homeowner.

* Renters should be subject to the full rigours of the free market (it’s actually not a “free market” due to massive government interference in form of NAMA, bank/developer bailouts, tax breaks to build shoebox flats in Leitrim etc, but lets pretend it is).
* Homeowners and BTL investors should be compensated for falls in asset prices by government bailouts. If those same asset prices had risen, they would of course have kept all the gains (in the case of BTL investors: at the expense of the same people they now expect to pay their mortgage for them)

* Families of homeowners struggling to pay mortgages are deserving of everyone’s sympathy, and only cruel heartless people would disagree.
* Families of renters struggling to pay exorbitantly high rents do not deserve equal sympathy (or any at all in the case of one particular poster), and who gives a fcuk anyway as these people apparently don’t vote for the pandering gombeens who helped get us into this mess.

The economy suffers from families struggling to pay mortgages having less money to spend in the wider economy. So their debts should be written down by money taken from the everyone else (borrowed from Europe at extortionate rates, looted from people’s pension funds, diverted from funds for special needs kids etc). The same people will then wonder why the country suffers when everyone else has less money to spend in the wider economy. Or why their own special needs kid cannot get a place at the local clinic.

So face it folks, you’re all just a bunch of me-feiners who want socialism for yourselves and capitalism for everyone else. The mantra is fcuk you, fcuk society, and fcuk the country I live in. Is it any wonder this country is in the sorry state that it is, and is likely to be for the next hundred years if we as a society don't start growing up and acting like responsible adults?

At least there are rational arguments beyond selfishness on the side of people arguing against bailouts - everyone is honest and pays their own way, and it is less likely to result in a huge property bubble 2.0 if moral hazard still applies.

Zamboni

cookie1977 wrote: »

Ask and yee shall receive:

http://www.scsi.ie/news_reports/tenure_mix

Drawing conclusions of a rental market based on a sample size of 761 tenants paid for by a vested interest!

You could be the new Charlie Weston.

Zamboni

MysticalRain wrote: »

So if I was to summarise this thread in a nutshell:

So this **** should totally go viral...

Quality post

cookie1977

Zamboni wrote: »

Drawing conclusions of a rental market based on a sample size of 761 tenants paid for by a vested interest!

You could be the new Charlie Weston.

Rather than personal comments about me you could always refute the publicly published and referenced stats that I provided with some stats of your own.

Calina

The_Morrigan wrote: »

This is a very emotive topic for a lot of people who are struggling day to day with mortgages and other bills because life has dealt them a bad hand.

On the wider subject of whether life dealt people a bad hand, I feel very strongly that many people chose the cards themselves.

And that is why this matter is emotive.

Ultimately, the question which people need to consider is do they want a functional economy or not? If they do, unfortunately the property market needs to take a hit.

Many people will get caught in the cross fire. Quite a lot of them will be renters. I've been terminated twice in the last 3 years for landlords who were repossessed.

I'm afraid that when that happens to you not once but twice, your cup of sympathy for people who are in negative equity is somewhat limited. If you're still able to pay your mortgage, you're still a lot better off than many others, regardless of how much value your house has lost.

I'm not sure how to fix this problem any more. We have a lot of ologoning because many young people are leaving and emigrating. We have a lot less debate on the sacrifices to be made to prevent it in the future.

Our property market has siphoned off a lot of our economic well being. As long as there is an argument in favour of not dealing with that; not recognising that houses not being paid for need to be reclaimed and sold, not recognising that houses could fall in value by 60 per cent, along with rents, leaving much more finance to support the retail industry and the gaping mess that will be pensions in about 25 years' time...the country is in deep trouble.

I am sorry for the people who are stressed out. But I find there needs to be more acknowledgement of their contribution to their dilemma because this mess was, objectively, visible since 2002 at least, and I can't buy the line that life dealt them a bad hand. We all make choices, and some of those choices have involved ignoring reality.

In the meantime, our young people will continue to emigrate and our social welfare bill will suck a lot out of our tax take.

If the cost of accommodation was massively lower, we would be better off as a whole.

Maybe the best thing to do is repossess, write off and force a limit of 2 years salary on mortgages going forward. And put the business back in the hands of building societies and out of the hands of banks.