Left Ireland for Australia, left keys in door

KegglesMcS

After talking to the banks a number of times in Ireland who failed to let me sell my houses I had no choice but to pack the bags and go. The company I worked for had a great offer for me in Oz and I felt I was depriving my kids of a better life by not accepting.

I have 2 properties in Ireland and I haven't paid either mortgage in 13 months. I offered to take on the negative equity as a personal loan but they refused.

My question is when living in Australia, can the banks/law force me to come home at any point?

My only concern is if I were home for christmas for example could I be arrested or am I being stupid?

Chris_5339762

This won't end well.

I'll say it nicely, because others won't. Try to pay your debts, don't run away from them. Sort out a payment plan with your bank that allows you to continue to pay your mortgage. Do not do a strategic default or anything like that.

Thank you and I'll go make the popcorn.

fasttalkerchat

Why not let the houses to someone on a low income living in a smaller house for a nominal fee. That way the houses can be put to good use and the banks cant touch them.
The way it stands they will sell your houses at auction for 50k and take you to court for the rest.

KegglesMcS

So they can take me to court even though I am living in Australia?

Lantus

After 13 months of no payment the banks should b screaming to accept some sort of deal whether it be interest only or int+some capital. Talk to the mortgage arrears section and put everything in writing.

Fundementally life is short and I say put you and your family first. Keep writing and engaging with the banks.

As others have said get the properties rented and use the money to furnish the mortgages. As your away get an agent or friends /family to do all of this.

Dont stick your head in the sand but dont let a very small pile of bricks, timber and plasterboard dictate the future of you and your family. The banks are corrupt and fundementally flawed. The entire premise of our civilisation is built on debt (the source of all money creation in the last 90+ years) My gut feeling is that the whole thing is circling the plug hole on a global level.

GetWithIt

1. Do not leave the keys in the door. That's just being silly. Mail them.

2. You're a grown adult. The repercussions of your actions are yours alone to bear. Research your options, accept the consequences and do what you need to do.

KegglesMcS

GetWithIt wrote: »

1. Do not leave the keys in the door. That's just being silly. Mail them.

2. You're a grown adult. The repercussions of your actions are yours alone to bear. Research your options, accept the consequences and do what you need to do.

Have I not done that?

Kristopherus

KegglesMcS wrote: »

Have I not done that?

To put it simply, you cannot run for ever. If the banks repossess, they can flog off the houses at sfa money and register the remaining mortgage as a debt against you. Nobody can tell the future, but it could be well on the case that Australia could well have pretty comprehensive tax treaty with the auld sod in the not too distant future. That being a possibility, you need to have your i's dotted and your t's crossed to cover yourself from future court action. Have you established that the bank cannot come after you in the Aussie courts?

KegglesMcS

No I havent. I guess thats my question right now.

catallus

KegglesMcS, if you think you're doing the right thing then don't let anyone talk you out of it.

The banks were fully aware of the risk of you defaulting; that's why they charge you (and the rest of us) interest!

Let them have their keys. Maybe talk to a friendly solicitor about going legally bankrupt.

If the idle rich can do it, so can you.

Enjoy Australia.

D3PO

catallus wrote: »

The banks were fully aware of the risk of you defaulting; that's why they charge you (and the rest of us) interest!

.

Eh they charge interest to make a profit not due to a default risk :rolleyes:

Nobody on here will change the OP's mind but the debt wont dissapear, its not a case of out of sight out of mind.

fasttalkerchat

D3PO wrote: »

Eh they charge interest to make a profit not due to a default risk :rolleyes:

Nobody on here will change the OP's mind but the debt wont dissapear, its not a case of out of sight out of mind.

They risk has a link to the interest charged. Profit comes into it too.

Ipso

If you had a job why didn't you pay any mortgage?

KegglesMcS

I had a job. I payed the mortgage until I left Ireland. Never missed a payment on either house for over 12 years.

fasttalkerchat

KegglesMcS wrote: »

I had a job. I payed the mortgage until I left Ireland. Never missed a payment on either house for over 12 years.

So you wanted to sell the houses and pay back the deficit as a personal loan but they refused. So you stopped paying the mortgage and they're still refusing anything?
Could you remortgage the houses with another bank then sell them off?

Peregrinus

Kristopherus wrote: »

To put it simply, you cannot run for ever. If the banks repossess, they can flog off the houses at sfa money and register the remaining mortgage as a debt against you. Nobody can tell the future, but it could be well on the case that Australia could well have pretty comprehensive tax treaty with the auld sod in the not too distant future. That being a possibility, you need to have your i's dotted and your t's crossed to cover yourself from future court action. Have you established that the bank cannot come after you in the Aussie courts?

This has nothing to do with tax or tax treaties. There's already an Ireland/Australia double taxation agreement in place, but it's not relevant to KegglesMcS's situation.

The position is this:

1. The banks can enforce their securities against the two properties, and take court action to have them sold.

2. Assuming the net sale proceeds do not clear the debt, Keggles still owes the bank the shortfall, plus accumulated interest, costs, etc. Interest continues to run.

3. Keggles's obligations do not evaporate when he gets on a plane. The bank can sue Keggles (in the Irish courts) while he's abroad. Whether they will or not is another matter, but they can.

4. If they sue, they'll almost certainly get judgment in their favour.

5. The bank can seek to enforce their Irish judgment against Keggles in the Australian courts (if they can trace Keggle - but banks have good international information networks). That's cumbersome and complex, but possible. Again, whether they will or not is another matter, but they can certainly try.

6. Alternatively, the banks can sue Keggles in the Australian courts. That's probably more straightforward. I have to say that it's not something banks normally do, except for very large amounts. But it can certainly be done.

7. Should Keggles come back to Ireland, either on a visit or permanently, they can seek to enforce their judgment against him in Ireland. Available enforcement mechanisms do not include arrest, however. What Keggles is contemplating doing is not a crime.

8. If Keggles remains in Australia, and assuming the Irish bank does not pursue him through the Australian courts, this could still cause him problems if he applies for credit in Australia. At a minimum, he'll probably have to lie (about not having defaulted on previous obligations) to obtain any signficant amount of credit, and lying to obtain credit is fraud, and that would be a crime - committed in his new country of residence, not his old. And there's a material chance of detection. So, best to avoid this.

catallus

^^^^^^^

Right!

So Kegles should get bankrupt ASAP......

StillWaters

catallus wrote: »

^^^^^^^

Right!

So Kegles should get bankrupt ASAP......

Certainly they should explore this, or a Personal Insolvency Arrangement. Leaving the arrangement as is is messy and leaves Kegles looking over their shoulder for years.

cookie1977

Have you looked at all the options under the MARP process?

It's really essential to have exploited all options before going with the one you're suggesting. You also might meet the criteria for personal insolvency. Have a look at the links below:

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/money_and_tax/personal_finance/debt/personal_insolvency/personal_insolvency_options.html

www.keepingyourhome.ie

stoneill

KegglesMcS wrote: »

I had a job. I payed the mortgage until I left Ireland. Never missed a payment on either house for over 12 years.

I don't understand, you just left?

Peregrinus

As I read it, he left 13 months ago and stopped making mortgage payments at that point.

JustAThought

Peregrinus wrote: »

As I read it, he left 13 months ago and stopped making mortgage payments at that point.

13 years is half the mortgage life. Australian visa authorities are tough & if their rules change they can choose to deport you - and your family.

Can you not re-engage with the banks here & get in tenants - even if you have to use an estate agent - and get some income from them to keep the mortgage cash flow going.

A lifetime is a long time to be running & watching over your shoulder. And you have 13 years of good credit behind you .shame to ruin the future when most of your past is so good.

D3PO

beginning to think the OP is trolling. Paid their mortgage in full for 12 years ?

If they paid interest and capital on a house since 2001, this doesnt add up at all

JustLen

D3PO wrote: »

If they paid interest and capital on a house since 2001, this doesnt add up at all

What doesn't add up?

murphaph

catallus wrote: »

KegglesMcS, if you think you're doing the right thing then don't let anyone talk you out of it.

The banks were fully aware of the risk of you defaulting; that's why they charge you (and the rest of us) interest!

Let them have their keys. Maybe talk to a friendly solicitor about going legally bankrupt.

If the idle rich can do it, so can you.

Enjoy Australia.

Extremely reckless advice. OP if you want to know if the banks can chase you in Australia then consult a specialist lawyer in Australia.

I think you've handled this badly and could end up regretting your actions later.

murphaph

JustLen wrote: »

What doesn't add up?

Actually it doesn't add up. A house purchased in 2001 is highly unlikely to be in negative equity in the first place.

Denis k

Best of luck in aus.unfortunately your debt will continue to grow.i believe the banks can sell on the debt,you will have to deal with it at some stage

looksee

If the house(s) has been standing empty with the key in the door for 13 years it is most likely either occupied or trashed by now.

RUSTEDCORE

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

They risk has a link to the interest charged. Profit comes into it too.

other way around

DamoKen

murphaph wrote: »

Actually it doesn't add up. A house purchased in 2001 is highly unlikely to be in negative equity in the first place.

I bought my house summer 2001.It's been in negative equity for at least the last two years. Talked with a mate who's a estate agent last summer. House near to mine that was the same spec but newer with a larger garden sold for 80,000 less than I bought mine. My estate and those surrounding it were all built within a year of each other. There are I would say over 1000 homes in all.

So it is quite possible that the OP is in negative equity.

earlyevening

DamoKen wrote: »

I bought my house summer 2001.It's been in negative equity for at least the last two years. Talked with a mate who's a estate agent last summer. House near to mine that was the same spec but newer with a larger garden sold for 80,000 less than I bought mine. My estate and those surrounding it were all built within a year of each other. There are I would say over 1000 homes in all.

So it is quite possible that the OP is in negative equity.

No way.

If he' has been repaying capital for 14 years, there's no way you could be in neg equity - unless he remortgaged.

D3PO

DamoKen wrote: »

I bought my house summer 2001.It's been in negative equity for at least the last two years. Talked with a mate who's a estate agent last summer. House near to mine that was the same spec but newer with a larger garden sold for 80,000 less than I bought mine. My estate and those surrounding it were all built within a year of each other. There are I would say over 1000 homes in all.

So it is quite possible that the OP is in negative equity.

Its very unlikely that you would be in NE unless

a) you remotgaged
b) you were interest only

if you were paying capital there is no chance you would be in NE

whippet

given the time lines the OP is talking about it looks like he has re-mortgaged the primary residence to buy a buy-to-let and in effect does not like the fact that it has gone pear shaped and for some reason feels like it's the banks fault.

There is no way a 2001 property is in such neg equity.

strandroad

looksee wrote: »

If the house(s) has been standing empty with the key in the door for 13 years it is most likely either occupied or trashed by now.

It's 13 months actually

DamoKen

earlyevening wrote: »

No way.

If he' has been repaying capital for 14 years, there's no way you could be in neg equity - unless he remortgaged.

Some fairly dodgy numbers being thrown around here. In the highly unlikely event the OP bought January 1st 2001 the longest he could possibly repay would be 12 years, not 14.

I bought in 2001 and I've been repaying just over 11.

D3PO wrote: »

Its very unlikely that you would be in NE unless

a) you remotgaged
b) you were interest only

if you were paying capital there is no chance you would be in NE

It is quite possible without remortgaging or paying interest only. And you didn't need to buy something well beyond your means either. Quite possible on a standard 30 year mortgage as I have discovered to have paid off a third of your mortgage and to find the remainder to be paid off comes to more than your house is now worth based on recent sale prices in the area. This means from my understanding of the definition you are in negative equity.

Sorry don't want to get all pedantic but people seem a bit too eager to dismiss out of hand without examining the numbers. I did nothing unusual in my mortgage arrangements and yet I am in negative equity. Doesn't bother me as I'm well aware compared to others it's insignificant and I'm happy enough where I am. It could however present a problem if I choose to emigrate.

Don't think I'd go the route the OP has chosen though.

jmayo

KegglesMcS wrote: »

After talking to the banks a number of times in Ireland who failed to let me sell my houses I had no choice but to pack the bags and go. The company I worked for had a great offer for me in Oz and I felt I was depriving my kids of a better life by not accepting.

I have 2 properties in Ireland and I haven't paid either mortgage in 13 months. I offered to take on the negative equity as a personal loan but they refused.

When did you leave for Australia ?
Was it 13 months ago or had you stopped paying the mortgage before you left ?

You won't be arrested or extradited from Oz.
You won't be arrested if you return to Ireland.
You would need to be a garlic importer or some such for that to happen.

But if you go for a loan at some stage in Oz and you lie about your past credit history, then you may be in serious do do.
And if you don't lie, a bank will take a dim view of you and view you as high risk I would say.

murphaph wrote: »

Actually it doesn't add up. A house purchased in 2001 is highly unlikely to be in negative equity in the first place.

Now hard to see.
The OP remortgages to release equity to buy a second property.
Hell half the country seemed to do the same thing to start their "would be" property empires. :rolleyes:

WetDaddy

Here's a question (with some hypothetical insinuations thrown) or two:

1. If KegglesMcS kicks the bucket, does his other half / do the kids inherit his debts?
2. If in coming back to Ireland he runs the risk of being arrested / pursued by the banks, etc., then is he potentially jeopardising his family's future return to Ireland as well (if the answer to #1 is "Yes")?

I ask as I think it's relevant. I understand his approach of "Doing what's best for his kids" and other posters' responses of "The idle rich do it, why can't you?" and "Life is short". Simply put, there's a lot more to be said for facing up to your decisions. The "other people do it, why can't I?" attitude only makes you as bad as the same folks. Moreover, if my hypothetical scenario(s) above rings true, then it might help you reconsider.

Rasmus

D3PO wrote: »

Its very unlikely that you would be in NE unless

a) you remotgaged
b) you were interest only

if you were paying capital there is no chance you would be in NE

Well, it is possible but unlikely. I bought a house in Dublin city in 2002 for 209k. Now, houses in that neighbourhood are selling between 100 and 200. It really depends on where the house is located.

Peregrinus

WetDaddy wrote: »

1. If KegglesMcS kicks the bucket, does his other half / do the kids inherit his debts?

No. They'll inherit nothing, since his estate will be liable for his debts, and his debts will presumably swallow his entire estate. But his kids won't be personally liable for what the estate can't pay.

WetDaddy wrote: »

2. If in coming back to Ireland he runs the risk of being arrested / pursued by the banks, etc., then is he potentially jeopardising his family's future return to Ireland as well (if the answer to #1 is "Yes")?

There's no risk of arrest, as previously stated. Imprisonment for debt was abolished more than a century ago.

By walking away from his debts, he's not necessarily doing the best thing for his kids, financially. The debts continue to accumulate and, the longer this problem festers, the more likely it is that on his death they will consume his entire estate. His legal personal representatives - his widow or his kids, in all likelihood - will be faced with the dilemma of paying the estate to those entitled, or paying it to themselves, which would put them at risk of very serious sanctions for breach of their legal duties as personal representatives.

This is Keggles's debt. He incurred it. He needs to sort it out, one way or the other, rather than leave the problem to his wife and kids. Whoever may be at fault here, it's not them.

faceman

An Irish court judgement for default of a personal debt cannot be enforced in Australia. It can be enforced in other parts of the EU

It's not uncommon for companies to hire Australian debt collectors to chase debtors living down under but they have no real power to do anything. That being said I know of people who had stringent conditions set by power companies down under when opening an account for electricity after getting wind of a default in another country

Generally speaking you can't be arrested for failure to pay a personal debt, even if you fail to turn up in court. (Unless fraud is involved. Then its a criminal matter) Credits can technically apply for a committal order, but no one does.

Ando's Saggy Bottom

KegglesMcS wrote: »

Have I not done that?

Clearly you haven't done your research fully if you're on here appearing to be completely unaware of the consequences of actions you have already taken.

WetDaddy

Peregrinus wrote: »

No. They'll inherit nothing, since his estate will be liable for his debts, and his debts will presumably swallow his entire estate. But his kids won't be personally liable for what the estate can't pay.


There's no risk of arrest, as previously stated. Imprisonment for debt was abolished more than a century ago.

By walking away from his debts, he's not necessarily doing the best thing for his kids, financially. The debts continue to accumulate and, the longer this problem festers, the more likely it is that on his death they will consume his entire estate. His legal personal representatives - his widow or his kids, in all likelihood - will be faced with the dilemma of paying the estate to those entitled, or paying it to themselves, which would put them at risk of very serious sanctions for breach of their legal duties as personal representatives.

This is Keggles's debt. He incurred it. He needs to sort it out, one way or the other, rather than leave the problem to his wife and kids. Whoever may be at fault here, it's not them.

Thanks for the clarification - yes, your final two paragraphs were what I was getting at: Doing the best for his family in the long run is what (I think) he should consider!

Peregrinus

faceman wrote: »

An Irish court judgement for default of a personal debt cannot be enforced in Australia. It can be enforced in other parts of the EU.

Indeed it can, under the usual common law principles regarding the enforcement of foreign judgments. Enforcement is not as straightforward as it would be under the EU arrangements, but it is certainly possible, if the bank is determined.

Riskymove

Rasmus wrote: »

Well, it is possible but unlikely. I bought a house in Dublin city in 2002 for 209k. Now, houses in that neighbourhood are selling between 100 and 200. It really depends on where the house is located.

I suppose the point is that if you haid paid your mortgage for 12 years on such a house it would be down to 100k and therefore no negative equity

(based on 20 year mortgage anyway)

Rasmus

Riskymove wrote: »

I suppose the point is that if you haid paid your mortgage for 12 years on such a house it would be down to 100k and therefore no negative equity

(based on 20 year mortgage anyway)

Correct

earlyevening

DamoKen wrote: »

Some fairly dodgy numbers being thrown around here. In the highly unlikely event the OP bought January 1st 2001 the longest he could possibly repay would be 12 years, not 14.

Maths fail on my part. Meant 12 years.

JustLen

murphaph wrote: »

Actually it doesn't add up. A house purchased in 2001 is highly unlikely to be in negative equity in the first place.

Lots of presumptions being made here by lots of posters.

However unlikely it is still resonably possible

D3PO

JustLen wrote: »

Lots of presumptions being made here by lots of posters.

However unlikely it is still resonably possible

Possible.

Then add in that the bank wouldnt allow sell at best to have a small personal loan with the OP, or that the OP wouldnt rent the houses out to meet at least some of the mortgage payments due.

Really doesnt add up.

Regardless, the debt wont dissapear the OP would be far better advised entering the MARP process then bury their head in the sand.

RATM

faceman wrote: »

An Irish court judgement for default of a personal debt cannot be enforced in Australia. It can be enforced in other parts of the EU

It's not uncommon for companies to hire Australian debt collectors to chase debtors living down under but they have no real power to do anything. That being said I know of people who had stringent conditions set by power companies down under when opening an account for electricity after getting wind of a default in another country

Generally speaking you can't be arrested for failure to pay a personal debt, even if you fail to turn up in court. (Unless fraud is involved. Then its a criminal matter) Credits can technically apply for a committal order, but no one does.

Just wondering what is the basis for this ? I thought that as Australia is a common law jurisdiction (like ourselves and other former British colonies) then a judgement would be enforceable, no ? What about after his death, could the banks have a claim on his estate ?

Keggies isnt the only one who have done this, anecdotally at least there are quite a few strategic defaulters out there and Canada/Oz seems to be the counties of choice. Personally I would have thought somewhere like Brazil would have been a better option for this stunt but getting a working visa there obviously isn't as easy.

Anyway there seems to be some confusion as to whether or not a judgement mortgage would be enforceable in another jurisdiction- I have heard before that it would be from a friend in the legal game, he reckoned that especially as it is a common law jurisdiction it would make it all the easier. Though that was off the top of his head, not from experience of an actual case.

From the banks perspective the CEO & Board are legally obliged to secure shareholders the best profits that are possible, if there is lots of Keggies out there (and I suspect there are) and it is legally possible to enforce it then the CEO and the board of directors are duty bound by company law to do so. That aside, the banks aren't exactly awash with money so it is very possible that they will pursue these cases as a matter of course.

murphaph

Indeed, don't be surprised if Irish banks club together and set up their own little enforcement office in Australia. Would make a lot of sense for them I reckon to to pursue the "new found fortunes" of people who've tried to dump their debts on the rest of us taxpayers.

Marcusm

faceman wrote: »

An Irish court judgement for default of a personal debt cannot be enforced in Australia. It can be enforced in other parts of the EU

It's not uncommon for companies to hire Australian debt collectors to chase debtors living down under but they have no real power to do anything. That being said I know of people who had stringent conditions set by power companies down under when opening an account for electricity after getting wind of a default in another country

Generally speaking you can't be arrested for failure to pay a personal debt, even if you fail to turn up in court. (Unless fraud is involved. Then its a criminal matter) Credits can technically apply for a committal order, but no one does.

Clayton Utz (whose size and competence I can attest from personal experience) would seriously disagree with you. Follow this link for a discussion of various routes for enforcement of foreign court money judgements. No treaty required!

http://www.claytonutz.com/publications/edition/29_march_2012/20120329/enforcing_foreign_judgments_in_australia_a_case_study.page