Allsop Property Auction Cancelled, amid organised protests

The_Conductor

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/property-auction-cancelled-amid-heated-protests-by-people-who-have-lost-homes-29395090.html

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/allsops-property-auction-cancelled-due-to-protest-1.1452696


Irish Times:
An Allsops property auction in the Shelbourne Hotel in Dublin was cancelled today following a protest.

One man stood in front of the auctioneer and appealed to buyers not to bid for the items for sale. The auctioneers were then heckled by a group of approximately 70 people.

Bidders started to leave the auction room followed shortly by the auctioneers.

The auction was then cancelled.

The Indo:
HEATED and dramatic protests have stopped the Allsop property sale at the Shelbourne Hotel in Dublin today.

A handful of protesters - many of whom have lost their homes in the downturn - shouted "Ireland is not for sale" and told the auctioneers to "go home".

After singing the national anthem, the protesters told the crowd that the auctioneers had left the premises "out the back door."

There were cheers following a brief statement when a spokesperson for the hotel said: "Ladies and gentlemen I'm afraid we're going to have to cancel today's auction."

The gardai were called to the protest and protesters told potential bidders to "make the right choice and leave peacefully".

"The auction is not continuing if we have to stay here til evening," they said.

Protester Gerry Calahan - a former publican from Dublin who lost his business - told the auction that they should remember Parnell's instructions on people who bought property on the backs of those who suffered.

"You should shun them in the fairgreen and the market place," he said.

But not all people supported the protest.

"Disgraceful - it's not fair. You cant expect to hold onto your property unless you pay for it. Its commercial property - not family homes," said a man who had come to the auction intending to bid on a premises.

stimpson

The_Conductor wrote: »

Protester Gerry Calahan - a former publican from Dublin who lost his business - told the auction that they should remember Parnell's instructions on people who bought property on the backs of those who suffered.

An ex-publican worrying about those who have suffered? Wow.

lima

Absolute Scumbags, they will not win, normal capitalism will prevail.

These scumbags are just bitter at losing their homes, disgusting carry-on.

I'll go in and buy a home at the next one and offer to rent it back to them now just to piss them off

khards

Quite right, all they need to do to keep their home is to keep up the mortgage repayments, how hard can that be?

On a side note these protestors should be locked up for causing trouble and the ring leaders sued for damages by Allsops. Locking them up would also silence them.

lima

They are deluded remnants of the boom

Repossessions need to happen in earnest before this country get's back to normal. So what if someone in the boom thought they could make a buck our of property and are now bitter.. tough luck.

Bannasidhe

lima wrote: »

Absolute Scumbags, they will not win, normal capitalism will prevail.

These scumbags are just bitter at losing their homes, disgusting carry-on.

I'll go in and buy a home at the next one and offer to rent it back to them now just to piss them off

Scumbags?
Glad to see a reasoned tone being adopted from the outset.

'Normal' capitalism?
That went out the window when the State decided to save private banks.

Sigourney

'After singing the national anthem, the protesters told the crowd that the auctioneers had left the premises "out the back door."'

They actually knew the words of 'Shinner Feena Fawl'?

Pawwed Rig

khards wrote: »

On a side note these protestors should be locked up for causing trouble and the ring leaders sued for damages by Allsops. Locking them up would also silence them.

Seriously?*
Luckily we live in a country that protesting is still legal. What kind of state do you want to live in?
There is nothing I have read that says the protestors were violent.
Whether you agree with them or not is your opinion, asking for peaceful protestors to be locked up is way OTT.




*not sure if you were being sarcastic in your post or not.

lima

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Scumbags?
Glad to see a reasoned tone being adopted from the outset.

'Normal' capitalism?
That went out the window when the State decided to save private banks.

Yes scumbags, how dare they ruin an auction like that. Such an Irish thing to do.. 'ahh giz me house back ye britz michael collins etc. bla bla"

I have NOTHING to do with the boom and I come back here after 7 years to work in the tech industry and I can't even buy a decent house because repossessions are not happening quickly enough and because of that there is severely limited stock available. I have NO sympathy for people like that who are angry because of their skewed Irish sense of entitlement.

Bannasidhe

lima wrote: »

Yes scumbags, how dare they ruin an auction like that. Such an Irish thing to do.. 'ahh giz me house back ye britz michael collins etc. bla bla"

I have NOTHING to do with the boom and I come back here after 7 years to work in the tech industry and I can't even buy a decent house because repossessions are not happening quickly enough and because of that there is severely limited stock available. I have NO sympathy for people like that who are angry because of their skewed Irish sense of entitlement.

So you want people's homes repossessed so you can buy a 'decent' house cheap? :eek:

lima

Bannasidhe wrote: »

So you want people's homes repossessed so you can buy a 'decent' house cheap? :eek:

Yes.

But not for 'cheap', for it's fair price.

More repossessed homes on he market, the more fairer the price.

D3PO

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Scumbags?
Glad to see a reasoned tone being adopted from the outset.
.

I don't normally agree with Lima but yes these people are scumbags.

valleyoftheunos

there is more than whiff of irony about people who bought commercial properties in an attempt to make make money protesting other people doing the same thing.

Bannasidhe

lima wrote: »

Yes.

But not for 'cheap', for it's fair price.

More repossessed homes on he market, the more fairer the price.

Given that the person whose home has been repossessed will still be paying any outstanding amount left after it's sale at a so-called 'fair' price, it could be argued that what you want is a house in which the bank has no real stake in achieving the highest price for it as they will still have someone on the hook and what you actually want is a decent house whose cheap price is attainable as someone else is subsiding it.

Lots of 'decent' houses for sale by NAMA - why can't you buy one of those?

P. Breathnach

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Given that the person whose home has been repossessed will still be paying any outstanding amount left after it's sale at a so-called 'fair' price, it could be argued that what you want is a house in which the bank has no real stake in achieving the highest price for it as they will still have someone on the hook and what you actually want is a decent house whose cheap price is attainable as someone else is subsiding it....

It's in the interest of the person whose property has been repossessed that it sell for the highest price achievable. I can't see that frustrating an auction helps the achievement of the best price.

Bannasidhe

P. Breathnach wrote: »

It's in the interest of the person whose property has been repossessed that it sell for the highest price achievable. I can't see that frustrating an auction helps the achievement of the best price.

But it is not usually the mortgagee who is selling the property but the lender who has repossessed the property and they are 'covered' regardless of the price they achieve. The auctioneer does have a stake in achieving a high price as they get a percentage.

Personally I would have no issue with repossessions as long as that is the end of the debt like in the U.S. - the house is security for the loan, if the loan is not paid repossess the house. End of story.

Nor do I have an issue with buy to let houses/commercial properties being repossessed - they are essentially failed business but I do understand the anger of people who have their homes repossessed, sold at knock-down prices and then are expected to continue paying off the remainder of the loan.

GetWithIt

The_Conductor wrote: »

"Disgraceful - it's not fair. You cant expect to hold onto your property unless you pay for it. Its commercial property - not family homes," said a man who had come to the auction intending to bid on a premises.

This.

They may as well be protesting outside Merlin's car auction. These weren't family homes that were being auctioned.

Pawwed Rig

GetWithIt wrote: »

This.

They may as well be protesting outside Merlin's car auction. These weren't family homes that were being auctioned.

There is usually a mix of all types of properties at these auctions. Commercial, residential housing/ apartments etc.

Here is the catalogue

http://www.auction.co.uk/irish/onlineCatalogue.asp

lima

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Given that the person whose home has been repossessed will still be paying any outstanding amount left after it's sale at a so-called 'fair' price, it could be argued that what you want is a house in which the bank has no real stake in achieving the highest price for it as they will still have someone on the hook and what you actually want is a decent house whose cheap price is attainable as someone else is subsiding it.

Lots of 'decent' houses for sale by NAMA - why can't you buy one of those?

Nama are restricting the sale of 100's of units for the same reason - to keep prices artificially high for the FF politicians who have investment property

jmayo

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Seriously?*
Luckily we live in a country that protesting is still legal. What kind of state do you want to live in?
There is nothing I have read that says the protestors were violent.
Whether you agree with them or not is your opinion, asking for peaceful protestors to be locked up is way OTT.

*not sure if you were being sarcastic in your post or not.

Do they have the right to protest in a non public place ?
Afterall they did protest within the hotel.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

So you want people's homes repossessed so you can buy a 'decent' house cheap? :eek:

And on the other hand you want him to financially help people keep their homes that they are not paying for and thus probably make sure he can't afford a similar home.

Can you see the hypocrisy in your statement ?

P. Breathnach wrote: »

It's in the interest of the person whose property has been repossessed that it sell for the highest price achievable. I can't see that frustrating an auction helps the achievement of the best price.

Will go away with your logic.
Don't you know people have a right and entitlement to their properties even if they can't or won't pay for them. :rolleyes:

jmayo

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

There is usually a mix of all types of properties at these auctions. Commercial, residential housing/ apartments etc.

Here is the catalogue

http://www.auction.co.uk/irish/onlineCatalogue.asp

Well maybe you have a different catalogue but mine has an overwhelming amount of investment, retail and commerical property.
In fact even those marked as Vacant Freehold Houses look for the most part like somone's little investment.

Bannasidhe

jmayo wrote: »

And on the other hand you want him to financially help people keep their homes that they are not paying for and thus probably make sure he can't afford a similar home.

Can you see the hypocrisy in your statement ?

:

Since he said himself that he has just returned to Ireland after 7 years 'financially helping' is stretching it.
These people's taxes and stamp duty helped pay for the infrastructure that attracted those IT jobs he returned to take up - but do we forget all of that now?

When all of these people enter the rental market will people then complain they are pushing up rental prices?
Or should they qualify for social housing complain how we are subsiding them?

We are all financially supporting the banks who are in a win-win situation. Sell the house cheap and chase the previous owner for the outstanding balance while we all pay for their mistakes.

What would be so wrong with repossession meaning the loan is cancelled as happens in the U.S.? Or did you fail to see where I said that when busy deciding I am a hypocrite?

Pawwed Rig

jmayo wrote: »

Do they have the right to protest in a non public place ?
Afterall they did protest within the hotel.

Yes they can protest wherever they like. If management ask them to leave then they should leave. If they refuse then the Gardai can force them out. This did not happen though probably for public safety/relations reasons. Do we really want to live in a country that protestors are locked up for protesting?

There was alot of protesting at the gay pride parade last weekend in favour of equal marriage rights. Should we lock them up too?
Also those protesting against abortion? Should these people be locked up?

jmayo wrote: »

Well maybe you have a different catalogue but mine has an overwhelming amount of investment, retail and commerical property.

I don't have a catalogue. I just provided a link to their webpage.

Bannasidhe

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Yes they can protest wherever they like. If management ask them to leave then they should leave. If they refuse then the Gardai can force them out. This did not happen though probably for public safety/relations reasons. Do we really want to live in a country that protestors are locked up for protesting?

There was alot of protesting at the gay pride parade last weekend in favour of equal marriage rights. Should we lock them up too?
Also those protesting against abortion? Should these people be locked up?



I don't have a catalogue. I just provided a link to their webpage.

3 bed house in Bray with reserve price of 155,000 - pretty cheap IMHO.

ledonb

Allsops are hosting an auction in a posh hotel where bottom feeders rake over the entrails of peoples ruined lives. It is no wonder there was a protest and the hotel, presumably full of wealthy American tourists at this time of year decided they didn't want any more to do with it.

melekalikimaka

bout time places started going up, cant pay/boot out. finally some normality returning to the country

khards

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Personally I would have no issue with repossessions as long as that is the end of the debt like in the U.S. - the house is security for the loan, if the loan is not paid repossess the house. End of story.

When the mortgagee signed the contract with the bank to fund the property purchase, they knew what they were getting into.
They know that thrie jhome/business would be repossessed if they did not keep up the repayments.
In many cases they knew they were borrowing far more than they could afford.
If the borrowers were not so greedy and the regulators actually regulated then none of this mess would have happened in the first place.

It is wishful thinking that the defaulter will get let off the hook, a write down or any other free gifts from the banks/tax payer.
They need to face the reality of the situation, hand back the keys and file for bankruptcy.

If it wasn't for denial and pride this mess could be resolved quickly and easily.

khards

Next time I hope they have security and the guards waiting outside.

The protesters were disturbing the peace and trespassing after they were asked to leave.
Since they were clearly breaking the law they should be charged.

Pawwed Rig

khards wrote: »

If the borrowers were not so greedy and the regulators actually regulated then none of this mess would have happened in the first place.

I assume you meant lenders?

khards wrote: »

The protesters were disturbing the peace and trespassing after they were asked to leave.
Since they were clearly breaking the law they should be charged.

But they weren't so can't have been doing anything that bad

khards wrote: »

Next time I hope they have security and the guards waiting outside.

So we want to Gardai to act as security for a private company? Tell us more about this utopia. Maybe everytime someone was suspected of planning to protest they could be locked up to prevent the protest taking place?

Sometimes posts on this site scare me.:(

The_Conductor

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

I assume you meant lenders?

The borrowers were every bit as complicit as the lenders. No one is innocent here.

Bannasidhe

khards wrote: »

When the mortgagee signed the contract with the bank to fund the property purchase, they knew what they were getting into.
They know that thrie jhome/business would be repossessed if they did not keep up the repayments.
In many cases they knew they were borrowing far more than they could afford.
If the borrowers were not so greedy and the regulators actually regulated then none of this mess would have happened in the first place.

It is wishful thinking that the defaulter will get let off the hook, a write down or any other free gifts from the banks/tax payer.
They need to face the reality of the situation, hand back the keys and file for bankruptcy.

If it wasn't for denial and pride this mess could be resolved quickly and easily.

That highlighted bit - did they hold a gun to the bank manager's head too?

Banks lent people up to 10x their salaries - no one forced them to do so but they wanted to extend mortgages and cheap credit and those 10x loans fuelled a property bubble and people had no choice if they wanted to buy but pay the over inflated prices - but still we bailed out the banks to the tune of billions.

Banks invest - they have a duty to ensure their investment is sound. They decided lending someone 10x their salary was sound financial practice. They messed up - but the State rescues them. Those who were foolish enough to listen to these so-called financial experts also messed up but we should take their homes and saddle them with decades of debt?

Bit of a double standard there.

jmayo

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Since he said himself that he has just returned to Ireland after 7 years 'financially helping' is stretching it.

Ehhh how do you know what taxes he may or may not have been paying.
You don't have to be resident and working here to still be contributing taxes.
And he will be financially helping for years to come.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

These people's taxes and stamp duty helped pay for the infrastructure that attracted those IT jobs he returned to take up - but do we forget all of that now?

So the IT industry in Ireland only got going once the stamp duty form overpriced crud was available.
Oh and aren't you forgetting a lot of that stamp duty was borrowed money in the first place.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

When all of these people enter the rental market will people then complain they are pushing up rental prices?

No because some of those in rental accommodation will buy some of the repossessed properties and some of the repossessed properties may come on the rental market.
Are you claiming that renters should help pay for people to remain in houses they are not paying for so that they can continue to rent ?

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Or should they qualify for social housing complain how we are subsiding them?

I think people would rather help pay for social housing rather than pay so someone can own an asset 20 or 30 years down the road.
And that is what you are proposing.

And once again you grab the scared cow argument that the only alternative to keeping one's property is social housing.
How the feck did they afford to buy a house in the first place if they are always probably destined for social housing ?

Bannasidhe wrote: »

We are all financially supporting the banks who are in a win-win situation. Sell the house cheap and chase the previous owner for the outstanding balance while we all pay for their mistakes.

What would be so wrong with repossession meaning the loan is cancelled as happens in the U.S.? Or did you fail to see where I said that when busy deciding I am a hypocrite?

That would be fine if we didn't have to cover the banks losses.
Why shoudl someone get to take out a massive loan, then not bother repaying over years all the while getting to use the property and then finally get to walk away scot free when they probably could have repaid something.

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Yes they can protest wherever they like. If management ask them to leave then they should leave. If they refuse then the Gardai can force them out. This did not happen though probably for public safety/relations reasons. Do we really want to live in a country that protestors are locked up for protesting?

The same protestors are trying to ensure I and my family end up paying for their mistakes, while they get a free ride then not alone would I advocate locking them for protesting, but confiscation of their assets and belonging.
I am tired of paying for others mistakes.

Once again I bet you will find the loudmouths doing the protesting are pretty similar to that poor elderly couiple who were going to get turfed out onto the street for not paying their debts.
oh wait that elderly couple were property investors and speculators whose business went down the toilet due to greed and poor management.

I always find the ones that really need help are stoic just getting on with things quietly and aren't the loudmouths demanding this and that.

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

There was alot of protesting at the gay pride parade last weekend in favour of equal marriage rights. Should we lock them up too?
Also those protesting against abortion? Should these people be locked up?

Equal marriage rights fair enough.
Gay pride fair enough.
But a protest by those in favour of screwing me over, so they get to live a life they can no longer afford can go to fooking hell.

And as for abortion, personally speaking any of the selfish bast**ds protesting against abortion for cases like Savita or others who have had to go to England to abort unviable pregnancies, nevermind cases of underage rape victims in danger of suicide, should be prevented from ever having children.

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

I don't have a catalogue. I just provided a link to their webpage.

Maybe next time take a look through the catalogue before issuing pronouncements on what they contain.

khards

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

I assume you meant lenders?

No, the regulators should be regulating the banks! They are there to keep an eye on banks and ensure that they are not undertaking in risky trading (lending to much to people!).
[/Quote]

So we want to Gardai to act as security for a private company?

In an ideal world no, but they usually position themselves where they know trouble is going to be, like outside nightclubs etc.

Pawwed Rig

The_Conductor wrote: »

The borrowers were every bit as complicit as the lenders. No one is innocent here.

I don't agree. There is nothing greedy about someone who borrows to buy their own property. People do what they have to do to get on with life. For many years we were fed a constant diet of 'buy now or you will never buy'. Rents were going higher and higher and people took the hard decisions based on the best information available at the time and what they felt was best for their family.
It is easy to see a boom and bust cycle in hindsight and I would agree that those with financial heads should have seen how things would end up. Most people just wanted somewhere to live. People ended up panic buying in places like Kinnegad in the hope that someday they would get enough positive equity behind them to be able to move close to their lives/jobs/families. I think it is very harsh to say that these people are equally culpable when all they wanted was a roof over their heads. You cannot blame the general public for believing what they were told over and over and over again by the people they were supposed to trust.

jmayo wrote: »

Maybe next time take a look through the catalogue before issuing pronouncements on what they contain.

I did and what I said was accurate

P. Breathnach

Bannasidhe wrote: »

...
Personally I would have no issue with repossessions as long as that is the end of the debt like in the U.S. - the house is security for the loan, if the loan is not paid repossess the house....

That's a different approach to lending and borrowing. You can't really change the rules after the mortgages have been created.

I would like to see mortgages without recourse become the norm here. It imposes a burden of responsibility on the lender to be very prudent and should make it a bit more difficult for a property bubble to be inflated.

But I don't think it is possible to bring in non-recourse mortgages at the moment. The market has not yet settled, and if lenders are spooked we could have a crash that is just as artificial as the bubble that caused all the trouble.

Pawwed Rig

jmayo wrote: »

Equal marriage rights fair enough.
Gay pride fair enough.
But a protest by those in favour of screwing me over, so they get to live a life they can no longer afford can go to fooking hell.

And as for abortion, personally speaking any of the selfish bast**ds protesting against abortion for cases like Savita or others who have had to go to England to abort unviable pregnancies, nevermind cases of underage rape victims in danger of suicide, should be prevented from ever having children.

Ah ok. So as long as they are protesting for something you are in favour of it is alright?

The bailout of the banks has 'screwed you over' alot worse than these guys protesting today have.

jmayo

The_Conductor wrote: »

The borrowers were every bit as complicit as the lenders. No one is innocent here.

To paraphrase a genius of sorts homer j simspon, it takes two to borrow.
One to lend and one to borrow.

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

I don't agree. There is nothing greedy about someone who borrows to buy their own property.

That depends on whether or not they have the wherewithal to afford it.
Even today if I chose to try and buy a gaff in Sorrento Terrace Dalkey or Shrewsbury Road Ballsbridge all with borrowed money then I would be bloody greedy.

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

People do what they have to do to get on with life. For many years we were fed a constant diet of 'buy now or you will never buy'. Rents were going higher and higher and people took the hard decisions based on the best information available at the time and what they felt was best for their family.

Actually were rents going higher and higher ?
AFAIK they had settled down after 2002 or so when more property became available.

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

It is easy to see a boom and bust cycle in hindsight and I would agree that those with financial heads should have seen how things would end up.

Congratulations on the Grade A bullsh**.
It was very hard not to see the boom and thus a subsequent bust.

I have said it here many times, but here goes again just for you.
I grew up in a part of Mayo famous for one thing, emigration or at least migration.
Suddendly during the boom you had houses and sites going for prices that would have been the norm in Galway city a few years before.
And where were all the people suddenly now working ?
Oh they were employed building, furnishing, fitting out new houses or in some of the new shopping centres.
How many were employed in new export industries ?
Shag all actually.

Only the totally myopic and self absorbed could not see it and many that saw it chose to ignore it becuase they wanted a slice of the action.
There nothing like watching your neighbour get rich (on paper at least) to force one to disregard common sense to strive to be equal.

And even when people were told there was a bubble they chose to ignore it beleiving in some fairytale that we would be different, for the first time in 34 odd huge bubbles in history, and we would have a soft landing.

And yes those in charge should have seen it and done something about it rather than redicule the warnings.

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Most people just wanted somewhere to live. People ended up panic buying in places like Kinnegad in the hope that someday they would get enough positive equity behind them to be able to move close to their lives/jobs/families. I think it is very harsh to say that these people are equally culpable when all they wanted was a roof over their heads. You cannot blame the general public for believing what they were told over and over and over again by the people they were supposed to trust.

Frankly if you trusted the likes of bertie or many more of the fanboys like brendan o'connor, frank fahey, donie cassidy, dan mclaughlin, etc you were an eeejit.

gaius c

Jerry Beades and Tom D'Arcy in attendance?
We're not exactly talking about people who ever stand a realistic chance of losing their own homes.

And Mattie McGrath & Healy-Rae there to support them. With friends like that, who needs enemies?

Also Ben Gilroy, the man with no intention of paying for his house that he's living in for free.

poker--addict

I understand the anger but i don't understand the symbolism. Are we trying to say that any repossessed house should never be bought by anyone? And in turn are we saying house repossessions should stop or should the repossed houses be left to fall empty into decay? If the issue being protested about is the fairness of the actually repossession the target is still can not be allsop.

Politicians, property developers and banks have questions to answer. Anger should be directed at them.
Allsop have very little to answer for while banks get bailed out and politicians continue their bureaucracy and self preservation.

These auctions are just cleaning up the mess that has been left behind after the party went sour.

Me think people know that irish banks and politicians don't lose any sleep and do not listen and these weary protestors are looking for an easy target. Another victor for FF and the banks.

Sconsey

Bannasidhe wrote: »

That highlighted bit - did they hold a gun to the bank manager's head too?

Banks lent people up to 10x their salaries - no one forced them to do so but they wanted to extend mortgages and cheap credit and those 10x loans fuelled a property bubble and people had no choice if they wanted to buy but pay the over inflated prices - but still we bailed out the banks to the tune of billions.

Banks invest - they have a duty to ensure their investment is sound. They decided lending someone 10x their salary was sound financial practice. They messed up - but the State rescues them. Those who were foolish enough to listen to these so-called financial experts also messed up but we should take their homes and saddle them with decades of debt?

Bit of a double standard there.

That highlighted bit - did someone hold a gun to peoples head and force them to buy houses?

No, they either bought into the whole 'sure rent is dead money' mantra or figured they would overstretch themselves for a few years and then sell on making a killing on the capital appreciation 'property only goes up right?'.

jmayo

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Ah ok. So as long as they are protesting for something you are in favour of it is alright?

The bailout of the banks has 'screwed you over' alot worse than these guys protesting today have.

Sweet jesus will you just look at who was leading the protest.

jerry beades, the guy who has refused to repay multi million debts to ACC, Ulster and not even sure if he owes KBC as well.
The guy that was on the fianna fail executive and was slurping at the same pig trough as bertie et al.

And the guy that costs this state every time he goes into court making serious allegations he cannot back up against the banks.

As I said remember all the whoopla about the couple in Dalkey.
There were headlines flying about fighting against the evil bankers, etc and backing some poor sod to keep their home.
And then a few hours later see who we are actually talking about.

The little guy jsut gets on with it.

The bottom feeders were not the ones there to buy, as some poster earlier clabelled them, but are these types who were there trying to ensure no bank gets to take their little empires away from them even though they have refused to pay their debts.

But you go right ahead and stand right beside jerry beades et al.

Pawwed Rig

jmayo wrote: »

Congratulations on the Grade A bullsh**.
It was very hard not to see the boom and thus a subsequent bust.

Not very civil but I will answer anyway. If you had seen a bust coming then I am assuming you made a fair bit of cash out of it? Just because you are aware of boom and bust cycles, that doesn't mean the average man in the street is. Most people go about their lives and do not care about economic history. I studied Engineering for 6 years and spent 13 years in the schooling system without ever hearing a mention of boom and bust cycles, so why you think it is a general knowledge confuses me.
You assume that people analysed their decisions based on information they did not have. What they saw was queues outside housing estates, people buying where they could, Financial advisors telling them to borrow as much as they can and invest.
Noone bought a house as an owner occupier to get rich. But these same people are saddled with unsustainable debt. Yes they could afford this debt when they initially borrowed but cannot now as the country has seen a collapse of a magnitude that even the most pessimistic did not see coming (see Richard Curran property crash documentary).
People were not told there was a bubble. A few commentators said their was a bubble and were rubbished by their better known colleagues and public representatives.
The Taoiseach, Minister for Finance, Governor of Central Bank, Eddie Hobbs etc etc all said Ireland was different. In hindsight I agree, it seems ridiculous but at the time people believed them.
As i said people made decisions based on what was best for their families. These decisions were based on the information available to them.

jmayo wrote: »

And yes those in charge should have seen it and done something about it rather than redicule the warnings.

Balmed Out

Bannasidhe wrote: »

but still we bailed out the banks to the tune of billions.

....

Bit of a double standard there.

To be fair we bailed out the banking system. The owners of the banks were wiped out. They lost more of their asset then anyone with property.

P.Breathnach is right in that it would be great to have mortgages without recourse but it would be silly and unfair to instill them retrospectively.

Bannasidhe

Bannasidhe wrote: »

That highlighted bit - did they hold a gun to the bank manager's head too?

Banks lent people up to 10x their salaries - no one forced them to do so but they wanted to extend mortgages and cheap credit and those 10x loans fuelled a property bubble and people had no choice if they wanted to buy but pay the over inflated prices - but still we bailed out the banks to the tune of billions.

Banks invest - they have a duty to ensure their investment is sound. They decided lending someone 10x their salary was sound financial practice. They messed up - but the State rescues them. Those who were foolish enough to listen to these so-called financial experts also messed up but we should take their homes and saddle them with decades of debt?

Bit of a double standard there.

Sconsey wrote: »

That highlighted bit - did someone hold a gun to peoples head and force them to buy houses?

No, they either bought into the whole 'sure rent is dead money' mantra or figured they would overstretch themselves for a few years and then sell on making a killing on the capital appreciation 'property only goes up right?'.

That highlighted bit - did you miss that?

No where did I advocate no reposessions. I came into this thread to comment on a poster dismissing those involved today out of hand as 'scumbags' who are intent of preventing him buying a decent house cheap. I had to check I wasn't in AH.

But, it is a growing problem which we need to sort out and throwing terms like scumbag about is not helpful.

ONE IN EVERY eight primary residences in Ireland is in mortgage arrears, new figures released earlier today showed...

The report shows that 95,554 or 12.3 per cent of primary residences in the country, are in arrears over 90 days, up from 92,349 in December. Added to that, the number of homes in arrears over 180 days increased by 4.8 per cent, while the number of mortgages in arrears over two years has grown by 12 per cent.

http://www.thejournal.ie/mortgage-arrears-crisis-highlighted-by-the-central-bank-960859-Jun2013/

Do I want people to be given houses scot free - do I 'uck! I pay my mortgage in full every month even though my house is now valued at 100,000 less than I paid for it. It is not an 'investment' it is my home.

My issue is that we have handed management of this whole mortgage crises to the very same banks who helped fuel it in the first place. Those very same 'financial experts' who agree to lend people 10x their salary are now charged with clawing that money back and damn the social consequences of evicting over 95,000 people many of whom will have partners and children. We could see well over 100,000 people left homeless due to reckless lending - and yes, many of them engaged in reckless borrowing but that does not lessen the impact a level of evictions not seen since the Famine would have on our society.

You can be sure some of those 95,000 + lost their jobs as businesses went bust - some of which is also due to the banks reluctance to extend any credit to small and medium businesses.

So yes, I do understand the anger and am not prepared to be quiet while people are dismissed as 'scumbags' for protesting against a system that favours the very banks that brought this country to ruin and saddles them with an unmanageable debt for a house they longer own.

jmayo

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Not very civil but I will answer anyway. If you had seen a bust coming then I am assuming you made a fair bit of cash out of it?

I had offer of buying a few houses for a quick flip, but the deal never came to fruitition before the downturn in 2007.
There is no way I would ever have bought to keep longer than few months as it was too risky.

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Just because you are aware of boom and bust cycles, that doesn't mean the average man in the street is. Most people go about their lives and do not care about economic history. I studied Engineering for 6 years and spent 13 years in the schooling system without ever hearing a mention of boom and bust cycles, so why you think it is a general knowledge confuses me.

Ehh I also studied engineering and for same length as yourself.
BTW did you did civil by any chance ?
You didn't have to know about boom and bust cycles, although if you grow up as teenager in 80s Ireland there was very good chance you knew of what happened in the UK.
Also Japan blewout in the early 90s.
Then Scandanavia in late 90s.

But even if you never knew about boom and bust cycles, common sense would have told you something was very wrong.
As I said if you could see the writing on the wall in the likes of Mayo, you could see it in almost every county in Ireland.
And if you were in Dublin surely you must have spotted all those trucks, all those builders and all the people buying appartments/townhouses in towns and villages outside the capital for prices that a few years before would have got you somewhere near the city centre.
And it was all with borrowed money.

And at the same time you kept hearing about more manufacturing jobs going, call centres closing because we were too expensive.
Yet where was everyone working ?
Oh yeah building, house fitting, conveyancying solicitors, estate agents, retail.
Everything that relied on cheap money.
If you took a look at the likes of Carlow as an example.
The sugar factory had gone, L'Apple, OralB had as good as closed and yet the town was booming.
There were new shopping centres, new retail parks, but no new factories.
So where was everyone getting the money.
Oh yeah they were building houses, apartments, and working in the latest trendy new interior design store.
Now when the building stopped and the credit disappeared the town is screwed and worse of than it was before.

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

You assume that people analysed their decisions based on information they did not have. What they saw was queues outside housing estates, people buying where they could, Financial advisors telling them to borrow as much as they can and invest.
Noone bought a house as an owner occupier to get rich. But these same people are saddled with unsustainable debt. Yes they could afford this debt when they initially borrowed but cannot now as the country has seen a collapse of a magnitude that even the most pessimistic did not see coming (see Richard Curran property crash documentary).

I will admit I saw a crash and huge drop in prices with lots of unemployment, but I never envisioned the outcome in the banks.
Sure I always thought Anglo was over exposed, and even though I always thought INBS and AIB were run by first class shysters I never believed they would mess up so much in their greed.

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

People were not told there was a bubble. A few commentators said their was a bubble and were rubbished by their better known colleagues and public representatives.

Ehh if you cared to look people were being told there were serious problems.
You believed politicans. :eek:
Come on you can't be an engineer surely ?
Ehh the better known colleagues worked for the banks a bloody vested interest. :rolleyes:

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

The Taoiseach, Minister for Finance, Governor of Central Bank, Eddie Hobbs etc etc all said Ireland was different. In hindsight I agree, it seems ridiculous but at the time people believed them.
As i said people made decisions based on what was best for their families. These decisions were based on the information available to them.

Ohh please stop.
It wasn't all the information and just look who was giving it to you.
Ever heard the term vested interest ?
FFS eddie hobbes was flogging property in Cape Verde.
Of course he would want you to remortgage your gaff here to buy his crud in a wind swept West African island.
BTW how anyone could trust a lying scheming back stabbing gimp like ahern is beyond me.

Pawwed Rig

jmayo wrote: »

Ohh please stop.
It wasn't all the information and just look who was giving it to you.
Ever heard the term vested interest ?
BTW how anyone could trust a lying scheming back stabbing gimp like ahern is beyond me.

Yes I did and that is why I escaped relatively unscathed from the whole debacle. As I said over and over people just get on with their lives. They do not hang on the word of every analyst on TV especially those in the minority.
Most people would have trusted Bertie et al, presumably that is why they kept voting for him.
I never said I didn't know about boom/bust cycles. I am saying they were not as common knowledge as you seem to think. You are assuming joined up thinking in people primarily focused on their own lives.
I addressed most of your other points already so won't go over them again as I am sure this thread is getting boring for most others.
Nope I wasn't a civil engineer.
Everyone is an expert in hindsight

I never heard of Jerry Beades so not sure why you want me to stand beside him in a protest.

super_furry

The irony of a bunch of landlords and landowners invoking Parnell to justify their actions is laughable.

Patser

Sweet Jesus I just had to comment on these clowns after seeing them on the 6.1 News.

Sorry but when Tom D'Arcy is being interviewed outside the Shelbourne and tries to invoke the 1916 rising with this statement (The spellings in here are directly what I think he says)

'Constant Markievicz gave his life to end supression, taxation, eviction and criminality'

My mind just went into melt down.

Where to start - I assume it's Constance Markievicz he mean or maybe Countess Markievicz - not Constant - but either way he addresses her, it is a her not a his, who did not die in the 1916 rising (or the War of Independence, she lived on til 1927 when she died from an illness). She was also given a Ministerial post in the 1st Irish Dail, so would have supported the continued taxation measures brought in by the new Irish Govt to pay it's way. And whatever about Suppresion and to a limited degree evictions being a motivation for the Rising, criminality??

If you're going to protest and place yourself as spokesman for that protest, garbling a message as badly as that while trying to tie an Irish hero and a huge piece of Irish history to your message is just brutal.

albert kidd

lima wrote: »

Absolute Scumbags, they will not win, normal capitalism will prevail.

These scumbags are just bitter at losing their homes, disgusting carry-on.

I'll go in and buy a home at the next one and offer to rent it back to them now just to piss them off

the only scumbags are those tramps in the dail..the scumbags who run our country/sold us out to zee germans and covered up for the bankers.

bring on the protests and start to strike fear into these chancers.

Ipso

albert kidd wrote: »

the only scumbags are those tramps in the dail..the scumbags who run our country/sold us out to zee germans and covered up for the bankers.

bring on the protests and start to strike fear into these chancers.

The dail is a great representation of the electorate.

washman3

We live in a democracy and people have a right to protest. Few can deny that. But as I watched the Six1 news, I like other posters here, nearly puked.
I mean FFS how can anyone take Jerry Beades, Tom Darcy,Mattie Mcgrath and Michael Healy-Rae serious. Probably the same guys that would piss down on genuine protesters during the farce that was the 'Celtic Tiger'.
McGrath and Healy-Rae's father cheerled every Fianna Fail decision and policy that would have made the likes of Beades and Darcy very rich.
These 4 charletens are now under the impression that people are still gullible enough to believe that they really care about ordinary peole in negative equity.
I really hope that Allsop refix this auction for a date as soon as possible and give the 2 fingers to fraudsters like these.
Lastly, if they feel an urge to protest maybe they can organise one outside the next FF ard-feis.:mad: