Leading banks prepare to sell off 1600 properties - Irish Independent

BookBook

How are the banks allowed to do this when there is a shortage of homes for sale for people who actually want to live in them.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/leading-banks-prepare-to-sell-off-1600-houses-30604015.html

Crusades

Cash out now before SF/ULA get in to power?

The great thing about banking:
- during good times, loan out as much money as you can for $1m houses (you only need $100k on deposit to loan out $1m)
- during bad times, repossess said houses for 30cent on the dollar (and still have the debtor on the hook for the remaining 70c)

Looks to me like NAMA are releasing properties bought for 30c for 50c/60c. Prudent enough - there are loads of big UK property rental companies who would see Ireland as a good opportunity for them to graft their business model to the Irish market.

But do these investors know what's in store for post 2016 Ireland?

ted1

BookBook wrote: »

How are the banks allowed to do this when there is a shortage of homes for sale for people who actually want to live in them.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/leading-banks-prepare-to-sell-off-1600-houses-30604015.html

And people will live in them. What exactly are you giving out about ?

GavMan

ted1 wrote: »

And people will live in them. What exactly are you giving out about ?

As tenants, not owner occupier

who_ru

ted1 wrote: »

And people will live in them. What exactly are you giving out about ?

They are available to purchase to investment/vulture funds only. Not the Irish public. Many of whom would quite like to be able to buy a suitable property to live in and possibly raise a family. These people, Irish tax payers, paying extortionate taxes, having the private pensions raided by the govt, cannot buy any if these properties because the banks, and by extension the Govt, won't sell to them, despite their hollow claims to want to do something for FTBs.

Frank Lee Midere

who_ru wrote: »

They are available to purchase to investment/vulture funds only. Not the Irish public. Many of whom would quite like to be able to buy a suitable property to live in and possibly raise a family. These people, Irish tax payers, paying extortionate taxes, having the private pensions raided by the govt, cannot buy any if these properties because the banks, and by extension the Govt, won't sell to them, despite their hollow claims to want to do something for FTBs.

Yes. These properties will not be included in the price rises because the sale price is hidden. Nor are the government helping these guys to build more property. It's a deliberate ploy to keep prices higher so that the rental market is taxed to make it impossible to get into home ownership.

lima

It is a wicked, evil thing to do to deprive first time buyers of the chance to purchase their first home for a normal price. I want to tear up any irish flag but I have enough toilet roll to wipe my a*se with.

I have a six figure wad of cash and mortgage approval to purchase my first home but I have been waiting for two years now because of the 'conspiracy' to deprive buyers of supply. I'll happily take my money elsewhere as the missus is from abroad but some people aren't as lucky and have to stay in this lunatic sad vested-interest peripheral hole.

handlemaster

Investors won't want to see these properties empty so don't see the issue. If the banks were to sell these units individually it would cost more i.e. the tax payer pays more.

I'm guessing its easier to cast aspersions when your not of a position of power but when the bare facts are laid out the view changes.

handlemaster

lima wrote: »

It is a wicked, evil thing to do to deprive first time buyers of the chance to purchase their first home for a normal price. I want to tear up any irish flag but I have enough toilet roll to wipe my a*se with.

I have a six figure wad of cash and mortgage approval to purchase my first home but I have been waiting for two years now because of the 'conspiracy' to deprive buyers of supply. I'll happily take my money elsewhere as the missus is from abroad but some people aren't as lucky and have to stay in this lunatic sad vested-interest peripheral hole.

No one "has to stay" as you say you have "six figure wad of cash" away you go. The tearing up the Irish flag is a little over dramatic and a little disingenuous to your fellow country men and women.

The banks have made a concerted effort to rid the country of the toxic property loans and when the economy is showing signs of a recovery is a good time to off load.

lima

handlemaster wrote: »

No one "has to stay" as you say you have "six figure wad of cash" away you go. The tearing up the Irish flag is a little over dramatic and a little disingenuous to your fellow country men and women.

The banks have made a concerted effort to rid the country of the toxic property loans and when the economy is showing signs of a recovery is a good time to off load.

To the detriment of first time buyers, most of whom did not contribute to the economic demise. This keeps prices rising. All the while there's all those people not paying their mortgages. Rents are going up. No stock. It is completely reasonable to despise this country from my point of view. The ideals of the flag are as dead as the rebels who 'freed' us so it's is as worthless as toilet roll.

who_ru

handlemaster wrote: »

No one "has to stay" as you say you have "six figure wad of cash" away you go. The tearing up the Irish flag is a little over dramatic and a little disingenuous to your fellow country men and women.

The banks have made a concerted effort to rid the country of the toxic property loans and when the economy is showing signs of a recovery is a good time to off load.

Are you nuts? The banks created the toxic loans in the first place for Christ sake. They created the credit bubble, they created the developers who have billions of euro in debt. We, the people, bailed the banks out, not the other way round. Good grief.

drumswan

GavMan wrote: »

As tenants, not owner occupier

And? More private rental accomodation is desparately needed in the city.

handlemaster

who_ru wrote: »

Are you nuts? The banks created the toxic loans in the first place for Christ sake. They created the credit bubble, they created the developers who have billions of euro in debt. We, the people, bailed the banks out, not the other way round. Good grief.

I love history but we live today and who now owns the banks is what is important

ted1

GavMan wrote: »

As tenants, not owner occupier

And? They will have professional landlords who will be quick and efficent when issues arise, good with regards returning deposits.

The banks will offload the properties that they don't want with minimal costs and time. Banks are not mandated to be estate agents

lima

ted1 wrote: »

And? They will have professional landlords who will be quick and efficent when issues arise, good with regards returning deposits.

The banks will offload the properties that they don't want with minimal costs and time. Banks are not mandated to be estate agents

..and families struggling to find property to purchase will remain kept out of the market.

drumswan

lima wrote: »

..and families struggling to find property to purchase will remain kept out of the market.

Why do we need to prioritise 'families' and first time buyers above everyone else? The city needs high quality professionally managed rental accommodation to attract the staff required to run the MNCs driving our economy

handlemaster

lima wrote: »

..and families struggling to find property to purchase will remain kept out of the market.

From what I understand from your posts your holding off to buy perhaps other people are/ should do the same.

ted1

lima wrote: »

..and families struggling to find property to purchase will remain kept out of the market.

So effectively your asking for social housing.

jmayo

handlemaster wrote: »

Investors won't want to see these properties empty so don't see the issue. If the banks were to sell these units individually it would cost more i.e. the tax payer pays more.

I'm guessing its easier to cast aspersions when your not of a position of power but when the bare facts are laid out the view changes.

The only issue I have with this is that we are basically pricing out (or in this case just not selling to) people who would like to enter the property market just to buy a "home" and these are the same people who actually will be paying for the banks messes for decades through increased taxes and decreased services.

Of course it is good for NAMA/banks to get as much as possible for property to recoup as much of the losses as possible, but lets be honest these are banks and the Irish state involved here.
When have Irish banks ever been honest and ever considered the people of this state.
And ffs one of them is AIB, who even used the regulatory arms of the state to shut up their own whistleblowers.

Somewhere a cushy inside deal will be done (again think of AIB and insider deals involving Caribean islands) and anyone that thinks the Irish taxpayers will get back all the money blown on banks through either NAMA loan buyouts or recapitalisation/nationalisation is living in cloud cuckoo land.

To me this is just another transfer of wealth.

the world wonders

lima wrote: »

..and families struggling to find property to purchase will remain kept out of the market.

...but families who are in a much tougher situation, struggling even to find a property to rent, will have their situation slightly improved.

jmayo wrote:

The only issue I have with this is that we are basically pricing out (or in this case just not selling to) people who would like to enter the property market just to buy a "home" and these are the same people who actually will be paying for the banks messes for decades through increased taxes and decreased services.

yes, it's a well known fact that renters pay no tax.

handlemaster

jmayo wrote: »

The only issue I have with this is that we are basically pricing out (or in this case just not selling to) people who would like to enter the property market just to buy a "home" and these are the same people who actually will be paying for the banks messes for decades through increased taxes and decreased services.

Of course it is good for NAMA/banks to get as much as possible for property to recoup as much of the losses as possible, but lets be honest these are banks and the Irish state involved here.
When have Irish banks ever been honest and ever considered the people of this state.
And ffs one of them is AIB, who even used the regulatory arms of the state to shut up their own whistleblowers.

Somewhere a cushy inside deal will be done (again think of AIB and insider deals involving Caribean islands) and anyone that thinks the Irish taxpayers will get back all the money blown on banks through either NAMA loan buyouts or recapitalisation/nationalisation is living in cloud cuckoo land.

To me this is just another transfer of wealth.

If they get the best price . . Job done.

Duckjob

We need to "get property prices up another little bit". Didn't you get Michael Noonan's memo?

MouseTail

How are banks selling off 1600 vacant units to an Investment Trust, who will then release them to the rental sector, in a period of chronic shortage of rental properties and escalating rents bad news?

mr_seer

who_ru wrote: »

Are you nuts? The banks created the toxic loans in the first place for Christ sake. They created the credit bubble, they created the developers who have billions of euro in debt. We, the people, bailed the banks out, not the other way round. Good grief.

Don't forget the role of the government in all of this. This is all Michael Noonan's brainchild for a grand "recovery" for the well housed grey hairs

mr_seer

jmayo wrote: »

The only issue I have with this is that we are basically pricing out (or in this case just not selling to) people who would like to enter the property market just to buy a "home" and these are the same people who actually will be paying for the banks messes for decades through increased taxes and decreased services.

Of course it is good for NAMA/banks to get as much as possible for property to recoup as much of the losses as possible, but lets be honest these are banks and the Irish state involved here.
When have Irish banks ever been honest and ever considered the people of this state.
And ffs one of them is AIB, who even used the regulatory arms of the state to shut up their own whistleblowers.

Somewhere a cushy inside deal will be done (again think of AIB and insider deals involving Caribean islands) and anyone that thinks the Irish taxpayers will get back all the money blown on banks through either NAMA loan buyouts or recapitalisation/nationalisation is living in cloud cuckoo land.

To me this is just another transfer of wealth.

They will actually get a lower return as the hedge fund buying the assets will expect to get a significant bulk discount.

lima

ted1 wrote: »

So effectively your asking for social housing.

I am not. Don't be smart :rolleyes:

lima

the world wonders wrote: »

yes, it's a well known fact that renters pay no tax.

Icepick

who_ru wrote: »

Are you nuts? The banks created the toxic loans in the first place for Christ sake. They created the credit bubble, they created the developers who have billions of euro in debt. We, the people, bailed the banks out, not the other way round. Good grief.

They came to peoples' homes and held gins to their heads until they signed for 100% mortgages!11!!!1

lima

drumswan wrote: »

Why do we need to prioritise 'families' and first time buyers above everyone else? The city needs high quality professionally managed rental accommodation to attract the staff required to run the MNCs driving our economy

We don't, I don't have a family yet, but from experience on these boards no-one gives a cr*p about single purchasers without children. Once you throw kids in the mix, everyone gets all sympathetic (ahh be jasus de poor families can dey not stay in der homes)

lima

MouseTail wrote: »

How are banks selling off 1600 vacant units to an Investment Trust, who will then release them to the rental sector, in a period of chronic shortage of rental properties and escalating rents bad news?

Because there are 1000's of people waiting to buy their first homes and they will be deprived of the opportunity to own their own homes. This all driven by the government who are meant to be there to look after the people.

Icepick

mr_seer wrote: »

They will actually get a lower return as the hedge fund buying the assets will expect to get a significant bulk discount.

Because it's much cheaper to sell them in bulk.

Crusades

It seems that the only people of fertile age who reproducing these days are those on the state payroll.

the groutch

Hopefully this will help to slightly deflate the crazy (sub)urban rental market.

drumswan

lima wrote: »

Because there are 1000's of people waiting to buy their first homes and they will be deprived of the opportunity to own their own homes. This all driven by the government who are meant to be there to look after the people.

They can live somewhere else. Like the out in the sticks.

NZ_2014

Crusades wrote: »

It seems that the only people of fertile age who reproducing these days are those on the state payroll.

Your right. People can't be bothered. They see an uncertain Job market, a crazy property market, the costs, and other factors and think "what's the point"

Peter File

Icepick wrote: »

Because it's much cheaper to sell them in bulk.

they would have got a higher price selling individually, the buyers will be getting a big discount. This is just another example of Irelands housing stock been sold off to hedge funds and reits. The pool of available housing for buyers falls again

Zzippy

drumswan wrote: »

And? More private rental accomodation is desparately needed in the city.

MouseTail wrote: »

How are banks selling off 1600 vacant units to an Investment Trust, who will then release them to the rental sector, in a period of chronic shortage of rental properties and escalating rents bad news?

But... these houses are already rented, no? They are buy-to-lets that have been repossessed, they are not empty*, and therefore will not do anything to address the supply shortage or rising rents...


*There is nothing in the article to suggest that these houses are currently unoccupied

lima

drumswan wrote: »

They can live somewhere else. Like the out in the sticks.

No one wants to live out there when the jobs are in Dublin.

There are 1000's of empty properties in Dublin and 1000's of people ready to buy buy buy but they are being sold to international investors.

By the way there are also 1000's of people who haven't paid their mortgage in years, perhaps they should get turfed out and they can go live in the sticks. That would be a solution.

lima

Zzippy wrote: »

But... these houses are already rented, no? They are buy-to-lets that have been repossessed, they are not empty*, and therefore will not do anything to address the supply shortage or rising rents...


*There is nothing in the article to suggest that these houses are currently unoccupied

If that's the case I'd rather buy my house than have a change of landlord.

ted1

lima wrote: »

No one wants to live out there when the jobs are in Dublin.

There are 1000's of empty properties in Dublin and 1000's of people ready to buy buy buy but they are being sold to international investors.

By the way there are also 1000's of people who haven't paid their mortgage in years, perhaps they should get turfed out and they can go live in the sticks. That would be a solution.

My read is that these are buy to let mortgages where the houses have been repossessed

L1011

lima wrote: »

We don't, I don't have a family yet, but from experience on these boards no-one gives a cr*p about single purchasers without children. Once you throw kids in the mix, everyone gets all sympathetic (ahh be jasus de poor families can dey not stay in der homes)

I'm not sure what forum you're reading but it's definitely not this one

MouseTail

ted1 wrote: »

My read is that these are buy to let mortgages where the houses have been repossessed

Yes, and voluntary surrenders.

Grandpa Hassan

Zzippy wrote: »

But... these houses are already rented, no? They are buy-to-lets that have been repossessed, they are not empty*, and therefore will not do anything to address the supply shortage or rising rents...


*There is nothing in the article to suggest that these houses are currently unoccupied

Well, if they're already occupied, how are they supposed to sell them to owner occupiers? Unless you are proposing that the tenants get thrown out....

K.Flyer

drumswan wrote: »

And? More private rental accomodation is desparately needed in the city.

These properties do not change the availability of rental properties on the market as most of them are already being let out.
Nama took them over, spent money finishing them, let them out, stabilised their rental income stream from them, bundle them and sell them as an established rental income package to the investor.
No extra rental property availability as most, if not all of them, are already let.

koheim

MouseTail wrote: »

How are banks selling off 1600 vacant units to an Investment Trust, who will then release them to the rental sector, in a period of chronic shortage of rental properties and escalating rents bad news?

They are not vacant units...

_Kaiser_

lima wrote: »

Because there are 1000's of people waiting to buy their first homes and they will be deprived of the opportunity to own their own homes. This all driven by the government who are meant to be there to look after the people.

Contrary to what many people in Ireland may think, no-one NEEDS to own property.. it's exactly this sort of mindset that led to the frenzied bubble-buying of the "good ole days" and which is spurring the current situation as well. "Looking after the people" isn't encouraging this IMO

If you can reasonably, SUSTAINABLY afford to buy then by all means do so, but we need to get away from this idea that property ownership is the be all and end all of life in Ireland.

What we need more than giving people opportunities to get themselves up to their neck in debt "just cause", is a private rental sector that is properly regulated, with efficient means of redress for both tenants AND landlords, with rent control and deposits held by 3rd parties. Most importantly we need to get to a place where long-term rentals isn't just 2/3 years, but 20/30 years.. where people have a chance to build a home without necessarily needing to "get on the property ladder" (oh how I hate that phrase!)

But, as long as we have governments that have a vested interest in stoking the madness that brought the country to its knees not THAT long ago(!!!), I won't hold my breath and in the meantime ALL sides involved suffer the consequences

Zzippy

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

Well, if they're already occupied, how are they supposed to sell them to owner occupiers? Unless you are proposing that the tenants get thrown out....

I wasn't proposing anything, and there was no mention of selling them to owner occupiers. I was responding to 2 posts that suggested this sale would relieve pressure in the rental sector by increasing supply. Read my post again.


Edit: Did you actually read the article? The proposal is to sell these houses to property companies that rent out properties. I don't know where you got the bit about selling to owner occupiers, especially from my post...

_Kaiser_

The only way we'll relieve pressure on the rental market in Dublin is to build new places for people to live - and preferably up, not out. Low density accommodation in the city has to go in favour of modern spacious (EU standard) apartments and housing.

The risk though is that we end up with more of the same Celtic Tiger shoeboxes with paper-thin walls and no insulation or facilities that are sill sitting abandoned/unfinished all round the country.

jmayo

the world wonders wrote: »

...but families who are in a much tougher situation, struggling even to find a property to rent, will have their situation slightly improved. yes, it's a well known fact that renters pay no tax.

WTF ??

handlemaster wrote: »

If they get the best price . . Job done.

Optimism much.

Problems are ...

• as mr_seer pointed out they will probably be bulk discounts so not quiet best prices per unit
• these are our banks (need I regurgitate the history of our banks and their complete lack of ethics)
• there may be NAMA which has had employees selling information to property investors and has no transparency when it comes to the use of the taxpayers funds.

Call me cynical and paranoid, but I haven't seen much change in this country to think that things have really changed since ar** fell out of our economy and banking system.

Grandpa Hassan

Zzippy wrote: »

I wasn't proposing anything, and there was no mention of selling them to owner occupiers. I was responding to 2 posts that suggested this sale would relieve pressure in the rental sector by increasing supply. Read my post again.


Edit: Did you actually read the article? The proposal is to sell these houses to property companies that rent out properties. I don't know where you got the bit about selling to owner occupiers, especially from my post...

A lot of people complaining on this thread that they should be sold to young families. Not to investors. Should have done a general post rather than a reply that appeared specifically to you.

All those suggesting sale to owner occupiers would probably be the first to complain off mass evictions of tenants were that to happen.

Frank Lee Midere

drumswan wrote: »

And? More private rental accomodation is desparately needed in the city.

If all the renters could buy houses would we need so much rent?