The Kingston story: Bidders fail to pay up for auctioned cows

blue5000

I see someone bought a lot of cows and then refused to pay for them

http://www.rte.ie/news/2016/0415/782168-cork-debt-cows/

Mods if this is inappropriate kindly remove it...



Mod:

Please read post#36 carefully.

Previous related discussion can be found on the Bank Foreclosure thread here.

RightTurnClyde

blue5000 wrote: »

I see someone bought a lot of cows and then refused to pay for them

http://www.rte.ie/news/2016/0415/782168-cork-debt-cows/

Mods if this is inappropriate kindly remove it...

:):):):):)
Cute cork boys
Lol

jimmy G M

blue5000 wrote: »

I see someone bought a lot of cows and then refused to pay for them

http://www.rte.ie/news/2016/0415/782168-cork-debt-cows/

Mods if this is inappropriate kindly remove it...

Crafty, one way to buck up an auction, presumably they had to put up some kind of deposit for a bidding number, but would be relatively small I presum?e

blue5000

Are they all going to be slaughtered now instead??

BoatMad

blue5000 wrote: »

Are they all going to be slaughtered now instead??

the article says they will be re-sold

pedigree 6

RightTurnClyde wrote: »

:):):):):)
Cute cork boys
Lol

Probably got the milk out of them and all.:p

freedominacup

pedigree 6 wrote: »

Probably got the milk out of them and all.:p

I thought you'd need a lot more than two to make that stunt stick at an auction. Well done to the men who did it. Receivers ad sheriffs should be frustrated at every turn by the farming community. They picked the case they thought was least sympathetic to push first. Those Dutch pricks are going to have to wait a bit longer before they do their next bit of blackguarding. If this isn't nipped in the bid it'll be coming soon to a townsland near you and all that person will have done wrong is not to be in a strong enough position to refinance because some bank wants to bail.

20silkcut

Here here the rebel county lives up to its name.
Great to see a bit of fight in the farming community.

farmerjj

20silkcut wrote: »

Here here the rebel county lives up to its name.
Great to see a bit of fight in the farming community.

Don't know why people are so happy will this all just be more expense for the banks, and just mean more of a chance they will go after the family home.

Bullocks

farmerjj wrote: »

Don't know why people are so happy will this all just be more expense for the banks, and just mean more of a chance they will go after the family home.

I don't think they'll get the family home after all the publicity this has got .

Brown Podzol

freedominacup wrote: »

I thought you'd need a lot more than two to make that stunt stick at an auction. Well done to the men who did it. Receivers ad sheriffs should be frustrated at every turn by the farming community. They picked the case they thought was least sympathetic to push first. Those Dutch pricks are going to have to wait a bit longer before they do their next bit of blackguarding. If this isn't nipped in the bid it'll be coming soon to a townsland near you and all that person will have done wrong is not to be in a strong enough position to refinance because some bank wants to bail.

+1
It's been reported that the sherif spent between €1 and €2m to realise €6k to €7k. This will reduce that figure. Not good business on the sherif's part. Seems vindictive or just putting down a marker, no harm to frustrate them. On the family home , ACC used to insist that the home was transferred into a separate folio because realising security containing the family home is very tricky, a lot of protection in law.

Sam Kade

The best of the cows were bought by the two bidders even though there were 150 bidders there, they musy have been busy.

RightTurnClyde

farmerjj wrote: »

Don't know why people are so happy will this all just be more expense for the banks, and just mean more of a chance they will go after the family home.

Mrs. Sheriff, is laying it on a bit thick with her €1M bill and her "shocked with the condition of the cows". A little taste of her own medicine.
She should have got a few cork lads to look after the cows for the last while instead of those Dutch lads, they would have done a cracking job for half the price. :)

Farmer Ed

No need to shoot that sherif. She seems well capable of shooting herself in the foot.

Short history lesson. The first healys to arrive in kilgarvan were said to come from Cork. Not before they shot a sherif on the way back.

paddysdream

freedominacup wrote: »

I thought you'd need a lot more than two to make that stunt stick at an auction. Well done to the men who did it. Receivers ad sheriffs should be frustrated at every turn by the farming community. They picked the case they thought was least sympathetic to push first. Those Dutch pricks are going to have to wait a bit longer before they do their next bit of blackguarding. If this isn't nipped in the bid it'll be coming soon to a townsland near you and all that person will have done wrong is not to be in a strong enough position to refinance because some bank wants to bail.

Rubbish.
If I borrow your tractor and then refuse to give it back until it suits me should all my neighbours help and sympathise with me?
Those Dutch "pricks" were doing their job same as the sheriff ,guards there on duty (pictures in paper) etc etc.
And yes it prob. is coming to a townland near me. What should I do ?Stand in solidarity with someone who has messed about for years,paid no one they could avoid and when they couldn't avoid it,paid as little and late as possible?
Not a hope
.Genuine hard luck cases are very rare and they deserve help but people who borrow millions and then it all goes wrong ?Would people feel the same about all those builders/developers who went under a few years ago?Just cause its farmers that are feeling the cold wind of reality at this time is no reason to lose our reason

Bass Reeves

freedominacup wrote: »

I thought you'd need a lot more than two to make that stunt stick at an auction. Well done to the men who did it. Receivers ad sheriffs should be frustrated at every turn by the farming community. They picked the case they thought was least sympathetic to push first. Those Dutch pricks are going to have to wait a bit longer before they do their next bit of blackguarding. If this isn't nipped in the bid it'll be coming soon to a townsland near you and all that person will have done wrong is not to be in a strong enough position to refinance because some bank wants to bail.

The real losers in this case are the unsecured creditors. In normal receiverships things like this only make it financial outcome worse. Also because the sheriff had to bring in expertise from abroad to run the farm this added to the cost. In the US if you hinder a reveivership you lose all protection from the court.

Bullocks wrote: »

I don't think they'll get the family home after all the publicity this has got .

I borrowed from ACC/Rabo bank in 2005 they stressed that they did not want the house as security. All my repayments are on schedule I have not heard from them except for yearly statements on the loan. My interest rate at present is below 2% as I have a tracker type loan.

Brown Podzol wrote: »

+1
It's been reported that the sherif spent between €1 and €2m to realise €6k to €7k. This will reduce that figure. Not good business on the sherif's part. Seems vindictive or just putting down a marker, no harm to frustrate them. On the family home , ACC used to insist that the home was transferred into a separate folio because realising security containing the family home is very tricky, a lot of protection in law.

IF you read Thursday journal it gives details about the state of the parlour, the milk from the cows scc etc. It was not totally favourable to the debtor IMO someone else may have a different opinion. If you deliberately frustrate a receiver in the US you lose everything.

RightTurnClyde wrote: »

Mrs. Sheriff, is laying it on a bit thick with her €1M bill and her "shocked with the condition of the cows". A little taste of her own medicine.
She should have got a few cork lads to look after the cows for the last while instead of those Dutch lads, they would have done a cracking job for half the price. :)

The journal is quite clear about the sheriff's costs. Why did the sheriff hire 30 security men, why did she have to bring in expertise from abroad. If you borrow a money and at the end of 8 years have only interest paid but no capital repayments is the loan sustainable. IMO any loan that goes beyond 2-3 years interest only is unsustainable.

I am being a Devils Advacote to a certain extent at the end of the day if you try to frustrate banks they will break you. The will to an extent make an example of you. Calling the Dutch workers names is the same as if Transdev brings in replacement drivers from abroad Trade unionists calling them scabs. Yet a good few here would have no issue(myself included) if the LUAs goes to that. I would have sympathy for the drivers that lose there job just like a farmers that loses everything but at the same time you cannot step outside the line.

People often fail to look at why it happened and was the business unsustainable. Then if you do you are considered unsympathic if you point out reasons why you think that the business failed.

The ones I feel sorry for here are the unsecured creditors. There is a big difference between getting 20-50c/euro back and getting nothing. That 20-50% of your money may be the difference between you surviving and not. I would like to see the amount of unsecured credit involved it might also answer a few questions if it is very substandical it may answer as to if the business was sustainable

viztopia

freedominacup wrote: »

I thought you'd need a lot more than two to make that stunt stick at an auction. Well done to the men who did it. Receivers ad sheriffs should be frustrated at every turn by the farming community. They picked the case they thought was least sympathetic to push first. Those Dutch pricks are going to have to wait a bit longer before they do their next bit of blackguarding. If this isn't nipped in the bid it'll be coming soon to a townsland near you and all that person will have done wrong is not to be in a strong enough position to refinance because some bank wants to bail.

If some one uses a loan to buy land or cattle then obviously they have outbid some one on either of these. If they now can not pay back these loans did they not have an unfair advantage over the under bidders in the first place?

keep going

ah lads would ye shut up about this because ye dont know the full story.

patsy_mccabe

For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. If banks can't chase bad loans, then banks will refuse to lend to farmers. Simple as that.

Sam Kade

Mega dairies in the US use investors for finance which a safer bet when thing go belly up.

20silkcut

Bass Reeves wrote: »

The real losers in this case are the unsecured creditors. In normal receiverships things like this only make it financial outcome worse. Also because the sheriff had to bring in expertise from abroad to run the farm this added to the cost. In the US if you hinder a reveivership you lose all protection from the court.



I borrowed from ACC/Rabo bank in 2005 they stressed that they did not want the house as security. All my repayments are on schedule I have not heard from them except for yearly statements on the loan. My interest rate at present is below 2% as I have a tracker type loan.




IF you read Thursday journal it gives details about the state of the parlour, the milk from the cows scc etc. It was not totally favourable to the debtor IMO someone else may have a different opinion. If you deliberately frustrate a receiver in the US you lose everything.



The journal is quite clear about the sheriff's costs. Why did the sheriff hire 30 security men, why did she have to bring in expertise from abroad. If you borrow a money and at the end of 8 years have only interest paid but no capital repayments is the loan sustainable. IMO any loan that goes beyond 2-3 years interest only is unsustainable.

I am being a Devils Advacote to a certain extent at the end of the day if you try to frustrate banks they will break you. The will to an extent make an example of you. Calling the Dutch workers names is the same as if Transdev brings in replacement drivers from abroad Trade unionists calling them scabs. Yet a good few here would have no issue(myself included) if the LUAs goes to that. I would have sympathy for the drivers that lose there job just like a farmers that loses everything but at the same time you cannot step outside the line.

People often fail to look at why it happened and was the business unsustainable. Then if you do you are considered unsympathic if you point out reasons why you think that the business failed.

The ones I feel sorry for here are the unsecured creditors. There is a big difference between getting 20-50c/euro back and getting nothing. That 20-50% of your money may be the difference between you surviving and not. I would like to see the amount of unsecured credit involved it might also answer a few questions if it is very substandical it may answer as to if the business was sustainable

Massive difference between a farmer and a luas worker. Don't know how anyone could side with these vulture funds no matter how well off or over ambitious the debtor is perceived .
These guys need to be driven out of this country now. They are the financial Black and Tans. It is great to see farmers collaborating together cohesively. It needs to be done on a much greater scale to halt the incessant decline of rural Ireland. But to see the insiders get a bloody nose is a good days work.

freedominacup

patsy_mccabe wrote: »

For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. If banks can't chase bad loans, then banks will refuse to lend to farmers. Simple as that.

Up to now banks have had to pull easy when chasing "bad" loans to farmers this never stopped them lending to farmers so far. Anyone who expanded rapidly in the seventies has a story about banks telling them to sell land or whatever was the current weeks brainwave when interest rates went into the high teens and beyond in the early eighties. Very few sales ensued and very few loans didn't work themselves out. Loans secured on land have to be paid because land is the tools of your trade. You can't sell it and do a runner without deeds and they get to use the huge ltv disparity to cover off all sorts of other dodgy creditlines. These are the reasons why banks acting the maggot has to be resisted. If that means the odd unworthy case gets support so be it.

Buford T. Justice XIX

freedominacup wrote: »

Up to now banks have had to pull easy when chasing "bad" loans to farmers this never stopped them lending to farmers so far. Anyone who expanded rapidly in the seventies has a story about banks telling them to sell land or whatever was the current weeks brainwave when interest rates went into the high teens and beyond in the early eighties. Very few sales ensued and very few loans didn't work themselves out. Loans secured on land have to be paid because land is the tools of your trade. You can't sell it and do a runner without deeds and they get to use the huge ltv disparity to cover off all sorts of other dodgy creditlines. These are the reasons why banks acting the maggot has to be resisted. If that means the odd unworthy case gets support so be it.

I will have to disagree with you there, freedom.

I remember going to 5 or 6 land sales with my father when land purchased had to be sold to avoid the whole business going to the wall. It was mostly land bought in Limerick by Kerry farmers not far from the county bounds. It may have been different in Waterford, though.

However, very few home farms were sold, it was normally the purchased land sold with a large chunk of the loan left being written off and a much smaller or no loan repayments left to work out the loan.

jaymla627

keep going wrote: »

ah lads would ye shut up about this because ye dont know the full story.

Whatever the "full story" is the fact that the dairy had stopped collecting milk from the farm due to a crazy high scc shows the farm was finished as a going concern ....
Whatever about the rights our wrongs of the situation on both sides, the farmer had lost the ability to run his dairy herd, it's as open and shut as that and the bank was well within its rights....
Everyone on here must agree that once any farmer has his milk refused by the dairy company they are more our less finished and when you consider the scale of the herd the losses being occurred in sales alone would of been astronomical on a monthly basis

orm0nd

blue5000 wrote: »

I see someone bought a lot of cows and then refused to pay for them

http://www.rte.ie/news/2016/0415/782168-cork-debt-cows/

Mods if this is inappropriate kindly remove it...

appartently 2 "buyers" bought a large number . mainly cows

both people were well known to the farmer (allegedly)

20silkcut

jaymla627 wrote: »

Whatever the "full story" is the fact that the dairy had stopped collecting milk from the farm due to a crazy high scc shows the farm was finished as a going concern ....
Whatever about the rights our wrongs of the situation on both sides, the farmer had lost the ability to run his dairy herd, it's as open and shut as that and the bank was well within its rights....
Everyone on here must agree that once any farmer has his milk refused by the dairy company they are more our less finished and when you consider the scale of the herd the losses being occurred in sales alone would of been astronomical on a monthly basis

Let's not get this thread shut down too

Brown Podzol

ACC loan management are no better or no worse than a vulture fund at this stage. Vulture funds are buying farm loans for between 15% and 50% I'm told. If these loans were offered to farmers at these rates I'm sure most if not all could refinance and other creditors would stand a chance of being paid as farmers could then trade out of their difficulties. The farmer in question has said in interviews that he had agreed to buy the loan at 50% discount more than once but the bank refused to proceed. The bank will be lucky to realise 50% at this stage and creditors have very little chance of getting their money.
The thing is that the farm loans are being packaged with other rubbish loans with very little chance of recovering anything. Distressed farm loans with very good LTV are being used to sell the rubbish loans. Now if the vulture funds have to recalculate what they pay for farm loans, in view of what has happened in Cork, it may force the banks to negotiate with farmers.

WheatenBriar

patsy_mccabe wrote: »

For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. If banks can't chase bad loans, then banks will refuse to lend to farmers. Simple as that.

But banks have their toast buttered on both sides
They've been bailed out to the tune of the distressed loans (inc rabbobank from bonds)via us as taxpayers and now they want money from the distressed loans too,in the most miserable way possible in this case?
Its immoral

hometruths

Don't know the full story obviously, but any views I have are based on what the lad himself has said publicly. One quote stands out:

"Peter Kingston said that he felt that he’s like to do more in life than just farming, even though it was his ‘thing’ for so many years.

In order to do this, he said, he needed to expand his farm big enough to sustain employment of other people to do the work, so that he could get away."

https://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/its-a-surreal-experience-like-the-day-after-a-funeral-peter-kingston-on-the-sale-of-his-950-cow-herd/

To be honest I am finding it a little difficult to buy into the farmers solidarity here when the root of the problem was he was trying to get away from farming. I would have thought any farmer would agree that if your hearts not in it you'll make a balls of it eventually.

On the other hand I have huge sympathy for the father:

"We bought the farm back in 1972. My father kept bees. He had a bumper year for honey...So he had a bit of money and he always loved dairy farming. This place (Craden Hill) was available and he put a deposit down.
"It was a leap of faith, but he loved dairy farming and it all really started from there."

http://www.independent.ie/business/farming/irelands-fittest-family-farmer-weeps-as-1000cattle-herd-auctioned-to-pay-24m-bank-debt-34622674.html

Ban me from the forum for saying so if you must, but it strikes me that the bank and receivers are not the cause of this farm going wallop.

And this fecking around with sticking it to the banks and frustrating the receivers is not helping anyone, the farmers in question, his other creditors or the rest of us.

its no different to the lads who commit insurance fraud or evade taxes - decent hard working folk ending up paying more as a result.

djmc

paddysdream wrote: »

Rubbish.
If I borrow your tractor and then refuse to give it back until it suits me should all my neighbours help and sympathise with me?
Those Dutch "pricks" were doing their job same as the sheriff ,guards there on duty (pictures in paper) etc etc.
And yes it prob. is coming to a townland near me. What should I do ?Stand in solidarity with someone who has messed about for years,paid no one they could avoid and when they couldn't avoid it,paid as little and late as possible?
Not a hope
.Genuine hard luck cases are very rare and they deserve help but people who borrow millions and then it all goes wrong ?Would people feel the same about all those builders/developers who went under a few years ago?Just cause its farmers that are feeling the cold wind of reality at this time is no reason to lose our reason

Did you listen to your man's side of the story on the radio Kerry podcast I put up at the start of this thread if not it's worth taking a few minutes to hear both sides of the story.
It seems he made a lot of attempts to pay them back and they refused 1.2 million to work with him.

Sam Kade

djmc wrote: »

Did you listen to your man's side of the story on the radio Kerry podcast I put up at the start of this thread if not it's worth taking a few minutes to hear both sides of the story.
It seems he made a lot of attempts to pay them back and they refused 1.2 million to work with him.

Talk is cheap he must have been on every radio station in the country at this stage.

paddysdream

20silkcut wrote: »

Massive difference between a farmer and a luas worker. Don't know how anyone could side with these vulture funds no matter how well off or over ambitious the debtor is perceived .
These guys need to be driven out of this country now. They are the financial Black and Tans. It is great to see farmers collaborating together cohesively. It needs to be done on a much greater scale to halt the incessant decline of rural Ireland. But to see the insiders get a bloody nose is a good days work.

What are the differences?
Not siding with the "vulture" fund but if you overreach then be prepared to take the consequences if you fail.
A lot of this is similar to the water charges hysteria.Somebody else is wrong,creaming it off ,fooling the poor sods,has the inside track etc etc.
Human nature to look for someone or something else to blame when you f@ck up.Was always a great believer in holding your hand up,admitting you may have been wrong and getting on with it.

paddysdream

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

I will have to disagree with you there, freedom.

I remember going to 5 or 6 land sales with my father when land purchased had to be sold to avoid the whole business going to the wall. It was mostly land bought in Limerick by Kerry farmers not far from the county bounds. It may have been different in Waterford, though.

However, very few home farms were sold, it was normally the purchased land sold with a large chunk of the loan left being written off and a much smaller or no loan repayments left to work out the loan.

Lots of land sold around here in late 70's early 80's by farmers who over borrowed to expand after we entered the EU.
Actually as I sit here eating the dinner and typing this can see 2 farmers who sold land to bail themselves out.
Out of all the places that I am aware of that had problems only 1 managed to hold onto all their land and lets just say that the stress etc of those years told on them in latter times.
One consequence of the failure of the celtic tiger is that the handy option for many of shifting a site or 2 at 100k plus each to fill a gap has been lost.It sponsored many a farmer over the last 10 years but to me smacked of fooling yourself to imagine that every time you fell into trouble then a site sale or 2 would keep the ship afloat

paddysdream

djmc wrote: »

Did you listen to your man's side of the story on the radio Kerry podcast I put up at the start of this thread if not it's worth taking a few minutes to hear both sides of the story.
It seems he made a lot of attempts to pay them back and they refused 1.2 million to work with him.

Hears him on radio 1 during the week and drew my own conclusions.
But to be fair have no interest in or clue about this one particular farmer.Its in general terms that I believe that if you borrow its in the full knowledge and understanding that it actually has to be paid back (with interest)If people have problems with terms and conditions etc then the option is there to not borrow.

Nobody has a gun held to their head to borrow money and in any reasonable persons estimation someone who is prepared to borrow 7 figure sums for business expansion should really know what they are getting into and the consequences of what could or might go wrong.Businesses fail every day all around this country and why should farmers be held to any different standard just because they have an irrational emotional attachment to land(Admit I would sell anything myself bar the land!!!!!!!!!)
Should we stand in solidarity with those developers who overreached 10 years ago or those who lost all in the dot com bubble before that or even those who lost money on eircom shares ?

pedigree 6

Whatever about the farmers case.
Is this the end of banks lending money using livestock as security?
Can't see many banks wanting to go through this again.
Easier to sell land and always be more sure of getting money back.


Just wondering about the planned 1000 cow farm in Tipperary looking for investors. Although the coop there was putting money into it as well so maybe paying a better price and maybe investors could use land there as security.
Also why all talk about 1000 cow herds. Why not 919 or 1021 cow herds?

Also every public farm walk I was at in the last few years the banks always had a stand there.

And one more will banks only lend now on past performance and not some makey uppy future herd output or grass grown figures or again back on only lending what they can get back by selling current holding.

blue5000

20silkcut wrote: »

Massive difference between a farmer and a luas worker. Don't know how anyone could side with these vulture funds no matter how well off or over ambitious the debtor is perceived .
These guys need to be driven out of this country now. They are the financial Black and Tans. It is great to see farmers collaborating together cohesively. It needs to be done on a much greater scale to halt the incessant decline of rural Ireland. But to see the insiders get a bloody nose is a good days work.

I think 20 you've started to hit the nail on the head, part of the problem here is the unequal distribution of wealth. The rich (bankers, vulture funds LGs DO'Bs of this world) are getting richer all the time at our (the little ppl, peasants/serfs/labourers) expense.

greysides

This thread is being split off from Bass Reeve's 'Banks borrowing money Foreclosure, and all that lark' which can be found here.

This is to try to preserve the value of the investment made by Bass and his financial advisers in that thread in case the sheriff intervenes here too.

There are two very different schools of thought on this issue so agree to disagree, or argue the point and not the poster.

Do not post hastily in response to something that inflames you. Give yourself time to compose a reasoned response!

Please continue to keep in mind that there is a real family, not a faceless corporation, at the core of this discussion.

Try to stick to what is in the public domain and avoid too much speculation. None of us are party to all the details!

Moderation here will be strict.

djmc

paddysdream wrote: »

Hears him on radio 1 during the week and drew my own conclusions.
But to be fair have no interest in or clue about this one particular farmer.Its in general terms that I believe that if you borrow its in the full knowledge and understanding that it actually has to be paid back (with interest)If people have problems with terms and conditions etc then the option is there to not borrow.

Nobody has a gun held to their head to borrow money and in any reasonable persons estimation someone who is prepared to borrow 7 figure sums for business expansion should really know what they are getting into and the consequences of what could or might go wrong.Businesses fail every day all around this country and why should farmers be held to any different standard just because they have an irrational emotional attachment to land(Admit I would sell anything myself bar the land!!!!!!!!!)
Should we stand in solidarity with those developers who overreached 10 years ago or those who lost all in the dot com bubble before that or even those who lost money on eircom shares ?

What I understand from his side of the story
The bank left him short 150k after he had completed the work which was promised but then renaged on due to the banking collapse.
The were given security over the land but not the cattle or the house or machinery.
He said he has no problem with the land as that's what he offered but they are coming after everything.
He said he was making payments and offered 1.2 million to work with him and give him more time but they refused.
I believe everyone that borrows money should repay it and be given every chance to repay it.
I also believe that if someone is set up to fail or someone is profiteering from others misfortune they should be investigated and exposed.

Buford T. Justice XIX

blue5000 wrote: »

I think 20 you've started to hit the nail on the head, part of the problem here is the unequal distribution of wealth. The rich (bankers, vulture funds LGs DO'Bs of this world) are getting richer all the time at our (the little ppl, peasants/serfs/labourers) expense.

Careful there, Blue.

Many out there would consider farmers to be part of the rich(even though you can't eat land).:p

Sam Kade

djmc wrote: »

What I understand from his side of the story
The bank left him short 150k after he had completed the work which was promised but then renaged on due to the banking collapse.
The were given security over the land but not the cattle or the house or machinery.
He said he has no problem with the land as that's what he offered but they are coming after everything.
He said he was making payments and offered 1.2 million to work with him and give him more time but they refused.
I believe everyone that borrows money should repay it and be given every chance to repay it.
I also believe that if someone is set up to fail or someone is profiteering from others misfortune they should be investigated and exposed.

He said that he was left short 250k.

hometruths

djmc wrote: »

He said he was making payments and offered 1.2 million to work with him and give him more time but they refused.
I believe everyone that borrows money should repay it and be given every chance to repay it.

What I don't understand is if he was making payments why did the bank call in the debt?

Surely banks aren't repo'ing on performing loans?

paddysdream

schmittel wrote: »

What I don't understand is if he was making payments why did the bank call in the debt?

Surely banks aren't repo'ing on performing loans?

You would wonder alright.Never seen the bank here take any interest in me or my finances once the direct debit clears each time a loan repayment is due.

flutered

farmerjj wrote: »

Don't know why people are so happy will this all just be more expense for the banks, and just mean more of a chance they will go after the family home.

who will they get to buy it

Farmer Ed

Seeing as we are doing a postmortem on what went wrong with an individual family's business. Is it ok if we we take a look at some other well known families in farming circles who have ran in to financial difficulty? I can think of one in particular who went on to be leader of IFA. Indeed there is some mention of someone currently seeking high office in IFA who may not be in a very healthy state financially. Where do we stop? I read somewhere that 5 farmers have lost their farms to the banks in recent times. Sadly some of these farmers have taken their own lives.
Just something to think about before we cast judgment.

cute geoge

I just want to add lads remember most pedigree breeders depend on heifer and bull sales to make profit . It is said they are lucky to break even on milk sales most years ,but can command top dollar for any stock .
Imo the outbrake of t.b. in the herd was the start of the demise ,it is all very well lads coming on here saying they have no trouble with the banks but its when there is an impediment to repaying ,that is when the banks start behaving disgracefully.

Farmer Ed

cute geoge wrote: »

I just want to add lads remember most pedigree breeders depend on heifer and bull sales to make profit . It is said they are lucky to break even on milk sales most years ,but can command top dollar for any stock .
Imo the outbrake of t.b. in the herd was the start of the demise ,it is all very well lads coming on here saying they have no trouble with the banks but its when there is an impediment to repaying ,that is when the banks start behaving disgracefully.

plus 1 .Judge no one because, there goes me but for the grace of God

Bass Reeves

20silkcut wrote: »

Massive difference between a farmer and a luas worker. Don't know how anyone could side with these vulture funds no matter how well off or over ambitious the debtor is perceived .
These guys need to be driven out of this country now. They are the financial Black and Tans. It is great to see farmers collaborating together cohesively. It needs to be done on a much greater scale to halt the incessant decline of rural Ireland. But to see the insiders get a bloody nose is a good days work.

Will you tell me the difference between a farmer and a LUAS worker. The question is why do banks sell to vulture funds is it because they do not want the hassle that RABO/ACC bank are getting here. I am not sure what the failure of a big farm has to do with the decline of rural Ireland

freedominacup wrote: »

Up to now banks have had to pull easy when chasing "bad" loans to farmers this never stopped them lending to farmers so far. Anyone who expanded rapidly in the seventies has a story about banks telling them to sell land or whatever was the current weeks brainwave when interest rates went into the high teens and beyond in the early eighties. Very few sales ensued and very few loans didn't work themselves out. Loans secured on land have to be paid because land is the tools of your trade. You can't sell it and do a runner without deeds and they get to use the huge ltv disparity to cover off all sorts of other dodgy creditlines. These are the reasons why banks acting the maggot has to be resisted. If that means the odd unworthy case gets support so be it.

This is a two sided street farmers give security for to get a reduction in Interest rates. secure loans are often 2-5% cheaper than unsecured that is the reality. Banks if it is viable pursue unsecured lending.

Brown Podzol wrote: »

ACC loan management are no better or no worse than a vulture fund at this stage. Vulture funds are buying farm loans for between 15% and 50% I'm told. If these loans were offered to farmers at these rates I'm sure most if not all could refinance and other creditors would stand a chance of being paid as farmers could then trade out of their difficulties. The farmer in question has said in interviews that he had agreed to buy the loan at 50% discount more than once but the bank refused to proceed. The bank will be lucky to realise 50% at this stage and creditors have very little chance of getting their money.
The thing is that the farm loans are being packaged with other rubbish loans with very little chance of recovering anything. Distressed farm loans with very good LTV are being used to sell the rubbish loans. Now if the vulture funds have to recalculate what they pay for farm loans, in view of what has happened in Cork, it may force the banks to negotiate with farmers.

Vulture Funds as you call them buy bungles of loans often in the hundreds. Some that are preforming they do not touch. Some they do deals with to maximize there returns. They may buy 200 loans at a 50% discount. To make money for a loan that they only recover 40% of the value they need to recover 60%+ from another loan. The real problem is that banks will now not go through the hassle of loan recovery for what is often a 20% better recover rate rather than sell to a loan recovery fund because of the bad publicity. At the end of the day this transfers to higher interest rates to us. What good is having security if you cannot recover it.

djmc wrote: »

Did you listen to your man's side of the story on the radio Kerry podcast I put up at the start of this thread if not it's worth taking a few minutes to hear both sides of the story.
It seems he made a lot of attempts to pay them back and they refused 1.2 million to work with him.

I heard the broadcast and yes you get the impression that they were willing to dicount loan by 50% but that nearly 2 years back in general banks will not do deals when they can recover greater than that amount.

djmc wrote: »

What I understand from his side of the story
The bank left him short 150k after he had completed the work which was promised but then renaged on due to the banking collapse.
The were given security over the land but not the cattle or the house or machinery.
He said he has no problem with the land as that's what he offered but they are coming after everything.
He said he was making payments and offered 1.2 million to work with him and give him more time but they refused.
I believe everyone that borrows money should repay it and be given every chance to repay it.
I also believe that if someone is set up to fail or someone is profiteering from others misfortune they should be investigated and exposed.

When you deals with banks and solicitors etc promises are no good you need the paperwork in place. There is no point in bidding on a house or land unless you have a loan offer in place. You also have to remember that AIB restructured his loans in 2007 already. two years down the road did ACC bank find that the figure did bot add up.

cute geoge wrote: »

I just want to add lads remember most pedigree breeders depend on heifer and bull sales to make profit . It is said they are lucky to break even on milk sales most years ,but can command top dollar for any stock .
Imo the outbrake of t.b. in the herd was the start of the demise ,it is all very well lads coming on here saying they have no trouble with the banks but its when there is an impediment to repaying ,that is when the banks start behaving disgracefully.

No matter what way I try to phrase this it sound awful but the reality when you borrow serious amounts of money for a business you need to take into account the worst case senario. You take out life insurance in case you pop your clogs unfortunately you cannot insure for a TB outbreak.

paddysdream

cute geoge wrote: »

I just want to add lads remember most pedigree breeders depend on heifer and bull sales to make profit . It is said they are lucky to break even on milk sales most years ,but can command top dollar for any stock .
Imo the outbrake of t.b. in the herd was the start of the demise ,it is all very well lads coming on here saying they have no trouble with the banks but its when there is an impediment to repaying ,that is when the banks start behaving disgracefully.

Only impediment I ever found to paying back money was not actually having it.
These things do not happen overnight.In most cases bank is not going to pull the plug and endure bad publicity, political and media attention etc etc when another solution is viable.
They would prefer to extract the maximum value from their investment and a fire sale usually will not realise this.

whelan2

paddysdream wrote: »

You would wonder alright.Never seen the bank here take any interest in me or my finances once the direct debit clears each time a loan repayment is due.

Are loan repayments not normally scheduled to come out the same day as milk cheque comes in, therefore the bank get their bit first?

Milked out

whelan2 wrote: »

Are loan repayments not normally scheduled to come out the same day as milk cheque comes in, therefore the bank get their bit first?

Can be any time most are set up for end of the month so milk cheque would be in and a lot would be in the high output months as in 6 repayments in a year from April may on. It's about having the money in the day it's due.

Milked out

I think the issue at hand is basically did the bank move in when there was another course of action available with the client restructuring or whatever. If they did then it's uncalled for however if there was repeated attempts to resolve it and get payments going again and they came to nothing then the bank are going to have to move. I've never heard of interest only periods longer than 2 years and AFAIK the longest you would get from a bank interest only would be 12 months, could be wrong on that now