PTSB selling bad loans - media whinefest

CeilingFly

PTSB fianlly comign to their sense.

The leftist media are now having a hysterical whinefest supported by the new leftist FF party with the senstaionalist indo claiming "20,000 homeowners affected"

Sorry, but this shoudl have been doen YEARS ago.

These are NON PEFORMING loans. they have not responded to dozens of letters from PTSB, they refuse to engane, they pay NOTHING, they are loiving for FREE and its the taxpayer and variable rate mortgage holders paying for this large group of noin payers

So before anyone says they should be supported - thay have had EVRY POSSIBL support thrown at them and they STILL refuse to engage.

Bring on the european system - refuse to engage and be out on your ear within 90 days.

THEN we'll get 2% variable rate mortgages like european countries get.

But for FF and the hysterical media to say the banks are doing wrong - WAKE UP and smell the coffee. These non payers are scamming the taxpayer and other mortgage payers.

end of the road

CeilingFly wrote: »

PTSB fianlly comign to their sense.

The leftist media are now having a hysterical whinefest supported by the new leftist FF party with the senstaionalist indo claiming "20,000 homeowners affected"

Sorry, but this shoudl have been doen YEARS ago.

These are NON PEFORMING loans. they have not responded to dozens of letters from PTSB, they refuse to engane, they pay NOTHING, they are loiving for FREE and its the taxpayer and variable rate mortgage holders paying for this large group of noin payers

So before anyone says they should be supported - thay have had EVRY POSSIBL support thrown at them and they STILL refuse to engage.

Bring on the european system - refuse to engage and be out on your ear within 90 days.

THEN we'll get 2% variable rate mortgages like european countries get.

But for FF and the hysterical media to say the banks are doing wrong - WAKE UP and smell the coffee. These non payers are scamming the taxpayer and other mortgage payers.

i presume you work for this bank to know that they had every possible opportunity to engage?

fair play to ff and the media for their work, the banks deserve everything they get for what they did to this country, we shall never forget.
the european system of having people out in 90 days is not viable for the tax payer of this country and we won't get 2% variable rate mortgages because it's likely not viable for the banks to give out such mortgages for such a small country.

namloc1980

end of the road wrote: »

i presume you work for this bank to know that they had every possible opportunity to engage?

fair play to ff and the media for their work, the banks deserve everything they get for what they did to this country, we shall never forget.
the european system of having people out in 90 days is not viable for the tax payer of this country and we won't get 2% variable rate mortgages because it's likely not viable for the banks to give out such mortgages for such a small country.

Ireland has an extremely casual approach to mortgage arrears. In almost every country you get to 90 days past due and the receiver/sheriff is out to evict you. Here we have people who haven't paid a bob in over a decade living happily in a house the taxpayer is paying for through the bank. Farce.

Taxburden carrier

end of the road wrote: »

i presume you work for this bank to know that they had every possible opportunity to engage?

fair play to ff and the media for their work, the banks deserve everything they get for what they did to this country, we shall never forget.
the european system of having people out in 90 days is not viable for the tax payer of this country and we won't get 2% variable rate mortgages because it's likely not viable for the banks to give out such mortgages for such a small country.

‘ Fair play to ff.’.......seriously??

SEPT 23 1989

do the vulture fund parasites still have charitable status in Ireland?

Dev84

I'm in court myself soon.

I have mortgage arrears of 8500 but have entered into an agreement with the PTSB to have them paid off by March 2019 and have been told that as long as I am keeping to the agreement I am ok. Believe me, going into arrears is not a choice people make for lifestyle.

Most of the people who defaulted did not do it buy choice. It was a knock on issue of thew way the financial institutes carried.

Lets just remember that it's families being evicted here. The majority of cases are not going to be a gorse hill or arrears of 500,000.

SEPT 23 1989

Dev84 wrote: »

I'm in court myself soon.

I have mortgage arrears of 8500 but have entered into an agreement with the PTSB to have them paid off by March 2019 and have been told that as long as I am keeping to the agreement I am ok. Believe me, going into arrears is not a choice people make for lifestyle.

Most of the people who defaulted did not do it buy choice. It was a knock on issue of thew way the financial institutes carried.

Lets just remember that it's families being evicted here. The majority of cases are not going to be a gorse hill or arrears of 500,000.

people who have agreements are also being thrown to the vultures

hopefully you are lucky

topper75

end of the road wrote: »

i presume you work for this bank to know that they had every possible opportunity to engage?

fair play to ff and the media for their work, the banks deserve everything they get for what they did to this country, we shall never forget.
...

Are you au fait with the ownership structure of PTSB? The 'banks' is us now!

Being evicted isn't nice.

Having the taxpayer shouldering non-payment isn't nice either.

But, which is it to be in your opinion?
Can't have both.

end of the road

namloc1980 wrote: »

Ireland has an extremely casual approach to mortgage arrears. In almost every country you get to 90 days past due and the receiver/sheriff is out to evict you. Here we have people who haven't paid a bob in over a decade living happily in a house the taxpayer is paying for through the bank. Farce.

we will be paying to rehouse them upon eviction most likely.

topper75 wrote: »

Are you au fait with the ownership structure of PTSB? The 'banks' is us now!

Being evicted isn't nice.

Having the taxpayer shouldering non-payment isn't nice either.

But, which is it to be in your opinion?
Can't have both.

if us the tax payer having to deal with non-repayment is cheaper then eviction and rehousing then i would have to live with it.

ohnonotgmail

FF are leftist now?? When did that happen?

namloc1980

end of the road wrote: »

we will be paying to rehouse them upon eviction most likely.



if us the tax payer having to deal with non-repayment is cheaper then eviction and rehousing then i would have to live with it.

It isn't cheaper. The bailouts and financial crisis should have told you all you need to know about how costly it is to cover losses on non performing loans.

Dev84

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

people who have agreements are also being thrown to the vultures

hopefully you are lucky

Yeh I see. Although the Irish times say they have only sold the buy to lets so far.

An absolute disgrace. Whatever about people who owe hundreds of thousands and are not trying to engage with the banks its honest people like myself who will suffer.

cajonlardo

Didnt the PTSB actively conspire and engage in Swindling mortgage customers ?

Wasn't it close to two thousand mortgages holders they stole from?

In other words, how many arrears were created by the Swindling crowd running the PTSB?

Squatter

Dev84 wrote: »

Yeh I see. Although the Irish times say they have only sold the buy to lets so far.

An absolute disgrace. Whatever about people who owe hundreds of thousands and are not trying to engage with the banks its honest people like myself who will suffer.

I think that the received wisdom is that you should keep your head down and stay shtum! The current Irish mindset is that if you can get away with not repaying your mortgage then fair dues to you because the banks are b@stards!

CeilingFly

end of the road wrote: »

i presume you work for this bank to know that they had every possible opportunity to engage?

fair play to ff and the media for their work, the banks deserve everything they get for what they did to this country, we shall never forget.
the european system of having people out in 90 days is not viable for the tax payer of this country and we won't get 2% variable rate mortgages because it's likely not viable for the banks to give out such mortgages for such a small country.

No - I was paying a 4.25% variable (now 3.3% fixed) for the past 8 years whilst a friend in France was paying 1.5% variable.

But in France your home is automatically repossessed is you do not pay three installments and not engage in an agreement

Dev84 wrote: »

I'm in court myself soon.

I have mortgage arrears of 8500 but have entered into an agreement with the PTSB to have them paid off by March 2019 and have been told that as long as I am keeping to the agreement I am ok. Believe me, going into arrears is not a choice people make for lifestyle.

Most of the people who defaulted did not do it buy choice. It was a knock on issue of thew way the financial institutes carried.

Lets just remember that it's families being evicted here. The majority of cases are not going to be a gorse hill or arrears of 500,000.

I have noy issue with anyone who enters agreements and respond to the banks - but thousands have purposely refused to engage or pay one cent. You and I are paying for these people in high rates. Imagine if your rate was 2% for the past 10 years - would you have needed to enter an agreement then? Possibly not - so those who refuse to engage and refuse to pay anything are possibly the casue of your high mortgage and needing to come to an agreement!

circadian

CeilingFly wrote: »

The leftist media are now having a hysterical whinefest supported by the new leftist FF party with the senstaionalist indo claiming "20,000 homeowners affected".

This is a wind up, right?

CeilingFly

Dev84 wrote: »

Yeh I see. Although the Irish times say they have only sold the buy to lets so far.

An absolute disgrace. Whatever about people who owe hundreds of thousands and are not trying to engage with the banks its honest people like myself who will suffer.

No you won't. Only "non performing" loans are being sold. A non-performing looand is one where no payment is being made and no agreement has been agreed.

Remember, if these strategic defaulters were not out there, your interest rate would be under 2.5% - and probably under 2%

Several European banks looked at the Irish market - they all declined due to how non payers are lauded over and that it costs a fortune to repossess a house from a non payer.

end of the road

CeilingFly wrote: »

Remember, if these strategic defaulters were not out there, your interest rate would be under 2.5% - and probably under 2%

there is no real proof for that though. a bank is a profit making business and is not going to give 2% when it can get 4% . it's unlikely there would be a reduction if there were no strategic defaulters, it wouldn't make financial sense unless the rates of mortgages been taken up could be such that it would increase profits more then just keeping things as they are.

CeilingFly wrote: »

Several European banks looked at the Irish market - they all declined due to how non payers are lauded over and that it costs a fortune to repossess a house from a non payer.

i don't really have a problem with that tbh, it's less banks to potentially have to hand over tax payer's money to when another crash happens. if the banks behaved responsibly then those banks deciding not to come to ireland would be an unfortunate situation. but we have to try and protect our country.

donegaLroad

How is handing mortgage debt to a vulcture fund, going to turn a non performing loan, into a performing loan?

Yer Da sells Avon

CeilingFly wrote: »

The leftist media are now having a hysterical whinefest supported by the new leftist FF party with the senstaionalist indo claiming "20,000 homeowners affected"

Wow. How far to the right do you have to be to call the Independent 'leftist'?

Fr_Dougal

Every. Single. Mortgage.

Warning: Your home is at risk if you do not keep up payments on a mortgage or any other loan secured on it.

It’s nothing new.

Arthur Daley

At long last someone starts connecting the dots. The vast majority who didn't default and struggled through the last few years will wait a very long time for the joke of a bought and paid for media to address some plain thruths. Well done OP.

Dev84

CeilingFly wrote: »

No you won't. Only "non performing" loans are being sold. A non-performing looand is one where no payment is being made and no agreement has been agreed.

Remember, if these strategic defaulters were not out there, your interest rate would be under 2.5% - and probably under 2%

Several European banks looked at the Irish market - they all declined due to how non payers are lauded over and that it costs a fortune to repossess a house from a non payer.

I think your definition of a non performing loan is wrong? And i think i could be in bother.

https://m.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/explainer-how-permanent-tsbs-decision-to-sell-4bn-of-loans-could-affect-you-36606424.html

end of the road

donegaLroad wrote: »

How is handing mortgage debt to a vulcture fund, going to turn a non performing loan, into a performing loan?

it's not. it's simply the bank taking what money it can and getting those loans off the books.

Wheeliebin30

Ireland has one of the lowest repossessions in European.

Its virtually impossible for the banks to repossess your home unless you dont engage in any way with them.

namloc1980

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Ireland has one of the lowest repossessions in European.

Its virtually impossible for the banks to repossess your home unless you dont engage in any way with them.

Even then appear in court with a sob story and you're almost guaranteed to get an adjournment from the judge. Happens all the time and is reported in the media. These people are lauded as getting one up on the banks for some reason.

namloc1980

donegaLroad wrote: »

How is handing mortgage debt to a vulcture fund, going to turn a non performing loan, into a performing loan?

It's off the banks balance sheet so no longer an npl for them.

Dev84

namloc1980 wrote: »

Even then appear in court with a sob story and you're almost guaranteed to get an adjournment from the judge. Happens all the time and is reported in the media. These people are lauded as getting one up on the banks for some reason.

In a minority of the cases this is true. Most people are trying to deal with their arrears but the banks dont want to know.

Dev84

What do we do when these families are evicted? They still need to be housed at the tax payers expense.

namloc1980

Dev84 wrote: »

In a minority of the cases this is true. Most people are trying to deal with their arrears but the banks dont want to know.

Do you have proof of that? We do know from central Bank figures there are thousands of people paying nothing.

Wheeliebin30

Dev84 wrote: »

In a minority of the cases this is true. Most people are trying to deal with their arrears but the banks dont want to know.

Thats not true.

By law once you engage in any way with the banks you cant be evicted.

namloc1980

Dev84 wrote: »

What do we do when these families are evicted? They still need to be housed at the tax payers expense.

If they are choosing not to pay why should they be housed? Those who struggle and qualify for social housing certainly should be assisted but that's a relatively small number. The others will have to manage like the rest of us and actually pay for our housing (mortgage/rent).

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

end of the road

namloc1980 wrote: »

If they are choosing not to pay why should they be housed?

because they have to be.

namloc1980 wrote: »

Those who struggle and qualify for social housing certainly should be assisted but that's a relatively small number.

which will include many of the families who will be evicted.

namloc1980 wrote: »

The others will have to manage like the rest of us and actually pay for our housing (mortgage/rent).

not financially viable, the bank is unlikely to give a mortgage to someone who didn't pay it last time + there are not enough rented properties at a reasonable rent in the market to meet the demand. if they aren't able to pay the mortgage they aren't able to pay private rent rates.

CeilingFly

Dev84 wrote: »

I think your definition of a non performing loan is wrong? And i think i could be in bother.

https://m.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/explainer-how-permanent-tsbs-decision-to-sell-4bn-of-loans-could-affect-you-36606424.html

Never ever believe sensationalist sh1te written in the indo.

namloc1980

end of the road wrote: »

because they have to be.



which will include many of the families who will be evicted.



not financially viable, the bank is unlikely to give a mortgage to someone who didn't pay it last time + there are not enough rented properties at a reasonable rent in the market to meet the demand. if they aren't able to pay the mortgage they aren't able to pay private rent rates.

So how do the rest of us manage? Plenty of people don't qualify for social housing and won't get a mortgage and have to pay rent. That's life. Prioritising people who have defaulted on their borrowings over average punters and allowing them to stay in houses they haven't paid for is socially irresponsible. Basically encourages everyone to give up paying their mortgage.

CeilingFly

Dev84 wrote: »

What do we do when these families are evicted? They still need to be housed at the tax payers expense.

Many strategic defaulters have the means to pay - they simply have decided to scam free living courtesy of variable mortgage payers.

suicide_circus

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

That is good news

end of the road

namloc1980 wrote: »

So how do the rest of us manage?

it's irrelevant, individuals will have different circumstances. the "rest of us" are not some homogenous group who all do the same thing or have the same circumstances.

namloc1980 wrote: »

Plenty of people don't qualify for social housing and won't get a mortgage and have to pay rent. That's life.

that's life means nothing. it's a soundbite. they have an income that is such that it is deemed they don't qualify for social housing.

namloc1980 wrote: »

Prioritising people who have defaulted on their borrowings over average punters and allowing them to stay in houses they haven't paid for is socially irresponsible.

it's not no . it can be necessary depending on the costings and circumstances.

namloc1980 wrote: »

Basically encourages everyone to give up paying their mortgage.

no it doesn't. this is another soundbite. people aren't going to stop paying their mortgages because someone else got away with it for a little bit longer then they actually may have in normal circumstances.

Arthur Daley

namloc1980 wrote: »

So how do the rest of us manage? Plenty of people don't qualify for social housing and won't get a mortgage and have to pay rent. That's life. Prioritising people who have defaulted on their borrowings over average punters and allowing them to stay in houses they haven't paid for is socially irresponsible. Basically encourages everyone to give up paying their mortgage.

The ECB and it's branch office here doesn't give a damn about the Irish taxpayer, actively treating the society with contempt. We have learned that lesson, if little else over the last ten years.

CeilingFly

Arthur Daley wrote: »

The ECB and it's branch office here doesn't give a damn about the Irish taxpayer, actively treating the society with contempt. We have learned that lesson, if little else over the last ten years.

you do know what the ECB does? don't you?

Maybe not because your post make absolutley no sense

Gavlor

cajonlardo wrote: »

Didnt the PTSB actively conspire and engage in Swindling mortgage customers ?

Wasn't it close to two thousand mortgages holders they stole from?

In other words, how many arrears were created by the Swindling crowd running the PTSB?

2000? Just a hunch based on your post.

Dev84

Gavlor wrote: »

2000? Just a hunch based on your post.

Hundreds of thousands. PTSB were explicit in creating the financial crisis and screwing you and i the taxpayer.

They along with other banks caused people to lose jobs and have incomes slashed thus meaning they couldnt fully service their debt.

The same people were forced to bail them out. And now ptsb are turfing them out.

Koala Sunshine

Bottom line if you fail to make your payments as agreed then the consequences per the contract should be enforced.

Housing is a very complex area in modern western societies.

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/inside-liverpools-amazing-1-homes-14240169?service=responsive

Ther was a really interesting documentary on C4 about how Liverpool council sold houses for one pound provided the buyers could come up with the money to do up the house without a mortgage the refurbishment costs were about 40k although some were hoping to do it for less. However, even at that, the project was a mixed success.

Ptsb selling of non-performing buy to lets is not a bad thing.

topper75

Dev84 wrote: »

What do we do when these families are evicted? They still need to be housed at the tax payers expense.

We, the taxpayers, are paying out in both scenarios, are we not?

Tell us - isn't the better scenario the one where the taxpayer owns all these valuable assets - rather than a scenario where non-engaging defaulters keep the assets?

Kiith

When i saw this news yesterday, i was disgusted. It seemed like one of the banks involved in the crash was just selling off mortgages to make a quick buck.

But if this is only for people who have stopped paying, without any attempt at coming to a reasonable agreement with the banks, then what the hell do people expect? People can't just be allowed to not pay what they owe, while enjoying the benefits of the agreement. I absolutely feel for people who have a hard time making their repayments. A friend of mine has had awful trouble with the banks, but she came to an agreement to pay a lower amount for a certain amount of time, and they are all good now.

No one is entitled to a free ride.

topper75

Dev84 wrote: »

... PTSB were explicit in creating the financial crisis and screwing you and i the taxpayer.

Historical PTSB deserve your derision.

Present-day PTSB is, well, I reiterate ....us.

This move is justified and correct. The media whining is wrong.

Because it hasn't sunk with a lot of people on the thread - I'll say it again, at the clear risk of being patronizing, the banks is us now.
Why argue against the move?

Engagement with the honest will continue.

Dev84

Just to nail my colours to the mast here.

I 100% agree that anyone with the means to pay and has just decided not to should be punished. Im just not sure that we can throw out the phrase that thousands of people are doing this.

Yes the banks are us. But the local authorities and social welfare are also us. We end up paying no matter what. Dont we?

Nabber

I pay 1420€ a month for my mortgage.
My friend who got pregnant from a one nightstand gets 1250€ on single parents allowance.

We as a group of friends are going to Italy in June for 2 weeks. Single parent mum can also afford to go.

I’m of the opinion that if you are on state handouts are able bodied, you should hand in your passport. No holiday abroad, no saving to move to Australia. Contribute to system get your passport back.

It’s tiring, we have gone so left that people who claim in excess of 1800€ from the state still Moab about how tough life is!

On social welfare? After 3 months on social welfare you have to begin cleaning the streets. If we pay for wasters, let’s at least have clean streets.

conorhal

Kiith wrote: »

When i saw this news yesterday, i was disgusted. It seemed like one of the banks involved in the crash was just selling off mortgages to make a quick buck.

But if this is only for people who have stopped paying, without any attempt at coming to a reasonable agreement with the banks, then what the hell do people expect? People can't just be allowed to not pay what they owe, while enjoying the benefits of the agreement. I absolutely feel for people who have a hard time making their repayments. A friend of mine has had awful trouble with the banks, but she came to an agreement to pay a lower amount for a certain amount of time, and they are all good now.

No one is entitled to a free ride.

Fair enough, but selling these homes to vulture funds is still a bad move going forward. The only people that reap any benefits are their shareholders,there has to be a better way deal with these properties that benefits citizens and gives some people a leg up.

Here's what I'd do with those properties.

When a loan has been non performing for more then 2 years they become subject to a 90 day automatic reposession order and subject to sale.


There were a bunch of these apartment in Smithfield I remember, about 200, which were sold as a job lot to a vulture fund for something crazy like 40 grand each.
If these had been offered at the same knock down price to the first 200 people on the affordable housing list, instead of selling them off as a batch to vulture funds, then citizens will reap the benefit instead and with a foot on the property ladder at an ultra affordable price then the local economy will reap the rewards rather then US investment shareholders. That discount would go back into local spending rather then the Cayaman Islands.