Strokestown **Mod Note in Post #4461**

NoteAgent

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I’d have no problem with a publicly owned bank repossessing land and downgrading people to basic social housing if they took the piss in this manner, but the idea of making anyone homeless is fundamentally immoral and I deplore any organization or ideology which contemplates doing so as an acceptable course of action under any circumstances.

So in other words everybody, no matter how lazy should get a free house. Thats a great way to harbour ambitions and a good work ethic...not.
And of course under this policy the most productive in society would have to pay for the least productive peoles lifestyle.

mgn

Edgware wrote: »

A house only fit for the bulldozer and middling land. No value except for agricultural use. Someone will buy it. They havent too many locals that would support them by illegal means

That what the likes of you think.

mgn

Edgware wrote: »

Thats didnt stop you coming in and posting uninformed ****e.

Seen that you seem to know it all,is the land going to be repossessed with the house?

mgn

JCJCJC wrote: »

Will you go away with that ould bull****. If an employee of CIE was a republican sympathizer, would you call the whole company IRA terrorists?
They were a legitimate security company exercising their lawful right to work across an EU border. The politics past or present of their employees is irrelevant. The thugs were the gang who caused trouble at the repossession and those who subsequently attacked the security men. It was obvious it wasn’t their first rodeo. That was where the criminality lies. Same psychopathic mindset as the thugs who assaulted the Quinn executive.

The same legitimate security company that evectided a few squatters in Dublin a while back, plenty of outrage in the media about though.

pgj2015

mgn wrote: »

The same legitimate security company that evectided a few squatters in Dublin a while back, plenty of outrage in the media about though.

squatters aren't people i care about to be honest with you.

mgn

pgj2015 wrote: »

squatters aren't people i care about to be honest with you.

Neither do i or people who don't pay what the owe either.

Edgware

mgn wrote: »

Seen that you seem to know it all,is the land going to be repossessed with the house?

No. They're just going to put the house on the back of a truck and take it away

mgn

Edgware wrote: »

No. They're just going to put the house on the back of a truck and take it away

You just don't have a clue about anything do you, and you call me uninformed.

Edgware

mgn wrote: »

You just don't have a clue about anything do you, and you call me uninformed.

With the depth of knowledge you have shown I don't know how could you possibly come to that conclusion.
Do you know where Strokestown is by the way?

mgn

Edgware wrote: »

With the depth of knowledge you have shown I don't know how could you possibly come to that conclusion.
Do you know where Strokestown is by the way?

I do, i pass through it a few times a week.

And what's more i know the history of Strokestown too.

Edgware

mgn wrote: »

I do, i pass through it a few times a week.

And what's more i know the history of Strokestown too.

Well done. You are excused homework for the week

mgn

Edgware wrote: »

Well done. You are excused homework for the week

Thanks, Teacher.

blueythebear

The people that are in the house are squatters. They do not own the property. Yes, they are the brother and sister of the owner and guy that borrowed the money but they have no interest in the property.

The guy that borrowed the money, screwed the bank for years and is now engaging in pseudo legal nonsense. He has no respect for the laws of the land given he hasnt bothered to engage with the court.

It is absolutely ridiculous that this can happen. If you take a loan you pay it back. If you provide something as security for a loan it should be taken off you when you default.

Next step will be the gardai arriving to arrest anyone onsite. Im sure we will not see a repeat of the last incident unless the mob are going to attack the gardai.

mgn

blueythebear wrote: »

The people that are in the house are squatters. They do not own the property. Yes, they are the brother and sister of the owner and guy that borrowed the money but they have no interest in the property.

The guy that borrowed the money, screwed the bank for years and is now engaging in pseudo legal nonsense. He has no respect for the laws of the land given he hasnt bothered to engage with the court.

It is absolutely ridiculous that this can happen. If you take a loan you pay it back. If you provide something as security for a loan it should be taken off you when you default.

Next step will be the gardai arriving to arrest anyone onsite. Im sure we will not see a repeat of the last incident unless the mob are going to attack the gardai.

I agree 100% with you, i just feel sorry for the brother and sister that lived there all of their lives being thrown out because the other brother dident pay his debts.
I think if i was in the same boat, i might not go to easy either.

pablo128

mgn wrote: »

I agree 100% with you, i just feel sorry for the brother and sister that lived there all of their lives being thrown out because the other brother dident pay his debts.
I think if i was in the same boat, i might not go to easy either.

As far as I am aware, the brother and sister only moved back in when the eviction proceedings started.

blinding

Once more unto the breech .

mgn

pablo128 wrote: »

As far as I am aware, the brother and sister only moved back in when the eviction proceedings started.

https://www.shannonside.ie/news/local/roscommon/breaking-strokestown-family-given-month-leave-property-kbc-wins-high-court-case/

blueythebear

mgn wrote: »

I agree 100% with you, i just feel sorry for the brother and sister that lived there all of their lives being thrown out because the other brother dident pay his debts.
I think if i was in the same boat, i might not go to easy either.

I understand whst youre saying but i dont really tfeel bad for them, to be honest. They had to have known what was going on, certainly at least when summons servers came looking for the brother. Or when the sheriff came knocking in advance of the eviction.

Also...while the papers are keen to point out that while the family had nothing to do with the attack, it is a fact that they moved back in immediately after and then, months later seem to be challenging the county sheriffs entitlement to carry out any evictions at all.

They are simply drawing this process out as much as they can in the hope that the bank will give up. If ever there was a case in which the bank couldnt give up, its this one! For the optics of the thing, the bank must do everything to retake the property and enforce their security. There will be no deals done and no quarter given

blueythebear

Oh and i notice that some posters earlier complained about sweetheart deals obtained by others they see as rich or connected. The personal insolvency legislation does not apply to the people in the house. They are not borrowers. The guy who borrowed the money could easily get a similar arrangement depending on his means, but he would rather waste the courts time with pseudo legal mumbo jumbo as the judge called it

beggars_bush

JCJCJC wrote: »

The issue was the bugger didn’t pay his debts.

I fully agree. And he deserved to be evicted

However, you cannot hire loyalist henchmen to enforce a court order

JCJCJC

beggars_bush wrote: »

I fully agree. And he deserved to be evicted

However, you cannot hire loyalist henchmen to enforce a court order

You hire a licensed security company.

blueythebear

JCJCJC wrote: »

You hire a licensed security company.

As i understand it... the company was hired by the sheriff. I presume that the sheriff confirmed that they were licensed appropriately considering the same crowd had been used by the sheriff before

blinding

I didn’t shoot No Deputy !

Brendan Bendar

Big sheds will open Nov12.

weldoninhio

blueythebear wrote: »

As i understand it... the company was hired by the sheriff. I presume that the sheriff confirmed that they were licensed appropriately considering the same crowd had been used by the sheriff before

You don't need a PSA to work for the sheriff.

blueythebear

weldoninhio wrote: »

You don't need a PSA to work for the sheriff.

Which is why i used the phrase "appropriately licensed"... that said, the fact of whether the persons that were attacked were actually psa licensed has never been confirmed either way.

Either way, the eviction was carried out appropriately. Physical force had to be used because those individuals present would not leave despite a high court order. The status of the security guys is a side issue totally.

mgn

mgn wrote: »

I agree 100% with you, i just feel sorry for the brother and sister that lived there all of their lives being thrown out because the other brother dident pay his debts.
I think if i was in the same boat, i might not go to easy either.

The sister only stayed there occasionally.

Topgear on Dave

Was anyone ever arrested after all the carry on??

Brendan Bendar

Nov12 should give us a few answers,

blueythebear

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Nov12 should give us a few answers,

No it wont. You think anyone is going charging in there once they are in breach of the order? Itll be ack to the high court for the bank to have anyone in the property arrested first. That will be in the new year unless the bank plan on another PR disaster by removing people close to christmas