The McNamaras, €2.9M debt write-off, some deal!

Morrisseeee

The latest sweet deal for the elite is > Frank McNamara and Theresa Lowe.
They had "what appears to be an incredible deal will see €2.9m in debts written off".
"..Mr Justice McDonald sided with the couple."

It makes me very mad to see this kinda stuff happening, a sweet deal for some and for others you're thrown out on the street, house gone.

Odyssey 2005

Absolutely sickening.

Hoboo

OUTRAGE!!!!!!

Best of luck to them. If anything it will help others in the same situation. I'm not sure why anyone should be sickened (other than jealousy at the thoughts of someone getting more than them)

Odyssey 2005

Hoboo wrote: »

OUTRAGE!!!!!!

Best of luck to them. If anything it will help others in the same situation. I'm not sure why anyone should be sickened (other than jealousy at the thoughts of someone getting more than them)

Thankfully I've never been in the position of nearly losing my home. Not in the least jealous but these pair gambled and lost. Lots of people didnt gamble,they just bought one house ,and lost it. If these two weren't in the positions they are,would they have been given €2.9m ?


The judge said it "is a very significant write-down in absolute terms" but was justified on the basis of the current value of the home and current earnings of the couple.

jam_mac_jam

Hoboo wrote: »

OUTRAGE!!!!!!

Best of luck to them. If anything it will help others in the same situation. I'm not sure why anyone should be sickened (other than jealousy at the thoughts of someone getting more than them)

Yes because nobody can criticize anything in this country without it being called begrudgery or jealousy. No other reason at all.

There are middle and working class people who have lost their homes and yet when people are sickened that somebody who so blatantly didn't pay their mortgage and didn't even try, I think I can understand why you would be sickened.

Plumbthedepths

Tangier turned down an insolvency plan put forward by an Insolvency Practitioner, the judge could only deal with it in a pragmatic fashion. I suppose of course that doesn't sit well with the whingers, start a dole bashing thread ye'll feel better.

Hoboo

Odyssey 2005 wrote: »

Thankfully I've never been in the position of nearly losing my home. Not in the least jealous but these pair gambled and lost. Lots of people didnt gamble,they just bought one house ,and lost it. If these two weren't in the positions they are,would they have been given €2.9m ?


The judge said it "is a very significant write-down in absolute terms" but was justified on the basis of the current value of the home and current earnings of the couple.

Those same people who bought one house also gambled, they took on significant debt in ratio to their means and lost. Because they either weren't educated enough or didn't seek better counsel is their own problem.

Odyssey 2005

Hoboo wrote: »

Those same people who bought one house also gambled, they took on significant debt in ratio to their means and lost. Because they either weren't educated enough or didn't seek better counsel is their own problem.

Wow...

Feisar

Where in the world will they go now?

lawred2

Morrisseeee wrote: »

The latest sweet deal for the elite is > Frank McNamara and Theresa Lowe.
They had "what appears to be an incredible deal will see €2.9m in debts written off".
"..Mr Justice McDonald sided with the couple."

It makes me very mad to see this kinda stuff happening, a sweet deal for some and for others you're thrown out on the street, house gone.

did they get to keep the gaff?

is_that_so

lawred2 wrote: »

did they get to keep the gaff?

Yeah they do but have to turn over a lot of cash to do so, far less than they owed mind.

jmayo

Morrisseeee wrote: »

The latest sweet deal for the elite is > Frank McNamara and Theresa Lowe.
They had "what appears to be an incredible deal will see €2.9m in debts written off".
"..Mr Justice McDonald sided with the couple."

It makes me very mad to see this kinda stuff happening, a sweet deal for some and for others you're thrown out on the street, house gone.

Don't forget what profession Ms Lowe has.
One can't have a member of the bar on the housing list after all. :rolleyes:

Hoboo wrote: »

OUTRAGE!!!!!!

Best of luck to them. If anything it will help others in the same situation. I'm not sure why anyone should be sickened (other than jealousy at the thoughts of someone getting more than them)

I absolutely detest people with your fooking mindset.
It is total gobshystery to think that they are sticking it to some mythical system, to "the bankers", to the vulture funds etc.

These two owe Bank of Ireland €550,000.

I like many others in this country are BOI customers and we will end up covering that debt, not some fooking bank employee or executive, not some investor. :mad::mad:

The plonkers who think there is nothing wrong with these debt write downs don't realise that those debts have to be covered by some other actual person and in this case it is the other customers of the banks that they owe money to.

Why are mortgage rates so high in Ireland?
Maybe if you didn't have massive fooking write-offs for plonkers like this couple or had confiscation of assets after few months of non repayment we might have cheaper rates due to more competition from foreign banks willing to set up here.

Portsalon

lawred2 wrote: »

did they get to keep the gaff?

It appears so.

Isn't it truly uplifting to see a judge being so kind to a barrister?

is_that_so

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

Yes because nobody can criticize anything in this country without it being called begrudgery or jealousy. No other reason at all.

There are middle and working class people who have lost their homes and yet when people are sickened that somebody who so blatantly didn't pay their mortgage and didn't even try, I think I can understand why you would be sickened.

Are these pair the same as the Clontarf pair? It looks like some very foolish decision making but they are owning up to a chunk of the debt and have offered up a payment plan. They are likely to be cash only for the rest of their lives.

blanch152

lawred2 wrote: »

did they get to keep the gaff?

Yes.

The left-wing parties - Sinn Fein, PBP - have been leading the campaign against vulture funds and against people being thrown out of their homes. This McNamara case, like the Pamela Flood one before it, and Twink, and the couple in Killiney are the ones who are benefitting.

Ultimately the taxpayers lost on the Fianna Fail bailout, the bank shareholders lost on the bailout, the bondholders lost (but less than they should have) on the bailout, but those like the McNamaras and others who got to keep their houses (are you watching Ivan Yates) without paying their debts are the ones who stuffed the taxpayer.

While the taxpayers lost out, the worst affected are the next generation who see higher house prices because those who won't pay aren't evicted and higher interest rates because the banks can't their money back if someone doesn't pay their mortgage.

malinheader

Hoboo wrote: »

OUTRAGE!!!!!!

Best of luck to them. If anything it will help others in the same situation. I'm not sure why anyone should be sickened (other than jealousy at the thoughts of someone getting more than them)

So do you really think someone with a small mortgage or loan would get the Same outcome. Some normal Joe public.

lawred2

is_that_so wrote: »

Yeah they do but have to turn over a lot of cash to do so, far less than they owed mind.

wtf? and if they sell the mega gaff? what then? sure that's casino winnings..

Is it any wonder our interest rates are so out of line with the rest of Europe!?

Another consequence of the deeply illogical anti eviction at all costs mindset.

is_that_so

lawred2 wrote: »

wtf? and if they sell the mega gaff? what then? sure that's casino winnings..

Is it any wonder our interest rates are so out of line with the rest of Europe!?

Another consequence of the deeply illogical anti eviction at all costs mindset.

A €550K house is not a mega gaff. It was bankruptcy or this, with this apparently being the better deal all round. Evictions usually involve people not having any cash, they do so had other options.

martingriff

lawred2 wrote: »

did they get to keep the gaff?

I think this case was can they get the person insolvency plan. The gaff will be decided by who is over the Personal Insolvency. The amount is staggering but loads go through the Personal Insolvency process. Have not heard of many who have gone through courts

lawred2

is_that_so wrote: »

A €550K house is not a mega gaff. It was bankruptcy or this, with this apparently being the better deal all round.

Hang on - I'm fairly sure I remember some glossy spread with her in some fairly substantial South Dublin home...

Have they lost that one?

martingriff

malinheader wrote: »

So do you really think someone with a small mortgage or loan would get the Same outcome. Some normal Joe public.

Yes anyone can go through the Personal Insolvency Process. Going to court as 1 side said no I have not heard

is_that_so

lawred2 wrote: »

Hang on - I'm fairly sure I remember some glossy spread with her in some fairly substantial South Dublin home...

Have they lost that one?

No idea, story just states the €500K family home is their main asset now and it also says other properties were sold to get out of what they imagined as "temporary" financial difficulties.

Markcheese

I think the judge was taking a pragmatic decision, there is an offer of cash,( upcoming inheritance and a pension fund),
The mortgage owner is going to get more money from this than they would if the house was repossessed), I've no idea how much the house is worth either.
Is it good for family involved? Yup, but it's not that they're squireling away money, or down to their last range rover...
I don't think it's fair that someone's pension should be protected from creditors.. Or living off a trust..

This does strikes me as a different scenario to Pamela flood and Co..

malinheader

martingriff wrote: »

Yes anyone can go through the Personal Insolvency Process. Going to court as 1 side said no I have not heard

There is no way of trying to cover up or condone it..there is different rules for different classes. End of

smelly sock

Morrisseeee wrote: »

The latest sweet deal for the elite is > Frank McNamara and Theresa Lowe.
They had "what appears to be an incredible deal will see €2.9m in debts written off".
"..Mr Justice McDonald sided with the couple."

It makes me very mad to see this kinda stuff happening, a sweet deal for some and for others you're thrown out on the street, house gone.

Good for them. Hopefully they can move on from this.

Portsalon

For as long as I live I will never forgive McNamara for his state-subsidised butchering of Handel's Messiah to mark the millennium.

For that grievous crime against culture and great art, he should have had his hands amputated.

For younger readers: https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/ive-got-no-regrets-about-messing-with-the-messiah-26132314.html

BarryD2

lawred2 wrote: »

did they get to keep the gaff?

Apparently and this is what the public should be rightly p*ssed off over. Whatever about debt forgiveness, these speculators should have been obliged to vacate the property for sale and downsize to more modest accommodation appropriate to their new situation.

jam_mac_jam

BarryD2 wrote: »

Apparently and this is what the public should be rightly p*ssed off over. Whatever about debt forgiveness, these speculators should have been obliged to vacate the property for sale and downsize to more modest accommodation appropriate to their new situation.

This is an aspect that really annoys me, just because something is a family home does not make it magically immune from any loans or agreement. Why can't you sell the large home and move to a smaller one as many people who have little debt or a normal proportion of debt have and do quite happily. The sense of entitlement.

martingriff

malinheader wrote: »

There is no way of trying to cover up or condone it..there is different rules for different classes. End of

I am not doing either but anyone can go for the Personal Insolvency Process and in that people get to keep thrown home.

Now if you want to talk about in this process they should be made sell there house and downsize then yes I agree with you. I am sorry if you aggrieved to hear it is not just for the rich.

lawred2

BarryD2 wrote: »

Apparently and this is what the public should be rightly p*ssed off over. Whatever about debt forgiveness, these speculators should have been obliged to vacate the property for sale and downsize to more modest accommodation appropriate to their new situation.

aye it does keep a half million euro house in the family which will ultimately benefit their children..

colm_mcm

Where in the world would you see this. Lowest of the Lowe.

quokula

Property prices have recovered since the crash - if the house is worth 500k now then they didn't buy it for 3 million. They took that 3 million and spent it on other things, including gambling and property speculation. This really shouldn't see the same sort of leniency as someone who took a mortgage on a family home in good faith and later hit difficulties.

malinheader

martingriff wrote: »

I am not doing either but anyone can go for the Personal Insolvency Process and in that people get to keep thrown home.

Now if you want to talk about in this process they should be made sell there house and downsize then yes I agree with you. I am sorry if you aggrieved to hear it is not just for the rich.

I think you know what's wrong with this case in particular. I am well aware that anyone can go through the insolvency process. How many ordinary people who do come out with such a great outcome.

Portsalon

lawred2 wrote: »

aye it does keep a half million euro house in the family which will ultimately benefit their children..

As will the Belvedere College education that the kids(s) are getting - without Frank and Teresa bothering to pay the fees.

rafatoni

Portsalon wrote: »

As will the Belvedere College education that the kids(s) are getting - without Frank and Teresa bothering to pay the fees.

How are the kids still allowed to go to private school if they arent paying the fees??:eek:

SteM

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

Why can't you sell the large home and move to a smaller one as many people who have little debt or a normal proportion of debt have and do quite happily. The sense of entitlement.

I guess they couldn't because it wasn't theirs to sell. They owe money on it and the selling cost wouldn't have covered the debts and the cost of a smaller home.

lawred2

Portsalon wrote: »

As will the Belvedere College education that the kids(s) are getting - without Frank and Teresa bothering to pay the fees.

the gaff not out in Meath?

suicide_circus

blanch152 wrote: »

Yes.

The left-wing parties - Sinn Fein, PBP - have been leading the campaign against vulture funds and against people being thrown out of their homes. This McNamara case, like the Pamela Flood one before it, and Twink, and the couple in Killiney are the ones who are benefitting.

Ultimately the taxpayers lost on the Fianna Fail bailout, the bank shareholders lost on the bailout, the bondholders lost (but less than they should have) on the bailout, but those like the McNamaras and others who got to keep their houses (are you watching Ivan Yates) without paying their debts are the ones who stuffed the taxpayer.

While the taxpayers lost out, the worst affected are the next generation who see higher house prices because those who won't pay aren't evicted and higher interest rates because the banks can't their money back if someone doesn't pay their mortgage.

bingo, frank and teresa owe mary lou and rbb a vote

atticu

Hoboo wrote: »

OUTRAGE!!!!!!

Best of luck to them. If anything it will help others in the same situation. I'm not sure why anyone should be sickened (other than jealousy at the thoughts of someone getting more than them)

What would happen if everyone in Ireland who has a mortgage stopped paying?

Asking for a friend.

jjmcclure

is_that_so wrote: »

No idea, story just states the €500K family home is their main asset now and it also says other properties were sold to get out of what they imagined as "temporary" financial difficulties.

I know the house, 500k is not accurate. The site alone (probably 2 to 3 acres) is worth twice that for development.


Not bothered about them getting the debt forgiveness, however the house valuation intrigues me. It cant be accurate. Detached houses in the area in a good estate are 500k

source

There is a fundamental misunderstanding of what the personal insolvency process is in this thread. The Personal Insolvency Act was introduced to keep people in their homes. There are 3 different types.

Debt Relief Notice: For unsecured debts under €35,000

Debt Settlement Arrangement: For unsecured debts of any amount, which the borrower will pay an affordable portion of their income towards for either 5 or 6 years – Balance after this time is written off

Personal Insolvency Arrangement: For both secured and unsecured debt, as with the DSA above the borrower pays towards the debt for 6 to 7 years based in their income and situation and split amongst their credits based on the % of the total debt the creditor holds. A sustainable long-term arrangement is put in place on their home which they will pay over an agreed term. The balance of any unsecured debt is written off after the 6 or 7 year term. I think there is an upper limit of €3m but can’t recall off the top of my head.

A Personal Insolvency Practitioner (PIP) will manage this for the borrowers and if they cannot come to an agreement with the creditors, then they can appeal to the Courts (which is what happened in this case) and the Court makes a decision based on the facts of the case.

The borrowers have to commit to a full financial review and the PIP will calculate how much they can afford to put towards the debt based on calculated reasonable living expenses. EG. A couple with no children is only allowed €1,486 a month outside their debt to live on, a single adult is allowed €1,050.48 a month, expenditure can go above this in certain circumstances (medical costs, second vehicle (necessary) etc.) but a case needs to be made to the creditors and in this case the Courts to support the expansion of the living expense guidelines. The reasonable living expense guidelines are set by the Insolvency Service of Ireland as are the rules around expanding same.

In this case there were a number of properties which resulted in the debt accruing, the borrowers agreed to sell all but their home, and the balance of the debt on the other properties, if they weren’t all cross secured) would have been unsecured residual debt, which is why they are writing off the debt.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

Yes.

The left-wing parties - Sinn Fein, PBP - have been leading the campaign against vulture funds and against people being thrown out of their homes. This McNamara case, like the Pamela Flood one before it, and Twink, and the couple in Killiney are the ones who are benefitting.

Ultimately the taxpayers lost on the Fianna Fail bailout, the bank shareholders lost on the bailout, the bondholders lost (but less than they should have) on the bailout, but those like the McNamaras and others who got to keep their houses (are you watching Ivan Yates) without paying their debts are the ones who stuffed the taxpayer.

While the taxpayers lost out, the worst affected are the next generation who see higher house prices because those who won't pay aren't evicted and higher interest rates because the banks can't their money back if someone doesn't pay their mortgage.

Do you think Theresa and Frank ever voted People Before Profit? Would you ever stop promoting the FF/FG system of government responsible for this kind of thing? you're not helping, well you're helping things remain the same or worsen.
Those kinds of movements are for working people who might lose their house and become homeless over thousands in debt not chancers getting millions written off. Post for the Irish taxpayer for once, be honest on this. You're being part of the problem on this with the spin that those responsible for the society we have, who make the policies, are mere passengers when things kick off but guardians of the people when their economy does well for them.

Portsalon

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Do you think Theresa and Frank ever voted People Before Profit?

Give that Frankie once ran for the Pee Dees, I think that's about as likely as you making an intelligent observation, Mattie lad.

James Brown

Portsalon wrote: »

Give that Frankie once ran for the Pee Dees, I think that's about as likely as you making an intelligent observation, Mattie lad.

Aren't you the lad accused me of always commenting after you post even though I never had and you're new?
Missed the point, but don't let that put you off. Now go on out and play in the garden.

AlanG

What is annoying about the information reported is that they appear to have been in trouble for a very long time but still sent their kids to private school instead of trying to live to the level they could afford.

martingriff

malinheader wrote: »

I think you know what's wrong with this case in particular. I am well aware that anyone can go through the insolvency process. How many ordinary people who do come out with such a great outcome.

What are they getting that others who go through the process are not. They get to keep there house (which I do not think is right) which is 1 of the reason personal insolvency process was developed. Now if you can show me them getting over and above what can be got then yes I will be with you.

But the idea that they are going through something because of who they are that Joe Soap can't is wrong.

martingriff

AlanG wrote: »

What is annoying about the information reported is that they appear to have been in trouble for a very long time but still sent their kids to private school instead of trying to live to the level they could afford.

That's not new in fairness many of the well to try to show they are still in the society.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Do you think Theresa and Frank ever voted People Before Profit? Would you ever stop promoting the FF/FG system of government responsible for this kind of thing? you're not helping, well you're helping things remain the same or worsen.
Those kinds of movements are for working people who might lose their house and become homeless over thousands in debt not chancers getting millions written off. Post for the Irish taxpayer for once, be honest on this. You're being part of the problem on this with the spin that those responsible for the society we have, who make the policies, are mere passengers when things kick off but guardians of the people when their economy does well for them.

The taxpayer is paying for everyone who keeps their house and doesn't pay their debts. That is wrong.

The person staying in the house is keeping up prices for the next generation. That is wrong.

The banks not being able to get back their money is keeping up interest rates for the next generation. That is wrong.

People like them living in houses being supported by the taxpayer when so many are homeless and renting. That is wrong.

Left-wing parties who are supposed to protect the homeless and the renters leading the charge to look after the likes of McNamara. That is wrong.

Fine Gael not having the courage to face down the misinformed and mistaken left-wing agenda. That is wrong.

People absolving Fianna Fail of responsibility because it all stems from their bailout. That is wrong.

Posters knee-jerk defending Sinn Fein and the other left-wing parties as you do. That is wrong.

martingriff

blanch152 wrote: »

The taxpayer is paying for everyone who keeps their house and doesn't pay their debts. That is wrong.

The person staying in the house is keeping up prices for the next generation. That is wrong.

The banks not being able to get back their money is keeping up interest rates for the next generation. That is wrong.

People like them living in houses being supported by the taxpayer when so many are homeless and renting. That is wrong.

Left-wing parties who are supposed to protect the homeless and the renters leading the charge to look after the likes of McNamara. That is wrong.

Fine Gael not having the courage to face down the misinformed and mistaken left-wing agenda. That is wrong.

People absolving Fianna Fail of responsibility because it all stems from their bailout. That is wrong.

Posters knee-jerk defending Sinn Fein and the other left-wing parties as you do. That is wrong.

Agree with you completely but no party will touch the eviction problem (that is to allow normal eviction like every other country) with a ten foot pole as they know there will be mass protest and such from those who shout the loudest

Portsalon

blanch152 wrote: »

The taxpayer is paying for everyone who keeps their house and doesn't pay their debts. That is wrong.

The person staying in the house is keeping up prices for the next generation. That is wrong.

The banks not being able to get back their money is keeping up interest rates for the next generation. That is wrong.

People like them living in houses being supported by the taxpayer when so many are homeless and renting. That is wrong.

Left-wing parties who are supposed to protect the homeless and the renters leading the charge to look after the likes of McNamara. That is wrong.

Fine Gael not having the courage to face down the misinformed and mistaken left-wing agenda. That is wrong.

People absolving Fianna Fail of responsibility because it all stems from their bailout. That is wrong.

Posters knee-jerk defending Sinn Fein and the other left-wing parties as you do. That is wrong.

It's the culture and the era of the parasite - (as we can see every day in compensation claims too).

No one is ever personally responsible for anything any more. It's always someone else's fault, generally either the gubberment's or the bankers'.

Harry Palmr

I look forward to the sob story on the LLS.