fliball123 wrote: » And for every opportunity lost there is one gained.https://www.irishtimes.com/business/commercial-property/new-lender-enters-the-market-mortgage-default-risks-and-italian-market-woes-1.3513066
schmittel wrote: » I am not sure the demand for private debt will be rapidly falling - all those taking mortgage payment breaks is demand for new debt. And whilst they might not wish to take on further debt a lot of businesses will face the stark choice of whether to increase borrowings or close down. Or are you just talking about in a private mortgage context that the demand will be rapidly falling? Re private debt having rapidly fallen since the last crash, where are you getting those figures from? Most stats I have seen indicate the opposite.
landofthetree wrote: » 100,000 mortgages with BOI are on a Covid break till Sep. Not many will be able to resume payments in Sep.
SozBbz wrote: » Humm...you don't know this though. Anecdotally many people took the break regardless of whether they needed it or not. I considered it myself but decided against it.
AlmightyCushion wrote: » That article is from 2 years ago.
Cuddlesworth wrote: » I know a few people that considered it thinking that it was free money.
Wanderer78 wrote: » no such thing as free money for us lesser people, unfortunately, only if your a bank
fliball123 wrote: » sorry wrong linkhttps://extra.ie/2020/07/30/news/irish-news/mortgage-war-spanish-bank
AlmightyCushion wrote: » I seen an article about that the other day. There is rumours that they will be offering mortgage rates of less than 2%. If so, that will be great for borrowers.
fliball123 wrote: » Well if you weighing that option up to defer with the lefty leaning in this country the worst that will happen is you lose you job you stop paying the mortgage and get to live in the house for anywhere up to 10+ years (rent free) if you have lost a job and cant pay the mortgage your really not going to give a flying phuck if you owe 10/20k more at the end of the day.. This is a major chink in the armor of people looking for prices to drop due to people getting into trouble as they will not be turfed out, no government will do this as they will get crucified ergo supply will not be effected by mortgage problems or job losses not at a scale that people should expect in a recession.
brisan wrote: » I would imagine they will cherry pick the low hanging fruit
Cantstandsya wrote: » People not getting turfed out has a direct impact on what risk banks are willing to take when deciding on who to offer mortgages to. Yeah people can stay in their house without paying so that affects supply... But that also makes banks more wary about giving out mortgages, which affects demand.
fliball123 wrote: » which is why we have the highest interest rates in Europe
fliball123 wrote: » Well it will be a great option for a lot of people but what it will do is it will put pressure on the existing lenders to bring their rates down
Wanderer78 wrote: » i think the higher interest rates are due to more worrying issues, are the banks actually losing confidence that they can withstand a significantly economic shock!
fliball123 wrote: » No we are the highest in Europe due to the fact that banks cannot directly take a house off a mortgage holder without jumping through years and years of litigation. I mean aren't the rest of Europe experiencing the same difficulties Ireland is we are all in a recession and Covid is there too. so the premium being paid is for this fact.
brisan wrote: » [/B]https://www.irishtimes.com/business/financial-services/bank-of-ireland-to-cut-over-1-400-jobs-as-covid-19-drives-937m-loans-charge-1.4322469?mode=amp I am not sure existing lenders are in any position to do that . Especially as they find it extremely difficult to repossess houses
schmittel wrote: » This is totally misleading, and needs to be understood in the context of inflation and interest rates. In all three recessions house prices fell in real terms and mortgage holders got thumped by interest rates. 1973-1976 - Inflation at about 25%, interest rates around 15%. 1980-81 - Inflation and interest rates were running at about 18% 1990-92 - "In the housing crash of the early 1990s house prices fell 20 per cent between 1989 and 1993." - The Times This happened against a backdrop of inflation and interest rates that rose as high as 15% - "average prices fell by an inflation-adjusted 35 percent from their peak in 1989, according to data from property services firm CB Richard Ellis" - Reuters Not even in boom/bust Ireland, could a 20% nominal, 35% real drop in house prices be considered a "small price decrease". No doubt there will be some on here who would be happy to see rampant inflation, because they could flatter themselves that their 3 bed semi is still worth half a million. But to quote Bass Reeves, they should be careful what they wish for.
Iceman29 wrote: » HaHaHa this is more of it. A fairy tale answer for everything. Where is you're evidence that will prove that it'll mostly be taken by people heading out the door anyway. Any healthy place I've worked never offered "Voluntary redundancies " but a few unhealthy places I've working in have.....then, unfortunately they weren't voluntary and people let go. But you must be right this time, I'm sure they were going to get rid of 1400 people just randomly.....haha
fliball123 wrote: » Maybe , maybe not but hopefully a new player coming in will force a rethink look at how Aldi and Lidl have forced the mainstream stores like Dunnes and Tesco, etc to compete
Bass Reeves wrote: » Up to the early 80's the banks recruited straight from schools after there leaving cert what was called a bank clerk. They entered with guaranteed conditions, payscale and pension plan. Bank clerks were the foundation level staff employment and you could rise to any level in the bank. Pay scale in today terms were about 25K to 80K approximetly. However social change caught the banks. Up until the early 80's women who married left on having children. Bank staff were regularly transferred between branches every 3-5 years and having to move 50+ mile was the geneall rule not the exception. However from the mid 80's there was social change women no longer left on marriage and expecting employees to move was considered unfair work practice and tantamount to unfair dissmissal. Around taht time as well technology changed and banks needs less staff. They reconfigured there cost base, gave the first VL deals to staff, started putting the older type clerks into area's like loan management branch managment etc and started to recruit lower paid staff for counter work. This has continued over the last 20 years along with branch closure's etc. However there is a core of about 10 years of these older bank clerks still around who can continue to work now virtually into there 70's. The bank will pay well to get them out but it will be happy to pay them.
brisan wrote: » I bought my first house in 1982 as a 4th year apprentice 3 bed semi for 24500 pounds Borrowed 18k at 16.5 % Lads now complain about 3 or 4 % mortgages lol
RANIA wrote: » But if you have lost your job ate you not very unlikely to sell your house, knowing the bank won't give you another even smaller mortgage? Will people not just not pay and stay put?
