Bankrupt Solicitors deseve to keep their houses says Jim Stafford

vitani · 10-09-2013 11:22AM

If my solicitor was stupid enough to keep on a house he couldn't afford just to keep up appearances, I wouldn't trust him to look after my legal affairs.

wexie · 10-09-2013 11:23AM

vitani wrote: »

If my solicitor was stupid enough to keep on a house he couldn't afford just to keep up appearances, I wouldn't trust him to look after my legal affairs.

The article I believe mentions 'professionals' so it could be an accountant as well

handlemaster · 10-09-2013 11:24AM

Sir Humphrey Appleby wrote: »

Wow but what a change of tune from Jim Stafford.
He wasn't that understanding when he was routinely acting as the official liquidator for the self same banks!:mad:

He who pays the piper calls the tune

hardCopy · 10-09-2013 11:30AM

Dord wrote: »

All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.

Four cars good, two cars bad?

SEPT 23 1989 · 10-09-2013 11:33AM

I love when the mask slips with these parasites

Ray Palmer · 10-09-2013 11:38AM

vitani wrote: »

If my solicitor was stupid enough to keep on a house he couldn't afford just to keep up appearances, I wouldn't trust him to look after my legal affairs.

That is exactly the point being made to keep up appearances by not taking their home. By taking the home they will lose business and not be able to pay money back.

It seems a little strange to me because I would think professional appearance would be more down to the office and car been driven. I don't know where my accountant lives but I know his offices and the car he drives.

If my accountant was in a crappy office and driving a crappy car I would be a little concerned.

wexie · 10-09-2013 11:41AM

Ray Palmer wrote: »

That is exactly the point being made to keep up appearances by not taking their home. By taking the home they will lose business and not be able to pay money back.

It seems a little strange to me because I would think professional appearance would be more down to the office and car been driven. I don't know where my accountant lives but I know his offices and the car he drives.

If my accountant was in a crappy office and driving a crappy car I would be a little concerned.

Absolutely agree with you on this, don't see how it should effect the house though. Like you said, most people wouldn't even know where he lives and in the current climate it's a bit of a jump to assume that a bankrupt accountant / sollicitor / architect (actually I could see a point for an architect) is necessarily a bad one.

By all means let them keep the tools of the trade (within reason) but the house shouldn't form a part of that.

norrie rugger · 10-09-2013 11:44AM

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Last week on the same programme Pearse Doherty said that people should be allowed to have €6000 savings set aside for their children's education and not to have that touched to pay their mortgage.

Savings is a strange one though, should a person be punished for NOT spending all their money Vs someone that blew absolutely everything on disposables?
Also an education, in Ireland, is only free in name. College alone costs most parents a shed load and that would be why they are saving

imitation · 10-09-2013 11:44AM

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Does nobody see the point being made?

I am not saying I agree but I can kind of see the point.

What point ? Hes trying to make out a big house for a consultant is the same as a hammer for a carpenter. I don't recalling asking for pictures of my doctors house last time I was in hospital. Its deluded, you mess up, you pay, should apply to all at the same level.

At least though hes saying what a lot of these types actually think to themselves

rockbeast · 10-09-2013 11:52AM

Professionals "need" a trophy house, sure.

Then a trophy car, obviously.

4 holidays a year, naturally.

Private educations for Fiachra and Turlough, but of course.

May I suggest to the banks that it in fact they that now owe the professionals money.

Scary thing is that Donald Trump was allegedly famous in banking circles for pulling the exact stunt as above when he was in financial trouble in 80/90's.

No doubt we'll see it here too.

Ray Palmer · 10-09-2013 11:58AM

wexie wrote: »

Absolutely agree with you on this, don't see how it should effect the house though. Like you said, most people wouldn't even know where he lives and in the current climate it's a bit of a jump to assume that a bankrupt accountant / sollicitor / architect (actually I could see a point for an architect) is necessarily a bad one.

By all means let them keep the tools of the trade (within reason) but the house shouldn't form a part of that.

I really didn't see the importance of the house but when I thought about a bit more I realised I wasn't considering rural areas. People know a lot about other peoples' business or at least talk about it.
If an accountant in such areas was seen selling his house and moving to a much smaller place or renting it would be noticed. In that situation I can see the point. They could lose their entire business. So to an extent a tool of the trade.

Not saying I agree just there is a certain amount of logic that maybe relevant.

Ray Palmer · 10-09-2013 12:00PM

imitation wrote: »

At least though hes saying what a lot of these types actually think to themselves

It actually seems to be about how others perceive them not how they see themselves

wexie · 10-09-2013 12:01PM

Ray Palmer wrote: »

I really didn't see the importance of the house but when I thought about a bit more I realised I wasn't considering rural areas. People know a lot about other peoples' business or at least talk about it.
If an accountant in such areas was seen selling his house and moving to a much smaller place or renting it would be noticed. In that situation I can see the point. They could lose their entire business. So to an extent a tool of the trade.

Not saying I agree just there is a certain amount of logic that maybe relevant.

hmmmm....yeah I can see where you're coming from. Should we not try to get away from that kinda thinking though? It's a slippery slope and before you know it we're looking at buy to lets in Romania again.

Changing the mindset of rural Ireland, now there's a challenge for when the recession is over

Sleepy · 10-09-2013 12:05PM

Do people understand what a PIP does?

They represent a person that's insolvent in negotiations with their creditors. That's all. They have absolutely no power. Any creditor presented with the argument being made by this eejit would tell him to catch a hold of himself (or deserves the losses it would cause them if they're stupid enough to agree to it).

If the creditors don't like the deal being offered by the PIP on behalf of the insolvent, they can still choose to bankrupt the individual.

alanoakie · 10-09-2013 12:06PM

https://soundcloud.com/mgslasher/personal-insolvency-practioner

here's the clip so you can hear what a knobend he is

Ray Palmer · 10-09-2013 12:09PM

wexie wrote: »

Should we not try to get away from that kinda thinking though? It's a slippery slope and before you know it we're looking at buy to lets in Romania again.

You can't stop human nature. If you think of a profession of these types you would expect them to earn a high wage. If they aren't you are naturally going to question their ability especially when you know they used to have a better standard of living.

I don't think it is a slippery slope to that extent.

Ultimately I want what ever is the cheapest option morality/perception of it be damned

Tigerandahalf · 10-09-2013 12:09PM

This is just madness.
This image is all I can think of.

http://imgace.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/the-best-blow-chart-ever-bird-****.jpg

Unfortunately it doesn't seem to be linking, but it is the picture of the birds sh*tting down on each other.

rockbeast · 10-09-2013 12:10PM

Sleepy wrote: »

Do people understand what a PIP does?

They represent a person that's insolvent in negotiations with their creditors. That's all. They have absolutely no power. Any creditor presented with the argument being made by this eejit would tell him to catch a hold of himself.

If the creditors don't like the deal being offered by the PIP on behalf of the insolvent, they can still choose to bankrupt the individual.

Of course he should represent his client to the best of his ability and I think he's really just looking for business and publicity here.

I think it's the fact that this mindset exists, or could exist, that has people riled up.

He, JS, reg'd over on p.ie to respond to that thread. "Interesting" reading...

Tigerandahalf · 10-09-2013 12:16PM

I wouldn't hold out hope that the ordinary taxpayer will be protected. Many of these solicitors, accountants and other professionals would have been giving financial donations to political parties like FG and Labour who are currently in government.

hardCopy · 10-09-2013 12:48PM

rockbeast wrote: »

Professionals "need" a trophy house, sure.

Then a trophy car, obviously.

4 holidays a year, naturally.

Private educations for Fiachra and Turlough, but of course.

May I suggest to the banks that it in fact they that now owe the professionals money.

Scary thing is that Donald Trump was allegedly famous in banking circles for pulling the exact stunt as above when he was in financial trouble in 80/90's.

No doubt we'll see it here too.

Don't forget golf club membership. Sure where else would he be able to find new clients?

Nitochris · 10-09-2013 01:16PM

If you ever wonder about what Ireland's left mean when we talk about the working class and the middle class/elite/bourgeois (depending on which space on the left we find ourselves) this is what we mean.

SEPT 23 1989 · 10-09-2013 01:46PM

discussing this on Liveline now

silverharp · 10-09-2013 01:47PM

they have a "contact us" on their website

http://www.frielstafford.ie/contact-us.113.html

silverharp · 10-09-2013 01:56PM

the plonker is on now making a bigger fool of himself

Cuddlesworth · 10-09-2013 02:02PM

Ray Palmer wrote: »

By taking the home they will lose business and not be able to pay money back.

I thought the point of insolvency was that he wasn't going to pay the money back? In which case, does it matter?

Ray Palmer · 10-09-2013 02:06PM

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

I thought the point of insolvency was that he wasn't going to pay the money back? In which case, does it matter?

You would be wrong. It is a restructure of finance to get as most as possible from the people involved.

jmayo · 10-09-2013 03:37PM

Ray Palmer wrote: »

That is exactly the point being made to keep up appearances by not taking their home. By taking the home they will lose business and not be able to pay money back.

It seems a little strange to me because I would think professional appearance would be more down to the office and car been driven. I don't know where my accountant lives but I know his offices and the car he drives.

If my accountant was in a crappy office and driving a crappy car I would be a little concerned.

If I knew the accountant had made sizable bad investments and was still driving a nice new car I would be even more worried.

Ray Palmer wrote: »

I really didn't see the importance of the house but when I thought about a bit more I realised I wasn't considering rural areas. People know a lot about other peoples' business or at least talk about it.
If an accountant in such areas was seen selling his house and moving to a much smaller place or renting it would be noticed. In that situation I can see the point. They could lose their entire business. So to an extent a tool of the trade.

Not saying I agree just there is a certain amount of logic that maybe relevant.

And in those same areas trust me word gets around how the accountant or solicitor had invested in the boarded up new hotel or the half built development.
People would be even more curious as to how they could still afford the same lifestyle even thought their little empires had gone tits up and others with similar investments had nothing.

Stretching this so that people keep the trappings of wealth so that they may repay some of their debts is insulting to those of us who will surely foot the bill.

MadsL · 10-09-2013 04:04PM

Pappa Charlie wrote: »

It seems like we have just set up a quango to protect the mighty who have fallen!

NAMA?

Ray Palmer · 10-09-2013 04:11PM

jmayo wrote: »

.
Stretching this so that people keep the trappings of wealth so that they may repay some of their debts is insulting to those of us who will surely foot the bill.

I am not convinced by the argument either. I was just pointing out that it isn't lunacy. There are valid arguments to the point.

The other thing I also pointed out that "those of who foot the bill" is not really accurate. The people on top wages pay a much higher portion of the taxes than the rest. In other words solicitors, accountants and other professionals pay for everybody else and have done for years.

Ultimately what do you want the cheapest solution versus one that is punitive and expensive?

emmabrighton · 10-09-2013 04:22PM

Wait now, he kind of has a point.

Would you trust a hospital consultant who was living in an ex-council house? Or would you be thinking - he must not be very good at what he does because he can't afford a house in Blackrock.

Same for your solicitor. You want one that exudes success. You can't say you would be nervous walking into court with a solicitor wearing a suit from pennys.

I only wish I had studied harder at school so I could afford the trappings of wealth that they are accustomed to.

I think that we should just accept that we were the dummies and they really are our betters and as such should be treated with respect and left to maintain their celtic tiger lifestyles.

Fair play to them I say.

Bankrupt Solicitors deseve to keep their houses says Jim Stafford

Comments