nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Repossession

Hitchens

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/breaking-solicitor-barricades-himself-into-palatial-home-31033240.html

I wonder does this course of action come under 'contempt of court', similar to the water protesters?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Guy:Incognito

boobar wrote: »

The more money you owe, the better you're treated.

Owe 160 for TV license go straight to jail

Owe 75 million, well...

Straight to jail eh? Not a reminder first, then another, then a summons, then a fine, then another court appearance for not paying the fine, then a payment plan, then another summons for not keeping to the payment plan, then a sentence for contempt of court for refusing to pay the court fine?

Guy:Incognito

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Are you speaking from experience or do you just have blind faith in the good nature of a section of society which has been proven time and time again to be utterly rotten and unethical to its core?

Why would you need blind faith? The bank loaned someone money, they don't pay and the bank want the house that they (the bank) own. It's a simple enough arrangement.

The bank are much better off if someone pays the 400k mortgage on the house now worth 200k taken out 10 years ago than they are having the house back so if its a goer they will want the person to stay in the house and pay them.

thebaz

usually I am a sympathetic sort - always up for the outsider against big brother - but in this instance I have zero sympathy - piss off out of your mansion and live with us ordinary folk - what the hell are the land league doing up there anyway - taxpayers should not be paying for this nonsense, if i don't pay my rent I'm kicked out onto the street , but the O'Donnellls have a divine right to live on Vico road.

FalconGirl

Land league ha. League of failed businessmen more like because thats all they are. These people lie outside the golden circle for whatever reason. Their loans have been called in and dealt with accordingly unlike others I can think of!

Lollipops23

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Are you speaking from experience or do you just have blind faith in the good nature of a section of society which has been proven time and time again to be utterly rotten and unethical to its core?

From the couple of people I know who have fallen into arrears due to unemployment etc.

Yes, the banks are a dreadful shower of b*tards, every single one of them, including the tellers, the people in the offices, all of them are inherently evil and won't do a thing to help customers out. :rolleyes:

yipeeeee

Who is this idiot from the land league talking ****e on my tv.

thebaz

FalconGirl wrote: »

Land league ha. League of failed businessmen more like because thats all they are. These people lie outside the golden circle for whatever reason. Their loans have been called in and dealt with accordingly unlike others I can think of!

the word on the streets is that - Bertie won it on the races, is planning a comeback , and linking up with this post Celtic Tiger land league - bring back the era of brown paper bag politics , that the stupid taxpayers will always pay for.
Long live Bertie an Irish legend, creator of the Celtic Tiger

diomed

Gerry Beades ... is he the Fianna Fail guy from Swords?

Andalucia

Vote Parnell - these guys are an embarrassment to his name

Beades is a failed businessman who has nearly spent as much time in the courts as the O'Donnells

he got lucky a few years back where ACC lost some deeds to property he had

why is not being asked how much did you borrow and not re-pay? How many banks have secured judgement against you?

He is also a former member of Fianna Fail

RecordStraight

Andalucia wrote: »

Beades is a failed businessman who has nearly spent as much time in the courts as the O'Donnells

A property developer, and a great pal of Bertie Ahern. What's not to like?

RecordStraight

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Straight to jail eh? Not a reminder first, then another, then a summons, then a fine, then another court appearance for not paying the fine, then a payment plan, then another summons for not keeping to the payment plan, then a sentence for contempt of court for refusing to pay the court fine?

I think his point is that you shouldn't have to pay the TV licence if you don't want to. Or your electricity or phone bills, or mortgage presumably. Everyone should get whatever services they want and pay what they feel they should pay. What could go wrong?

Desolation Of Smug

If I borrow a billion, and buy stuff with it, am I smart or reckless? And if it turns to muck, should I suffer? Like they'll suffer anyway...

oppenheimer1

So is this second great land battle of Gorse Hill?

Specialun

On 4fm now...spokesperson for the family..claiming the house is owned by the children with zero finance on it

darkpagandeath

Desolation Of Smug wrote: »

If I borrow a billion, and buy stuff with it, am I smart or reckless? And if it turns to muck, should I suffer? Like they'll suffer anyway...

Yes because it was all pretty much borrowed money, to buy more and more property. They started with some assets and borrowed to obtain all the rest. Pure greed, No attempt to have a safety net if things went south.

Baby Jane

Watch him do a Ben Gilroy and become one of the put-upon little people - in solidarity with the ordinary working man, like a James Connolly of the 21st century (and Mr Constance Markiewicz :pac:).
Seriously, this is how these clowns operate - despite having no time for the little people and plenty of time for greed when the going was good.

ted1

Specialun wrote: »

On 4fm now...spokesperson for the family..claiming the house is owned by the children with zero finance on it

They claimed to have put the house in a trust years ago, but the bank had a claim to it before IT was out in trust. Cowboys the courts have been through this already

hatrickpatrick

Lollipops23 wrote: »

From the couple of people I know who have fallen into arrears due to unemployment etc.

Yes, the banks are a dreadful shower of b*tards, every single one of them, including the tellers, the people in the offices, all of them are inherently evil and won't do a thing to help customers out. :rolleyes:

I have never said anything of the kind.
The banks as organizations were bailed out after failing to pay their debts. Hardly any senior executive has suffered real consequences as a result.
With that in mind, these reposessions are entirely hypocritical. I'm sorry, but unless the banks will one day have to repay every red cent given to them by the taxpayer, my loyalties lie firmly with people who are in the same situation the banks themselves were in a couple of years ago, but were unlucky enough not to have friends in high places.

Capitalism for everyone, or capitalism for no one. I will never be ok with selectively applying any set of rules.

yipeeeee

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I have never said anything of the kind.
The banks as organizations were bailed out after failing to pay their debts. Hardly any senior executive has suffered real consequences as a result.
With that in mind, these reposessions are entirely hypocritical. I'm sorry, but unless the banks will one day have to repay every red cent given to them by the taxpayer, my loyalties lie firmly with people who are in the same situation the banks themselves were in a couple of years ago, but were unlucky enough not to have friends in high places.

Capitalism for everyone, or capitalism for no one. I will never be ok with selectively applying any set of rules.

And why can't the banks pay them back?

Because people also were wreckless and can't pay them back.

There was two in it, but the banks get all the usual rabble from the usual crowd.

By the way we are expected to get back what the banks were bailed out with, by the banks.

Whether we will get it all back remains to be seen but it's a plan in action.

Some people who can't pay back won't even talk to the banks.

Balmed Out

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I have never said anything of the kind.
The banks as organizations were bailed out after failing to pay their debts. Hardly any senior executive has suffered real consequences as a result.
With that in mind, these reposessions are entirely hypocritical. I'm sorry, but unless the banks will one day have to repay every red cent given to them by the taxpayer, my loyalties lie firmly with people who are in the same situation the banks themselves were in a couple of years ago, but were unlucky enough not to have friends in high places.

Capitalism for everyone, or capitalism for no one. I will never be ok with selectively applying any set of rules.

Why were the banks bailed out?
To protect the economy at large and the population with deposits in banks. To protect the innocent who hadn't taken large irresponsible loans out.
If you want this money paid back then people who bought what they can't afford have to have those things taken back.
I can't see how anyone can believe repossessions aren't a very necessary act if we are to allow secured loans.

suicide_circus

Someone needs to get a stick and bate this lad out of the gaff.

HalloweenJack

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/high-court/gorse-hill-solicitor-son-calls-father-to-tell-him-he-is-trespassing-1.2125055

Disgraceful carry on from this lot. It boils my blood. They are people out there who are genuinely struggling with repossessions and then you have people like this who are just throwing their toys out of the pram because they got caught out. They're showing no respect whatsoever for the court by sending in the son who clearly has no idea what he's doing and is being sent like a lamb to the slaughter.

Thargor

I wonder whats going through his mind barricading himself in, is he mentally unwell at this point? Whatever about his behaviour the guy is a pretty senior solicitor, he must know its completely hopeless. You'd think with houses like these that are all about prestige and keeping up appearances to colleagues that this would be complete humiliation that they'd avoid at all costs. What firm will take him on after this?

RainyDay

Thargor wrote: »

I wonder whats going through his mind barricading himself in, is he mentally unwell at this point? Whatever about his behaviour the guy is a pretty senior solicitor, he must know its completely hopeless.

I suspect (though I have no inside knowledge) that he's never had to face up to anyone saying No to him for the last 20 or 30 years. He's got his own way on everything - so he's really find it hard to understand that he's got it so wrong on this one.

Dog of Tears

Thargor wrote: »

I wonder whats going through his mind barricading himself in, is he mentally unwell at this point?

He's going through a very public temper-tantrum at not getting his own way. Similar behaviour to an indulged 2 year old.

ronan45

Vincent Brown is now on the scene :rolleyes:

sjb25

ronan45 wrote: »

Vincent Brown is now on the scene :rolleyes:

**** is about to kick of lol he's blocking the gate closing coz he wants to get in lol

StewartGriffin

ronan45 wrote: »

Vincent Brown is now on the scene :rolleyes:

Crazy old guy turns up at Crazy old guys house!

conorh91

HalloweenJack wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/high-court/gorse-hill-solicitor-son-calls-father-to-tell-him-he-is-trespassing-1.2125055

Disgraceful carry on from this lot. It boils my blood. They are people out there who are genuinely struggling with repossessions and then you have people like this who are just throwing their toys out of the pram because they got caught out. They're showing no respect whatsoever for the court by sending in the son who clearly has no idea what he's doing and is being sent like a lamb to the slaughter.

Seriously patronizing article there. Although the whole thing is of course ridiculous, I don't see the point in making fun of the guy's advocacy skills, and seeming to enjoy his inexperience.

Bottom line is that the O'Donnell parents seem to be in denial, but we all know how it's going to end.

I don;t understand why anyone needs to be "outraged" or why Kathy Sheridan needs to write an article mocking a young solicitor's skills. This is a small town and to me, it seems like a pointless abuse of the paper's influence. She's enjoying it a bit too much IMO.

seamus

Thargor wrote: »

I wonder whats going through his mind barricading himself in, is he mentally unwell at this point? Whatever about his behaviour the guy is a pretty senior solicitor, he must know its completely hopeless. You'd think with houses like these that are all about prestige and keeping up appearances to colleagues that this would be complete humiliation that they'd avoid at all costs. What firm will take him on after this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possession_is_nine-tenths_of_the_law

He's looking for an angle on which to fight the repossession, but he knows that no matter how bonkers the angle, it's far more likely to succeed while he occupies the house than if he doesn't.

For someone who knows the law, it's a relatively logical course of action to take, even if it is one of desperation.