Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Buy house, don't pay mortgage, live rent-free for 9 years. MOD WARNING POST #268

2456718

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 4,331 ✭✭✭Arthur Daley


    The V Fund won't care one way or another. They are not going to pay a dime for this. They are not that gullible. The Irish taxpayer is.


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,930 ✭✭✭✭Fr Tod Umptious


    Not paying a mortgage saved them 300k+.
    The hypocrisy here is beyond belief.

    Non payment of mortgage meant that they no longer allowed live in the house they lived in for 9 years and they are unlikely to get any sort of a loan (personal, business, car etc) again in the foreseeable future with anything like a normal interest rate.

    If you were offered that outcome by spending 300k+ on something instead of your mortgage would you take it ?


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,863 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    In the case of their home they speculated to accumulate and it didn’t work out. <snip> The fact is for 9 years they lived in a prime property rent free without making 1€ repayment, how can this be deserving of sympathy? This is why we pay higher interest rates.


  • Registered Users Posts: 32,802 ✭✭✭✭NIMAN


    It does appear to prove the theory that the more you owe the more leeway you are given.

    These folk are allowed to walk away from over €1mill debt, yet if you owe €50,000 then they will chase you til its repaid.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    Non payment of mortgage meant that they no longer allowed live in the house they lived in for 9 years and they are unlikely to get any sort of a loan (personal, business, car etc) again in the foreseeable future with anything like a normal interest rate.

    If you were offered that outcome by spending 300k+ on something instead of your mortgage would you take it ?

    Yeh I’d buy a house for 300k. In fact 300k would pay off my mortgage and then some.

    You keep trying to promote a deliberate act as some kind of misfortune.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 419 ✭✭Tacklebox


    NIMAN wrote: »
    It does appear to prove the theory that the more you owe the more leeway you are given.

    These folk are allowed to walk away from over €1mill debt, yet if you owe €50,000 then they will chase you til its repaid.

    And if you're rubbing shoulders with celebs, attractive looking and have a lovely smile....

    I know a few similar couples in Clare who are living it up and haven't paid any of their mortgages in years.

    Still making money and going on holidays, new car's etc.

    There's definitely something wrong somewhere.
    No way should they have gotten away with that.

    I guarantee you, they'll get on with their lives and they'll not feel one bit of remorse, shame or guilt.

    It's just another day for the middle classes, laughing at everyone else.

    This will make that couple feel invincible now.

    They'll be celebrating and cracking open the champers, and they'll land on their feet.....


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,863 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    Not sure I agree with all above in that I’m sure there is some embarrassment felt.

    I lived in the US for a couple of years and I have to say I admire their system.

    Business people/entrepreneurs take a chance and if it doesn’t work out, bankruptcy for a couple of years, then they go again with a clean slate, but, they get turfed out on their hole quick. They don’t have it both ways. They start again and it’s almost like a right of passage and in many ways is admired.

    Here, you borrow big, you can’t access credit again when things go bad, but the creditor takes an enormous hit and that gets passed on to the rest of us.


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,930 ✭✭✭✭Fr Tod Umptious


    Yeh I’d buy a house for 300k. In fact 300k would pay off my mortgage and then some.

    You keep trying to promote a deliberate act as some kind of misfortune.


    No I'm not

    I saying a deliberate act of spending 300+k over 9 years on something other than ones mortgage has consequences such as a repossession and a bad credit rating.

    It's not a win win like some here think it is.

    It's not a win at all, it's a loss.


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,647 ✭✭✭✭punisher5112


    NIMAN wrote: »
    It does appear to prove the theory that the more you owe the more leeway you are given.

    These folk are allowed to walk away from over €1mill debt, yet if you owe €50,000 then they will chase you til its repaid.

    Wrong if it's 1 cent or even €1.50 they will send letters, call and end up sending out debt collection agency letters.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    Mod Note

    Leave the unfounded allegations/guesses out please.

    Do not reply to this post on thread.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 87 ✭✭Rosina1969


    9 years rent and mortgage free????!!!!! I'd say they will buy another house no problem.

    Life is bloody unfair. One law for the rich another for the poor. Im facing homelessness cos I cant recover my feckin deposit, from a landlord who has blatantly spent it, and not paid his mortgage for 2 years, and has been receiving my rent.

    If I hadn't paid rent for the past 9 years I'd have approx. 150,000 grand. Or I could have been living a life instead of this month to month existence I'm struggling so bad just putting food on the table and paying bills. I bet all their kids do all their activities they want to.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,628 ✭✭✭klaaaz


    [/b]
    I saying a deliberate act of spending 300+k over 9 years on something other than ones mortgage has consequences such as a repossession and a bad credit rating.

    It's not a win win like some here think it is.

    It's not a win at all, it's a loss.

    Really? This couple are wealthy celebrities, they will have no problem earning multitudes again due to their connections among the elite in society, a poor credit rating won't even figure when they "earn" six figures pa in their careers. The vast vast majority of us do not earn that much and would suffer from a bad credit rating for life with no hope of ever owning a house, running a business or having a simple car loan. This wealthy entitled couple will not ever be paupers so your poor mouth does not apply!


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,578 ✭✭✭JDD


    This is shocking tbf. As a previous poster says, if it was Joe Schlo not paying on a €300k house, and he stayed in it for nine years while different lenders didn't make a consistent attempt to repossess, the public would have had more sympathy.

    Even if these two hadn't paid a penny for nine years, it'd be more palatable if they were stuck with at least a portion of the remaining €400k - rolled into the mortgage for their new home or whatever. It's not as if the town mine has been closed is it? Both of them have substantial earning power.

    I've said before that "moral hazard" isn't really an argument when it is applied to cases that are a result of the financial crisis, as they are just the other side of the coin to the bank bailouts. But this is a nonsense. One party had decided to give up their lucrative career and have three kids, all while being unable to pay ANYTHING towards their mortgage. Must be nice to be them. And what was he doing for nine years where they were unable to pay anything towards their mortgage? Clearly they had enough to pay a lawyer.

    And really, so what if they can't get a credit card or a car loan again. They shouldn't get a credit card or a car loan. Or any loan. They are untrustworthy with other people's money.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    Mod Note

    Off topic posts deleted.

    If you want to have a general gossip about the couple in question, take it somewhere else.


  • Registered Users Posts: 194 ✭✭happyfriday74


    Yep. The slow repo process is why we pay such high rates.

    I was in Spain recently and was shocked at the level of homelessness. A Spanish mate told me that once you bounce a few mortgage payments action is taken fairly quickly.

    the other side of this is their rates are much cheaper and sub 2%


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,578 ✭✭✭JDD


    It's the same in the UK. Miss three payments and you're in court a month later. If you don't pay the entirety of the arrears the day you are in court a repossession order is given and you're out the next month.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,150 ✭✭✭✭Marcusm


    They played the game. They realised a sale at 500kwas not acceptable. Tanager left them in place so that the house was not abandoned. Surprised that they have not had to agree to any future payments at all.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf




  • Registered Users Posts: 3,529 ✭✭✭dubrov



    Not much of a defence to be honest. At no point is there any suggestion that they would have to take any personal responsibility for the losses they had accumulated.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    You get what you can negotiate. It would be interesting to know the exactly details of how all the different deals worked out. But I doubt we will ever know.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,016 ✭✭✭JJJackal


    Impossible to make any real comment on this case - sounds very complicated and all we have is very superficial information.

    If he tried to sell the houses 3-4 times and wanted to leave there isnt much more in could do

    Leaving for the sake of leaving the house would not have helped the situation


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,105 ✭✭✭Kivaro


    JJJackal wrote: »
    If he tried to sell the houses 3-4 times and wanted to leave there isnt much more in could do

    Leaving for the sake of leaving the house would not have helped the

    The husband's 'defense' of the situation is full of holes.
    He said that they were told not to make payments on the house: Who told them that? Threshold? A friend down the road?

    He also claims that they tried to sell the house a number of times, but could not because the offers were not high enough. By not accepting these multiple offers, it allowed him and his family to continue living in the house without having to make any payments.
    His spin of the situation does not compute.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,016 ✭✭✭JJJackal


    Kivaro wrote: »
    The husband's 'defense' of the situation is full of holes.
    He said that they were told not to make payments on the house: Who told them that? Threshold? A friend down the road?

    He also claims that they tried to sell the house a number of times, but could not because the offers were not high enough. By not accepting these multiple offers, it allowed him and his family to continue living in the house without having to make any payments.
    His spin of the situation does not compute.

    In this scenario, I imagine the bank dictates what offer is accepted?


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,497 ✭✭✭Hoboo


    JJJackal wrote: »
    Kivaro wrote: »
    The husband's 'defense' of the situation is full of holes.
    He said that they were told not to make payments on the house: Who told them that? Threshold? A friend down the road?

    He also claims that they tried to sell the house a number of times, but could not because the offers were not high enough. By not accepting these multiple offers, it allowed him and his family to continue living in the house without having to make any payments.
    His spin of the situation does not compute.

    In this scenario, I imagine the bank dictates what offer is accepted?

    Exactly. The bank is more than happy with the the outcome, only ones that aren't are the outraged begrudgers.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,331 ✭✭✭Arthur Daley


    JJJackal wrote: »
    Someone told him not to pay the interest - i am not sure he was every paying off the principle.

    If your loan was sold 3-4 times is it clear to whom you should be paying money? I have seen a query re a sold loan and to whom money should be paid on a previous thread

    I am sure the original bank (presumably Bank of Scotland) serviced the mortgage until they handed over the servicing to a new entity, who would then be ready and eager to receive payment. They would have to communicate all of this by letter, as part of the regulations.

    So, no I doubt there is any real excuse here for not paying a mortgage for the guts of a decade. What next, the dog ate the demands, come on.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Indeed, handy to say somebody told me not to pay my mortgage. I had the money, but I held it back. Disgraceful excuse really.

    I assume, someone told him there's no point paying if you've lost the house anyway. Makes no sense to pay it, until he knows what debt he actually has to pay. If they negotiates a debt free exit, he be a bit stupid to made any payment.

    Look at all the developers and banks which negotiated their way out off massive debts. Who gave them such a risky loan in the first place.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Apart from the whataboutery, the Banks did not default on massive debts. The Bank's debts are to the depositors, large yes and small, including pensions schemes and just ordinary people saving money. These were all fully secure throughout the crisis, albeit with temporary government support, and the Banks came out the other side of the crisis honouring their obligations to their creditors.

    People should watch It's a wonderful life at Christmas. My deposits go into your home, and that's the way the system works. Encouraging this kind of behaviour goes completely against these principles. It's new, and it was not the Irish way of doing business generally up to now.

    The banks were propped up.

    If they had been treated as people want the home owner (?) to be treated we'd have let them go to the wall.

    Double standards.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    Mod Note

    Off topic posts and general digs at the family in question have been deleted.

    Read the previous on thread warnings before posting.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    I don't know enough to make a moral judgement on any of this. But we don't have all the facts. I'm sure some accountant somewhere worked it out so it made sense.

    Someone worked out that the house would get more than the debt that was bought from the bank. So they might have made money on it and the bank wrote off the difference.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement