Massive Write Down

Sleepy · 13-02-2019 1:03pm

seamus wrote: »

There is no actual benefit to anyone, not even to PTSB, in disposing of the property.

There is if the actual market value of the property is closer to the outstanding mortgage balance than the value put forth in the case.

CIARAN_BOYLE · 13-02-2019 1:09pm

Sleepy wrote: »

There is if the actual market value of the property is closer to the outstanding mortgage balance than the value put forth in the case.

artivle says value was agreed

meeeeh · 13-02-2019 1:11pm

Sleepy wrote: »

Was it though?

Sorry for making the same point twice but I just can't accept that a property bought for €343,785 in 2005 is only worth €160,000 in 2019. Was the valuation agent a friend of the lady in question I wonder?

The average trend would have the property back at roughly the value it was in 2005 (or even higher), not at 46% of the original price.

So unless the property was affected by pyrite (and isn't covered under the remediation schemes) or the owners have a habit of swinging around sledge-hammers, how in the hell is the asset worth so much less than was paid for it?

So from one graphic showing national averages you can deduct auctioneer lied in court. Cool.

Of course it could be a self build opinion the middle of nowhere that has value only if you actually want to live there.

abcabc123123 · 13-02-2019 1:14pm

'He also said PTSB would do better from the PIA than in a bankruptcy; has protection if the house is sold in the future at a value higher than the agreed market value and can pursue the husband over the mortgage debt.'

Two courts also rejected PTSB's appeal.

Sleepy · 13-02-2019 1:18pm

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

artivle says value was agreed

When was it agreed? By whom?

meeeeh wrote: »

So from one graphic showing national averages you can deduct auctioneer lied in court. Cool.

Does the auctioneer actually have to appear in court? I wouldn't have thought so...

I'm unaware of any area in the country where property is still at 45% of it's (pre-peak) 2005 value and I can't seem to access the data anywhere on the CSO website.

Franz Von Peppercorn · 13-02-2019 1:22pm

Sleepy wrote: »

Was it though?

Sorry for making the same point twice but I just can't accept that a property bought for €343,785 in 2005 is only worth €160,000 in 2019. Was the valuation agent a friend of the lady in question I wonder?

The average trend would have the property back at roughly the value it was in 2005 (or even higher), not at 46% of the original price.

So unless the property was affected by pyrite (and isn't covered under the remediation schemes) or the owners have a habit of swinging around sledge-hammers, how in the hell is the asset worth so much less than was paid for it?

The 343,785 is the mortgage she owed at write-down not the price of the house or the original mortgage. Interest and fees accumulate if you stop paying.

meeeeh · 13-02-2019 1:33pm

Sleepy wrote: »

When was it agreed? By whom?

Does the auctioneer actually have to appear in court? I wouldn't have thought so...

I'm unaware of any area in the country where property is still at 45% of it's (pre-peak) 2005 value and I can't seem to access the data anywhere on the CSO website.

Self build mortgages. A few houses in our neighbourhood went for around 150k (propery tax evaluation was for 125k), our original mortgage was 325k. I haven't got a clue how much people would be prepared to pay for our house because they are all one of houses.

Giveaway · 13-02-2019 1:37pm

seamus wrote: »

That makes no sense. Moving someone out into the rental market just so some numbers can be moved around some spreadsheets?

As a country we're constitutionally bound to place the security of a person's home above the cleanliness of a bank's mortgage account. It's one thing if a person is not paying and refusing to do anything about it. It's another thing entirely if they're willing to pay but have been dragged into the mire by circumstances outside of their control.

There is no actual benefit to anyone, not even to PTSB, in disposing of the property.

I agree no advantage for the individual cases, but when you establish a culture of defaulting without losing the home, you have many pleading difficulty and a non functional system. If they leave this home some other family will buy it , freeing up supply in the rental sector and so on. When you have non payers holding out in thr home, it forces prices up and rents too as it locks potential buyers into continued renting.
I saw it when house hunting myself

Nermal · 13-02-2019 1:49pm

seamus wrote: »

That makes no sense. Moving someone out into the rental market just so some numbers can be moved around some spreadsheets?

As a country we're constitutionally bound to place the security of a person's home above the cleanliness of a bank's mortgage account. It's one thing if a person is not paying and refusing to do anything about it. It's another thing entirely if they're willing to pay but have been dragged into the mire by circumstances outside of their control.

There is no actual benefit to anyone, not even to PTSB, in disposing of the property.

Moral hazard. The reason why we have the highest mortgage interest rates in the Eurozone.

Sleepy · 13-02-2019 1:50pm

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

The 343,785 is the mortgage she owed at write-down not the price of the house or the original mortgage. Interest and fees accumulate if you stop paying.

I somehow missed that in the article despite actually looking for it!

meeeeh wrote: »

Self build mortgages. A few houses in our neighbourhood went for around 150k (propery tax evaluation was for 125k), our original mortgage was 325k. I haven't got a clue how much people would be prepared to pay for our house because they are all one of houses.

If that was the case, I'd have little sympathy for the bank tbh. Lending someone more than the end value of a self-build is pretty much the definition of reckless lending.

Giveaway · 13-02-2019 1:51pm

Nermal wrote: »

Moral hazard. The reason why we have the highest mortgage interest rates in the Eurozone.

No moral hazard in ireland

seamus · 13-02-2019 1:54pm

Nermal wrote: »

Moral hazard. The reason why we have the highest mortgage interest rates in the Eurozone.

I'd argue that the moral hazard in Ireland is the fact that banks could hand out mortgages of any size without any real risk that they might lose part of it. A mortgage debt, no matter how large and no matter the value of the underlying asset, would follow the borrower to their grave, basically meaning all the risk is with the borrower and not the lender.

This case is an example of a properly balanced system where a borrower who hits repayment difficulties and the bank who provided the loan, both experience the fallout of the risk coming to fruition. The borrower is in a six-year PIA, the bank has taken a large write down.

No moral hazard at all.

13-02-2019 1:55pm

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

The 343,785 is the mortgage she owed at write-down not the price of the house or the original mortgage. Interest and fees accumulate if you stop paying.

How or why did she stop paying when she was earning 2900 net per month? if she was working and earning that?
I can understand how someone could get into debt if they didnt have a job and couldnt sustain their outgoing costs, and then end up spending money servicing debts say for example on credit cards and fall into debt cycle, but she was working, why wasnt she paying the mortgage, I didnt see it in the article either, but I suspect it must be the case otherwise, how is the mortgage cost so high.
If penalties and to some extent interest has been cut from the costs, then ok, but how did they occur?

Pussyhands · 13-02-2019 1:56pm

seamus wrote: »

Seem reasonable to me. She's on a stable, but relatively fixed income being a civil servant, therefore very little prospect of increasing her earnings into the future. She can afford €900/month in payments, leaving €2k to support herself and her daughter.

If she'd been the one gambling, I'd have less sympathy. But she got shackled to some PoS who racked up a pile of debts and then fncked off.

PTSB should be chasing him for the balance.

The lack of empathy from people in this thread is something else. She should be kicked out of the house because her husband was a scumbag and loaded her with debt? Nice humanity there.

Was her name on the mortgage? That's her fault for marrying a POS then.

You can't just pick and choose after the fact!

These are the risks of doing these things. Pay your debts!!!!

If I take a loan for 20k tomorrow for a new diesel car and then the arse falls out of diesels the next day, can I get half my debt wiped off too?

Pussyhands · 13-02-2019 2:00pm

Xterminator wrote: »

nothing socialist about it.

FFS why is it okay for the bank to write down 10's of thousands of mortgages and see them, but wrong to write down a single one ?

Value was written down to current market value of the house. If the poor woman was turfed out and the house sold that is all they would get anyway. It is simply a practical solution to a sad situation.

Should we all extend ourselves fully in the current housing market knowing that if house prices were to fall we too are deserving of getting chunks of the debt wiped off?

It's a 0 sum game. If she's not paying for it, someone else is and why should someone else suffer for poor decisions she made?

meeeeh · 13-02-2019 2:02pm

Nermal wrote: »

Moral hazard. The reason why we have the highest mortgage interest rates in the Eurozone.

Whose moral hazard though? We are paying 1.05% interest rate on our mortgage because banks were at one stage so eager to throw money at people with lowest possible interest rate. PTSB are especially guilty. Some people are paying the highest rates in Europe because I'm pretty sure a lot of us are paying the lowest.

Franz Von Peppercorn · 13-02-2019 2:04pm

1874 wrote: »

How or why did she stop paying when she was earning 2900 net per month? if she was working and earning that?
I can understand how someone could get into debt if they didnt have a job and couldnt sustain their outgoing costs, and then end up spending money servicing debts say for example on credit cards and fall into debt cycle, but she was working, why wasnt she paying the mortgage, I didnt see it in the article either, but I suspect it must be the case otherwise, how is the mortgage cost so high.
If penalties and to some extent interest has been cut from the costs, then ok, but how did they occur?

I don’t know I was just explaining the write down was partly a write down of fees and interest etc.

I don’t condone not paying if you can.

Franz Von Peppercorn · 13-02-2019 2:05pm

meeeeh wrote: »

Whose moral hazard though? We are paying 1.05% interest rate on our mortgage because banks were at one stage so eager to throw money at people with lowest possible interest rate. PTSB are especially guilty. Some people are paying the highest rates in Europe because I'm pretty sure a lot of us are paying the lowest.

Don’t rub it in, mate :-)

13-02-2019 2:06pm

Pussyhands wrote: »

Was her name on the mortgage? That's her fault for marrying a POS then.

You can't just pick and choose after the fact!

These are the risks of doing these things. Pay your debts!!!!

Well, thats where I disagree, marriage seems to be used as an excuse to shackle you to someone and they can change who they are overnight and they effectively own you/by which I mean they can influence how you are dealt with based on their behaviour, and you can do nothing about it, which I think is wrong.
Should be able to get out of marriage easier and quicker, 2 years max, maybe even 1 year. Personally I wouldnt recoomend marriage to anyone, because of $hit like this, can just be living with someone, except the State pushes marriage so you are shackled to a person, or you dont get the same rights of inheritence and tax credit transfers, which in this day and age I think is draconian. Should be able to state someone is your life partner and be able to transfer rights entitlements to them on that basis or remove them rapidly if you so choose, that or be able to get out of marriages easier.

She may not have known he was a POS, and likewise for guys marrying, they can not know who a person is, because its possible they only find out afterwards.

If she was working, she should have kept paying the mortgage and not had anything to do with his debts from loan sharks, personally Id have gotten the Gardai involved in that if there were any threats or worse.
what we dont know is how was she with her own finances? living it up new cars and holidays or just wasting her money on crap? its hard to see where 2900 net per month went, so if she was not sensible with her money then I dont believe that should be rewarded even if her husband was a POS, then she's responsible too.

Eric Cartman · 13-02-2019 2:06pm

Sleepy wrote: »

Where in the hell is she living that a property bought for €343,785 in 2005 is only worth €160,000 in 2019?

I know the recovery has been slower in some areas than others but they didn't even buy at the peak?

One of the pyrite areas in the midlands id imagine

13-02-2019 2:11pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

One of the pyrite areas in the midlands id imagine

If thats the case, then I am sympathetic, I dont know much about other than its unsuitable, but someone signed off and that and people bought houses which were built with/on unsuitable material and sold at the cost they were not fit for purpose. Dont know how anyone with Pyrites was not remedied by the remediation though?
Maybe thats the reason not to pay, throwing good money after bad, in which case should be allowed throw the keys back at them as they have a hand in it too if they didnt do, what I believe is called due diligence.
But she is still living there? I suppose maybe no where else to go? I suppose one things for sure, all the facts arent here.

meeeeh · 13-02-2019 2:12pm

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Don’t rub it in, mate :-)

:P It's true though. A lot is said about moral hazard but moral hazard we are paying for was mostly done, fueled or encouraged by banks.

meeeeh · 13-02-2019 2:17pm

I think a lot of people here think the process of getting a mortgage was the same as today. It was not, there were 120% mortgages, people remortgaged houses to buy a car or redo the kitchen. I have no idea how bank came up to the loan amount they gave us but I can guarantee you it was not on the basis of build cost or the house prices in neighborhood were building in (you were lucky to get something under half a million).

Ardent · 13-02-2019 2:18pm

So there we have it. A template for halving your mortgage. And no identification concerns.

I know what I'll be doing if I decide one day I can't be arsed paying my mortgage.

marieholmfan · 13-02-2019 2:20pm

Ardent wrote: »

So there we have it. A template for halving your mortgage. And no identification concerns.

I know what I'll be doing if I decide one day I can't be arsed paying my mortgage.

Good luck with that - I mean that sincerely.

meeeeh · 13-02-2019 2:20pm

Ardent wrote: »

So there we have it. A template for halving your mortgage. And no identification concerns.

I know what I'll be doing if I decide one day I can't be arsed paying my mortgage.

I'm sure it's easy peasy.

Giveaway · 13-02-2019 3:52pm

meeeeh wrote: »

I'm sure it's easy peasy.

I m sure it was awful for this lady; with the worry and dealing with an awful husband. The upset the tears and i do support writing off the debt after the house is sold. Husband should be then lumped with the outstanding debt whenever he returns

Plumbthedepths · 13-02-2019 4:00pm

Ardent wrote:

I know what I'll be doing if I decide one day I can't be arsed paying my mortgage.

Will you start a thread and let everyone know how easy it is, surprised everyone hasn't done it already since it's so easy to achieve a writedown. ;-)

Riskymove · 13-02-2019 4:08pm

Ardent wrote: »

So there we have it. A template for halving your mortgage.
.

the mortgage wasn't halved

By the sounds of it they have mostly written off the arrears element

she still has a mortgage to pay now and the bank will be able to get paid if house is sold for more than 160k

Xterminator · 13-02-2019 4:37pm

Ardent wrote: »

So there we have it. A template for halving your mortgage. And no identification concerns.

I know what I'll be doing if I decide one day I can't be arsed paying my mortgage.

you mean

if your spouse runs up massive gambling debts and allows the mortgage to go unpaid,

and

You work your hardest with insolvency practitioner, and engage with the lender and try to work out a compromise

and

win two court cases when the bank rejeects the compromise offered

Then

the result is your house is written down to its current market value, and a claw back clause inserted.

My anonymous friend if that happens to you i wish you all the best in your life and your future financial affairs. I wouldn't begrudge you or anyone that outcome.

Massive Write Down

Comments