Government Funds Local Authority Housing Scheme

Eric Cartman · 22-01-2018 11:23pm

chrismon wrote: »

So everyone is trying to figure out how to get refused for a mortgage.

yeah, I'm kind of wondering how this works out. Like if you have a bad history with say paddy power, some late card payments and stuff , a traditional bank might only give you 75% at 3.5 times or 3 times salary or some such, would the government giving you more be grounds enough for it ?

Cash_Q · 22-01-2018 11:31pm

My husband and I earn about â‚¬63,000 between us and have approval for â‚¬224,000. Including our deposit our max budget is â‚¬255,000. Let's say we wanted a house costing â‚¬275,000/â‚¬300,000; previously we would have been ruled out...will this scheme enable us to borrow more? Using the calculator it says we could qualify for â‚¬288,000 so with a â‚¬32,000 deposit we'd be looking at houses for â‚¬320,000.

If so, we would surely need to prove that we can't find a house we like for our budget and prove that two banks won't lend us enough money. Surely we'd need all this in place before bidding on a house as a vendor won't take it off the market without proof of AIP. But in order to qualify for this scheme we'd need proof of having secured a house that two banks won't lend us enough for...catch 22??

Agree with all previous posters about people who've been rejected by banks not being suitable for huge loans and I feel this scheme is total bull and serves only to push house prices up. I suppose I'm trying to see any legitimate good in it?!

hmmm · 22-01-2018 11:31pm

From reading the website, you don't have to be refused, just receive "insufficient offers".

Just tell the bank you earn 40k and would like to borrow 200k. When they finish laughing, ask them to write down what they will offer you and there's one of your insufficient offers.

The banks are going to be inundated with people who are hoping to be turned down for the amount they are requesting, it's all a bit mad. I wonder if they were consulted as part of this?

Dont Be at It · 22-01-2018 11:38pm

Will this announcement see a reduction in the banks' current mortgage rates?
Or will they be happy to ignore given that they wouldn't have been getting that business anyway?

Stheno · 22-01-2018 11:43pm

Cash_Q wrote: »

My husband and I earn about â‚¬63,000 between us and have approval for â‚¬224,000. Including our deposit our max budget is â‚¬255,000. Let's say we wanted a house costing â‚¬275,000/â‚¬300,000; previously we would have been ruled out...will this scheme enable us to borrow more? Using the calculator it says we could qualify for â‚¬288,000 so with a â‚¬32,000 deposit we'd be looking at houses for â‚¬320,000.

If so, we would surely need to prove that we can't find a house we like for our budget and prove that two banks won't lend us enough money. Surely we'd need all this in place before bidding on a house as a vendor won't take it off the market without proof of AIP. But in order to qualify for this scheme we'd need proof of having secured a house that two banks won't lend us enough for...catch 22??

Agree with all previous posters about people who've been rejected by banks not being suitable for huge loans and I feel this scheme is total bull and serves only to push house prices up. I suppose I'm trying to see any legitimate good in it?!

You have approval already for the amount you posted so don't qualify for this surely?

hmmm · 22-01-2018 11:44pm

Stheno wrote: »

You have approval already for the amount you posted so don't qualify for this surely?

Not for a house costing 256k they don't. Insufficient finance offer right there, I know what I'd be doing.

Besides their 255k house is no more, it's 300k as of today.

Junadl · 22-01-2018 11:45pm

Another benefit of the proposed scheme is that people won't need a permanent contract and people who have been working in a job for years, without a permanent contract, will now be allowed to buy! I think it's a much fairer deal than the banks.

The government have finally decided to help people who, for example, are living with relatives, saving and have a deposit but are turned down by the banks due to their ridiculous stress testing and the massive amount they want people to have after paying mortgage. Don't these people, who are working hard, going without any kind of luxuries, deserve a break?!

In my view a house is a basic need. Someone being taxed 10,000 per year who can't get a mortgage, don't they deserve help?!!! It's a lot of tax to take from a family without having anything to show for it!

hmmm · 22-01-2018 11:49pm

Junadl wrote: »

Don't these people, who are working hard, going without any kind of luxuries, deserve a break?!

In my view a house is a basic need. Someone being taxed 10,000 per year who can't get a mortgage, don't they deserve help?!!! It's a lot of tax to take from a family without having anything to show for it!

This 200 million has added not one extra house to supply.

Instead it allows people to outbid others. All it does is drive up the price of houses. It offers no "help" except to allow people borrow more, and outspend someone else, and the money will disappear into the pockets of sellers while everyone has to borrow more.

BillyBobBS · 22-01-2018 11:53pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

every 3 bed semi within 1 hour of the m50 just became 320k

Mission accomplished for FG so.

Losty Dublin · 22-01-2018 11:59pm

I can see some potential pro's out of this.

It may force the main lenders to reduce their rates and some of their fringe costs.
It may coax some vacant properties onto the open market as well as some of the private small time rental homes.
It will make things easier for some people to escape from a long term rental trap.
It will discourage sub prime lenders from entering the market.

However I can't see it being decisive enough to make a difference bar the last, which is something that the Central Bank can control to some extent everything. Also, given the chronic lack of housing in most sectors of the market none of these were badly needed acting upon and it will only serve to hurt the market in the mid term.

fritzelly · 23-01-2018 12:06am

200m will get you about 700 houses or 700 mortgages - not a lot for a lot really

But building them themselves will give a sustainable income with a non ridiculous rent for working people - paid back in less than 40 years

But the council doing something like this...better to pay some middle man company to manage rooms for the homeless in an hotel

Graham · 23-01-2018 12:44am

fritzelly wrote: »

200m will get you about 700 houses or 700 mortgages - not a lot for a lot really

This.

Nationally speaking, it’s not particularly significant and as such unlikely to have any substantial effect on house prices.

Averagevegan · 23-01-2018 12:51am

Losty Dublin wrote: »

I can see some potential pro's out of this.
It may force the main lenders to reduce their rates and some of their fringe costs. It may coax some vacant properties onto the open market as well as some of the private small time rental homes.

It will make things easier for some people to escape from a long term rental trap.

It will discourage sub prime lenders from entering the market.

However I can't see it being decisive enough to make a difference bar the last, which is something that the Central Bank can control to some extent everything. Also, given the chronic lack of housing in most sectors of the market none of these were badly needed acting upon and it will only serve to hurt the market in the mid term.

The government is going to be a subprime lender.
When the defaults occur, it will be swept under the carpet as always.
just give away the money and save on the admin.

Averagevegan · 23-01-2018 12:53am

chrismon wrote: »

So everyone is trying to figure out how to get refused for a mortgage.

Easy, just mention your best friends with paddy and Mr power.

Crunchymomma · 23-01-2018 12:53am

I'm curious how the insufficient funds will work?

My partner and I were hoping to buy later in the year and while we should have no issues securing a regular mortgage, I'd love to be get one fixed at such a low rate!!

fritzelly · 23-01-2018 12:55am

Hardly subprime lender - how many people are going to be successful in getting the money

Government/councils should not be thinking short term solutions to long term problems, it's the other way round - long term solutions to short term problems because those short term problems (as they happen to be called and god know why because they will never be solved) are actually long term problems that require 'radical' thinking about how to invest money where it isn't just flushed down the toilet with no return for the future of the city/country
Of course DCC is of the hypothesis that charging more for commercial rates is a solution and killing more businesses just for example...

FinanceDublin · 23-01-2018 1:46am

Graham wrote: »

This.

Nationally speaking, it’s not particularly significant and as such unlikely to have any substantial effect on house prices.

Possibly dumbest thing I’ve seen FG do in the last decade. And we’ve seen a lot.

They would’ve been far better off investing in O’Cualann housing, say.

Cookie_Monster · 23-01-2018 2:03am

Junadl wrote: »

In my view a house is a basic need. Someone being taxed 10,000 per year who can't get a mortgage, don't they deserve help?!!!

Do they? That's about 42k gross, 19.7% high than average and 82% higher than min wage. Hardly the level of income you should be targeting for assistance
https://salaryaftertax.com/ie

Junadl · 23-01-2018 8:15am

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Do they? That's about 42k gross, 19.7% high than average and 82% higher than min wage. Hardly the level of income you should be targeting for assistance
https://salaryaftertax.com/ie

For a one income family with very young kids? Of course they deserve help. Or I know a couple one on permanent contract on around 35k the other on around the same but not on a permanent, yet has been in the same job years. Do they not deserve help?! Of course they do!!!! Slaving away without a chance with the banks. Aging and missing a chance to settle down and have their own family. What hell that has been.
If someone is working their ass off every day, up at 5 am, home at 6pm but just falling outside of the banks crazy rules then yes they need help!
Come on!

Junadl · 23-01-2018 8:17am

Of anything it is the ridiculously unfair tax system which needs to desperately change. They are absolutely thieving from people. The government are the ones who make it hard for everyone.

Darkglasses · 23-01-2018 8:48am

Jurgen Klopp wrote: »

I'm not sure how they are claiming it as new, co councils have been offering mortgages for years once you get two rejections form banks or building society's

The terms under this scheme are significantly different. The previous scheme had a max loan to value ratio of 97%, requiring a far lower savings amount. Also they were variable only rates, meaning the borrowing capacity was stress tested. A much fairer scheme than this one, in my opinion. Also not every council offered them in practice, and the high publicity launch of this scheme should have the effect of forcing them to do so.

Darkglasses · 23-01-2018 8:53am

sjb25 wrote: »

There always has been a co council mortgage scheme run along similar lines I think I’d only started looking at it all lately maybe confusion is being caused

I’m assuming these mortgages will also remain available
My local one can be found here https://www.wexfordcoco.ie/housing/mortgages/house-purchase-mortgage/single-applicant

Unfortunately the old mortgage schemes are to close come 1st February, if CoCos will still accept applications for it at all. The RIHL credit policy will replace the old one once it is signed into law.

Darkglasses · 23-01-2018 8:56am

Important general note on these mortgages which I haven't seen mentioned yet - the underwriting process for CoCo mortgages does not take any account of the number of children or dependents you have in calculating your borrowing capacity, it is purely based on income and loans repayments/alimony if applicable. If this was a factor in your refusal with banks, this is very likely to be a good route for you.

neonsofa · 23-01-2018 9:11am

Junadl wrote: »

For a one income family with very young kids? Of course they deserve help. Or I know a couple one on permanent contract on around 35k the other on around the same but not on a permanent, yet has been in the same job years. Do they not deserve help?! Of course they do!!!! Slaving away without a chance with the banks. Aging and missing a chance to settle down and have their own family. What hell that has been.
If someone is working their ass off every day, up at 5 am, home at 6pm but just falling outside of the banks crazy rules then yes they need help!
Come on!

I'm in the one income family with young kids bracket. All I see this doing is pushing us further from our goal. Property prices will increase past the modest mortgage we were slowly working towards and there'll be more people bidding against us for the moderately priced houses that are left. The last 4 or 5 years I've been scrimping and saving with a plan in place based on central bank rules, my salary increasing,my savings slowly building up...now I'm not even sure if my original plan will pay off but in the meantime house prices everywhere will increase.

KellyXX · 23-01-2018 9:17am

We are looking seriously at the moment.
I wanted to take a year off work.

I wonder if I quit work then the other half's salary will be about right for this scheme.

We get a sweet low interest loan and just invest the money we have saved now at twice the rate the mortgage is.

I sat down to work it out last night but got interrupted. I'd love a year off work and a nice low interest mortgage.

And me quitting gets us refused from the banks we need too ha.

BattleCorp · 23-01-2018 9:22am

KellyXX wrote: »

We are looking seriously at the moment.
I wanted to take a year off work.

I wonder if I quit work then the other half's salary will be about right for this scheme.

We get a sweet low interest loan and just invest the money we have saved now at twice the rate the mortgage is.

I sat down to work it out last night but got interrupted. I'd love a year off work and a nice low interest mortgage.

And me quitting gets us refused from the banks we need too ha.

I'm not hitting out at you but you see the problem here. This product isn't meant for the likes of you. You would essentially be taking advantage of a system that wasn't meant to be used that way. Not your fault by the way, it's natural to want to do as well for yourself as possible.

KellyXX · 23-01-2018 9:24am

BattleCorp wrote: »

I'm not hitting out at you but you see the problem here. This product isn't meant for the likes of you. You would essentially be taking advantage of a system that wasn't meant to be used that way. Not your fault by the way, it's natural to want to do as well for yourself as possible.

It's meant for anyone who qualifies for it.
If I make certain changes I can qualify for it.
My taxes are paying for it, so I don't feel guilty benefitting from it. After all I'm paying more towards the cost of it than most who will be on it.

BattleCorp · 23-01-2018 9:28am

KellyXX wrote: »

It's meant for anyone who qualifies for it.
If I make certain changes I can qualify for it.

Ah yeah like I said, I'm not knocking you for doing it, if that's what you are going to do.

I just think it's a badly thought out scheme and the only saving grace is that it will only allow about 700 people to buy houses. If this scheme was more widely available, it would push up the price of houses. It still might do that.

Lolle06 · 23-01-2018 9:34am

Darkglasses wrote: »

Important general note on these mortgages which I haven't seen mentioned yet - the underwriting process for CoCo mortgages does not take any account of the number of children or dependents you have in calculating your borrowing capacity, it is purely based on income and loans repayments/alimony if applicable. If this was a factor in your refusal with banks, this is very likely to be a good route for you.

Yes, I agree. A lot of ppl with 2+ children have very little chance to get bank mortgages. They are also the ones who‘d need to stay in a certain locality due to schools etc. A bit of security for their family is necessary. Having said that though, I think this scheme is a halfcooked solution as it does nothing to supply more houses into the market! The Government should support self-builders - at the moment you pay premium building costs... and they keep rising! Also, some planning restrictions in rural areas need to be looked at as case-to-case not a blanket „you didn’t grow up in this area, you are not allowed to raise your own family here“. A lot of „blow-ins“ struggle with this, as they wouldn’t get planning in certain areas, therefore they can’t even purchase sites near town boundaries to successfully apply for planning. Moreover, the CoCo‘s could support renovation works for currently inhabitable houses. I know that ppl prefer low-energy new builds, but there are older builds lying idle and some of them could be brought up to be in liveable condition within a few months. If families are willing to live in these houses, why not support them? The Government scheme also would need to offer a tax-funded mortgage on the condition, that the purchased property will be a long-term family home and if ever sold, there will be a claw-back of a certain percentage.

BattleCorp · 23-01-2018 9:39am

I've a question.

The banks claim they are losing money on trackers. Nobody seems to be disputing this.

How will the Government not lose money on what is essentially an interest rate that will more than likely turn out to be even lower than the tracker rate over the lifetime of the mortgage.

The interest rate is 2% - 2.25% for a fixed 25 or 30 year term. This will not change.

Currently trackers are typically the ECB interest rate + 1%. So, give or take 1.25% right now. This is 100% likely to increase in the near future.

The Government us taxpayers will lose hand over fist on this one.

hmmm · 23-01-2018 9:44am

BattleCorp wrote: »

How will the Government not lose money on what is essentially an interest rate that will more than likely turn out to be even lower than the tracker rate over the lifetime of the mortgage.

The government will presumably finance this with some long term bonds, so they are unlikely to lose money on the interest charged. The banks can't compete with government borrowing costs.

Where they (we) will lose out is if borrowers won't or can't repay their loans and default. Some of the default rates mentioned in the media for existing government schemes are shocking.

Lolle06 · 23-01-2018 9:51am

hmmm wrote: »

The government will presumably finance this with some long term bonds, so they are unlikely to lose money on the interest charged. The banks can't compete with government borrowing costs.

Where they (we) will lose out is if borrowers won't or can't repay their loans and default. Some of the default rates mentioned in the media for existing government schemes are shocking.

And what happens in this case? Will the CoCo be able to take possession and rent the property to the family? I.e. social housing tenant?

OscarBluth · 23-01-2018 10:02am

I think people are misinterpreting why people will be eligible for these- it's not about having bad credit, it's about having a legitimate reason why banks won't lend to you but you're still a good bet.

I've friends with a county council mortgage. They've both been working extremely hard, and consistently, for over a decade- which they had to, and were able to, prove via tax returns- but didn't have permanent jobs, and didn't work in a field where people get permanent jobs. They had saved a deposit while paying exhirbetant rates twice what mortgage repayments would be. They'd been evicted twice in the year before they got their mortgage due to one landlord refurbishing to hike up prices even further and one being forced to sell by NAMA. They now have security, more manageable payments, and a lot more certain future.

They contribute to society, they work very hard, they pay tax and they are entirely unlikely to default on any loan. There should be a scheme for people like them that gives certainty. I've worked in the charity sector which is another area where people often have fixed term contracts, depending on funding, for years and years and years. I work in a sector where if I lost my job tomorrow I could be confident of getting a new role within a number of months, but where there is also an aversion to making people permanent. I've got a mortgage, but a slight change in our circumstances would have made that harder.

The CoCo mortgages seemed to be v rigorous and involved a lot of jumping through hoops and proving affordability. I agree this new scheme will in no way help supply, but I think it sounds like a useful way to help some v hardworking people gain security in a very uncertain market.

zell12 · 23-01-2018 10:15am

It's just a distraction by FG/FF, tbh.
It only serves to increase house prices, and get media coverage.

Only 11 people availed of this FF-concocted scheme in 5 years (HCL) 2011-2016
https://www.kildarestreet.com/wrans/?id=2016-06-23a.439#g448.r

This latest move is just an extension of that scheme

Lumen · 23-01-2018 10:41am

OscarBluth wrote: »

I think people are misinterpreting why people will be eligible for these- it's not about having bad credit, it's about having a legitimate reason why banks won't lend to you but you're still a good bet

Banks issue mortgages using a rules-based system, regulated by the central bank.

Under this system civil servants (presumably) will issue mortgages using a rules-based system, regulated by politicians.

You are arguing that the politically-governed rules-based system is better than a central bank-regulated rules-based system.

That is a difficult argument to make.

The whole point of the central bank rules is to prevent the State (well, taxpayer) being lumbered with bad private sector debts. This proposal completely undermines that.

Darkglasses · 23-01-2018 10:52am

Lolle06 wrote: »

And what happens in this case? Will the CoCo be able to take possession and rent the property to the family? I.e. social housing tenant?

Local Authorities have and do carry out repossessions. If the borrowers comply and if the figures add up, they can be eligible to rent the house back from the Council under mortgage to rent.

Darkglasses · 23-01-2018 11:08am

hmmm wrote: »

The government will presumably finance this with some long term bonds, so they are unlikely to lose money on the interest charged. The banks can't compete with government borrowing costs.

Where they (we) will lose out is if borrowers won't or can't repay their loans and default. Some of the default rates mentioned in the media for existing government schemes are shocking.

Just wondering, do you have a link to the figures you saw?

Eric Cartman · 23-01-2018 11:26am

I think the biggest advantage to this is the default possibility. Were the economy to tank, you can het you'd have the loudest voices in the country clucking about 'joe/adrian/chris i tell ye, de guberment cant trow peeple out o der gafs, its a bloody disgrace' and theyll protest, paul murphy will defend them, as will the shinners.

Get one of these mortgages and youll never ever be kicked out of your home even if you default in a year. The media mafia won't let you

stryker mcqueen · 23-01-2018 11:27am

KellyXX wrote: »

It's meant for anyone who qualifies for it.
If I make certain changes I can qualify for it.
My taxes are paying for it, so I don't feel guilty benefitting from it. After all I'm paying more towards the cost of it than most who will be on it.

Sounds a bit ...."snobby"

A 10% deposit is required here so a minimum of circa €25-30k in most cases, as im sure we all know saving this amount is bloody hard, so to imply people benefiting from this scheme are paying less tax than you or whatever the above means is pure nonsense, from reading some comments it seems some posters have already painted the picture of the kind of people who will be availing of this scheme if you catch my drift.

I'm no scrounger, I have paid 60k in rent in the last 5 years and have a (Dublin) deposit sitting ready to go that i have worked by ass off to save, I work full time and pay my taxes, Yet the banks cant make us a realistic mortgage offer because my wife is self employed so apparently we cant afford it despite paying €1700 every month to Sherry Facking Fitzgerald, we deserve a break, if this is our break so be it, I'll apply anyway and see what happens.

dory · 23-01-2018 11:33am

I'm now in a weird position where I really need to get rejected by two banks to avail of this. Suggestions? Buy a car and not pay the repayments?? I jest....but I really need to be rejected. Can I just show that the amount I'm being offered is a joke for the city I live in? Surely they could just say I should buy an apartment an hour away?

shivermetimber · 23-01-2018 11:44am

It feels weird even asking this but does anyone know how long it usually takes for mortgage refusal from banks? Are we talking weeks or months?

hmmm · 23-01-2018 11:58am

Seriously, I wouldn't do anything re refusal until the details of the scheme is published & you read the small print. No point wrecking your bank & credit record if it turns out to be half-baked.

LirW · 23-01-2018 12:08pm

People, for real, nobody knows yet how easily accessible these loans are. If it is a case of bloody hard to get and people mess up their applications on purpose, not a smart move. Again, the previous scheme offered literally just a handful of mortgages to a huge load of applicants.
Also the strange lending rule the new scheme brings supports over-borrowing, which is seems people are already considering again.
While I understand that a a fixed mortgage at a low rate are incredibly attractive, there are certain economic factors that could cause a huge wave of job losses again the way it happened 10 years ago. And suddenly a third of your previous monthly income is too much to handle as a mortgage and you'll find yourself in real struggle again.

I think this scheme supports not only house prices to rise but dangerous borrowing. Especially jobs on the lower income level are in risk in the future of just being wiped out.

I can only urge people to caefully assess themselves what they can afford to repay even if things turn for the worse.

While for now the deal sounds pretty sweet, nobody knows any details yet of how it really works out, what the waiting times are and how strict the assessments are for approval.
And honestly messing bank applications up on purpose is not particularly smart when it comes to the biggest purchase of your live, because you have 2 refusals of lending institutes and no idea yet if you'll actually be granted the council mortgage anytime soon.

shivermetimber · 23-01-2018 12:21pm

LirW wrote: »

People, for real, nobody knows yet how easily accessible these loans are. If it is a case of bloody hard to get and people mess up their applications on purpose, not a smart move. Again, the previous scheme offered literally just a handful of mortgages to a huge load of applicants.
Also the strange lending rule the new scheme brings supports over-borrowing, which is seems people are already considering again.
While I understand that a a fixed mortgage at a low rate are incredibly attractive, there are certain economic factors that could cause a huge wave of job losses again the way it happened 10 years ago. And suddenly a third of your previous monthly income is too much to handle as a mortgage and you'll find yourself in real struggle again.

I think this scheme supports not only house prices to rise but dangerous borrowing. Especially jobs on the lower income level are in risk in the future of just being wiped out.

I can only urge people to caefully assess themselves what they can afford to repay even if things turn for the worse.

While for now the deal sounds pretty sweet, nobody knows any details yet of how it really works out, what the waiting times are and how strict the assessments are for approval.
And honestly messing bank applications up on purpose is not particularly smart when it comes to the biggest purchase of your live, because you have 2 refusals of lending institutes and no idea yet if you'll actually be granted the council mortgage anytime soon.

Kind of hard not to get carried away though if you are someone who fits the requirements and is currently being screwed with the rental market.

sjb25 · 23-01-2018 12:21pm

Darkglasses wrote: »

Unfortunately the old mortgage schemes are to close come 1st February, if CoCos will still accept applications for it at all. The RIHL credit policy will replace the old one once it is signed into law.

Well that’s a balls I’ll still qualify for this new scheme tho

Pepe LeFrits · 23-01-2018 12:22pm

Does anyone know how the councils are going to manage this? Have they the infrastructure there already? Are they white-labelling with a bank? Credit unions?

I mean, it’s not like logging into their online banking and just flinging a load of cash at someone. There’s a lot of overhead and ongoing maintenance – front line staff, admin staff, finance staff, underwriters, solicitors, IT costs yada yada. Running a bank ain't cheap.

zell12 · 23-01-2018 12:24pm

Pepe LeFrits wrote: »

Does anyone know how the councils are going to manage this? Have they the infrastructure there already? Are they white-labelling with a bank? Credit unions?

I mean, it’s not like logging into their online banking and just flinging a load of cash at someone. There’s a lot of overhead and ongoing maintenance – front line staff, admin staff, finance staff, underwriters, solicitors, IT costs yada yada. Running a bank ain't cheap.

They've been doing it since 2011 under this 2009 Act

GingerLily · 23-01-2018 12:29pm

shivermetimber wrote: »

Kind of hard not to get carried away though if you are someone who fits the requirements and is currently being screwed with the rental market.

Not everyone who meets the requirements will get one - you still probably have a better chance in financing through a bank

shivermetimber · 23-01-2018 12:36pm

GingerLily wrote: »

Not everyone who meets the requirements will get one - you still probably have a better chance in financing through a bank

I hear you but if your not in you can't win and all that. The problem is finance through a bank does not provide me with enough money to do anything with whereas this scheme would. Repayments on the new scheme would be half the current rental costs of a 1 bed in Dublin.

Darkglasses · 23-01-2018 1:39pm

Pepe LeFrits wrote: »

Does anyone know how the councils are going to manage this? Have they the infrastructure there already? Are they white-labelling with a bank? Credit unions?

I mean, it’s not like logging into their online banking and just flinging a load of cash at someone. There’s a lot of overhead and ongoing maintenance – front line staff, admin staff, finance staff, underwriters, solicitors, IT costs yada yada. Running a bank ain't cheap.

It will vary from county to county in size, but most already have their own full loans department in place. Under various different schemes and models, County Councils have been offering and administering loans for decades.

Government Funds Local Authority Housing Scheme

Comments