Key Post Court procedure for debt cases

Status
Not open for further replies.
What difference will it make to you if they have your address and if they record the conversation?

I suppose, they will say that they sent me a court order and i avoided it although i wasnt home at the time. Im not going down the legal route or been drawn in as i dont have the money to pay solicitors to represent me. Thats all.
 
Any court decision will be based on the merits of the Bank case and not based on whether you are avoiding dealing with the Bank solicitors. You have nothing to lose by calling them back. If they record the call, what difference will that make. Anyway it would be unethical of them to record a call without advising you first that they are doing this.

I have no intention of dealing with solicitors. If he bank want to deal direct, i would be happy to do so. At the end of the day, they had the choice to communicate with me for the last 18 months and they chose not to. They decided to use their solicitors to threaten me and they are fully aware that i dont have the funds to hire a solicitor myself so it will be just a walk over and i presume theyll be judgement after judgement for the 3 properties. Ive written to the bank directly and this is what i get back, a call from solicitors. Thanks bank but no thanks.
 
I don't see your issue Martin. You owe the money, having a solicitor would not help you. So what if it's the banks solicitor that is doing the talking?
 
I don't see your issue Martin. You owe the money, having a solicitor would not help you. So what if it's the banks solicitor that is doing the talking?

Im not comfortable talking to solicitors and i lack confidence when it comes to dealing with them. If it was a member of the bank (i mean a bank manager, etc), then at least i would have some hope of putting my point across and trying to work out some solution if there is one but with solicitors, i am very nervous. Im sure im not the only one who fears solicitors.
 
Martin the solicitor is only a human being same as the banker. And the solicitor is only working for the bank. In addition the solicitor is probably well used to dealing with many people in your situation. Why don't you try calling the solicitor and see how you get on.
 
Agreed. Solicitor may provide a more reasoned and professional option than dealing with the Bank.
 
Agreed. Solicitor may provide a more reasoned and professional option than dealing with the Bank.

44brendan, speaking with a number of friends back in ireland, none have had any joy when dealing through the banks solicitors. In fact they said that the solicitors dont deal, its the bankers that make the deals they have said. Its a catch 22, isnt it. I just dont see the merit in talking with them. Im thinking of writing to the bank again and asking that i deal with the bad debts department as im not comfortable dealing with solicitors and see what happens. What do you think?
 
Worth a try. The solicitors are agents of the Bank and are not in a position to make agreements without reverting to the Bank. If you are uncomfortable dealing with solicitors then the Bank should deal with you directly.
 
Martin, everytime the bank goes to court, they are racking up more costs which will be added to your debt. You may argue that this will make no difference as you have so little and owe so much, but, I dont see the point in making things worse. If you agree that you owe the debt (which is not the same as being able to pay the debt)you are better cooperating and allowing them to obtain judgement by consent - it saves legal fees, gets things done quicker and means you dont need to hire a solicitor or attend court.
 
Martin, my debt was brought to court and a judgement obtained. For that the bill went up E780. I advised the solicitor that moves like that are counterproductive as there is no extra cash to pay off anything that is an extra these days.
I did write back to them and tell them this. But it is their right to do it. Going to court repeatedly does nothing but raise your bill.
Csirl - the bank can obtain a judgement with or without your consent. And for them appearing in court for the bank, you pay.
I offered my lot 40 quid a month, which they accepted temporarily, reviewed in 6 months time. At that rate it will take 10 years to pay back the original debt, which I have no problem doing.
 
Martin, everytime the bank goes to court, they are racking up more costs which will be added to your debt. You may argue that this will make no difference as you have so little and owe so much, but, I dont see the point in making things worse. If you agree that you owe the debt (which is not the same as being able to pay the debt)you are better cooperating and allowing them to obtain judgement by consent - it saves legal fees, gets things done quicker and means you dont need to hire a solicitor or attend court.

Thanks for the reply but i dont really get your point. I will never be in a position to pay this debt and so speeding it up and cutting down on solicitor fees doesnt really made any difference to me. Another 20 or 30k added to 1million is insignificant because i cant pay the million back so why should i worry about another 20k or 30k in fees. Do you see my point. A judgement for each property will be sought and ill end up with 3 judgements and around 700k in debt after the bank sell my property. Lets say i was to move back to Ireland, in order for me to pay this back, id have to make around 1.5 million before tax to pay the 700k back and then Id have to feed my family, etc. Well now thats totally impossible for a construction worker especially with the economy over there. So where its 700k, 730k or a million, I have absolutely no hope of ever paying. Am i not beter therefore to just forget about it altogether and let the bank take its own course of action. It means that i wont be returning to Ireland for a long time, i presume its for 12 years but i dont really know. Id still like to talk with a banker but definitely not with solicitors. Im a simple construction guy and these solicitors have all the qualifications, knowledge and ability to take advantage of my in experience.
 
Sorry Martin, I didn't realise you owed that amount. Well then the obvious is hand them back, sorry about that. They get judgements for the balance that you will never be able to pay and they go away in 12 years time.
The route your are heading is faily clear cut.

There isn't really any 'dealing' or 'deals' to be done here. March yourself down to the bank and lay it out to them.
Nothing will change the fact you lost your pants on the deal.

You will never have the money.
 
Csirl - the bank can obtain a judgement with or without your consent. And for them appearing in court for the bank, you pay.
I offered my lot 40 quid a month, which they accepted temporarily, reviewed in 6 months time. At that rate it will take 10 years to pay back the original debt, which I have no problem doing.

But the fees charged for something that has to go to hearing - even if it is only a 10min hearing in the Masters Court - will be a lot more than for a by consent which may be dealt with on a 'For Mention' basis, thus attracting little or no fee.
 
But the fees charged for something that has to go to hearing - even if it is only a 10min hearing in the Masters Court - will be a lot more than for a by consent which may be dealt with on a 'For Mention' basis, thus attracting little or no fee.

But sure the whole point is, the fees make no difference to me, i cant pay the debt so whether they add fees or not, they wont be getting paid. If the bank prefers to spend its own money rather than to work with individuals, so be it. Remember they chose to go down the legal route rather than communicate with me and ask would i be willing to hand over the properties. They like the bully boy tactics rather than work with people . Sorry i should have said some of the banks prefer. In the case of 44Brendan, i see he's reasonable and logical and its people like Brendan that are needed in the banks to sort out the mess not solicitors.
 
But sure the whole point is, the fees make no difference to me, i cant pay the debt so whether they add fees or not, they wont be getting paid. If the bank prefers to spend its own money rather than to work with individuals, so be it. Remember they chose to go down the legal route rather than communicate with me and ask would i be willing to hand over the properties. They like the bully boy tactics rather than work with people . Sorry i should have said some of the banks prefer. In the case of 44Brendan, i see he's reasonable and logical and its people like Brendan that are needed in the banks to sort out the mess not solicitors.

The banks are required to get court judgements for accountancy purposes (someone in the financial business can probably explain this better than me). Therefore they have to go to court. They have a right to use a solicitor in a court case - and most people going to court for any reason use solicitors, so this is not bully boy tactics, its part of the normal procedure. If the banks asks that you deal with the solicitor, then this should be respected - in the same way that if you were taking someone to court, and you had a solicitor, you'd probably do the same. I dont see what harm can be done by you writing directly to the solicitor rather than the bank.
 
The banks are required to get court judgements for accountancy purposes (someone in the financial business can probably explain this better than me). Therefore they have to go to court. They have a right to use a solicitor in a court case - and most people going to court for any reason use solicitors, so this is not bully boy tactics, its part of the normal procedure. If the banks asks that you deal with the solicitor, then this should be respected - in the same way that if you were taking someone to court, and you had a solicitor, you'd probably do the same. I dont see what harm can be done by you writing directly to the solicitor rather than the bank.

Csirl, i agree with you that the banks are fully entitled to go to court, use solicitors, etc. thats a given but its also a cost for the banks. Would you not think that if the banks were to first communicate with their clients and try to work out a solution. If this was the case they would have by now had the properties in their possession. If they then wanted to proceed with a judgement, they could have and theyd be better off. Rather they preferred to go legal and use their bully boy tactics. If i am to talk with the bank, i borrowed the money from a banker not a solicitor and so i should be entitled to speak with a banker not a solicitor. I was reading on the net about a crowd called bxxxx of ireland who seem to be challenging the banks for bringing people to court when they dont own these loans. Not sure what the story is or if it works but id much prefer just to work directly with the bank, in any case i cant afford the legal route and im not going to talk with solicitors.
 
Last edited:
When it comes to large amounts of money, a bank will obtain a legal recognition of the debt to enforce their power to collect it, if and when that becomes the road to the last option. There are a few threads on the topic.
 
When it comes to large amounts of money, a bank will obtain a legal recognition of the debt to enforce their power to collect it, if and when that becomes the road to the last option. There are a few threads on the topic.

Itsallwrong, i realise the bank are fully entitled to get their million back but on this occasion, they have backed the wrong horse. I'd love to be able to pay them back and get out of this mess but i cant. The 3 properties i bought have dropped by 200,000 each and so i have lost 600,000. They can have the properties but where am i going to find 600,000 to pay them back. There isn't a hope in hell and so the bank can get all the legal recognition they need to get but it wont make any difference what so ever. As they say, its impossible to get blood out of a stone.
 
I am sure you have tried to let the bank know you are skint. It's up to them to realise quickly that this horse can't be flogged any more. Given the amount is so big, they might not even waste the time doing the legal thing. At the end of it all as you said, there is not a hope in hell in getting it.
 
I am sure you have tried to let the bank know you are skint. It's up to them to realise quickly that this horse can't be flogged any more. Given the amount is so big, they might not even waste the time doing the legal thing. At the end of it all as you said, there is not a hope in hell in getting it.

Yes roamer808, the bank know my situation for last 18 months but just dont want to listen or work with their clients. They seem to prefer the bully boy tactics and solicitors. They seem to have more money than common sense but i suppose over time they will assess their position and may look more at working with clients rather than wasting their money using solicitors on hopeless cases. I suppose at the end of the day its the irish tax payer that is and will fund these costs anyway. The bank needs to save its money to pay its bonuses to the heads of the bank.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top