First insolvency settlement with mortgage debt

I think the family involved had two buy-to-let properties written down, but can afford full mortgage repayments on the family home, so will be left with that mortgage only.
It is good news though, and congrats to them and their PIP.
 
Another sad day for those struggling in this country to meet their debts.
They got to keep the family home and the buy to lets, with the debt written down to a 'sustainable level'....absolute sickening joke
 
I would reserve judgement until we see the actual details of the deal that has been hammered out. While "now" is not the right time to sell the BTL's - that's not to say that down the line this could change. As it stands the deal appears to include the income from them and the owners paying towards them - all may not appear to be as it seems.
 
I would be amazed if the secured lender is letting them retain the BTLs without some provision for them to benefit more from the agreement in the long run. BTLs to be sold at end of term and clawback used perhaps.. all guess work tho, and good to see a PIA approved.
 
Delboy said:
Another sad day for those struggling in this country to meet their debts.
They got to keep the family home and the buy to lets, with the debt written down to a 'sustainable level'....absolute sickening joke
Click to expand...

Hi Delboy

This couple was insolvent or else they would not have qualified for a PIA.

They could have gone bankrupt which wouldn't benefit anyone. Their debts would be written off anyway.

We don't know much about this case, and I am surprised that they kept the buy to lets. But I would imagine that the PIA incorporates some form of a split mortgage, so that the lender shares in the upside.

If the writing off of unsecured loans and negative equity allows people to keep their homes, then it's good for them, good for the secured lender and good for society generally.
 
Brendan Burgess said:
Hi Delboy

This couple was insolvent or else they would not have qualified for a PIA.

They could have gone bankrupt which wouldn't benefit anyone. Their debts would be written off anyway.

We don't know much about this case, and I am surprised that they kept the buy to lets. But I would imagine that the PIA incorporates some form of a split mortgage, so that the lender shares in the upside.

If the writing off of unsecured loans and negative equity allows people to keep their homes, then it's good for them, good for the secured lender and good for society generally.
Click to expand...

It's good if they keep their home or their homeS?
 
I suspect that the only reason that they are allowed to retain the BTLs is because they are in negative equity and the banks don't want to crystallize the loss by having them sold. This is a fairly common approach by banks at the moment. The banks will be happy to play this card until the properties are back in positive equity.

If my suspicions are correct, its not such a great deal for the debtor. The debtor is still stuck with the huge burden of BTL mortgages for many years to come and just becomes a rent collector for the bank. The PIP has received a miserable 150 euro to date and will see the remainder of fees spread thinly over the next 6 years. The only winners in this are the banks. Quelle surprise.
 
Delboy said:
Another sad day for those struggling in this country to meet their debts.
They got to keep the family home and the buy to lets, with the debt written down to a 'sustainable level'....absolute sickening joke
Click to expand...

Del Boy
There is nothing stopping anyone in this country who are struggling with debt to engage either with a PIP or their creditors. Its time we faced up to the issues that exist and deal with them. Had they gone bankrupt no doubt you would have been whining also
 
Hi Delboy

I had missed the link in your post to the further details from Charlie Weston

http://www.independent.ie/irish-new...debt-first-to-get-writeoff-deal-29949084.html

The agreement at the creditors' meeting does not cover the family home, but the family's two buy-to-let properties are part of the deal.


It is understood the family are able to cover the mortgage on their family home, but were unable to meet the repayments on the two investor mortgages and a string of other loans.
Click to expand...

This is very odd indeed and I hope we get more details.

Why did they not just surrender or voluntarily sell the RIPs?

They might well have been able to do a DSA on the unsecured credit and be out of the arrangement much earlier.
 
T&R said:
Del Boy
There is nothing stopping anyone in this country who are struggling with debt to engage either with a PIP or their creditors. Its time we faced up to the issues that exist and deal with them. Had they gone bankrupt no doubt you would have been whining also
Click to expand...

Whatever...if you think people get 50% write off on their debts while apparently keeping several gaffs, at a time when there is a huge shortage of supply in some areas (with house prices roaring upwards again the past 2 years)....and that this is society facing up to it's 'issues'....well then I think your being very selective in the 'issues' you feel we need to face up to?
 
Im with DelBoy on this one ... whats to stop us all speculating on BTL's into the future safe in the knowledge that if we guest right we benefit from capital appreciation / increased rental income , and also safe in the knowledge that if we are wrong and the market crashes that we simply enter PIA and get the negative equity written off.

Naturally the devil is in the detail and we wont have a full picture until we see that data.

I hope the detail shows that the lender has retained an interest in the BTL's and can recoup the write down + interest in the future ... otherwise its sending the wrong message.
 
Delboy said:
Whatever...if you think people get 50% write off on their debts while apparently keeping several gaffs,
Click to expand...

Are they keeping property or keeping debt?

I don't understand your point about lack of homes, presumably these two BTL's are housing people? In any case the country is awash with property apart from Dublin and a couple of other cities.

_____________

I wonder how much the mortgage is on the family home and whether there is equity in it. Only reason I can see for the banks allowing the BTL's to continue is if the loss would be greater if they were forced to sell now. Plus another poster mentioned that banks don't want to crystalise their losses.
 
This is a very odd case. I thought we were all lead to believe that BTL's were not safe, whether they were making money or not??
 
I would be surprised if Bank has just (walked) away and left all property to debtor, unless there is as mentioned negative equity/write down Bank losses etc.

I find it a worry to read the (why let them off) atitude being driven so hard.
I must assume the re-solution was the best that could be achieved.There should be no winners .

I find it quaint there does not appear to be such (shouting) over write downs on corporate entities?
Do not forget ,we, Joe and Josephine Muggins pay for both corporate and personal write downs!
 
Bronte said:
Are they keeping property or keeping debt?

I don't understand your point about lack of homes, presumably these two BTL's are housing people? In any case the country is awash with property apart from Dublin and a couple of other cities
Click to expand...

'Dublin and a couple of other cities'...so thats probably affecting half the population!!! So we're not awash with property...there's a huge shortage, especially in large parts of Dublin that's driving prices crazy.
And lack of repossessions is only adding to the shortage and also encouraging people into a herd type mentality right now that need to buy asap as prices are going up.
 
Delboy said:
And lack of repossessions is only adding to the shortage and also encouraging people into a herd type mentality right now that need to buy asap as prices are going up.
Click to expand...

If people are that stupid after all that has happened than I've no sympathy for them. You should only buy what you can afford and if you cannot afford it don't buy it.

You haven't answered the question, who is going to house the people renting if the house is sold? You do realise the state is abysmal at housing people and have a hugh backlog on those needing housing, a need that is catered for by the much maligned private landlord who is taxed at every turn. I'd say a lot of the reason for housing shortgages is mainly down to lack of supply but also because people like me won't buy as the returns are abysmal, and the red tape every more onerous.
 
I believe Dublin City Council has plans on building 5,000 houses as per a council meeting last night. God only knows when this will happen.
 
I'd say a lot of the reason for housing shortage's is mainly down to lack of supply but also because people like me won't buy as the returns are abysmal, and the red tape every more onerous.[/QUOTE Bronte]

The red tape, regulation taxation and anti landlord sentiment in government circles and in the general population is not only to the detriment of Landlords but also of Tenants. There needs to be a balance in the legislation in relation to private landlords rights.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top