Are We Looking At Mortgage Strikes?

This article does not seem to be in line with reality based on mortgage stats published here.
Surprise?
 
bugler said:
New Beginnings have serious delusions of grandeur.
Click to expand...

Fair play to them, at least they're doing something to try and stop people's homes being repossesssed.

Why is it that everytime someone tries to do some good in this country, the cynics come out?

Fair enough, some of their ideas and economics might be a bit cockeyed but at least they're making noise and giving a voice to those without legal representation who otherwise might find themselves homeless.

Just be glad you don't need them.
 
But are they not also giving false hope to those who genuinely have unsustainable mortgages and for whom repossession or forced (most likely negative equity) sale is the only realistic outcome?
 
Prseumably due to their limited resources they will only pick fights that they have a chance of winning.

They're doing something good, for nowt, and that should be applauded.

You could have this lot instead.

[broken link removed]

A tad OTT but you gotta admire the rhetoric.

Look around you at what's happening over a century later. History is repeating itself again. The only difference is that instead of absentee landlords and British backed authorities throwing people out onto the roads, it's banks, councils and our own Gardaí doing it. But the end result is exactly the same as it was 150 years ago and now it's Irish people doing it to Irish people. Surely we've moved on from those dark times in the 19th Century, or have we just exchanged one predatory group for another?
 
What I find most interesting in the Guardian article is the mention of forged signatures on mortgage application documents. These signatures were not that of the mortgage holder nor were they signatures of their employer. We can guess the rest . . .

Surely, the mortgage holder has a case against the provider. We never hear anything about this, yet the homeowner is hounded and almost treated like a criminal by others who were more prudent during the boom.
 
NorfBank said:
Why is it that everytime someone tries to do some good in this country, the cynics come out?
Click to expand...

I don't think that is fair to those of us who have questioned what New Beginning are doing.

They have promoted a daft scheme. I have challenged them on it and they have not responded. The say that it is not debt forgiveness, but of course it is. They also say that everyone wins, whereas it is the taxpayers who will be paying for the debt forgiveness.

They put forward a guy on the Front Line twice whose father is also on the mortgage, yet they want him to pay even less than the interest which is due on the mortgage, although it appears to me that he can well afford the full repayments.

There is a view in Ireland that the banks are all bad and the borrower is always the victim. Their prime example is someone who knowingly borrowed such a massive multiple of their salary , that he had to get his father to buy the house jointly with him.

To me, New Beginning are the cynics, in promoting guys like these as victims.
 
Their scheme might be daft, every scheme put forward as a solution to our current predicament is daft.

The majority of commentators are daft but they get airplay, that's the point.

Logical, reasoned ideas are ignored, no controversy there to attract viewer/readers/listeners. You need the "Joe Duffy Factor" - similar to the X Factor but many times more annoying.

Daft schemes gets media coverage. New Beginnings are not stupid, they know what to do to court publicity. If on the back of this publicity they get more enquiries then the end justifies the means.

Taking one individual case and knocking all they do because of that is easy. There must be hundreds of sub prime borrowers who have been exploited, it is these people that need a voice. I agree that those who knowingly borrowed too much due need to suck it up.

The point is NB are doing something good. For free.

A bit like askaboutmoney.
 
NorfBank said:
Daft schemes gets media coverage. New Beginnings are not stupid, they know what to do to court publicity. If on the back of this publicity they get more enquiries then the end justifies the means.
Click to expand...
So begrudgery is bad but cynicism is OK? Right...
 
Most (and I accept, not all) of the house repossessions that we see in the newspapers are to subprime lenders such as Start. Given the interest rates they charge, the chances are that a lot of these reposssions could have happened if we never had a receession. At the minute, the main lenders are only repossessing in exceptional circumstances, and providing that practise continues then I'm not convinced that a massive "strike" will necessarily happen.

There is a seperate discussion that needs to be had around mortgage mis-selling. If, for example, the lender knew the borrower was unemployed or on benefits and from doing basic maths would struggle to repay their mortgage at any stage, then the New Beginnings arguement is that the lender breached their legal duty of care to their customer. I don't think that is an unrealistic arguement for them to make and even if it is rejected in the Supreme Court, I wonder would the European Court of Justice take a different view. Time will tell.

That arguement more then likely will not apply to all borrowers (and they have to take responsibility if they misled the lender on their application form, albeit the lender may have to take responsibilty for not checking properly) but if sucessful, it may open the gate and who knows what will come through
 
Hi Spartacus, agree with your post. Not far from were I am living there are apartments that were priced at just below 1m a few years back. You'd be lucky to get 300k for them today. Most of the owners have now left the country and the complex is mainly occupied by rent allowance tenents. Obviously the mortgages are not been fully met so I do believe the banks will be back with cap in hand.
 
That whole argument is based on the premise that Irish banks issued non-recourse mortgages for apartments. This, of course, is simply untrue. So, we had no non-recourse loans and no banks selling apartments on a lease-purchase contract. Given the above on what do you base your opinion that people will “not be too bothered about giving them back to the banks”. The banks didn’t give them the keys and didn’t sell them the apartments so why in the world would they take the keys “back”? How would they (the banks) be “terrified at the prospect of being left with thousands of worthless apartments”?


And what will we do with the rotting corpses?
 
There's the rub. They might be recourse mortgages but the security is the property and the bank has to go after that first before coming after the mortgage holder for the balance. Most apartments are unsaleable at any price. Banks won't give mortgages on them, issues with management companies, priory hall, availability of houses in the same prices bracket, etc, etc. So what do the banks do? Foreclose and sell? If they do that in any numbers, what little market that is there will collapse completely and Joe Duffy will have a field day. Then, after selling the property for 20cent, they have to go after the defaulter for the rest. Expensive, time-consuming and probably ultimately futile. Oh no, however worried owners or apartments are, banks are absolutely terrified.

Better to get whatever they can from the owner and kick the can down the road in the hope that better days are ahead. Well, we all have our own opinions on how that's going to work out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register