David Hall claiming credit for stopping an eviction

Discussion in 'Personal Insolvency, bankruptcy, etc' started by Bronte, 10 Jan 2019 at 10:59 AM.

  1. Bronte

    Bronte Frequent Poster

    Posts:
    12,894
    I'm just wondering how Mr. Hall is so powerful. Is this story actually true. Or is the headline misleading. It's certainly lurid enough.

    https://www.independent.ie/irish-ne...st-threat-by-leading-campaigner-37698013.html

    Who actually benefits here. The bank will get it's money, arrears and costs. The widow stays in the house, but she will never own it. Her rent will be paid by the state. It would be paid by the state if she was forced to leave. Mr. Hall gets loads of publicity. And his company - iCare Housing - get another property.

    Strangly Start mortgage say that the repossession being cancelled had nothing to do with the actions of Mr. Hall.

    So can it be that he's claiming the credit for the repossession cancellation while the mortgage company disputes that. Would that mean he is putting himself forward as a 'solution' while creating more of a property portfolio.
     
  2. Brendan Burgess

    Brendan Burgess Founder

    Posts:
    36,331
    I have no doubt that David Hall stopped this eviction.

    Having said that, there are very few actual forced evictions. On the few occasions that the Sheriff calls, they give plenty of notice and the person sometimes leaves - that is if it's not an abandoned house.

    This woman bought her house 20 years ago.

    How much did a house in Crumlin cost then and how much is it worth today? I would say it has gone from €100k to €300k?

    How much has she paid? I would say that she has been living rent free for years.

    And she will continue to live rent-free for many more years to come because the taxpayer will rent it from David Hall.

    Brendan
     
  3. elcato

    elcato Moderator

    Posts:
    2,927
    Just to add in DH's favour the article does state that they can buy the house back later at any time from the iCare company and that they cannot ever sell it at a profit. Although I don't know the actual workings on that one. The taxpayer will only pay if they are on social welfare benefits otherwise they will pay 15% of gross income from any other source.
     
  4. Bronte

    Bronte Frequent Poster

    Posts:
    12,894
    How does iCare get the money to buy the property? They also have to pay the arrears and costs. Who is funding that?
     
  5. NoRegretsCoyote

    NoRegretsCoyote Registered User

    Posts:
    65
    From the article:

    In the Cabra case, the woman and her husband bought their home in 1995 with a mortgage from First National Building Society but soon got into difficulties paying off their loan. Start Mortgages took over the mortgage in 2006 and began High Court proceedings the same year.


    13 years to get to the point of eviction!

    This case was in trouble long before the economic collapse post-2008.
     
    so-crates likes this.
  6. Brendan Burgess

    Brendan Burgess Founder

    Posts:
    36,331
    At the time, Start were a sub-prime lender.
    They did not buy this mortgage from another lender.
    So she was a sub-prime customer in the first place.
    She should not have got this mortgage so she should not be in the house she is in. She can't afford it and she could never afford it.

    Brendan
     
    so-crates likes this.
  7. Delboy

    Delboy Frequent Poster

    Posts:
    1,508
    Nearly 25 years of arrears in which probably very very little was paid. And according to the report the arrears will be paid along with local authority level rent levels with the LA paying the balance.
    I'm struggling to believe that.

    And legally, how can they be stopped in say 30 years time from selling the house on at whatever price they want. I cannot see how that is enforceable.
     
  8. Bronte

    Bronte Frequent Poster

    Posts:
    12,894
    They will not own the house. The bank transfers it to David Hall and his company is the landlord. The woman will be a tenant.

    What will Hall do if the tenant doesn’t pay the rent?

    And if she wishes to buy the house she’ll have to pay what Halls company paid. Might be an absolute fortune if arrears and costs are factored in.

    It would probably be cheaper for the state to pay her rent elsewhere. Only people winning is the bank gets fully paid, and iCare gets another property. If they are successful they will become the biggest landlord in the state after the local authorities.
     
  9. Brendan Burgess

    Brendan Burgess Founder

    Posts:
    36,331
    Hi Delboy

    This is how a Mortgage to Rent works
    1) iCare buys the house from the owner
    2) the proceeds are paid to the lender who writes off the shortfall
    3) iCare rents the house to the Local Authority at market rent - probably about 10% of the property value
    4) The local authority rents the house to her on a differential rent - an average of €50 a week.

    iCare is not allowed by the rules to sell the house back to her. However, you can be sure that in time, political pressure will result in a change to these rules.

    Her kids will probably buy the house at 60% of the market value.

    Brendan
     
    so-crates, NoRegretsCoyote and Delboy like this.
  10. Brendan Burgess

    Brendan Burgess Founder

    Posts:
    36,331
    He won't give a damn.

    His tenant is the Local Authority. They will pay him whatever happens.

    Brendan
     
    so-crates likes this.
  11. Bronte

    Bronte Frequent Poster

    Posts:
    12,894
    You mean she moved banks? From the building society to a sub prime.

    If iCare is willing to pay back Starts debts, as per the article, why would they bother with the repossession. That doesn’t make sense.
     
  12. RedOnion

    RedOnion Frequent Poster

    Posts:
    2,056
    They're not. They make an offer to buy it at a price.
     
  13. Bronte

    Bronte Frequent Poster

    Posts:
    12,894
    Is this correct.

    1. The LA pays iCare 30k rent 10% of 300k)
    2. The tenant pays the LA €2600 a year. Where does she get this money if she’s not working?
    3. The landlord then is the LA.

    Would it be cheaper for the LA to pay her rent on a different property.
     
  14. Bronte

    Bronte Frequent Poster

    Posts:
    12,894
    Why would Start accept a price if it’s much less than the property value?

    Also the article said arrears and legal costs would be paid.
     
  15. Bronte

    Bronte Frequent Poster

    Posts:
    12,894
    That’s hilarious.

    I was wondering what the catch was. Aren’t the LA’s the worst landlords ever.
     
  16. Delboy

    Delboy Frequent Poster

    Posts:
    1,508
    I understand that Brendan. My point was that the kids buy it from iCare at that 60% reduce price say in 20 years time. 2 years later they sell it at market value.
    How can that be stopped...I don't see how.
     
  17. RedOnion

    RedOnion Frequent Poster

    Posts:
    2,056
    Well if it says it in the paper....

    I never said Start would accept less than the property value. However, the mortgage balance has nothing to do with it.
     
  18. Delboy

    Delboy Frequent Poster

    Posts:
    1,508
    Last edited: 10 Jan 2019 at 4:36 PM
    Hall on talking to Ivan Yates now on Newstalk

    - the family were fully engaged and fully involved in finding solutions from the start
    - 'widow and 2 children'
    - Hall will now lead protests at any properties where he believes the repossession order is not necessary
    - no home should be repossessed if it could go under the mortgage to rent scheme

    The State are giving iCare 30% of the purchase price of houses at very low interest rates
     
    Last edited: 10 Jan 2019 at 4:36 PM
  19. Feemar5

    Feemar5 Frequent Poster

    Posts:
    91
    I agree that no home should be repossessed if it could go under the mortgage to rent scheme but I also feel there is not enough repossessions where people are making no effort to engage. People who are paying their mortgages are taking the hit and paying above what the interest rate should be. I also think there are too many Charities involved in the housing crisis .
     
    Annie51 likes this.
  20. Bronte

    Bronte Frequent Poster

    Posts:
    12,894
    Last edited: 12 Jan 2019 at 9:34 AM
    I was wondering how iCare is funded. Hall got 15 million from AIB. But they also get state funding.

    https://www.irishtimes.com/business...p-icare-eye-target-of-1-000-tenants-1.3576329

    So the state provides subordinated debt to iCare. ICare gets to own the properties. And then the state pays again. Paying iCare rent for the properties.

    AIB gets rid of their most problematic properties, family homes with non payers. Presumably carefully picked homes too.

    Anyone care to explain what state subordinated debt means in this context?

    I'd love to know the figures on one of these transactions. And whether it is costing the state more than them just paying the mortgage directly.
     
    Last edited: 12 Jan 2019 at 9:34 AM