Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 52,091
Last night's Fronline programme fell way below its normal standards of objectivity and Pat Kenny's normal standards. It was very onesided.
The Panel
The Panel consisted of
Ciarán Lynch - Labour TD
Ross Maguire - New Beginnings
Constantin Gurdgiev
Ronan Lyons - Daft.ie
No Irish TD has the backbone to point out to consumers that they have made mistakes and that they have to pay for them. Ciarán who is genuinely interested in the housing issue is no exception.
New Beginnings spend their time defending people trying to counter bank repossessions.
Both Ronan Lyons and Constantin Gurdgiev have called for widespread debt forgiveness which would cost the taxpayer, according to their calculations, up to €49 billion
Why was there no one on the panel who opposed widespread debt forgiveness? Declan Jordan of UCC, Séamus Coffey of UCC, Professor Gregory Connor of Maynooth, myself? Even a three to one against panel would have been unbalanced, but at least it would have been less unbalanced.
The case studies were simply not probed at all
The Clonee couple who featured in the programme. They had bought a two bedroom apartment a few years ago. They were worried about the future. They were meeting their repayments but what if one of them lost their job? But bizarrely, two years ago they had applied to the bank to trade up with a negative equity mortgage. The bank had laughed at them. They were critical of the bank. But they should be grateful to the bank. If they had traded up , they would be in much more severe negative equity and their repayments would be much higher. Their worry about losing their job would be far worse.
Ken bought an apartment "with his father on the deeds" a few years ago for €300k and it's now worth €90k. He is working in sales and has never missed a repayment. The bank won't do anything for him. What does he want the bank to do? Reduce the repayments which he and his father can well afford? Ken has a Facebook page mortgagedebtforgiveness
I am sorry for people in negative equity, but if they can pay their mortgage, then they must do so.
The €1m mortgage woman bought a house with a €1m mortgage a few years ago and got an offer of €500k last year for it. The bank refused to let her sell it. Again, I have sympathy but there was no personal background given. She was wealthy enough to borrow €1m a few years ago and now the house is rented. It's likely that the rent received and her own income is easily enough to cover the repayments. Why should the bank let her sell?
The public servant who has not paid her mortgage since December 2010. She was in her early fifties and put all her savings into a house. She could not get the bank to agree anything and her income has reduced as a "professional public servant". So her response has been to put €1,000 a month into a separate bank account until the bank agrees. Every option that the bank discusses involves repossession. It is very unusual for a bank to suggest repossession, so we were not getting the full story. Mind you, if she has not paid anything towards her mortgage for 10 months, then there should be a fast-track court procedure to repossess her house.
Update: This case is discussed in detail in this thread : Caroline Lennon Henry Posterwoman for Mortgage Arrears
For comparison - The Cork couple who featured on Richard Curran's programme before Frontline
A couple with three young children. He lost his job. She had a part-time job so she increased her hours and he minds the kids combined with a Social Employment Scheme. Things got to breaking point and they could not afford the €600 monthly mortgage payment. What happened? They went into Ulster Bank who assessed their position and reduced their repayments to €200 per month for 12 months. This is exactly how it is working in reality. A borrower gets into trouble. They cut back. They act responsibly. They talk to their bank who assesses their needs and the bank facilitates them.
Pat Kenny's approach
was extraordinarily one sided. He accused the bank who had lent to Ken and his father of wanting to "grab his father's pension, although he had signed the paperwork".
He never pointed out how lucky the Clonee couple were that the bank had not allowed them to trade up.
He told the woman who had borrowed €1m whose house was worth only €500k that the banks were not paying for their mistakes. They were professionals who were used to valuing houses. She had bought only one house and had made a mistake and she was carring the can for their joint mistake.
He kept repeating that the banks had made "300,000 mistakes" i.e. the number of people in negative equity.
He referred sarcastically to "the wonderful code of conduct on mortgage arrears"
He said "I have a difficulty with this blanket rejection of the blanket rejection of debt forgiveness..."
He never put any difficult questions to those seeking debt forgiveness, in fact he puts his words into their mouths. By contrast, he badgered Ciarán Lynch who tried to explain the government's position.
I was so annoyed at the programme that I had to switch it off half way through. I knew that The Property Pin contributors would be going absolutely mad and indeed they were. See here They were throwing stuff at the television.
The last Frontline programme on the topic showed the other side of the argument
One of the panel, Declan Jordan, effectively challenged Brian Lucey's proposals on Debt Forgiveness.
I was in the audience and was able to explain why the Expert Group had recommended against it.
There was a German(?) who had a high mortgage and was very opposed to debt forgiveness.
We were in an unpopular minority, but at least, the view was heard.
The Panel
The Panel consisted of
Ciarán Lynch - Labour TD
Ross Maguire - New Beginnings
Constantin Gurdgiev
Ronan Lyons - Daft.ie
No Irish TD has the backbone to point out to consumers that they have made mistakes and that they have to pay for them. Ciarán who is genuinely interested in the housing issue is no exception.
New Beginnings spend their time defending people trying to counter bank repossessions.
Both Ronan Lyons and Constantin Gurdgiev have called for widespread debt forgiveness which would cost the taxpayer, according to their calculations, up to €49 billion
Why was there no one on the panel who opposed widespread debt forgiveness? Declan Jordan of UCC, Séamus Coffey of UCC, Professor Gregory Connor of Maynooth, myself? Even a three to one against panel would have been unbalanced, but at least it would have been less unbalanced.
The case studies were simply not probed at all
The Clonee couple who featured in the programme. They had bought a two bedroom apartment a few years ago. They were worried about the future. They were meeting their repayments but what if one of them lost their job? But bizarrely, two years ago they had applied to the bank to trade up with a negative equity mortgage. The bank had laughed at them. They were critical of the bank. But they should be grateful to the bank. If they had traded up , they would be in much more severe negative equity and their repayments would be much higher. Their worry about losing their job would be far worse.
Ken bought an apartment "with his father on the deeds" a few years ago for €300k and it's now worth €90k. He is working in sales and has never missed a repayment. The bank won't do anything for him. What does he want the bank to do? Reduce the repayments which he and his father can well afford? Ken has a Facebook page mortgagedebtforgiveness
I am sorry for people in negative equity, but if they can pay their mortgage, then they must do so.
The €1m mortgage woman bought a house with a €1m mortgage a few years ago and got an offer of €500k last year for it. The bank refused to let her sell it. Again, I have sympathy but there was no personal background given. She was wealthy enough to borrow €1m a few years ago and now the house is rented. It's likely that the rent received and her own income is easily enough to cover the repayments. Why should the bank let her sell?
The public servant who has not paid her mortgage since December 2010. She was in her early fifties and put all her savings into a house. She could not get the bank to agree anything and her income has reduced as a "professional public servant". So her response has been to put €1,000 a month into a separate bank account until the bank agrees. Every option that the bank discusses involves repossession. It is very unusual for a bank to suggest repossession, so we were not getting the full story. Mind you, if she has not paid anything towards her mortgage for 10 months, then there should be a fast-track court procedure to repossess her house.
Update: This case is discussed in detail in this thread : Caroline Lennon Henry Posterwoman for Mortgage Arrears
For comparison - The Cork couple who featured on Richard Curran's programme before Frontline
A couple with three young children. He lost his job. She had a part-time job so she increased her hours and he minds the kids combined with a Social Employment Scheme. Things got to breaking point and they could not afford the €600 monthly mortgage payment. What happened? They went into Ulster Bank who assessed their position and reduced their repayments to €200 per month for 12 months. This is exactly how it is working in reality. A borrower gets into trouble. They cut back. They act responsibly. They talk to their bank who assesses their needs and the bank facilitates them.
Pat Kenny's approach
was extraordinarily one sided. He accused the bank who had lent to Ken and his father of wanting to "grab his father's pension, although he had signed the paperwork".
He never pointed out how lucky the Clonee couple were that the bank had not allowed them to trade up.
He told the woman who had borrowed €1m whose house was worth only €500k that the banks were not paying for their mistakes. They were professionals who were used to valuing houses. She had bought only one house and had made a mistake and she was carring the can for their joint mistake.
He kept repeating that the banks had made "300,000 mistakes" i.e. the number of people in negative equity.
He referred sarcastically to "the wonderful code of conduct on mortgage arrears"
He said "I have a difficulty with this blanket rejection of the blanket rejection of debt forgiveness..."
He never put any difficult questions to those seeking debt forgiveness, in fact he puts his words into their mouths. By contrast, he badgered Ciarán Lynch who tried to explain the government's position.
I was so annoyed at the programme that I had to switch it off half way through. I knew that The Property Pin contributors would be going absolutely mad and indeed they were. See here They were throwing stuff at the television.
The last Frontline programme on the topic showed the other side of the argument
One of the panel, Declan Jordan, effectively challenged Brian Lucey's proposals on Debt Forgiveness.
I was in the audience and was able to explain why the Expert Group had recommended against it.
There was a German(?) who had a high mortgage and was very opposed to debt forgiveness.
We were in an unpopular minority, but at least, the view was heard.