Laragan customers lose their deposits

Status
Not open for further replies.
I am very sure, our last option is the court route, we served comp notice and everything, also offered them to keep our 15k deposit but nada. Its an abolsute disgrace to think they can get away with this, and your right there is no way I would live on a building site


But you wanted to give them the 15k not so long ago just to get out of the contract.

That may very well happen, so you have what you wanted to be done with everything.

I'm not saying it's right to lose your money that you worked hard for, but you are better off. It's either that or be made to buy a property way over valued.

Would you really want to go ahead with the purchase of the place, just to keep 15k??
 
samanthajane said:
I am very sure, our last option is the court route, we served comp notice and everything, also offered them to keep our 15k deposit but nada. Its an abolsute disgrace to think they can get away with this, and your right there is no way I would live on a building site


But you wanted to give them the 15k not so long ago just to get out of the contract.

That may very well happen, so you have what you wanted to be done with everything.

I'm not saying it's right to lose your money that you worked hard for, but you are better off. It's either that or be made to buy a property way over valued.

Would you really want to go ahead with the purchase of the place, just to keep 15k??
Click to expand...


Samantha Jane. I am aware of what I have said, but this was all borne out of frustration. Furhtermore how could I be made buy a property that a: doesnt exist and b: would be way over completion period

Do you not also think that by getting away with this, carte blanche is been given to builders to swindle people out of their hard earned cash in the future !!
 
andycole said:
The fact that the property market rises or falls is only a distraction




.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but this is a huge part of why people wanted to get out the contracts!! For what ever reasons. Some didn't want to be in negative equity, some couldn't get the mortgage anymore ect ect

If house prices had gone up 100k i would bet that every one would be looking for that amount in compensation.
 
samanthajane said:
I'm sorry but this is a huge part of why people wanted to get out the contracts!! For what ever reasons. Some didn't want to be in negative equity, some couldn't get the mortgage anymore ect ect

If house prices had gone up 100k i would bet that every one would be looking for that amount in compensation.
Click to expand...


I completely disagree with you here as we were buying a home and the propertys were still valued at the purchase price in dec 07 when they were supposed to be completed and even still some months afterwards. We would have loved to move into our apartment when it was supposed to be ready , but why on earth should anyone be made to wait several years . The problems with this development have been going on since the start of this development due to poor project management and not to do with economic downturn
 
foxylady said:
Samantha Jane. I am aware of what I have said, but this was all borne out of frustration. Furhtermore how could I be made buy a property that a: doesnt exist and b: would be way over completion period

Do you not also think that by getting away with this, carte blanche is been given to builders to swindle people out of their hard earned cash in the future !!
Click to expand...


And i totally agree with what you said in that respect. It was unfair not right, and totally out of order.

My comment was said because i really thought that you would be happy about this because of previous comments. Sorry if i was wrong on that.

Of course it's wrong, and hopefully because of this no one will ever be swindled out of money again.

There is so much legal speak in contracts that the best of us couldn't understand. I still dont get why the homebond didn't extend past 24 months when you were given 30 months for the house to be finished. It's like giving you a ladder of 3ft when you need to get to a height of 6ft. A complete and utter waste of time.

This is what needs to be looked at. Out of all 95 people involved did not one of their solicitor's pick up on this?? That if the worst should happen ( which has happened ) no one's money is covered??
 
Samantha -

Yes I do admit that the issue of negative equity is why I want out of these contracts - I am not pretending otherwise.

But you have just cut this quote out from the middle of my earlier posting. With my earlier post one of the points that I was trying to make is the actual validity of the contracts that were offered / put in place in front of buyers.

The Homebond Certification expires after 24 months it now seems - But the contracts offered had Completion Periods of 30 months with Homebond protection mentioned in these contracts.

So there has to be something wrong with this does there not?

That is what I am bringing to attention here - the issue of negative equity and property bubbles is this context is a distraction. I apologise if this is hijacking this thread - it should no doubt in the the Ask About Law section - but initially I was just replying to Brendan.
 
The big picture is that the Examinership process has been used sucessfully by this Developer to get themselves out of a hole and continue to trade at the expense of its Creditors and prospective Buyers who had handed over tens of thousands of hard earned Euro each in the hope of buying a home. The Customers could not be described as lucky in the true sense, robbed but saved from a worse fate may be a more apt title. Who are the winners here? the Developer and their Bank. Because the alternative for them would be Receivership and potentially bankruptcy.
 
foxylady said:
I completely disagree with you here as we were buying a home and the propertys were still valued at the purchase price in dec 07 when they were supposed to be completed and even still some months afterwards. We would have loved to move into our apartment when it was supposed to be ready , but why on earth should anyone be made to wait several years . The problems with this development have been going on since the start of this development due to poor project management and not to do with economic downturn
Click to expand...

This is another reason yes. I agree what happened to you and the others is unacceptable and shouldn't of happened.

But i'm being totally honest here, if it was the other way around and house prices had risen i for 1 would be looking for compensation as i'm sure many others would. I would also like you be very upset at losing 15k but i would still prefer to lose that 15k.

I'm sure everyone would of liked to move in years ago but that didn't happen and you cant turn back time, whats done is done.

But still if you had moved in years ago you would still today be in a lot more negative equity than 15k.

I really think that you should get your money back, but if there is no money to give back what can you do? Where can you go? Shouldn't the issue be with the homebond? Can nothing be done about that? Surely it's not right they would cover you for the full term of 30 months that you were given for completition?
 
Yes I agree with your points here Gill.

The potential benefit of the examinership process is huge for Laragan Developments. They will be able to continue as a going concern.

As you have well pointed out "robbed but saved from a worse fate may be a more apt title"

So what have I learned here? What lesson have I taken from this experience as an Unsecured Deposit Holder Creditor?

Not to sign a contract where my deposit is forwarded to the builder. In future I will make sure that if I buy off the plans again that my deposit will be allowed to be held by my solictor or in a similar kind of setup.
 
andycole said:
Samantha -

Yes I do admit that the issue of negative equity is why I want out of these contracts - I am not pretending otherwise.

But you have just cut this quote out from the middle of my earlier posting. With my earlier post one of the points that I was trying to make is the actual validity of the contracts that were offered / put in place in front of buyers.

The Homebond Certification expires after 24 months it now seems - But the contracts offered had Completion Periods of 30 months with Homebond protection mentioned in these contracts.

So there has to be something wrong with this does there not?

That is what I am bringing to attention here - the issue of negative equity and property bubbles is this context is a distraction. I apologise if this is hijacking this thread - it should no doubt in the the Ask About Law section - but initially I was just replying to Brendan.
Click to expand...

Andy

My contract was 18 months extended to 24 and the homebond policy didnt even cover this as the homebond ran 2 years from date of booking deposit and not the date of signing contracts a month later.
 
Not to sign a contract where my deposit is forwarded to the builder. In future I will make sure that if I buy off the plans again that my deposit will be allowed to be held by my solictor or in a similar kind of setup.[/quote]


On another note we werent aware when sigining that money was being given straight to the builder
 
andycole said:
Samantha -

Yes I do admit that the issue of negative equity is why I want out of these contracts - I am not pretending otherwise.

But you have just cut this quote out from the middle of my earlier posting. With my earlier post one of the points that I was trying to make is the actual validity of the contracts that were offered / put in place in front of buyers.

The Homebond Certification expires after 24 months it now seems - But the contracts offered had Completion Periods of 30 months with Homebond protection mentioned in these contracts.

So there has to be something wrong with this does there not?

That is what I am bringing to attention here - the issue of negative equity and property bubbles is this context is a distraction. I apologise if this is hijacking this thread - it should no doubt in the the Ask About Law section - but initially I was just replying to Brendan.
Click to expand...

Sorry for just quoting that section. I do agree with you with everything else you said.

And can i say thank you for being honest about the negative equity a lot of people wouldn't.

Yes there is something very wrong with the homebond agreement, You could agrue well you should of looked more closely at the contract but as i said before half of it you cant understand, this is why i asked did no solicitor pick up on this at all. Was it something that you would normally look into.

I purchased a house a few years back and untill today didn't know that a homebond for your deposit even existed!

Was it because no one expected this to happen? Thats not good enough, you just cant expect things not to happen you have to know whats in place to protect you, if the worst should happen.

The only good thing to come out of this is now people will be more careful, they will ask more questions. If i was to ever buy another house from the plans it wouldn't be on my list to make sure what the completion date was and i now know if it's over 24 months i have no come back for my deposit. ( unless this changes which i hope it will )

No much use to you, foxylady and the 93 others i know.

But i still think that you are all in a much better situation because of being allowed out of your contract. Financially speaking anyway. It's still hurts to know that the builder got your money and never has to re-pay or even face the situation of this.

Is it an option to sue him directly? this 1.5 million has to of gone somewhere. Could you argue that it was bad acting on his part that lead the company to collapse in the first place?
 
Foxylady -

No I was aware - its a condition in my contract. I was aware of this when I signed.

But not aware of the Homebond Certification 24 month expiration period.

Also I thought the Completion Period was legally binding if breached by the builder and did not expect the current problems - but I was not aware of a possible contradiction between the completion period and the Homebond certification period.
 
At time of signing contracts our SOlicitor told us everything was above board , juts the normal bog standard contract.
 
foxylady said:
...These people would not be able to hold anyone to these contracts as they have been blatantly breached by exceeding times by 18 months in some cases
Click to expand...

Is there a date for completion in the contracts? I thought there was some difficulty in holding developers/builders to completion dates unless theres a penalty clause. Was there a get out clause if the date was breached?
 
Can I ask? Why does the Examiners scheme not look to have people who have put deposits down require the same depositors to complete their contracts for sale? Especially, if the agreed prices are as people are saying 40% higher than the current market price!

If the examiner did this would he not be realising more money for the examinership. Therefore having more money to pay for to the other unsecured creditors of the company. The examiner has a duty to come up with the best scheme possible for the creditors of the company. I know all of the depositors worked hard to earn the money they have now lost but it would appear that these depositors only represent a small number of the company's creditors.

Also, with the reputation Laragan has just earned itself who will want to deal with them again? Part of the Examinership is to determine if the company has a reasonable prospect of survival. However, so many companies that come out of examinership fail shortly after due to the bad publicity and suppliers/customers being unwilling to deal with the post examinership. For this reason I ask how Mr McCann can determine that the company has a reasonable prospect of survival.

If the answer is no the the company must be liquidated. If the company goes into liquidation Mr McCann will be appointed and will have a duty to realise the assets of the company. If this was to happen perhaps it could be agreed that depositors would be allowed purchase their aparments at current market values and that they would be permitted to use their existing deposits?
 
Makes sense..but who would complete the houses? Most of them are still a long way off being finished? Would it be viable to another contractor to take these on and sell them at current market value? If another contractor could take these on i would of thought they would have to pay for work done so far. If there was a profit to be made out of it then wouldn't it be said that laragan had a chance of survival, at least untill this project was finished. Highly doubt any further business would come his way after what has happened.
 
samanthajane said:
Makes sense..but who would complete the houses? Most of them are still a long way off being finished? Would it be viable to another contractor to take these on and sell them at current market value? If another contractor could take these on i would of thought they would have to pay for work done so far. If there was a profit to be made out of it then wouldn't it be said that laragan had a chance of survival, at least untill this project was finished. Highly doubt any further business would come his way after what has happened.
Click to expand...


Very long way off completon as they havent started .
 
If someone was to buy the development the liquidator would be looking for the highest bid. Anyone who bid to buy the development would not have to pay for the work done to date they would just be buying what is there and in theory they would calculate their offer by considering the expected market value of the houses (less honouring deposits) less cost of completion and profit!

I cannot say that it is viable but on the assumption that the Examiner believes that the examinership will succeed then the it is viable (based on the fact that the examiner has more of the facts and figures than I do). The Examiner is essentially selling the development to a new investor as would the liquidator.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top