Leaving Ireland

It's amazing how a whole bunch of 'tax payers' are suddenly so concerned about people paying their debts back to a bank. If the government didn't make such a stupid decision to socialize all the banks debts, would these people still be so worried about it? My guess is they wouldn't give a toss!

As hard and all as it is, people should forget about the fact that the tax payers own the banks because it is clouding people's judgement on what the right course of action is to get the economy moving again. While the 'moral hazard brigade' are so busy trying to make sure that debtors and entrepreneurs are 'punished' for trying to do the thing that most people do in a society which is buy your own home and make a living by setting up businesses etc, the economy won't recover.

Those (overly conservative tight ar3e types) who are constantly gloating about the fact that they never borrowed a penny from the banks and didn't spend any money in the boom years other than on food and water, need to bear in mind that if everyone was to do that we would have no economy at all! Why do you think the UK & US have developed a system that frees up over indebted people in a straight forward manner, because it actually benefits the economy in the long term to have these people functioning properly in the economy. People take risks, people make mistakes, this is a normal part of a modern economy.

It is crazy that the OP finds himself in a situation where he has to leave Ireland because he is saddled with debt that he most likely will never be able to repay anyway. He and many others like him should not have to do this, just stop and think about his situation for a minute and see how morally wrong it is to be pushing our very own citizens out of the country. The Irish begrudgery mentality is alive and well. Maybe we should round up all the debtors and throw them in jail like they did in the 19th centruy, that would surely keep the moral hazard brigade happy!
 
No I dont want to bring us into the dark ages, I know that in a modern capitalist society, writedowns are going to be a fact of life. Both the banks and the borrowers are both to blame for reckless lending and irresponsible borrowing.

What alot of people here dont seem to agree with is the borrower accepting ANY responsibility for their PART in this problem. It cannot be just an option to pay your mortgage.

Moral hazard is a real concern and shouldn't be brushed under the carpet. Fianna Fail made I agree made a stupid decision to nationalize Anglo and Irish nationwide. What about the shareholders who have lost everything in the "pillar banks" with many job losses.

Those "overly conservative tight ar3se types" who live and manage their money well and dont spend it all on tat or get pi33ed every weekend, who dont borrow to buy brand new imported cars they dont need are displaying exactly the right culture we need to encourage. Those "boom years" never really existed, it was a credit bubble in which many lived to excess and spent money they never had.
The US and UK are not exactly the economies I'd want to living up to. Both are swimming in unsustainable debt and can get away with it as they have their own currency and interest rates but this cant go on forever.

I cant believe that there are not more people out there that dont hold the borrower to blame in some degree of culpability.
 
I cant believe that there are not more people out there that dont hold the borrower to blame in some degree of culpability.
Click to expand...

Some (but not all) of those in serious financial trouble bought modest houses to live in. Then they lost their jobs through no-fault of their own and cant pay what they borrowed. They want to-but can't.
So, your solution-keep them here, and in penury to the banks for decades. What a great solution!
 
a-tax-payer said:
I cant believe that there are not more people out there that dont hold the borrower to blame in some degree of culpability.
Click to expand...

Of course we blame them but I'd equally blame the government, the bad banking regulations, the regulator, the central bank and the bankers. All of those are receiving no punishment whatsoever, so why concentrate on the hapless borrower who hasn't a hope. It's not as if the loss of everything isn't punishment enough. People who are losing their homes, moving abroad, marriages breaking up, having to relocate, living on the dole. How do you not see this.

You've suggested at least 20 years punishment, which is a lot longer than most murderers get and you've not shown how this would a) be good for society b) be good for the borrower c) get the economy moving again d) prevent this mess happening again.

If you want however to discuss jailing bankers et al for 20 years, then I'd be agreeable to that, but that's never going to happen.
 
The previous government (which helped bring about this mess) were voted out of government and shouldnt be back in power for another 10 years at least.
Some Banks have been shut down and others nationalised.
Shareholders were completely wiped out and lost all money invested.
Many staff in banking, lending, insurance have and will loose their jobs.
The previous regulator was asleep at the wheel and should be in prison though i'll give you that.
People deciding to move abroad and their personal relationship status are no concern of mine or the state - we're not in China and people have the right to move where they want and marry or divorce if they want.

I've not suggested anywhere that anyone should get 20 years in prison for home loan default.
I did suggest that their credit record should be on the ICB for 20 years for serious defaulters to prevent them (and protect lenders) from engaging in wreckless lending and borrowing in the future. If I cause a car accident, I expect my premium to rise as I am a then a greater risk - the same rule should apply.

Isnt this common sense??
 
a-tax-payer said:
I did suggest that their credit record should be on the ICB for 20 years for serious defaulters to prevent them (and protect lenders) from engaging in wreckless lending and borrowing in the future.
Click to expand...
Would you consider a person who borrows a relatively moderate sum of money that's well within their capacity to repay the loan at that time, wreckless lending? Because that's what the vast majority of distressed borrowers did but either lost their jobs or took a massive and unprecedented pay cut. Why do you want to vilify these people?

This category of people shouldn't be confused with large scale developers borrowing hundreds of millions of Euro building apartments that weren't needed!
 
This is gone way off topic.
@ataxpayer, if you want to rant on an on about moral hazard, blame etc, start a new thread about that or post in one that's actually about that.
 
Hi All

Just a little update.

So we decided instead of leaving it up to the bank to repossess or us voluntarily surrendering the property, as Gerry Canning suggested in a previous post, we are now assisting the bank to dispose of the property. We have it up for sale and we are hoping it will go sale agreed this week.

The max we will get for the house is €65k!! Mortgage balance with arrears now probably 259k. It just shows that back in 2007 the house prices were way over priced.....how could the market value decrease that much!!!....anyway thats for another thread!

So we are still planning on leaving in October. The bank still have not agreed to us selling, actually we cannot get any answers from them at all and I have written to them a couple of times now detailing our plans.

All going well, they will allow us sell, they can take whatever money we get for it and they can sing for the balance!!

I know is a very blase attitude to have but tey have left us with no choice.

One question though, does anyone know if they can force bankruptcy on us? Somebody said that to me the other day and if they do force bankruptcy, that if and when we come back to ireland from abroad we will have to deal with the bankruptcy then even if its 10 or 12yrs later?
 
One question though, does anyone know if they can force bankruptcy on us? Somebody said that to me the other day and if they do force bankruptcy, that if and when we come back to ireland from abroad we will have to deal with the bankruptcy then even if its 10 or 12yrs later?
Click to expand...

Good question. I too know people that are leaving a house and a large debt behind them to go abroad and earn a lot of money for a few years. Will the debt just disappear over a period of time, ie is there a specific period where they can come back to the country and not be liable for this debt?
 
Update:

Sale agreed, bank still not aggreeing to the sale. They will send a valuer to the house to see if its sold at market value.

They want us to send in another financial statement of our means. This is no problem, we are both on the dole, we have receipts etc.

But...as I said in previous posts, I did not tell the bank that we had rented out the house. As it happens the tenents are moving out in two weeks. They had been putting a weekly amount of rent into our account and now the bank wants to see our bank stats.
They will probably question what the "lodgement" is, and Im jst not sure what way to handle this with the bank so has anyone any advice?
 
Hi Belle, I've been reading your story with interest. Has there been any more progress?

I can't give you specific advice on your questions, but here's what I think. You sell your house for the best price you can get. You impress on the Bank that you are leaving and this is the only deal in town. They will probably insist you accept responsibility for the shortfall. If that's how it is - maybe the best way forward is to play along with that and agree. They'll ask for a payment plan or whatever....so what, you have no money.
The house is sold, the mortgage is 'closed' and the remainder becomes an unsecured debt. That's my understanding - the experts may correct me.
You then leave and stop paying.
They can't pursue you for an unsecured debt.
End of story.
 
Starbuck said:
They can't pursue you for an unsecured debt.
End of story.
Click to expand...

That isn't correct Starbuck of course a lender can pursue an unsecured debt. Secured simply means that you have offered them something of value (e.g. A house) that they will be entitled to have ownership of if you cannot pay.
 
Starbuck said:
You sell your house for the best price you can get. You impress on the Bank that you are leaving and this is the only deal in town.
Click to expand...

The OP can't sell the house unless the bank agrees as they hold it as security!


Starbuck said:
They can't pursue you for an unsecured debt.
Click to expand...

Yes indeed they can! Whether or not it is worth their while to do so or not is another matter.
 
belle1 said:
Update:

Sale agreed, bank still not aggreeing to the sale. They will send a valuer to the house to see if its sold at market value.

They want us to send in another financial statement of our means. This is no problem, we are both on the dole, we have receipts etc.

But...as I said in previous posts, I did not tell the bank that we had rented out the house. As it happens the tenents are moving out in two weeks. They had been putting a weekly amount of rent into our account and now the bank wants to see our bank stats.
They will probably question what the "lodgement" is, and Im jst not sure what way to handle this with the bank so has anyone any advice?
Click to expand...
It's for this very reason I wouldn't bother my Barney on doing the dirty work for your bank when this is how they respond. Simply send in a surrender document which you can type up yourself (if your banks don't want to supply you with one) and stick a set of keys in the envelope with it. The game is up when the bank receive this and you'll effectively be done with them as far as you're concerned!
 
Fair enough, perhaps my terminology is wrong. I guess it hinges on the term ' pursue'. If Belle leaves and they don't know where he/she goes to - how much pursuing can they do? And since the debt is unsecured, if they find him/her, what can they do to recover in a foreign country outside the EU? Going through foreign Courts could be a waste of time in the end, and if they have no assets in their name - there's nothing to sequester.

That sale price does seem very low though, and maybe it would be better to simply surrender the property to the Bank and let their liquidator find a better price. I'm not sure how that would work out - but if they are blocking the sale, maybe it's the only alternative.

What about Credit Ratings? Is there a Global Register which follows you around the planet?
 
Hopefully belle1 will not have to use bank for a while after this is been sorted out. I lived through 2 recessions in the UK the first one was in the 70's with the 3 day week for workers and fortunately I did not have a mortgage back then. In the late 80's with the recession then I did have a mortgage but luckily I was in a reasonable good secure employment and got through it, but it is something I would not want to do again in a hurry.

At the end of the day I would rather deal with a landlord than a bank any day, it is far better for your mental state of your health as stress is not good for anyones wellbeing and that is all that matters.

Have a look at your mortgage deeds and see what it says about renting out your property, if it does not mention anything about rent it out your home then it maybe OK.
 
Update:

2 years abroad now, no contact from the bank re the shortfall on the mortgage, my solicitor checked this for me but they still have four years to act under the statute of limitations so who knows....

So far so good!
 
Great to hear from you Belle, hope you've now well settled in. It's always interesting to find out what happened to people thanks for coming back to share. Whatever happened to the house?
 
We sold the house for the bank instead of walking away from it, they were happy to let us deal with that end of it. There was a shortfall, the bank said we needed to come to some arrangement but we never heard anything after, never got paper work etc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top