More repossessions will not lead to lower mortgage rates

Jimmy s

Registered User
Messages
30
You need to pay to attract the best. The taxpayer is the shareholder and the higher the value of a share the better the return for the taxpayer when the shares are sold.

These costs must be paid from income hence the higher interest rates.

We can't have it both ways ie low interest rates, low income and the best staff. You get what you pay for. You have to pay to attract the best.
I don't get how you think banking staff from management up are not paid enough. Judging ability to repay is far from rocket science. They have not reinvented the wheel, they are not creating any extra or primary wealth. Mistakes are absorbed and no one pays the piper I mean talk about easy street. Overpaid and run for cover pass the buck that's all that springs to mind.
 

NiallSparky

Registered User
Messages
11
I don't get how you think banking staff from management up are not paid enough. Judging ability to repay is far from rocket science. They have not reinvented the wheel, they are not creating any extra or primary wealth. Mistakes are absorbed and no one pays the piper I mean talk about easy street. Overpaid and run for cover pass the buck that's all that springs to mind.
You don't really seem to have a decent grasp of what banks do. It's not exclusively retail mortgage lending.
 

Dazzler123

Frequent Poster
Messages
63
No I'm not but what's done is done if these people now have no ability to pay they have to be let live. Its within reason to think a lot of these mortgages should not have been given out. Id have no problem with their ownership been revoked but no eviction the mistake is already made. A fair rent or mortgage in relation to their income to but owning a percentage of what they pay for.
How do you revoke ownership but allow people to remain in the property? Who owns the property when ownership is revoked ? What happens when they refuse to pay the rent or fair mortgage? Anyone who is still in trouble since the crash has had plenty of opportunity to resolve their loans but have failed to do so. Those people will not cooperate with such schemes
 

Jimmy s

Registered User
Messages
30
Irish banking has some features of an oligopoly.

There has to be explicit, concious price-fixing for a cartel to exist though.

Irish banking is nor a cartel.
You don't really seem to have a decent grasp of what banks do. It's not exclusively retail mortgage lending.
I never mentioned mortgage I presume you are not just adding business loans and basic banking including foreign exchange
 

The Horseman

Frequent Poster
Messages
283
I don't get how you think banking staff from management up are not paid enough. Judging ability to repay is far from rocket science. They have not reinvented the wheel, they are not creating any extra or primary wealth. Mistakes are absorbed and no one pays the piper I mean talk about easy street. Overpaid and run for cover pass the buck that's all that springs to mind.
A mortgage is a contract to borrow an amount and pay it back. Judging peoples ability to pay is based on the evidence supplied to get the loan.

Borrowers fabricated their incomes, went to multiple banks, got multiple loans and never told the banks about the multiple loans they had.

Hence the reason for the Central Credit Agency. Now we know what debts people have when they apply for loans.

You need a functioning banking system for an economy to work. This is the reason the banks were bailed out.

I did not say staff are or are not paid enough, you did. Again I just explained if you want the best you have to pay to attract them.

The "piper" was paid. The value of bank shares fell to almost nothing. Warren Buffet bought BOI shares for 10c each. These shares were trading at €15 to €18 at one stage.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Jimmy s

Registered User
Messages
30
How do you revoke ownership but allow people to remain in the property? Who owns the property when ownership is revoked ? What happens when they refuse to pay the rent or fair mortgage? Anyone who is still in trouble since the crash has had plenty of opportunity to resolve their loans but have failed to do so. Those people will not cooperate with such schemes
Most people will pay what they can afford. Get over it it won't make banks reduce svr they will only increase profits. The banks still haven't learned from the great tracker mortgage robbery and have had enough support from the people instead of trying to divide them
 

The Horseman

Frequent Poster
Messages
283
The loans are still owed to somebody. Its not owed to the bank its owed to people who have money on deposit with the bank.

You know every ordinary person who has a bank account with their wages in it, their savings for a car or a holiday or for a deposit for a house.
 

Jimmy s

Registered User
Messages
30
[Q
a lot of bank staff facilited the fabricated wages in fact they gave them new jobs. I presume your joking about share price been punishment to banking malpractices,collusion and daylight robbery of people working in the banks
UOTE="The Horseman, post: 1618035, member: 100185"]

[/QUOTE]
Are you joking me the value of shares falling what's that got to do with not having more of the bankers in jail
 

Jimmy s

Registered User
Messages
30
[Q
a lot of bank staff facilited the fabricated wages in fact they gave them new jobs. I presume your joking about share price been punishment to banking malpractices,collusion and daylight robbery of people by the banks
UOTE="The Horseman, post: 1618035, member: 100185"]
Are you joking me the value of shares falling what's that got to do with not having more of the bankers in jail
[/QUOTE]
 

Jimmy s

Registered User
Messages
30
The loans are still owed to somebody. Its not owed to the bank its owed to people who have money on deposit with the bank.

You know every ordinary person who has a bank account with their wages in it, their savings for a car or a holiday or for a deposit for a house.
The ordinary person you are talking about are guaranteed up to 100000 the low percent after that im sure are well covered between property, gold and fire proof boxes
 

Dazzler123

Frequent Poster
Messages
63
Most people will pay what they can afford. Get over it it won't make banks reduce svr they will only increase profits. The banks still haven't learned from the great tracker mortgage robbery and have had enough support from the people instead of trying to divide them
I admire your optimism... but the nearest thing to your idea for people paying what they can afford is council rents. Figures in 2016 showed that over 20% of council tenancies are in arrears... that is a means tested payment that is tailored to the individuals ability to pay and yet there is massive arrears. Your idea simply will not work and has been shown ro not work.

The tracker scandal and other alleged wrongs of the "banksters" are not relevant to the obligation on a person to pay their mortgage.
 

Jimmy s

Registered User
Messages
30
I admire your optimism... but the nearest thing to your idea for people paying what they can afford is council rents. Figures in 2016 showed that over 20% of council tenancies are in arrears... that is a means tested payment that is tailored to the individuals ability to pay and yet there is massive arrears. Your idea simply will not work and has been shown ro not work.

The tracker scandal and other alleged wrongs of the "banksters" are not relevant to the obligation on a person to pay their mortgage.
This is going to cost one way or another if we can get up to 80 percent of holders in arrears paying what they can afford we would have done well. Let's work with these people and show them the light if they are still holding part ownership I believe even more will follow
 

AlbacoreA

Frequent Poster
Messages
3,275
....
The tracker scandal and other alleged wrongs of the "banksters" are not relevant to the obligation on a person to pay their mortgage.
Except we are implying a moral imperative to pay the mortgage. But not to the banks activities.

In some places you can hand back the keys. We don't have that here. Which would change how this business is handled. Especially how banks often refuse to negotiate.
 

Dazzler123

Frequent Poster
Messages
63
This is going to cost one way or another if we can get up to 80 percent of holders in arrears paying what they can afford we would have done well. Let's work with these people and show them the light if they are still holding part ownership I believe even more will follow
Its a nice idea but i)banks are not charities and ii) the banks have attempted to work with these people already. For years given that many of these people have been i arrears since the crash
 

galway_blow_in

Frequent Poster
Messages
1,472
A mortgage is a contract to borrow an amount and pay it back. Judging peoples ability to pay is based on the evidence supplied to get the loan.

Borrowers fabricated their incomes, went to multiple banks, got multiple loans and never told the banks about the multiple loans they had.

Hence the reason for the Central Credit Agency. Now we know what debts people have when they apply for loans.

You need a functioning banking system for an economy to work. This is the reason the banks were bailed out.

I did not say staff are or are not paid enough, you did. Again I just explained if you want the best you have to pay to attract them.

The "piper" was paid. The value of bank shares fell to almost nothing. Warren Buffet bought BOI shares for 10c each. These shares were trading at €15 to €18 at one stage.
Don't think buffet bought shares in any Irish bank.

Wilbur Ross did
 

Dazzler123

Frequent Poster
Messages
63
Except we are implying a moral imperative to pay the mortgage. But not to the banks activities.

In some places you can hand back the keys. We don't have that here. Which would change how this business is handled. Especially how banks often refuse to negotiate.
00
There is a moral imperative to repay a loan, irrespective of the banks activities. If the bank has misbehaved the cbi and fspo are there to address that. The answer is not to renege on your loan.

Handing back the keys happens all the time here. That just deals with the security for the loan. Not the loan itself. Its reasonable for the bank to want their money back. The fact is that they generally dont however
 

cremeegg

Frequent Poster
Messages
3,082
Cremeegg you are the perfect example too worried about what everyone else has and is getting.
My point is that public policy should be rules based and not based on whoever can gain sympathy for their plight.

Your comment
I'm sure 90% are genuinely less well off
reflects nothing but your own subjective opinion, which is no basis for the formation of public policy. Your opinion or anyone else's.

The ironic think is you are jealous of the poorer
I will ignore your personal observation as you are new here.
 

Jimmy s

Registered User
Messages
30
My point is that public policy should be rules based and not based on whoever can gain sympathy for their plight.

Your comment

reflects nothing but your own subjective opinion, which is no basis for the formation of public policy. Your opinion or anyone else's.


I will ignore your personal observation as you are new here.
My point also is it should be rules based just not what's in place. My sympathy certainly doesn't lie with the banks who now even though are posting huge tax free profits can still sow an idea of repossessions equaling lower svr rates. Public policy was an option at some stage
 
Top