NB:-Shocking discovery on clawback concept during sale of A/H Apartment

Z

zen

Guest
Folks

As you know I'm an active critic of this scam. Being mislead each and ever step along the way and being strangled by terms and conditions that were not made available to us and punished on so many levels through no fault of our own.

I'm in the process of selling my unit in the hope to escape the vampire claws of of DCC after years torment.

To my horror I discovered yet another thing I thought I'd fully understood, but didn't. The CLAWBACK clause....

My understanding (and EVERYONE I know in this situation) was that if you sold your AH unit above what you paid for you'd have to pay the CLAWBACK (28% in my case). This was because people were not to be making money of a government scheme. Totally understandable.

NB:- It turns out there is a CONFISCATION, then there is the CLAWBACK. Allow me to explain using simple figures.

Original value of property is 200k
Bought the property for 150k (50k or 25% discount aka Clawback)
Sale Agreed for 170k (20k above bought price)

My understanding was that the 20k was subjected to the 25% CLAWBACK,,,, but NOOOOOO. THAT ENTIRE 20K IS TOTALLY CONFISCATED!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I've been informed by DCC that anything above the ORIGINAL MARKET PRICE of 200k would be liable for the 25%.

ITS A DOUBLE WHAMMY!!!!!!!! The first amount from what you paid and the original market value is DIRECTLY CONFISCATED and the second amount above the original market value is subjected to the CLAWBACK!!!!!!


If your selling your Affordable Home property THERE IS NO POINT NEGOTIATING ANYTHING ABOVE WHAT YOU PAID FOR AS IT WILL BE CONFISCATED.

I'm using an excellent solicitor and a agent that are both familiar with this scheme. PM me if you are going through this process or thinking about this and I'll see if I can offer some free advice based on my experience.
 

vandriver

Registered User
Messages
1,933
You agreed to pay the percentage discount of the sale price to the council if you sold within the first 10 years.
On a €170 k sale at 28% discount,you agreed to pay the council €47,600.
As a concession,so you are not out of pocket,this agreement was modified to how you describe it above.
If you wait past 10 years,the clawback decreases by 10% a year.
 

elcato

Moderator
Messages
3,840
So you would be in 30k negative equity had you paid the market price of 200k This way you are getting out without that. Is it not fair that in this case DCC are taking the hit as they are down 50k and are only getting 20k back. Seems reasonable enough but I may be way off the mark in my summary of it.
 

vandriver

Registered User
Messages
1,933
'I've been informed by DCC that anything above the ORIGINAL MARKET PRICE of 200k would be liable for the 25%. '
As you don't seem to have understood much about the scheme,you may have misinterpreted what you were told.
Any price achieved within the first 10 years,above the pre discounted price is all subject to the 25%(in this case)
So,if you sold for 250k,you would owe €62.5 k.
However,in your terms,the 'confiscation' plus the clawback will amount to the same value.
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
48,411
My understanding was that the 20k was subjected to the 25% CLAWBACK,,,, but NOOOOOO. THAT ENTIRE 20K IS TOTALLY CONFISCATED!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That is great news. I had assumed that this scam on the taxpayer almost guaranteed profits for buyers of affordable housing.

So the scheme was very fairly designed.

You bought a house worth €200k .

You made repayments based on a loan of €150k.

You are selling it for €170k.

And you don't have to pay the shortfall?

Wow!
 

cremeegg

Registered User
Messages
3,892
I am inclined to agree with Brendan, if you were sold the house below value because of your "needs" but now you are selling it, you should reasonably be expected to repay the original market price, i.e. the €200k. After all you obviously no longer "need" the house.
 

Bronte

Registered User
Messages
14,162
Folks

As you know I'm an active critic of this scam. Being mislead each and ever step along the way and being strangled by terms and conditions that were not made available to us and punished on so many levels through no fault of our own.

I'm in the process of selling my unit in the hope to escape the vampire claws of of DCC after years torment.

To my horror I discovered yet another thing I thought I'd fully understood, but didn't. The CLAWBACK clause....

My understanding (and EVERYONE I know in this situation) was that if you sold your AH unit above what you paid for you'd have to pay the CLAWBACK (28% in my case). This was because people were not to be making money of a government scheme. Totally understandable.

NB:- It turns out there is a CONFISCATION, then there is the CLAWBACK. Allow me to explain using simple figures.

Original value of property is 200k
Bought the property for 150k (50k or 25% discount aka Clawback)
Sale Agreed for 170k (20k above bought price)

My understanding was that the 20k was subjected to the 25% CLAWBACK,,,, but NOOOOOO. THAT ENTIRE 20K IS TOTALLY CONFISCATED!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I've been informed by DCC that anything above the ORIGINAL MARKET PRICE of 200k would be liable for the 25%.

ITS A DOUBLE WHAMMY!!!!!!!! The first amount from what you paid and the original market value is DIRECTLY CONFISCATED and the second amount above the original market value is subjected to the CLAWBACK!!!!!!


If your selling your Affordable Home property THERE IS NO POINT NEGOTIATING ANYTHING ABOVE WHAT YOU PAID FOR AS IT WILL BE CONFISCATED.

I'm using an excellent solicitor and a agent that are both familiar with this scheme. PM me if you are going through this process or thinking about this and I'll see if I can offer some free advice based on my experience.

What is your excellent solicitors advice?
 
Z

zen

Guest
Van Driver you haven't understood the post, if your not a troll then please read the post again as you CLEARLY dont understand the clawback. Thats not how it works.

I'm in the process of selling, I'm going through the clawback process, I'm explaining EXACTLY HOW IT WORKS and its NOT how we were told.

Please keep to the thread topic, this is about understanding the clawback concept, not being out of pocket.
 
Z

zen

Guest
So you would be in 30k negative equity had you paid the market price of 200k This way you are getting out without that. Is it not fair that in this case DCC are taking the hit as they are down 50k and are only getting 20k back. Seems reasonable enough but I may be way off the mark in my summary of it.

Incorrect, I wouldn't have paid 200k as I couldn't afford that. DCC are not taking any hit, they are getting the full loan amount redeemed 10 YEARS BEFORE THE TERM DATE.

Please keep to the thread topic, this is about understanding the clawback concept, not being out of pocket.
 
Z

zen

Guest
That is great news. I had assumed that this scam on the taxpayer almost guaranteed profits for buyers of affordable housing.

So the scheme was very fairly designed.

You bought a house worth €200k .

You made repayments based on a loan of €150k.

You are selling it for €170k.

And you don't have to pay the shortfall?

Wow!

No Brendan, not WOW,....... The taxpayer (ME, not some other alien third party) had not guaranteed Affordable Housing, your thinking about the bankers,,,.....

Please keep to the thread topic, this is about understanding the clawback concept, not being out of pocket.
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
48,411
This is about a "shocking discovery" , a "scam" and being "strangled" and "punished" in technicolor.

So it's perfectly on topic to point out that it is a very fair scheme. OK, your losses were reduced by €30k at the expense of the taxpayer, but it's very fair to you.


Brendan
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
48,411
I would say that plenty of people who bought a house at the same time for €200k would happily swap with you who can get out without loss.

Brendan
 
Z

zen

Guest
Very dramatic and colourful post, alas nothing to see here, the scheme is fair, seriously what is expected, it is all in the t/c's, it does not suit the O.P. that does not make it wrong.

This thread is powerful with information as I'm going through this, not you.

Please keep to the thread topic, this is about understanding the clawback concept, not being out of pocket.
 
Z

zen

Guest
What is your excellent solicitors advice?

Finally, a genuine question but I'm not sure the adjective "excellent" is sarcasm.

The responses to my thread reads like some of you are in the same room.....o_Oo_Oo_O

My solicitors advice is....

If you bought your property for 150k and are offered 150k, just take it. Don't waste your time trying to negotiate above that figure as anything above that figure will be confiscated as I've been trying to explain.

The thread is not about being out of pocket, that's a different story and the entire forum is littered with people out of pocket, it doesn't need any more, just like it doesn't need any cheerleaders of the scheme telling people they got a good deal when they clearly didn't.
 

Suebee

Registered User
Messages
42
Yes given back to the council therefore benefitting the tax payer so actually your solicitors advice is to screw the taxpayer and sell for less


Marvellous advice
 
Z

zen

Guest
Come on Brendan,,,,... every time I post anything about this scheme you stand all over everything I say, defend the council and dismiss my points. I dont recall you ever agreeing to anything I post.

I'm having serious concerns about the role of this website.

It is a shocking discovery about the clawback. I used colour because those tools are available your forum and used it simply to emphasis the potential dual layer payments during a sale.

This is a very very valid post to anyone looking to sell.
 
Z

zen

Guest
Yes given back to the council therefore benefitting the tax payer so actually your solicitors advice is to screw the taxpayer and sell for less


Marvellous advice

???
No, sell for the price you PAID FOR IT. Can you people read? Not BELOW the price, for the love of god! IF one sells for the said amount 170k, the council/taxpayer/MMEEEEE get the full amount BACK,,,,.....ON TOP of the 10 years of mortgage and mortgage insurance payments .......wait for it 10/15 years before the mortgage term!

This has to be a joke these replies!
 

Suebee

Registered User
Messages
42
Well actually what you were saying is don't look for more cause it won't go in ur pocket. The property could well be worth more than what you paid for it but you are advising people not to bother accepting higher offers. So yes you are looking to screw the taxpayer

You are forgetting that you got it at a discount in the first place
 
Top