I don't think €400 is enough to cover interest only so I think the bank could seek repossession - otherwise the debt will just grow ever-bigger. They apparently originally offered €100/€150. I may be hard-hearted but I think if the offer is not at least what it would cost the family to rent elsewhere, they shouldn't really be evoking so much sympathy. They want their accommodation costs subsidised by someone else.2. The couple claim that they offered to pay €400 per month of a €900 pm mortgage but Start refused this offer. Is this possible? Can the bank refuse an offer of almost 50% payment and opt for repossession instead (I think it unlikely but I could be wrong)
There was apparently a repossession order from the High Court.1. Can a bank repossess a home without a court order?
Main point was they could not afford to go to Dublin for court proceedings and could not understand why a representative of the lending agency could not come down and meet them.
....Sounded very sad case and i could easily understand why locals would lend support as it brought back memories of stories of evictions in Ireland in the past.
Lots of people have made bad decisions over the last 10 years in this country with their large deposits...I did'nt see the shareholders of the banks get refunds from the taxpayer when the shares collapsed.Meanwhile Mr O’Sullivan said he wasn’t sure what was going to happen over the coming days but he was determined that his family would not leave their home after putting down a € 110,000 deposit on the property in 2007.
Oh the irony of that shower who collapsed the whole country making pleas in headline grabbing casesFianna Fáil leader, Micheál Martin called on the Taoiseach to intervene personally in the case as he reminded him that he had said in March that he did wish to see homes being taken from people.
Happily for the taxpayer, Start is not government backed/funded/bailed-out so if Start does want to indulge in some debt forgiveness, it won't cost the taxpayer anything.They basically want the taxpayers to subsidised their home for the rest of their lives
Delboy, you said an offer of 1/2 the mortgage is now on the table, you mean half of the 180K, so a 90K mortgage?
No, I'm saying they're now only willing to pay less than half their monthly mortgage bill...they want to pay €400 v's the full amount of €900. That's the deal they seem to be putting on the table
For this individual case, yes it might be a better solution in purely financial terms. But it would set a dangerous precedent for many more of Start's customers to expect the same write-down - regardless of whether they are as 'deserving' or not. Start's business model is to charge higher interest on subprime risks knowing that they will lose on some loans (hence the higher interest to cover that risk). They can't be seen as a soft touch when it comes to borrowers in difficulty because their whole business would probably collapse around them.If Start wrote down the mortgage to say 100K, and left the family in the house, wouldnt' that be a better solution
Happily for the taxpayer, Start is not government backed/funded/bailed-out so if Start does want to indulge in some debt forgiveness, it won't cost the taxpayer anything.
. Start's business model is to charge higher interest on subprime risks knowing that they will lose on some loans .
Because next week, Start would have a queue out their door of borrowers saying 'honest, I can only pay on 100K so how's about a bit of that debt write-off I've heard you do?'In relation to deserving or not. What does that matter. Surely it should be based on maths. If they cannot afford a 180K mortgage, but can afford say 100K, and the property is not going to give Start back more than 100K then I don't see why they shouldn't write it down to 100K, or whatever the borrower can afford.
This is a pure case of strategic default. They have made no effort at all. They paid nothing because they knew that the CCMA meant that Start Mortgages could do nothing. They paid nothing because they thought that the High Court would never let a family home be repossessed.
Micheál Martin is an absolute disgrace for supporting these people.
Séamus Coffey has written an excellent
Anatomy of a Repossession Case.
That's a great analysis by Coffey (who is he?). Nearly every single case that one reads in the newspapers seems to have grounds for suspecting strategic default. And it's exceedingly difficult to pin down exactly what happened.
Why in this case would you borrow another 34K at such a high interest rate, in 2009 when you knew Ireland was in the middle of a recession. Why would a plumber have such large debts? Because customers hadn't paid him for work? Despite the recession I sometimes find it hard to get a good plumber, plenty of cowboys though.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?