The rich don't get pursued for their debts like the poor do

Steven Barrett said:
The bankrupt does not own the €1m in the pension pot, they own the €1m on deposit.




In the context of the discussion, having those limits can have an impact on a 65 year old who has saved into his pension for his lifetime and made a mistake by buying an investment property in Bulgaria. Or someone in a defined benefit pension who receives €33,000 a year pension. If they were in the public service, they would have earned €66,000. Hardly rich but their pension would come into play if there was a limit of €1m.

And how would a public servant's pension be treated? It is unfunded, so there is nothing to take. They are protected but someone in a private pension isn't?
Click to expand...
I wouldn't claim to be an expert, but surely it is possible to put a valuation on offshore property or a DB pension, just as other assets are valued in bankruptcy? Or put a lien on the ongoing payments, so the creditors get paid from the ongoing pension payments, over a certain cap?
 
Brendan Burgess said:
Because they lent irresponsibly to property developers and mortgages to ordinary people.

But the two main banks which went insolvent were Anglo and Irish Nationwide. Their depositors got a higher rate because of the perceived riskiness of those banks. And yet the same depositors were guaranteed in full by the taxpayer.

The banks should have been let go bust and the bondholders and ordinary depositors with more than €20k should have lost their money.

Brendan
Click to expand...
So, the state bailed out depositors, because of reckless borrowing/lending.
But financial stability of the entire country was at stake. The banks would not have opened, large queues would have formed, possible public disorder, a complete collapse of any trust in high Street banks.
I agree that the excessive interest rates, should have been clawed back, if practical. But punishing prudent savers for the sins of Johnny Bigpants and his chums in the banks was never going to happen.
 
Steven Barrett said:
The bankrupt does not own the €1m in the pension pot, they own the €1m on deposit.
Click to expand...
Yes one asset is far more liquid but it is absurd to claim that someone has no ownership of their pension.


RetirementPlan said:
I wouldn't claim to be an expert, but surely it is possible to put a valuation on offshore property or a DB pension, just as other assets are valued in bankruptcy?
Click to expand...
Of course it is! Divorce settlements frequently involve the assignment of a portion of DC pension rights to the other spouse. There is no fundamental issue with changing the law to allow the same for the benefit of creditors in certain circumstances.
Steven Barrett said:
In the context of the discussion, having those limits can have an impact on a 65 year old who has saved into his pension for his lifetime and made a mistake by buying an investment property in Bulgaria.
Click to expand...
It's merely a question of degree. I'm not advocating life-long millstones of confiscation of all pension funds. I just think that pension assets (particularly when very large) shouldn't be sacred.
 
RetirementPlan said:
I wouldn't claim to be an expert, but surely it is possible to put a valuation on offshore property or a DB pension, just as other assets are valued in bankruptcy? Or put a lien on the ongoing payments, so the creditors get paid from the ongoing pension payments, over a certain cap?
Click to expand...
And maybe a lien life assurance / death benefit payouts, so the sneaky buggers don't wriggle out of it by popping their clogs?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top