Voluntary Surrender- don't do it just yet?

As some of the other posters have already pointed out, it can be a criminal offence to damage property. One of the definitions of property in the Criminal Damage Act 1991 is along the lines of "any person having a charge on property". A mortgage is a charge on property. It is 100% clear from the Act that someone intentionally damaging a charged property would be committing a criminal offence.

It is also a criminal offence to threaten to damage charged property.

A criminal conviction would block any visa to Canada or the US etc.


Jim Stafford
 
Thanks Jim, this is certainly helpful to know. Do you have a definition of damage?
 
Brendan Burgess said:
I think that it would clearly include
Click to expand...
Wires and windows will constitute damage I'd imagine but the floors, toilets, sinks,kitchen and two thirds of the doors will be leaving with me as I put them in,at least this is what I'm thinking until I hear better.
 
gone said:
Wires and windows will constitute damage I'd imagine but the floors, toilets, sinks,kitchen and two thirds of the doors will be leaving with me as I put them in.
Click to expand...

No problem with that, as long as you put back the ones they replaced.

Brendan
 
Brendan Burgess said:
No problem with that, as long as you put back the ones they replaced.

Brendan
Click to expand...
They didn't replace any. Here's the definition of damage as per the Act - "to destroy, deface, dismantle or, whether temporarily or otherwise, render inoperable or unfit for use or prevent or impair the operation of " .
I suppose if I hadn't made any alterations to the house and was intending on stripping it it would probably fall under dismantling or rendering unfit for use.
So we can assume that anyone who has stripped the property before repossession has fitted all the stripped items themselves or else are facing criminal charges.
 
gone. I am no supporter of the Banks but your attitude stinks. You have apparently lived in the house for 6 years without paying anything and you want to continue this for sometime into the future. You then want to leave the house a semi wreck when you leave it and this is nothing short of spite. Then you want to go to Canada under another name to do what. I assume you could could have got your mortgage deemed unsustainable and got a social house here and gone the bankruptcy route.
It might be better for your own state of mind and health in the long run. I still hold the view that people should take some personal responsibility for their own actions.
I well realise that people got into trouble because of events outside their own control.
 

"You have apparently lived in the house for 6 years without paying anything and you want to continue this for sometime into the future." - Yes Dermot it's kinda hard to pay when your industry and job vanish overnight and yes I will be holding onto the house for as long as legally possible in the hope that as it appreciates my debt will shrink. This is logical and legal.
"You then want to leave the house a semi wreck when you leave it and this is nothing short of spite." - This was a bargaining tool and never going to actually happen, the house was always going to be left as it was purchased. I also thought it was legal and so not spite.
"I assume you could could have got your mortgage deemed unsustainable and got a social house here and gone the bankruptcy route." - Even if I wanted to further burden the state by looking for social housing the waiting lists are years afaik, I would be on the streets if I went this route and certainly not looking at emigrating and removing the burden of my unemployment from the state.
" I still hold the view that people should take some personal responsibility for their own actions.
I well realise that people got into trouble because of events outside their own control." - You do see the inherent contradictions in taking responsibility for something that is outside of your control?
And finally Dermot your opinion on my attitude is of no consequence to me, an attitude that you would approve of won't put bread on the table for me or my offspring. You need to stop taking this personally, like I said this is just business.
 
Gone : I am not a fan of banks but I do believe in trying to pay what I owe.

Very many have been stung by the fallout of the incompetence of decision makers in financial and political circles, and will continue to take various hits.

What engages me, having read your two threads, is that you articulate, argue, plan, threaten various alternatives from going incognito to Canada to stripping your house etc but have been unable to in any way address your loan.

What I mean is that with such an active brain you have not found an employer who would have needed someone of your ilk who can think, plan, execute a project , and pay you for your competencies.

Your line of work died with the crash, I gather, but it is apparent that you are capable of diversifying. Have you tried ? Or are you engaging in self indulgent argument here?

Posters here give wonderful advice and guidance .
 
I have nothing against banks, I have nothing against anyone involved in my demise tbh, everybody was just doing their jobs, it's the system and my financial naivete that's at fault.
I too believe in paying my debts and have never used credit to purchase anything other than the house but a time comes when you look at your debts and you realise that you will never pay them unless you achieve the same sort of income you were getting at the time of drawdown and that's when the pressure starts building and you start getting all sorts of psychosomatic illnesses and guess what, there's no valve to release it.
I look at my friends who have spent their last resources reskilling, some of them even managed to get decent work but none will ever earn even half of what they were in construction, the problems they have with their mortgages now they will still have in 10 years time when they hit the ceilings in their industries.
I tried diversifying yeah, within a year I had a company formed but got out bid on contracts by established businesses with economies of scale. A year later a similiar story, starting a viable business in this economy with few resources is nigh on impossible, no one wants to take a risk on you.
Eventually I realised that it was highly unlikely that I would ever be able to address my problem and that it would define my life if I let it, after that the decision to flee came naturally.
All of the high horsers (not you in particular) who say they believe in paying their debts? Yeah that's because they have the ability to, put them in my situation and I guarantee you 100% of them do a variation of what I'm doing, if a person goes overboard with a rock tied around their neck then they're gonna do everything they can to get the rock off before they drown (not trying to be too dramatic but you get my drift, I can spend my life here working and will still never come near to paying off my debts unless we have another tiger driven boom and that ain't happening imo).
 
Gone, I'm a fan of people paying their debts too, and I can understand why posters might feel aggrieved at the thought of somebody not doing so. After all, depending on the bank involved, we'll be paying for it. However, I also believe that people should not be burdened with unpayable debt, and I much prefer to see people going your route than internalising the stress of the situation and literally making themselves ill and incapacitated. That's no use to anyone either. I think we should all save a bit of our ire for the banks who still operate out of self interest (well, that's "business" too, but if we're going to get annoyed with people for getting on with business...) but most especially for our political class who put us in the situation of shouldering the debt, on the pretext that we couldn't live without functioning banks. Well we don't have functioning banks -- if we did the OP would be out on his ear as someone else observed. I don't think we should be faulting only the borrowers for this can-kicking situation.
 

The decision to flee came naturally.....6 years later!

There are several legal options open to you to resolve this situation...bankruptcy, PIA etc
But you want to strip the house, change your name etc

You talk about 'business' but live rent free for 6 years +, better than any homeless person.
You talk about 'business' while mortgage rates in Ireland are the highest in the EU because of you and your ilk- thus making the likes of me pay way more than I should every month for a new mortgage.

I have no doubt that if the market had gone the in the opposite direction, but that the likes of you would be on this website asking whether Kazaksthan would be a good investment opportunity for the equity you had built up in Ireland. Such is the way of life.

So forgive my downright negativity towards your 'woe is me, I never knew what I signed up for' , 'the banks screwed little ol me over' attitude.....and you living there rent free ever since.

You want your cake...and you sure as hell want to eat it all also
 
Lots of inaccuracies there Delboy but sure no point in letting the truth get in the way of a good rant, I take it you're struggling too so?
What do you think I should have done and should do now?
 
gone said:
I'd imagine but the floors, toilets, sinks,kitchen and two thirds of the doors will be leaving with me as I put them in,.
Click to expand...


what carry then all the way to Canada??? your baggage charges will be fairly hefty so
 
gone said:
As long as the deeds are in my possession I'm fully entitled to do as I please with the house, no?
Click to expand...

But the deeds are not in your possession, they are with the bank, as you singned a mortgage which means really the bank owns the property if you do not fulfill the terms of your mortgage.

Signing a mortgage gives your obligations.
 
Delboy said:
You've already dragged it out for 6 years....how many more do you feel you should get away with?
Click to expand...

Think about this differently Delboy. Is he getting away with anything, or has he had 6 years of stress.

And who is gaining by the 6 years, is the bank not gaining if you do the figures.

And whose fault is it he's managed to hold onto it for 6 years.

Forget about poster Gone for a minute and focus on what the banks are at.
 
Time said:
Rent a container would be the cheapest option.
Click to expand...

You guys realise the people doing the stripping are selling on something called 'donedeal' or somesuch, I've been reliable informed.

And if the owner doesn't stip it and banks appoint receivers or house is vacant, somebody else might be stripping it. That's why banks don't want to board up houses.
 
I was in a county registrars court last month and there were over 60 repossession cases on the docket. Are the banks actually taking possession of the houses or are they leaving them occupied with the possession order at the ready should conditions improve?

The reason I ask is if you leave houses unoccupied, they will get vandalised and without heat damp will set in, thus destroying the interior.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register