I see a piece in the indo today on page 5 re the minister and the fact that in his recent meetings with the banks he failed to ask them to reduce their rates. He as before mentioned competition and switching but how can you switch if in negative equity. Roll on the election as we've been ignored and abandoned and we'll see what backlash is there. I urge anyone with an svr to vote appropriately in the election especially those in negative equity, eg anyone but FG and LAB. This is our last chance to do anything in the absence of a desire for a public protest.
"Minister Noonan has not asked the banks to reduce variable rates" - Indo
- Thread starter tonymac
- Start date
Tony
I fully agree with your comments on Minister Noonan.In fact he thinks the BOI offer of 2% cashback is good and promoted same on radio two weeks ag
bviously he thinks like BOI ----- suck them in and lock them up.It is vital that we highlight the issue,so we vote appropriately.
I fully agree with your comments on Minister Noonan.In fact he thinks the BOI offer of 2% cashback is good and promoted same on radio two weeks ag
bviously he thinks like BOI ----- suck them in and lock them up.It is vital that we highlight the issue,so we vote appropriately.From what I can see only Michael McGrath from the opposition parties has given the issue any serious support. We would then have to depend on him continuing his support for us if he did get into office but if I remember from the burlington meeting he did commit when asked to continue his support if elected to office. Ruth Coppinger did reply to one of my emails expressing support in the Dail. SF did reply expressing support but the promised reply from Pears Doherty never arrived. We need to keep getting in touch with them all to make sure it stays on their agenda. Re a public protest which would certainly achieve that I have previously advocated this as an action but I feel if it's not getting big support on this forum I don't see it getting it elsewhere . Too many people with svrs are sitting back doing nothing as we would need a few thousand to co-ordinate a proper campaign and I don't see the required numbers coming forward. All we have to do is look at the attendance at the burlington meeting after all the efforts the organisers made for it.
Both FF and Sinn Fein introduced private member bills to give the Central Bank the power to set and/or control mortgage rates. The Central Bank has been pretty clear that it doesn't want this power and wouldn't exercise any such power in the current environment.
If you want to go the political route, I would suggest that you need to be far more specific as to precisely what you want to achieve. Relying on vague promises made by any politician during an election campaign is unwise in my opinion.
If you want to go the political route, I would suggest that you need to be far more specific as to precisely what you want to achieve. Relying on vague promises made by any politician during an election campaign is unwise in my opinion.
Agree re vague promises all right especially during an election campaign. What I want to achieve is the same as what the name of the campaign, fair mortgage rates. For me it's an svr rate of approx 2.5%, if im right the average euro area rate. Unfortunately just like the government the CB has renaged on its consumer protection role role and as nothing else seems to have worked the CB would be one of the first places for a picket the finance ministers office along with the Dail next and the HQs of the main banks. To do this though we need numbers and for me not enough people are willing to take part in a campaign, most of the noble exceptions are on this site.
Ger Fleming
Registered User
- Messages
- 61
Pearse Doherty emailed me last week to say he has tabled a question to Minister Noonan on the issue tomorrow Tuesday.
Good stuff, hopefully he'll give him the grilling he deserves but I won't be holding my breath. He does need to remind him about the fact that when you're in negative equity and high LTV that you can't switch or negotiate so basically you're trapped by the banks on high SVR. I'll try emailing him about this to make sure he asks him.
I think you may have misunderstood me. Politicians don't set mortgage rates - they pass laws - so what specific law do you want them to pass?
Politicians - particularly opposition politicians - will throw whatever shapes they think will appeal to you. But what exactly do you want them to do? Specifically, what laws do you want them to pass? Until you decide that I really can't see how you're going to advance your cause,
Correct re politicians not setting rates, the banks do. The banks have abused their right to set rates so for me legislation needs to come in to control their actions. If im right you made a suggestion in a different thread about allowing a max rate of 133% of the average tracker rate like in France. Another would be to make them justify a rate increase to the regulator with him having the right to say no if he deems it out of order, just like what's there with energy price regulation. His decision would be based on prevailing market conditions to use the words used in some mortgage contracts that the bank's decided to ignore. Agree totally that politicians have an eye on the election and will say what you want to hear. They need to be made commit to an actual policy position on this issue going into the election .
Mod's note: posts on Sarenco's suggestion moved here:
Suggestion: Cap existing rates at 125% of the new business rate
Mod's note: posts on Sarenco's suggestion moved here:
Suggestion: Cap existing rates at 125% of the new business rate
Last edited by a moderator:
Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 52,045
Here is an exchange from the Dáil yesterday.
QUESTION NO: 118
DÁIL QUESTION addressed to the Minister for Finance (Deputy Michael Noonan)
by Deputy Michael McGrath
for PRIORITY ANSWER on 29/09/2015
To ask the Minister for Finance his views that reductions in fixed mortgage rates offered by the banks represent an inadequate response to the widespread public concern over high variable rates; that it is important that all domestic banks reduce their core variable rate product offering; his plans to address high mortgage rates by the non-deposit taking retail credit (sub-prime) sector; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
REPLY.
As the Deputy knows, I have been aware of this issue for some time and have taken steps to ensure the banks provide real options for borrowers.
To summarise actions taken to date, I requested a report from the Central Bank on the topic which was published in May. I also met with the six main mortgage lenders and outlined my view that the interest rates being charged to Irish customers was too high.
I have recently concluded a further series of meetings with these banks and the reality is that the majority have put options in place to allow borrowers to reduce their monthly repayments.
Traditionally borrowers focused on standard variable rates but borrowers should at least consider other options. While individual borrowers must decide what suits their particular circumstances, some of the fixed rates being offered are now substantially below what the SVR rate was in May. These rates offer substantial savings to borrowers and also offer security as to monthly repayments over a specific period of time. At the end of that term, borrowers can then revert to an SVR rate if that is what they prefer. I would therefore encourage borrowers to contact their bank to see what is available to them in their particular circumstances or consider moving to another bank if the offer is not satisfactory.
I would also point out that lenders have not just reduced fixed rates. One lender significantly reduced their SVR for example, while another has embarked on a new pricing strategy based on property valuation. I asked the banks to provide options by which customers might reduce their monthly repayments and I believe options have been put in place.
While I have not met all mortgage providers operating in Ireland, changes to interest rates by the main lenders should drive competition in the market and exert downward pressure on other lenders to reduce their rates in line with other providers. Sub-prime lenders operate in a particular niche and deal with customers who present a different risk profile to other customers hence their rates will be higher other lenders.
Competition is the best long term way of reducing interest rates paid by Irish borrowers and ensuring that Irish banks offer a sustainable product range. Higher than warranted mortgage interest rates will encourage new entrants to the Irish market over the longer term. As the Deputy will be aware, the Government has undertaken a number of initiatives in order to promote competition in the market. For example, it introduced the changes to Section 149 of the Consumer Credit Act 1995 in the Central Bank (Supervision and Enforcement Act) 2013 for new entrants. This section regulates fees and charges and the changes mean that it does not apply for the first three years of operation of new entrants to the Irish banking sector as new entrants to the mortgage market bring welcome competition to this sector.
In the shorter term, customers can foster competition by considering switching mortgage provider. Central Bank research suggests that 21% of existing PDH variable rate mortgage customers could save by switching their provider. I expect that if financial institutions are convinced that there is a threat that they will lose existing customers, they will reduce the rates that they currently charge such customers. The CCPC website www.consumerhelp.ie is a valuable source of information on the rates charged by various financial institutions.
Deputy Michael McGrath: I thank the Minister for his reply. Several banks have introduced new options, which are always a good thing, but these options are very selective. They are of most benefit to new customers in particular. Many existing customers continue to be discriminated against and the options simply are not for everyone.
The following are the actual standard variable rates still being charged by the banks today: Bank of Ireland, 4.5%; Permanent TSB, 4.3%; KBC 4.5%. or 4.3% if the customer opens a current account with it; Ulster Bank, 4.3%; AIB, 3.65%; ACC, 4.4%; and Danske Bank, 4.95%. I could go on and get into the vulture funds and the servicing companies now managing loan books that have been sold.
Greater fixed rate products have been offered but they come at a price, as the Minister well knows. Existing customers continue to be charged much higher rates than new customers. The Minister has concluded his second round of meetings with the banks. Is he satisfied that they have done enough? Have the banks satisfied the Minister, because I am not satisfied? Is the threat of a levy and-or legislation now off the table? Has the Minister concluded his assessment or is it still an open book on his file?
Deputy Michael Noonan: I thank the Deputy for his supplementary question. He will recall that the Central Bank report published last May, to which I referred, stated that there was an excessive margin being charged in Ireland on variable interest rates but it disagreed that the margin was as big as has been cited in debates here on several occasions. The banks have moved to lower that particular margin. AIB has had made three reductions and it is the biggest mortgage provider in the country. It is down to 3.65% and it does not vary between new mortgages and existing ones. Permanent TSB has moved from its variable standard rate to what it describes as a managed variable rate and has introduced the concept of loan to value.
In the best loan-to-value situations they are offering money at 3.6%, I believe, and then it varies with loan-to-value rates, so there is significant movement. There are dozens of interest rates being offered now in different circumstances and I wish to see how the market operates and if competition will kick in. There is a reluctance among people to change. There is a type of inertia which is leading to individuals staying with their existing mortgage holders, but there is much better value if people shop around. It is not something one must fix for life - one will not get that option anyway. Normally, one fixes for one, two or three years and people can then revert to standard variable rates. At the conclusion of my meetings with the banks I said that if we are all around, we will talk again early in the new year and we will see how competition is operating.
On the question of the levy, there has been a levy in place over the last number of budgets. It will be a matter for the budget, and whether the levy will be maintained as it is, increased or reduced is a matter for announcement on budget day.
Deputy Michael McGrath: Reading between the lines, it sounds as if the Minister has made up his mind that the banks have gone far enough to satisfy him. I believe he is letting the banks off the hook, because they have not gone far enough. Yes, there have been improvements in the product offering, the fixed rates have come down and the managed variable rates are an innovation, but for many customers who are in negative equity or have very little equity and are really struggling there is little or no improvement. I have outlined all the variable rates still being charged by banks. Many of them are still up around the 4% to 4.5% rate and they are even higher in some cases. That is excessive when one considers the very low cost of funds that the banks are facing at present, the price that consumers must pay by entering into a fixed rate, the loss of flexibility they encounter when they do that and the fact that existing customers are being discriminated against. When the Minister says that if he is still here he will meet the banks again in the new year, it sounds as if the threat of the levy being increased or of legislation being introduced to give more powers to the Central Bank appears to be off the table. The Minister has been bought off too easily by the banks on this matter.
Deputy Michael Noonan: The Deputy is jumping to conclusions. While the headline variable rates that the Deputy outlined in his initial contribution are correct, other much lower rates are available to mortgage holders-----
Deputy Michael McGrath: For some customers.
Deputy Michael Noonan: -----either from their own bank or mortgage provider or by switching.
Deputy Michael McGrath: It is very difficult to switch.
Deputy Michael Noonan: What puzzles me at present is why more people are not switching. There is demonstrably an amount of money to be saved if people change, yet there appears to be an inertia in the system and they are not changing.
Deputy Michael McGrath: It is not easy to do.
Deputy Michael Noonan: I wish to let it go for a few months and see if the new competitive situation will operate to the benefit of customers. We have made significant progress. The Deputy's Private Members' Bill, which I complimented as a good initiative, sought to provide that the Central Bank should intervene to fix interest rates if they went above 3%. We have the two biggest mortgage providers down to 3.65% now, so we are coming close to the position the Deputy outlined.
I am not sure what will happen with interest rates internationally but there are very strong indications that the cycle of rising interest rates could commence this autumn when the US authorities increase interest rates. People should look seriously at fixing now because we might be at the bottom of the cycle. If one fixes, one does not fix irretrievably. One can always revert to a variable rate subsequently.
QUESTION NO: 118
DÁIL QUESTION addressed to the Minister for Finance (Deputy Michael Noonan)
by Deputy Michael McGrath
for PRIORITY ANSWER on 29/09/2015
To ask the Minister for Finance his views that reductions in fixed mortgage rates offered by the banks represent an inadequate response to the widespread public concern over high variable rates; that it is important that all domestic banks reduce their core variable rate product offering; his plans to address high mortgage rates by the non-deposit taking retail credit (sub-prime) sector; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
REPLY.
As the Deputy knows, I have been aware of this issue for some time and have taken steps to ensure the banks provide real options for borrowers.
To summarise actions taken to date, I requested a report from the Central Bank on the topic which was published in May. I also met with the six main mortgage lenders and outlined my view that the interest rates being charged to Irish customers was too high.
I have recently concluded a further series of meetings with these banks and the reality is that the majority have put options in place to allow borrowers to reduce their monthly repayments.
Traditionally borrowers focused on standard variable rates but borrowers should at least consider other options. While individual borrowers must decide what suits their particular circumstances, some of the fixed rates being offered are now substantially below what the SVR rate was in May. These rates offer substantial savings to borrowers and also offer security as to monthly repayments over a specific period of time. At the end of that term, borrowers can then revert to an SVR rate if that is what they prefer. I would therefore encourage borrowers to contact their bank to see what is available to them in their particular circumstances or consider moving to another bank if the offer is not satisfactory.
I would also point out that lenders have not just reduced fixed rates. One lender significantly reduced their SVR for example, while another has embarked on a new pricing strategy based on property valuation. I asked the banks to provide options by which customers might reduce their monthly repayments and I believe options have been put in place.
While I have not met all mortgage providers operating in Ireland, changes to interest rates by the main lenders should drive competition in the market and exert downward pressure on other lenders to reduce their rates in line with other providers. Sub-prime lenders operate in a particular niche and deal with customers who present a different risk profile to other customers hence their rates will be higher other lenders.
Competition is the best long term way of reducing interest rates paid by Irish borrowers and ensuring that Irish banks offer a sustainable product range. Higher than warranted mortgage interest rates will encourage new entrants to the Irish market over the longer term. As the Deputy will be aware, the Government has undertaken a number of initiatives in order to promote competition in the market. For example, it introduced the changes to Section 149 of the Consumer Credit Act 1995 in the Central Bank (Supervision and Enforcement Act) 2013 for new entrants. This section regulates fees and charges and the changes mean that it does not apply for the first three years of operation of new entrants to the Irish banking sector as new entrants to the mortgage market bring welcome competition to this sector.
In the shorter term, customers can foster competition by considering switching mortgage provider. Central Bank research suggests that 21% of existing PDH variable rate mortgage customers could save by switching their provider. I expect that if financial institutions are convinced that there is a threat that they will lose existing customers, they will reduce the rates that they currently charge such customers. The CCPC website www.consumerhelp.ie is a valuable source of information on the rates charged by various financial institutions.
Deputy Michael McGrath: I thank the Minister for his reply. Several banks have introduced new options, which are always a good thing, but these options are very selective. They are of most benefit to new customers in particular. Many existing customers continue to be discriminated against and the options simply are not for everyone.
The following are the actual standard variable rates still being charged by the banks today: Bank of Ireland, 4.5%; Permanent TSB, 4.3%; KBC 4.5%. or 4.3% if the customer opens a current account with it; Ulster Bank, 4.3%; AIB, 3.65%; ACC, 4.4%; and Danske Bank, 4.95%. I could go on and get into the vulture funds and the servicing companies now managing loan books that have been sold.
Greater fixed rate products have been offered but they come at a price, as the Minister well knows. Existing customers continue to be charged much higher rates than new customers. The Minister has concluded his second round of meetings with the banks. Is he satisfied that they have done enough? Have the banks satisfied the Minister, because I am not satisfied? Is the threat of a levy and-or legislation now off the table? Has the Minister concluded his assessment or is it still an open book on his file?
Deputy Michael Noonan: I thank the Deputy for his supplementary question. He will recall that the Central Bank report published last May, to which I referred, stated that there was an excessive margin being charged in Ireland on variable interest rates but it disagreed that the margin was as big as has been cited in debates here on several occasions. The banks have moved to lower that particular margin. AIB has had made three reductions and it is the biggest mortgage provider in the country. It is down to 3.65% and it does not vary between new mortgages and existing ones. Permanent TSB has moved from its variable standard rate to what it describes as a managed variable rate and has introduced the concept of loan to value.
In the best loan-to-value situations they are offering money at 3.6%, I believe, and then it varies with loan-to-value rates, so there is significant movement. There are dozens of interest rates being offered now in different circumstances and I wish to see how the market operates and if competition will kick in. There is a reluctance among people to change. There is a type of inertia which is leading to individuals staying with their existing mortgage holders, but there is much better value if people shop around. It is not something one must fix for life - one will not get that option anyway. Normally, one fixes for one, two or three years and people can then revert to standard variable rates. At the conclusion of my meetings with the banks I said that if we are all around, we will talk again early in the new year and we will see how competition is operating.
On the question of the levy, there has been a levy in place over the last number of budgets. It will be a matter for the budget, and whether the levy will be maintained as it is, increased or reduced is a matter for announcement on budget day.
Deputy Michael McGrath: Reading between the lines, it sounds as if the Minister has made up his mind that the banks have gone far enough to satisfy him. I believe he is letting the banks off the hook, because they have not gone far enough. Yes, there have been improvements in the product offering, the fixed rates have come down and the managed variable rates are an innovation, but for many customers who are in negative equity or have very little equity and are really struggling there is little or no improvement. I have outlined all the variable rates still being charged by banks. Many of them are still up around the 4% to 4.5% rate and they are even higher in some cases. That is excessive when one considers the very low cost of funds that the banks are facing at present, the price that consumers must pay by entering into a fixed rate, the loss of flexibility they encounter when they do that and the fact that existing customers are being discriminated against. When the Minister says that if he is still here he will meet the banks again in the new year, it sounds as if the threat of the levy being increased or of legislation being introduced to give more powers to the Central Bank appears to be off the table. The Minister has been bought off too easily by the banks on this matter.
Deputy Michael Noonan: The Deputy is jumping to conclusions. While the headline variable rates that the Deputy outlined in his initial contribution are correct, other much lower rates are available to mortgage holders-----
Deputy Michael McGrath: For some customers.
Deputy Michael Noonan: -----either from their own bank or mortgage provider or by switching.
Deputy Michael McGrath: It is very difficult to switch.
Deputy Michael Noonan: What puzzles me at present is why more people are not switching. There is demonstrably an amount of money to be saved if people change, yet there appears to be an inertia in the system and they are not changing.
Deputy Michael McGrath: It is not easy to do.
Deputy Michael Noonan: I wish to let it go for a few months and see if the new competitive situation will operate to the benefit of customers. We have made significant progress. The Deputy's Private Members' Bill, which I complimented as a good initiative, sought to provide that the Central Bank should intervene to fix interest rates if they went above 3%. We have the two biggest mortgage providers down to 3.65% now, so we are coming close to the position the Deputy outlined.
I am not sure what will happen with interest rates internationally but there are very strong indications that the cycle of rising interest rates could commence this autumn when the US authorities increase interest rates. People should look seriously at fixing now because we might be at the bottom of the cycle. If one fixes, one does not fix irretrievably. One can always revert to a variable rate subsequently.
Last edited:
Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 52,045
It's very hard to know what to do about this?
The Minister is puzzled about why people are not switching. Only some borrowers can switch and for many of them they are switching from one outrageous rate to a slightly less outrageous rate. If they could switch to rates around the levels charged in the rest of the Eurozone, far more would switch.
Brendan
My sentiment exactly. Realistically, only people who bought after the boom can switch but even then they can switch from one high rate to another, somewhat lower, but equally high rate. The elephant in the room is that half of the customers are at 1.5% while another at 4.5% and Noonan portrays the possibility of changing from 4.5 to 3.75 like it is a big deal. Changing to 2.75 would have been a big deal, but even 3.75 is not possible: out of curiosity I explored if I could switch from BOI's 4.5% to AIB's 3.75, went to talk to them last week. My LTV is over 90% but I can probably get down to 90 from savings. But they said my income was not sufficient to meet 3.75 plus 2% stress-tested monthly, even though my income is higher now than in 2008, mortgage lower, and rate in 2008 was over 5. But I already have this mortgage, it is not like I need a new, reasonable one.
QUOTE We have the two biggest mortgage providers down to 3.65% now, so we are coming close to the position the Deputy outlined. UNQUOTE
Not true, only one mortgage provider, AIB, is down to 3.65.
QUOTE I am not sure what will happen with interest rates internationally but there are very strong indications that the cycle of rising interest rates could commence this autumn when the US authorities increase interest rates. People should look seriously at fixing now because we might be at the bottom of the cycle. UNQUOTE
This argument is even worse, he sounds like a spokesman for the BOI. If they charge 4.5 at the bottom of the cycle, what would they charge later? The european economy is much too vulnerable still and it is not certain that the ECB will increase rates, or increase too much, soon. In fact, it is equally likely that ECB rates remain low for 2 years or so - precisely for the duration of "fix" that the BOI offers.
QUOTE We have the two biggest mortgage providers down to 3.65% now, so we are coming close to the position the Deputy outlined. UNQUOTE
Not true, only one mortgage provider, AIB, is down to 3.65.
QUOTE I am not sure what will happen with interest rates internationally but there are very strong indications that the cycle of rising interest rates could commence this autumn when the US authorities increase interest rates. People should look seriously at fixing now because we might be at the bottom of the cycle. UNQUOTE
This argument is even worse, he sounds like a spokesman for the BOI. If they charge 4.5 at the bottom of the cycle, what would they charge later? The european economy is much too vulnerable still and it is not certain that the ECB will increase rates, or increase too much, soon. In fact, it is equally likely that ECB rates remain low for 2 years or so - precisely for the duration of "fix" that the BOI offers.
I admit that I cannot figure out the govt rationale here. Surely, from the public good perspective, the right goal is to make sure all customers are able to participate in a competition that in turn would bring the rates down. The fact is that NE and high LTV customers cannot switch. Therefore, no competition, the rate stays high. But surely, if NE and high LTV people had a lower, below 3%, rate in the last 3-4 years or so, quite a few would have chosen to overpay, thereby bringing their loans down, making themselves eligible for switching. Win-win. I do not even raise other externalities like fairness or a higher disposable income to feed back into economy. What is the penalty for regulation/caps on of SVR if you put yourself in their shoes? Would it really deter new entrants - btw, what new entrants - or make irish govt bonds riskier? Or is it an indirect subsidy to improve the capitalization of banks? There must be some logic here that from the govt view outweighs regulation but it is not obvious to me.
This is a major let down and a disappointment from Deputy Michael Noonan, "I wish to let it go for a few months" at who's expense?
He needs to come out and say he is going todo nothing, rather then this silly game of wait and see that he has played with SVR mortgage holders over the last 12 months.
He needs to come out and say he is going todo nothing, rather then this silly game of wait and see that he has played with SVR mortgage holders over the last 12 months.
In other words....let's leave it for a few months until right before the election and then look to be seen to be doing something about it then......just in time for everyone to vote for me again.
A
Asphyxia
Guest
touche !
So the easy response from Michael Noonan would be to change the law to force banks to reduce their SVR's. If it were that simple then why is he not doing it. It would be a tremendous coup for MN & FG and much needed boost to party ratings going into an election.
While fully appreciating the "cartel" nature of SVR's and banks exploitation of same I would see a number of difficulties in bring in Government legislation to fix bank margins on HL SVR's. This intervention would reduce the profits of those banks which are predominately PLC's. Who will compensate the shareholders for the losses in profits? The banks are unlikely to take such intervention lying down and will bring their case to European Courts for compensation. Not being a legal expert I have no idea how strong their case would be. However, would the Government then be entitled to put a cap on the price of a "cup of coffee" or to avoid being facetious capping rents charged by private landlords?
MN can certainly lobby the banks and make life difficult for them but other than that I feel that his powers in this area are limited. Restrictive legislation always sounds good when it is aimed at big corporations like the "evil banks". However the ownership of these organisations is largely composed of private citizens and their pension funds. While we may all support the reduction of SVR's, would we be happy to fund this through losses in our share portfolio or pension policy?
It's the hurlers on the ditch who can always play the best game!
While fully appreciating the "cartel" nature of SVR's and banks exploitation of same I would see a number of difficulties in bring in Government legislation to fix bank margins on HL SVR's. This intervention would reduce the profits of those banks which are predominately PLC's. Who will compensate the shareholders for the losses in profits? The banks are unlikely to take such intervention lying down and will bring their case to European Courts for compensation. Not being a legal expert I have no idea how strong their case would be. However, would the Government then be entitled to put a cap on the price of a "cup of coffee" or to avoid being facetious capping rents charged by private landlords?
MN can certainly lobby the banks and make life difficult for them but other than that I feel that his powers in this area are limited. Restrictive legislation always sounds good when it is aimed at big corporations like the "evil banks". However the ownership of these organisations is largely composed of private citizens and their pension funds. While we may all support the reduction of SVR's, would we be happy to fund this through losses in our share portfolio or pension policy?
It's the hurlers on the ditch who can always play the best game!
A
Asphyxia
Guest
Are you in the ditch or on the pitch ? Which bank do you play for ?
Absolutely. I think most normal people supported by their own labour and who have to overpay at arbitrary rates set by the banks would choose restrictive legislation that corrects these rates in line with real funding costs and that may entail losses in the share portfolio of some people. I would be happy to choose in a heartbeat. Any day of the week. I think an overwhelming majority would. Paying at arbitrary rates for your home is unfair and painful; having a share portfolio in the first place is a luxury most people cannot afford. I am not sure how can anybody not see that paying the rate that is 3x of the tracker and 2x of the EU average is simply not normal.I am perplexed that Noonan ignores it.
Besides, If I did not have to pay that much for my home, well, I might have been able to start my own portfolio, but I would not invest in irish banks.