# David Hall claiming credit for stopping an eviction



## Bronte (10 Jan 2019)

I'm just wondering how Mr. Hall is so powerful.  Is this story actually true.  Or is the headline misleading. It's certainly lurid enough.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-ne...st-threat-by-leading-campaigner-37698013.html

Who actually benefits here. The bank will get it's money, arrears and costs. The widow stays in the house, but she will never own it. Her rent will be paid by the state. It would be paid by the state if she was forced to leave. Mr. Hall gets loads of publicity.  And his company - iCare Housing - get another property.

Strangly Start mortgage say that the repossession being cancelled had nothing to do with the actions of Mr. Hall.

So can it be that he's claiming the credit for the repossession cancellation while the mortgage company disputes that. Would that mean he is putting himself forward as a 'solution' while creating more of a property portfolio.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (10 Jan 2019)

I have no doubt that David Hall stopped this eviction. 

Having said that, there are very few actual forced evictions.  On the few occasions that the Sheriff calls, they give plenty of notice and the person sometimes leaves - that is if it's not an abandoned house. 

This woman bought her house 20 years ago. 

How much did a house in Crumlin cost then and how much is it worth today? I would say it has gone from €100k to €300k? 

How much has she paid? I would say that she has been living rent free for years. 

And she will continue to live rent-free for many more years to come because the taxpayer will rent it from David Hall.

Brendan


----------



## elcato (10 Jan 2019)

Just to add in DH's favour the article does state that they can buy the house back later at any time from the iCare company and that they cannot ever sell it at a profit. Although I don't know the actual workings on that one. The taxpayer will only pay if they are on social welfare benefits otherwise they will pay 15% of gross income from any other source.


----------



## Bronte (10 Jan 2019)

How does iCare get the money to buy the property? They also have to pay the arrears and costs.  Who is funding that?


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (10 Jan 2019)

From the article:

In the Cabra case, the woman and her husband bought their home in 1995 with a mortgage from First National Building Society but soon got into difficulties paying off their loan. *Start Mortgages took over the mortgage in 2006 and began High Court proceedings the same year.*​

13 years to get to the point of eviction!

This case was in trouble long before the economic collapse post-2008.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (10 Jan 2019)

NoRegretsCoyote said:


> *Start Mortgages took over the mortgage in 2006 and began High Court proceedings the same year.*



At the time, Start were a sub-prime lender. 
They did not buy this mortgage from another lender.
So she was a sub-prime customer in the first place.
She should not have got this mortgage so she should not be in the house she is in. She can't afford it and she could never afford it.

Brendan


----------



## Delboy (10 Jan 2019)

Nearly 25 years of arrears in which probably very very little was paid. And according to the report the arrears will be paid along with local authority level rent levels with the LA paying the balance.
I'm struggling to believe that.

And legally, how can they be stopped in say 30 years time from selling the house on at whatever price they want. I cannot see how that is enforceable.


----------



## Bronte (10 Jan 2019)

Delboy said:


> Nearly 25 years of arrears in which probably very very little was paid. And according to the report the arrears will be paid along with local authority level rent levels with the LA paying the balance.
> I'm struggling to believe that.
> 
> And legally, how can they be stopped in say 30 years time from selling the house on at whatever price they want. I cannot see how that is enforceable.



They will not own the house. The bank transfers it to David Hall and his company is the landlord. The woman will be a tenant.

What will Hall do if the tenant doesn’t pay the rent? 

And if she wishes to buy the house she’ll have to pay what Halls company paid. Might be an absolute fortune if arrears and costs are factored in.

It would probably be cheaper for the state to pay her rent elsewhere. Only people winning is the bank gets fully paid, and iCare gets another property. If they are successful they will become the biggest landlord in the state after the local authorities.


----------



## Bronte (10 Jan 2019)

Brendan Burgess said:


> At the time, Start were a sub-prime lender.
> They did not buy this mortgage from another lender.
> So she was a sub-prime customer in the first place.
> She should not have got this mortgage so she should not be in the house she is in. She can't afford it and she could never afford it.
> ...


You mean she moved banks? From the building society to a sub prime.

If iCare is willing to pay back Starts debts, as per the article, why would they bother with the repossession. That doesn’t make sense.


----------



## RedOnion (10 Jan 2019)

Bronte said:


> If iCare is willing to pay back Starts debts


They're not. They make an offer to buy it at a price.


----------



## Bronte (10 Jan 2019)

RedOnion said:


> They're not. They make an offer to buy it at a price.


Why would Start accept a price if it’s much less than the property value?

Also the article said arrears and legal costs would be paid.


----------



## RedOnion (10 Jan 2019)

Bronte said:


> Also the article said


Well if it says it in the paper....



Bronte said:


> Why would Start accept a price if it’s much less than the property value?



I never said Start would accept less than the property value. However, the mortgage balance has nothing to do with it.


----------



## Delboy (10 Jan 2019)

Hall on talking to Ivan Yates now on Newstalk

- the family were fully engaged and fully involved in finding solutions from the start
- 'widow and 2 children'
- Hall will now lead protests at any properties where he believes the repossession order is not necessary
- no home should be repossessed if it could go under the mortgage to rent scheme

The State are giving iCare 30% of the purchase price of houses at very low interest rates


----------

