# A Union for Irish Mortgage Holders??



## daftpunk (28 Jun 2013)

Ok, before anybody smashes their computer off the ground in disgust and comes looking for me to shoot dead, please just answer why the following proposal would not work. 

A National union/association for mortgage holders in difficulty is set up where all banks are informed that this union/association is now the main point of communication between the lender and borrower. Anybody who joins is represented by the union. Lenders are informed that each member/s is/are only going to pay the lender a max.of 35% of their salary, or their current repayment(whichever is less), no matter what interest rate, mortgage deal etc. is in place. This is only the starting point for members and all other members with moratorium/split mortgage/interest only deals remain in situ for now. 
If the lenders do not agree, all repayments are stopped immediately, until the lender agrees to negotiate with the union/association about serious and real write downs/deals etc.
The union/association could effectively destroy the lenders business by mass default on repayments and it would be impossible to repossess and sell all of the properties involved due to the amount of borrowers in question.

I am just wondering what are the real barriers to such a proposal.

Thanks.


----------



## wbbs (28 Jun 2013)

Who is going to pay the employees?  There would be a lot of work involved representing everyone who needed it.  It kind of sounds like MABS.


----------



## GDUFFY (28 Jun 2013)

I think its a great idea , but it's a bit like Communism, great in theory, but in reality it sucks. Wish you well in your endeavours though ,sign me up !


----------



## eamo (28 Jun 2013)

Great idea ,people need to stand up to the banks as they no  buyers waiting to offer more for distressed property.  Sock it to them.


----------



## daftpunk (28 Jun 2013)

wbbs said:


> Who is going to pay the employees?.



The lenders will because they wont want their business to fail. It will be in their best interest to enter meaningful consultation straight away to avoid their business failing. Well, in my dream scenario that's how it will work anyway.


----------



## Delboy (28 Jun 2013)

You already have a lot of 'Unions' out there hawking for mortgage arrears business.
Irish Mortgage Holders, New Beginnings, Phoenix Project, We the people, Freemen, FLAC etc etc.

As for this 35% suggestion. 35% to the average worker is 1 thing.
35% to a barrister or hospital consultant is a whole different ball game...that'll leave them plenty of cash left over to enjoy a lifestyle suited to their standing no doubt, whilst neatly avoiding their debts.

Can we also have a Union for all of those with mortgages who are currently paying them....to lobby on our behalf to avoid us having to pay for the mortgage debt relating to those that can't pay as well as those than won't pay?


----------



## daftpunk (28 Jun 2013)

eamo said:


> Great idea ,people need to stand up to the banks as they no  buyers waiting to offer more for distressed property.  Sock it to them.



Exactly, well said. Would/Could something like this actually work?


----------



## daftpunk (28 Jun 2013)

Delboy said:


> Can we also have a Union for all of those with mortgages who are currently paying them....to lobby on our behalf to avoid us having to pay for the mortgage debt relating to those that can't pay as well as those than won't pay?



Good point delboy. But in reality the 'wont pay' mortgage holders need to be caught by whatever means possible, publically named in the courts and fined. There are people calling revenue daily about dole cheats, something along these lines for the 'wont pay' folk would be a good idea.


----------



## breakonthru (28 Jun 2013)

I don't think a union would work. Everyone's situation is different and there's a plethora of orgs and these forums to give all the advice (for which I'm most grateful for) one could possibly need to negotiate with a bank. 

In my own situation, I clearly laid out the research I did in relation to going bankrupt in the UK and how I would choose that action unless I got another interest only deal on my mortgages. The bank promptly supplied me another interest only contract which I signed.

They weighed up the negative equity, repossession costs, selling in a slow market etc etc, versus me continuing to pay interest only (and servicing the loan in that way) and they choose the latter..


----------



## daftpunk (28 Jun 2013)

breakonthru said:


> I don't think a union would work. Everyone's situation is different and there's a plethora of orgs and these forums to give all the advice (for which I'm most grateful for) one could possibly need to negotiate with a bank.
> 
> In my own situation, I clearly laid out the research I did in relation to going bankrupt in the UK and how I would choose that action unless I got another interest only deal on my mortgages. The bank promptly supplied me another interest only contract which I signed.
> 
> They weighed up the negative equity, repossession costs, selling in a slow market etc etc, versus me continuing to pay interest only (and servicing the loan in that way) and they choose the latter..




I'm sure that you are relieved they delayed your repayments by offering to extend your interest only deal, but would'nt a long term solution such as write down or a split mortgage not be better for everybody in difficulty?


----------



## Jim2007 (28 Jun 2013)

daftpunk said:


> The union/association could effectively destroy the lenders business by mass default on repayments and it would be impossible to repossess and sell all of the properties involved due to the amount of borrowers in question.
> 
> I am just wondering what are the real barriers to such a proposal.
> 
> Thanks.



Totally unacceptable, since at the end of the day it is the taxpayers and not some unknown entity that would be on the hook for this - in other words your neighbours, work colleagues, family members and so on!


----------



## daftpunk (28 Jun 2013)

Jim2007 said:


> Totally unacceptable, since at the end of the day it is the taxpayers and not some unknown entity that would be on the hook for this - in other words your neighbours, work colleagues, family members and so on!



Ok good point. But do the lenders not have funding already to cover such losses?

And there would also be the extra money people would have to spend, and in turn this would boost the economy. Consumer confidence would be up and maybe, just maybe the creation of jobs, more taxes to the exchequer etc.


----------



## Delboy (28 Jun 2013)

daftpunk said:


> Ok good point. But do the lenders not have funding already to cover such losses?
> 
> And there would also be the extra money people would have to spend, and in turn this would boost the economy. Consumer confidence would be up and maybe, just maybe the creation of jobs, more taxes to the exchequer etc.



The banks have already used most of the bailouts to plug their balance sheets. These 'write offs' you seek will come from the taxpayers pocket so it's not a runner this time I'm afraid.


----------



## daftpunk (28 Jun 2013)

Delboy said:


> The banks have already used most of the bailouts to plug their balance sheets. These 'write offs' you seek will come from the taxpayers pocket so it's not a runner this time I'm afraid.



Banks have already signed up to debt write offs, along with some credit unions.

This would just bring about parity and quicker turn-arounds in offering such deals. The 'taxpayer' is going to get squeezed eventually anyway.


----------



## MrEarl (29 Jun 2013)

Jim2007 said:


> Totally unacceptable, since at the end of the day it is the taxpayers and not some unknown entity that would be on the hook for this - in other words your neighbours, work colleagues, family members and so on!



Well put !

Sadly, it would appear that what capital has been put into the Banks, has been used to help cover losses already incurred, support write offs related to speculative development funding, cover incresed capital requirements for Banks going forward and cover unneccessary / overspending spending.

Dare I ask why TV adverts for the Banks are needed in the current environment for example, not alone questions like why AIB have so many branches, to include independent EBS branches now it's a subsidiary company, seperate stationary etc and thats just the start of it, regarding one of our State owned banks ?

We've already put far too much into the Banks and cannot under any circumstances put further funds into them - it's time to start radically shrinking the size of the State owned entities, cutting out waisted expenditure on unnecessary subsidiary companies to reduce related costs (marketing, stationary, possible different offices etc etc)...

As for a proposal to have a union of mortgage holders who would "go on strike" .. anyone refusing to pay a legitimate debt should be sued & convicted in my view - there's a complete difference between helping the genuine and permitting those who simply don't want to pay so lets not confuse the two issues.  

More support for the groups trying to assist genuine hardship cases is the way to go in my view, not forming a union ...

Regards

Mr. Earl.


----------



## daftpunk (29 Jun 2013)

MrEarl said:


> More support for the groups trying to assist genuine hardship cases is the way to go in my view, not forming a union .




Eh, this would be for 'genuine hardship' cases. And as stated it would only 
be a starting point for deals. 
My suspicion is that people without any/large/unsustainable mortgages have little to none sympathy, as they sometimes have those condescending superior thoughts of 'I paid so you have to' or 'your own fault for being greedy and taking more than you can handle'. 

The reality mostly is genuine people will be banded together with the minority of 'wont pays' in the public eye. There are many groups assisting the genuine hardship cases but the banks seem to be winning always. Something has to be done,and I believe it definitely will. It's just a matter of who and when and how. Obviously my little dream scenario is unrealistic legally,morally and financially for the taxpayer, but somebody somewhere with the gumption will start something soon.


----------



## MrEarl (30 Jun 2013)

daftpunk said:


> Eh, this would be for 'genuine hardship' cases. And as stated it would only
> be a starting point for deals.
> My suspicion is that people without any/large/unsustainable mortgages have little to none sympathy, as they sometimes have those condescending superior thoughts of 'I paid so you have to' or 'your own fault for being greedy and taking more than you can handle'.
> 
> The reality mostly is genuine people will be banded together with the minority of 'wont pays' in the public eye. There are many groups assisting the genuine hardship cases but the banks seem to be winning always. Something has to be done,and I believe it definitely will. It's just a matter of who and when and how. Obviously my little dream scenario is unrealistic legally,morally and financially for the taxpayer, but somebody somewhere with the gumption will start something soon.




Hello,

For the record .....

A)  I'm in negative equity, with a further 25-years to run on my homeloan before it will be repaid (and that assumes, I continue to be in a financial position to make repayments, which thankfully I am at presant).

B)  I do agree that more needs to be done to help those genuine cases, but while everyone who bought a property in the past circa 10-years has probably overpaid for it, that doesn't mean everyone is a genuine case that needs help as I see it.  

Those who have the finances to pay their homeloan, must ... those who genuinely don't should get sorted out with all the help they need, thats the difference for me & hence, I don't agree witht he concept you suggested 

Why not use your efforts to perhaps give support to MABS, perhaps New Beginnings or The Irish Mortgage Holders Association, FLAC etc - I'm sure all of these would appreciate any available assistance, be it financial, voluntary service etc ?

..if for whatever reason, none of those names were appropriate, there are other organisations which try to help people who would also appreciate our assistance - such as the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, The Phoenix Project, Cluid or Treshold for example.  Again, I'm sure all of these would appreciate the assistance of volunteers or some financial support from anyone willing.

Just some food for thought 

Regards

Mr. Earl.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (30 Jun 2013)

It's an interesting idea, but how is it different from the existing groups? One of the problems is that there are so many groups and individuals advocating on behalf of those in arrears


MABS
FLAC
New Beginning
Phoenix
The anti-eviction taskforce
David Hall
Myself
The groups often disagree with each other. For example, I thought that New Beginning were irresponsible. Then David Hall left because they were not radical enough.  It seems clear to me that the moratorium on legal action is of no benefit to most people and actually harms those with their heads in the sand. But all the other groups think that the moratorium was a good idea. So it's hard to get an agreed common position. 


If the only difference is that you are calling for a general mortgage strike, then you will have little respect and little support. You might well get a bit of media coverage, but you will be of little more than entertainment value.

I think that Mr Earl has the right idea. If you want to help out, then get involved in one of the above groups. 

A possible angle could be to set up a group for the customers of a specific lender. For example, the IBRC mortgage holders group or the  Bank of Scotland mortgage holders group.  You could compare notes. See what deals are being offered.  If you see repeated breaches of the Mortgage Arrears Code, you could report it to the Central Bank. In the case of IBRC, you could lobby politicians for fast write off of shortfalls where a home is surrendered. 

If your group worked successfully, you could inspire similar groups to set up.


----------



## daftpunk (30 Jun 2013)

Brendan Burgess said:


> A possible angle could be to set up a group for the customers of a specific lender. For example, the IBRC mortgage holders group or the Bank of Scotland mortgage holders group. You could compare notes. See what deals are being offered. If you see repeated breaches of the Mortgage Arrears Code, you could report it to the Central Bank. In the case of IBRC, you could lobby politicians for fast write off of shortfalls where a home is surrendered.
> 
> If your group worked successfully, you could inspire similar groups to set up.


 
That's a good start and probably more realistic. Good idea.

I am not calling for an all-out mortgage strike, nor am I proposing actually setting up such a group. I am merely wondering if such an association with so many members would have merit in achieveing faster and fairer action from lenders. 

Would lenders have any other choice but to listen, engage and negotiate with such a group?

I am looking for the reasons it would thrive or fail. Leave moral hazard aside, for now.


----------



## Delboy (30 Jun 2013)

I left out 1 other mortgage arrears support group in my list above...Daftpunk, you could join with Caroline on Facebook and her merry group!

http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=177609


----------



## Brendan Burgess (30 Jun 2013)

Delboy said:


> I left out 1 other mortgage arrears support group in my list above...Daftpunk, you could join with Caroline on Facebook and her merry group!
> 
> http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=177609



This shows the problem with any new group. It is  likely to lack credibility especially if its members are strategic defaulters.


----------



## daftpunk (30 Jun 2013)

Brendan Burgess said:


> This shows the problem with any new group. It is  likely to lack credibility especially if its members are strategic defaulters.



That is why 'strategic faulters' should be omitted from such a group. They should also, and separately, be named,shamed and punished.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (1 Jul 2013)

daftpunk said:


> That is why 'strategic faulters' should be omitted from such a group. They should also, and separately, be named,shamed and punished.



But your first post specified that the group was for strategic defaulters?



> If the lenders do not agree, all repayments are stopped  immediately, until the lender agrees to negotiate with the  union/association about serious and real write downs/deals etc.



That is strategic default, and very, very bad advice.

Anyone who withholds payment like this would be excluding them from a potential Personal Insolvency Arrangement, where it is a requirement that a borrower must have engaged with their lender for at least 6 months.


----------



## daftpunk (1 Jul 2013)

Brendan Burgess said:


> Anyone who withholds payment like this would be excluding them from a potential Personal Insolvency Arrangement, where it is a requirement that a borrower must have engaged with their lender for at least 6 months.



Strategic defaulters are those currently who wont pay.

A full withdrawal of repayments would only be temporary until the association had meaningful consultation from the lenders. Then full repayments would resume at current rates immediately. Anyway all in all it probably is a lousy idea, but I did want the reasons why such a proposal would not work. Chances are it probably would work, but obviously the moral hazard brigade would be all over it like a rash.


----------



## Gerry Canning (1 Jul 2013)

daftpunk said:


> Strategic defaulters are those currently who wont pay.
> 
> A full withdrawal of repayments would only be temporary until the association had meaningful consultation from the lenders. Then full repayments would resume at current rates immediately. Anyway all in all it probably is a lousy idea, but I did want the reasons why such a proposal would not work. Chances are it probably would work, but obviously the moral hazard brigade would be all over it like a rash.


.......................................................

Not a LOUSY idea:

The Problem is getting tight rules of engagement and having enough people on side quickly.
Your Idea is a Lenders worst nightmare.
It will be countered as a chanchers rule-book, but that is NOT the intention.

Your enemy, is that people love to work with known institutions ,not what they perceive as a huddle of hopefuls.


----------



## khards (1 Jul 2013)

I for one do not think that this 'scheme' would get widespread public support as the majority of mortgage holders are not defaulters and as such would not like the idea of other people essentially getting free money gifted to them in the form of write downs and forbearance.

Until near 50% of mortgage holders are in trouble schemes for troubled mortgage holders will get little support as it is unfair to those that are paying.


----------

