# Ptsb to offer write off to landlords in arrears and negative equity



## Pat Sorrn (6 Sep 2017)

I have read on various news sites today, that ptsb are going to offer some landlords a deal. It will apply to landlords who have property in negative equity with no possibility of paying the balance. It's not clear who will get the deal but the idea seems to be that you sell your property to ptsb and they would write off the remaining loan balance.
It looks like a great deal, but would be interesting to hear other people's opinions


----------



## Delboy (6 Sep 2017)

Very little detail available yet
http://www.irishexaminer.com/breaki...write-off-mortgages-for-landlords-804800.html

So PTSB want to get into the property owning game. Will they take back BtL's from places like Leitrim?


----------



## TLO (6 Sep 2017)

Just to clarify, PTSB do not appear to be buying properties.  Instead, it would appear that they will let negative equity landlords sell their but to lets (BTLs) on the open market at which point the difference between the sale price and the outstanding mortgage will be written off.  

It is an excellent idea.  For PTSB it helps clean up their ledgers.  For negative equity landlords it is an excellent opportunity to exit a "no win" situation.   The downside might be for tenants who may be asked to vacate so as to facilitate the sale.


----------



## Pat Sorrn (6 Sep 2017)

If anyone hears anymore details on how to qualify for the deal, could they please post a link here. 
Thanks


----------



## galway_blow_in (6 Sep 2017)

TLO said:


> Just to clarify, PTSB do not appear to be buying properties.  Instead, it would appear that they will let negative equity landlords sell their but to lets (BTLs) on the open market at which point the difference between the sale price and the outstanding mortgage will be written off.
> 
> It is an excellent idea.  For PTSB it helps clean up their ledgers.  For negative equity landlords it is an excellent opportunity to exit a "no win" situation.   The downside might be for tenants who may be asked to vacate so as to facilitate the sale.



when it comes to receiver sales , tenants are often in situ upon sale , not sure this situation here will change that ?


----------



## geri (6 Sep 2017)

It looks more like a normal market sale, with the outstanding morttgage being written off rather than the bank taking back the house and selling.  I would imagine vacant possesion would apply in most cases, with the tenant having to leave.


----------



## Delboy (6 Sep 2017)

> When contacted, Permanent TSB said it was writing to certain buy-to-let mortgage holders who have been in arrears for a long time, to explore their willingness to surrender properties for sale by the bank.
> “For customers who are offered and who agree to a voluntary surrender in this initiative, the bank has agreed to clear any arrears or shortfalls that remain on the loan after the property has been sold and that it will not seek any further repayment by the borrowers in respect of the relevant mortgage.”
> 
> The bank said the offer is restricted to certain buy-to-let mortgages and is being made following a detailed review of the loan accounts by the bank.
> The offer is limited to customers who the bank believes have no means of meeting the repayment terms of the loan or the shortfall debt which will arise upon the sale of the property, the spokesman said.


For sale by the bank is mentioned in this piece in the Indo


----------



## Seagull (6 Sep 2017)

That might be so that the bank can maximise the sale price. If you know that any deficit will be wiped clean, there's no incentive not to sell to a friend for a low price.


----------



## cremeegg (6 Sep 2017)

Why oh why do the people who messed up get the deals.

No one will write off the negative equity on my buy to let, because I am not in arrears.

This nonsense makes me so cross. These landlords should be forced into bankruptcy.


----------



## TLO (6 Sep 2017)

cremeegg said:


> Why oh why do the people who messed up get the deals.



1)  Ireland's procedure for repossessing mortgaged properties is far too long winded.
2)  It would appear that PTSB omitted to include the ability to appoint receivers in their BTL mortgage agreements.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (6 Sep 2017)

cremeegg said:


> Why oh why do the people who messed up get the deals.



It is a practical solution. 

It will apply only to people in negative equity and heavy arrears.  They were never going to pay their mortgage anyway. 

The courts system is loaded against the lenders. They can't do much if the borrower won't pay.

But this is the moral hazard issue. If you raise it in public, you get savaged. 

Brendan


----------



## odyssey06 (6 Sep 2017)

cremeegg said:


> Why oh why do the people who messed up get the deals.
> No one will write off the negative equity on my buy to let, because I am not in arrears.
> This nonsense makes me so cross. These landlords should be forced into bankruptcy.



The banks made a conscious decision to give the loan ... seems only fitting and proper to me if they have to take a hit on it.


----------



## gahfan (6 Sep 2017)

Seems like a good idea. Will put upward pressure on rents though


----------



## Pat Sorrn (6 Sep 2017)

Should I contact ptsb and see if I qualify or just wait for a week or two and see if they write to me?


----------



## galway_blow_in (6 Sep 2017)

Brendan Burgess said:


> It is a practical solution.
> 
> It will apply only to people in negative equity and heavy arrears.  They were never going to pay their mortgage anyway.
> 
> ...



brendan , i thought endless delays in repossessions were only really limited to prime residences , surely a judge would have little sympathy for a BTL mortgage holder not working with their lenders , i agree its politically very sensitive to have a lot of people loosing their homes but i doubt there is much sympathy for BTL owners who are in trouble with repayments ?


----------



## AAM_User (6 Sep 2017)

I wonder will there be a clause precluding legal action for those taking it if they were to avail of the facility?

I also wonder if I'll be able to avail of it with very low arrears but very large negative equity.


----------



## Jim Stafford (7 Sep 2017)

As Brendan stated above, this is a very sensible approach by PTSB given that they unable to appoint Receivers with a power to sell. (They can appoint rent receivers.)  Given that they cannot appoint a "normal" type of receiver, they have to apply to the Courts for re-possession which is timely and costly.

Agreeing a voluntary sale produces much more money for PTSB.

It is clear that PTSB will be very selective in the cases that they chose to offer such write offs.  They have made it clear that they will only write off debt if they are satisfied that the borrower has no capacity to make any contribution towards the residual debt. Borrowers will need to submit a statement of affairs before any decision is granted.

Any borrowers who are offered such a deal and who have debt owed to other creditors should immediately seek the advice of a PIP, as a PIA could be used with the PTSB debt utilised to "cram" down other debt.

Jim Stafford


----------



## breakonthru123 (7 Sep 2017)

cremeegg said:


> This nonsense makes me so cross. These landlords should be forced into bankruptcy.



But Cremeegg,

Obviously, from the PTSB POV - this 'write down' solution is financially more preferable for them - then to 'force' bankruptcy upon BTL owners.

-------

Now to test PTSB's willingness to assist in the termination of tenancies (in order for those properties to be sold under vacant possession..)

As the properties have PTSB Rent Receivers in place, there's no spare cash from the BTL owners to financially induce tenants to leave (as PTSB can see this from BTL owners financial statements).

Indeed, it could be argued that it's cheaper for PTSB to fund a BTL's PIA & provide a financial inducement to BTL tenants for them to voluntarily end their agreements.

One tenant I have, won't leave the house (but will continue to pay the PTSB Rent Receiver) until another 'suitable house' is available to rent. As far as he is concerned (and I fully agree with him) it will take a court order, sheriff and Garda to evict his family.

Far easier for me to go bankrupt - and let the PTSB deal with all this stuff - unless they pay an inducement of some sort.


----------



## breakonthru123 (7 Sep 2017)

Another thing that crossed my mind..

.. PTSB should also guarantee a clean ICB record in the event of sales occuring through vacant possession of BTL properties.

I.e the credit record should be "qualitatively better" then that of a bankrupt. So that same can apply for credit again ASAP to get a family home ( if the BTL landlord is currently renting themselves, as I am).

Otherwise, what's the point in PTSB offering this settlement?

Could it be that this offer is only available to those BTL landlords that have a family home? 

As this would provide more leverage for PTSB to ensure landlords deal with the mess that is the untimely termination of tenancy agreements / eviction of tenants.


----------



## demoivre (7 Sep 2017)

cremeegg said:


> This nonsense makes me so cross. These landlords should be forced into bankruptcy



Where the shortfall would be written off ?



cremeegg said:


> Why oh why do the people who messed up get the deals.



Agree. Scandalous what bankers and regulators got away with for reckless lending during the boom.


----------



## cremeegg (7 Sep 2017)

breakonthru123 said:


> But Cremeegg,
> 
> Obviously, from the PTSB POV - this 'write down' solution is financially more preferable for them - then to 'force' bankruptcy upon BTL owners.
> 
> -------



Only because the law does not allow them to enforce their security.

After say 3 months non payment of the mortgage, PTSB should be able to evict the tenant and sell the house. That would allow the house be occupied by new occupiers on a sustainable basis. And everyone could get on with their lives.


----------



## cremeegg (7 Sep 2017)

demoivre said:


> Agree. Scandalous what bankers and regulators got away with for reckless lending during the boom.



bank shareholders got away with nothing. They lost all their money, as they should. Bank staff certainly got off lightly.


----------



## breakonthru123 (7 Sep 2017)

Jim Stafford said:


> Given that they cannot appoint a "normal" type of receiver, they have to apply to the Courts for re-possession which is timely and costl



Cremeegg,

The law does provide for PTSB to 'take the house' but it's more costly as Jim Stafford points out.



cremeegg said:


> PTSB should be able to evict the tenant and sell the house. That would allow the house be occupied by new occupiers on a sustainable basis. And everyone could get on with their lives.



How can tenants 'get on with their lives' if they've just been evicted and are on the side of the road?


----------



## gahfan (8 Sep 2017)

Other banks may follow P Tsb's lead.

What do people mean that P Tsb cannot appoint a receiver or something? I saw a few mentions of that above and wasn't aware of it. Can someone explain please.


----------



## breakonthru123 (8 Sep 2017)

gahfan said:


> What do people mean that PTSB cannot appoint a receiver or something?



PTSB have the ability to appoint 'Rent Receivers' - private firms - that can legally collect rent from BTL's and disburse same after taking their cut - to PTSB. This is allowed as it's written into the BTL mortgage agreement.

They can't appoint a 'Repossession Receiver to 'easily' repossess BTL's as this particular process was not allowed for within the same BTL mortgage agreement.

They have to go to court separately - and seek repossession - but this is a costly and timely route. Here's a newspaper article from 2015 giving some info..


----------



## breakonthru123 (8 Sep 2017)

By the way, I rang up PTSB and enquired as to why my BTL mortgage(s) was not included in this 'sell and writeoff' offer.. But PTSB would not say why my BTL's were not included in this 'pilot scheme' - nor would they give out the criteria under which certain BTL's qualify (as I have large arrears and negative equity).

---------

So 'forward march' with my bankruptcy.  At this point in time i think seeking bankruptcy (and letting the Official Assignee deal with tenants) is more preferable versus waiting longer to get credit again..


----------



## Pat Sorrn (8 Sep 2017)

Did they give you any information at all?


----------



## breakonthru123 (8 Sep 2017)

Nope. Wouldn't give out any criteria, or when 'pilot' would be expanded if ever.


----------



## Maz2408 (9 Sep 2017)

2 BTL Mortgages with PTSB property 1: €163,734.01 owed including restructured arrears of €3,734.01, property value around €90k, restructured mortgage 20 months ago, €62,709.57 in main account @ tracker rate 1.10%, monthly interest only payment €69.00  €103,454.44 in warehouse account @ 0.5%, monthly payment €49.81.  Total monthly payment on property 1 is €118.81 + €78.74 Mortgage protection debited by PTSB with monthly mortgage interest payment, which they would not let us cancel to increase mortgage payments. 

Property 2: €183,986.64 including restructured arrears, current property value around €140k, original Mortgage €165,000. Restructured 20 months ago, €71,280.34 in main account @ 5.8% interest only payment of €367.16. Warehoused amount €112,706.30 @ 0.5%, €49.81, total monthly interest only payment €416.97, + Mortgage protection payment which PTSB wouldn't allow us to cancel €56.46.

Combined negative equity €117,720 

Both Mortgages have 19 years left.

Rental income:                         €1040

Interest & Mortgage protection: €667.01

House insurance x2:                 €107.62

Property Tax:                           €52.50

Maintenance costs:                   €150.00

Accountant Fee's                      €30.00

We are 53 and 52 years old, our home mortgage €166,000, property value approx €175,000. 50% of My Husbands income goes on our home mortgage payment, we have no credit so we stick band aids on everything that doesn't work in our own home, but mantain the rentals as best we can.  I can no longer work as the stress of 9 years of this huge mortgage debt nearly killed me 2 years ago.  

Tennant at Property 1 has given me notice, as she's moving in to a Council house.  Property will need several thousand spending on it as carpets, front door and a shower need replacing plus full redecoration.  We have nothing left in the pot.  I have no idea if we're in the running for a sale and write down, but we must fit the criteria.  Property prices where we are have been pretty stagnent for years, I personally know someone who's been trying to sell a lovely 3 bed semi for €85,000 on a newish development for over a year, she's had 3 viewings in that time and 1 offer of €69,000.

Should I contact PTSB and ask to be considered in the selection process, if they say no and we hand back the key's what's the chances of them pursuing us through the courts for the deficit once the properties are sold when we clearly fit the criteria they have outlined for a write down.


----------



## Pat Sorrn (9 Sep 2017)

I also spoke to ptsb yesterday, the agent told me that I was not included in the write down deal even though I'm in a lot of negative equity with no chance of repaying. He said he was not allowed discuss the criteria for the offer.


----------



## breakonthru123 (9 Sep 2017)

@Maz2408,

You should consider starting a new thread with your post - as you might garner more attention that way.


----------



## gahfan (9 Sep 2017)

P tsb might be dipping their toes in the water with this, seeing how it goes, maybe dealing with the worst ones first, the people who haven't paid anything in 2 years etc.


----------



## gahfan (9 Sep 2017)

breakonthru123 said:


> PTSB have the ability to appoint 'Rent Receivers' - private firms - that can legally collect rent from BTL's and disburse same after taking their cut - to PTSB. This is allowed as it's written into the BTL mortgage agreement.
> 
> They can't appoint a 'Repossession Receiver to 'easily' repossess BTL's as this particular process was not allowed for within the same BTL mortgage agreement.
> 
> They have to go to court separately - and seek repossession - but this is a costly and timely route. Here's a newspaper article from 2015 giving some info..




Thanks for info breakonthru123. So I presume P Tsb would be reluctant to seek repossession? Does it apply to all BTL's or just some of theirs? like I said I wasn't aware of this until I stumbled up it here.


----------



## gahfan (9 Sep 2017)

Maz2408 hope everything works out for you. If you are in a position to work even part time it would obviously help both financially and otherwise. You could speak to MABS/Abhaile/FLAC/Irish Mortgage Holders Org etc too.

I phoned them and they said if you haven't received a letter then you are not part of it though it was only announced a few days ago.

Like I mentioned above this could be P Tsb dipping their does in the water and starting with the worst cases.


----------



## cremeegg (12 Sep 2017)

Pat Sorrn said:


> Should I contact ptsb and see if I qualify or just wait for a week or two and see if they write to me?



Well you should certainly stop paying your mortgage, you will need to get those arrears as high as possible to qualify.

As Brendan says,



Brendan Burgess said:


> It will apply only to people in negative equity and heavy arrears.



so better make sure you are one of those.


----------



## Pat Sorrn (19 Jan 2018)

Did anyone ever hear anymore about this offer?


----------



## breakonthru123 (23 Feb 2018)

I rang PTSB recently due to current media updates and was told - again - that I’m not included in the ‘BTL write down’ batch. 

Told them over the ‘phone and email that all our docs are lodged with IMHO and we’re awaiting  date at high court for bankruptcy.

Also explained they’d be down circa 170k - due to official assignee fees taking their cut off the eventual sale of assets.

Didn’t seem to perturb them as no reply to either..  They are going to sell the bad loan book at a huge discount maybe €2 / €3b - so like what’s €160k in the grand scheme of things?


----------

