# Banks are to blame for their own reckless lending



## RETIRED2017 (26 Feb 2019)

Cabinet to discuss Bill to support  distressed  borrowers in Mortgage arrears Today,

It will be interesting to see if the look to see what affect reckless leading has on the amount of distressed Mortgages,

I know there are some who will not be happy to be bringing up this subject on AAM

Distressed Mortgage Holders who are experiencing financial trouble due to the practice of neglect from Mortgage lenders in the past,

I know the argument they were Adults they did not have to take the amount of mortgage offered,

The problem is reckless lending pushed up house prices , so the asset the lent against was not worth the amount advanced ,

 Who should take the blame ?


----------



## so-crates (26 Feb 2019)

Delboy said:


> This was discussed on Sean O'Rourke show this AM. Boxer is now a Minister and was asked if he'd resign should the Govt not progress the bill.
> Boxer said it won't come to that as he expects it to be brought in and he hinted that Leo had given him that level of assurance.
> 
> Dan O'Brien later warned against the bill. He pointed out that repossessions were practically non-existent. And that this has the potential to keep mortgage rates higher than the Euro average as well as keeping competition out.
> Mary Murphy, lecturer at NUI Maynooth, seemed to think higher rates was a small price that society had to pay to keep people in their homes. Especially as she expects a very large ramping up of repossessions over the next 2 years....she reiterated that point a few times!


Ah poor Mary, 18 months later and still no sign of her then impending tsunami of repossession ...


----------



## Seagull (26 Feb 2019)

RETIRED2017 said:


> Cabinet to discuss Bill to support  distressed  borrowers in Mortgage arrears Today,
> It will be interesting to see if the look to see what affect reckless leading has on the amount of distressed Mortgages,



When we were getting a mortgage, we took the adult approach of considering what we could comfortably afford to borrow, and kept to that limit. We didn't lie on the application, we didn't fudge the figures to get the maximum the banks might give us, and we got a property we could afford. Yes, the banks were giving away easy money, but that didn't mean you had to take it.


----------



## so-crates (26 Feb 2019)

RETIRED2017 said:


> Cabinet to discuss Bill to support  distressed  borrowers in Mortgage arrears Today,
> 
> It will be interesting to see if the look to see what affect reckless leading has on the amount of distressed Mortgages,
> 
> ...



The simple truth though is the majority of mortgages (including probably a sizeable proportion of those now defined as distressed) were not "reckless" lending by any measure, we need to keep that in view. 

I would guess it is also true to say that the majority of borrowers were not at the time, in their own view as well as in their lenders estimation, distressed borrowers or at risk of same. It is fundamentally flawed to argue that banks drove up the prices, bank lending went hand in glove with borrower ambition, to heap blame on the banks is to decide that the borrowers were incapable of making rational decisions themselves. 

It is also the case that the recession was a true paradigm shift for many borrowers, tipping them from managing their repayments into arrears. 

Going around looking for someone to blame at this juncture is of limited value - it's been done to death, culpability is shared between lenders, borrowers, low credit cost, overheating government incentives and an increasing population. It generates no valuable insights and certainly does nothing at all to help those in distress at present.


----------



## Delboy (26 Feb 2019)

RETIRED2017 said:


> The problem is reckless lending pushed up house prices , so the asset the lent against was not worth the amount advanced ,
> 
> Who should take the blame ?


Bank shareholders wiped out.
CEO's all shown the door...albeit on good packages unfortunately.

What more would you like to see happen?


----------



## RETIRED2017 (26 Feb 2019)

Seagull said:


> When we were getting a mortgage, we took the adult approach of considering what we could comfortably afford to borrow, and kept to that limit. We didn't lie on the application, we didn't fudge the figures to get the maximum the banks might give us, and we got a property we could afford. Yes, the banks were giving away easy money, but that didn't mean you had to take it.


I belong to the same stable as your good self , I moved three times buying the property I could afford each time until got to the house I wanted,
but giving people up to 14 times there annual wages was not very Adult like,
I worked in Manufacture  for 45 years If the company I worked for was as reckless as the banks they would be out of Business long ago,


----------



## RETIRED2017 (26 Feb 2019)

Delboy said:


> Bank shareholders wiped out.
> CEO's all shown the door...albeit on good packages unfortunately.
> 
> What more would you like to see happen?


I would like to see the not so Adult shareholders stop lecturing others on being Adults,


the bank shareholders who got wiped out were Adults also and the did not see it coming even after the train left the station,
 some still lecture others on being Adults when they are ill-Equipped in the same department to this day,


I have met people who lost there shareholding in Irish banks who resent seeing mortgage holders getting a deal just because  the so called smarter Adult brothers and sisters lost all because the could not see the had there money investing in reckless  Banks just to get a good return,

Outside of this site I have met people who have got over the fact they were not as Smart as the looked or acted,and are humble having lost there bank shareholding,

I also meet the other  kind shareholder who still try to lecture mortgage holders caught up in the reckless over borrowing /  lending and resent the fact mortgage holders might come out of this sorry mess without losing there home , because of banks and  shareholders bad judgement,

Some shareholders are so small minded they would love nothing better than to see people less well off than themselves loose everything  it is eating them up seeing this is not allowed to happen ,


----------



## qwerty5 (26 Feb 2019)

RETIRED2017 said:


> I belong to the same stable as your good self , I moved three times buying the property I could afford each time until got to the house I wanted,
> but giving people up to 14 times there annual wages was not very Adult like,
> I worked in Manufacture  for 25 years If the company I worked for was as reckless as the banks they would be out of Business long ago,



Anybody who gave 14 times somebody's wages deserved everything they get  But who did that? I must be the only one in Ireland that borrowed in 2008 and didn't have money thrown at me. I can't remember what my multiple was but looking back it was about 3 and a half time our wages at the time and it wasnt just a rubber stamp approval.


----------



## RETIRED2017 (26 Feb 2019)

qwerty5 said:


> Anybody who gave 14 times somebody's wages deserved everything they get  But who did that? I must be the only one in Ireland that borrowed in 2008 and didn't have money thrown at me. I can't remember what my multiple was but looking back it was about 3 and a half time our wages at the time and it wasnt just a rubber stamp approval.


Yours was not reckless borrowing/lending then,there would be a lot less problems if yours was the norm,


----------



## RETIRED2017 (26 Feb 2019)

Seagull said:


> When we were getting a mortgage, we took the adult approach of considering what we could comfortably afford to borrow, and kept to that limit. We didn't lie on the application, we didn't fudge the figures to get the maximum the banks might give us, and we got a property we could afford. Yes, the banks were giving away easy money, but that didn't mean you had to take it.


Did you ever hear the saying easy come easy go, Banks and there shareholders  left holding there own baby comes to mind,going by some posters it is only a matter of time before it happens again,
I think we need to get Eoin involved with the banks,


----------



## RETIRED2017 (26 Feb 2019)

Delboy said:


> Bank shareholders wiped out.
> CEO's all shown the door...albeit on good packages unfortunately.
> 
> What more would you like to see happen?


The right-wing leaning need to realise they are being fleeced by there own,I really feel there pain,but there is no cure i am afraid,for the Right wing to stay in power they have to look after the left-leaning better than there own,Enjoy,

You mean CEO all shown the door gone with what was left of shareholders money ,


----------



## Delboy (26 Feb 2019)

Retired2017 - as is often the norm, I'm none the wiser after reading your replies. In fact, I'm downright confused 

And where has all this 'right wing/left wing' stuff come from in the past few days? It's a mantra at this stage with you!


----------



## RETIRED2017 (26 Feb 2019)

Delboy said:


> Retired2017 - as is often the norm, I'm none the wiser after reading your replies. In fact, I'm downright confused
> 
> And where has all this 'right wing/left wing' stuff come from in the past few days? It's a mantra at this stage with you!


 Confused  post no5/ 12 shows you have a good handle on LEO Right-wing leaning
 turning Judges into Social workers with this bill,


----------



## MrEarl (26 Feb 2019)

I can't believe questions are still being asked about "who should take the blame" ... it's obvious, all parties need to shoulder part of the responsibility !


The Borrowers didn't have to borrow such large sums

The Banks didn't have to lend such large sums

The Regulator could have and should have done more to slow down the Banks and Borrowers

The Builders should have built more houses, and produced better quality
The Government of the day should have acted to slow down the rate at which property investors were buying and ramping up property prices

The list goes on ....

It's one thing trying to help and protect those genuinely in need of assistance, but another when it comes to simply trying to pass the blame to someone else for mistakes made by just about everyone.


----------



## Leper (26 Feb 2019)

Who should take the blame? . . . . The banks of course. They were not pressganged in giving loans to anybody. It was greed and more greed.


----------



## Purple (28 Feb 2019)

Leper said:


> Who should take the blame? . . . . The banks of course. They were not pressganged in giving loans to anybody. It was greed and more greed.


We bailed out the depositors and the bond holders, not the banks. 
Everyone with savings and/or a pension should remember that.
If there was no bail out then pensions would have been very badly hit and savings would have disappeared. The banks would have still been there; they are just buildings, conduits through which money flows.


----------



## MrEarl (28 Feb 2019)

Leper said:


> Who should take the blame? . . . . The banks of course. They were not pressganged in giving loans to anybody. It was greed and more greed.



The exact same can be said for the Borrowers, they also were not "pressganged" into taking the loans.  See my point ?


----------



## Leper (28 Feb 2019)

MrEarl said:


> The exact same can be said for the Borrowers, they also were not "pressganged" into taking the loans.  See my point ?



The borrowers were not exactly pressganged, but there were people looking for loans for a 2nd hand cars and came out of the bank with loans for a new car + a new runaround. One of my neighbours in Spain and she's from Ireland got simultaneous loans for a holiday home in Co Donegal and two apartments in the Costas. She is no longer a neighbour, I hasten to add. She used to be boasting amongst our Brit neighbours of the proactive performance of Irish banks versus UK banks. Giving her that money was like giving chocolate to a two year old.

Read my lips:- It was greed by the banks.


----------



## Sarenco (28 Feb 2019)

Was your former neighbour not greedy in taking out those loans?  You know, to buy things she didn't need with money she didn't have.

Incidentally, we can't see you on the Internet so it's not really possible for us to read your lips!


----------



## RETIRED2017 (28 Feb 2019)

Sarenco said:


> Was your former neighbour not greedy in taking out those loans?  You know, to buy things she didn't need with money she didn't have.
> 
> Incidentally, we can't see you on the Internet so it's not really possible for us to read your lips!


  Between the neighbour and the Banks  which was the biggest simpleton or were both simpletons.

The neighbour should have put down that damn Gun,


----------



## Purple (1 Mar 2019)

Leper said:


> Giving her that money was like giving chocolate to a two year old.


And unless she was actually two at the time she is responsible for the decisions she made and should face the full consequences if things go wrong up to and including losing her family home.


----------



## Gordon Gekko (1 Mar 2019)

There’s very little that someone can do if they lose their job during an economic crisis.

If I’ve borrowed €400k, €500k, or €600k, and I’ve lost my job, I’m goosed either way.

In Ireland we seem to delight in expensive enquiries and navel gazing, when everyone knows that the answer is “it’s complicated”.


----------



## Leper (1 Mar 2019)

Purple said:


> And unless she was actually two at the time she is responsible for the decisions she made and should face the full consequences if things go wrong up to and including losing her family home.





Sarenco said:


> Was your former neighbour not greedy in taking out those loans?  You know, to buy things she didn't need with money she didn't have.
> 
> Incidentally, we can't see you on the Internet so it's not really possible for us to read your lips!





RETIRED2017 said:


> Between the neighbour and the Banks  which was the biggest simpleton or were both simpletons.
> 
> 
> 1. I agree with Purple she should be held responsible. Hardly though! The manager of her bank shares responsibility too.
> ...


----------



## Purple (1 Mar 2019)

The Irish taxpayer didn't pay the debt, they funnelled money into the banks to protect the depositors and the bondholders. If they'd paid the debt then people wouldn't still have mortgages.


----------



## MrEarl (1 Mar 2019)

Gordon Gekko said:


> There’s very little that someone can do if they lose their job during an economic crisis. ....



Very true, and they are the people who deserved assistance. 

But that's an entirely different scenario to someone who just decided to borrow more than they could afford to comfortably repay because they wanted to show off to their friends and family about what a big house they had, or what a fancy car they had, or that they owned properties in seven different countries etc.  Many of those people continue to blame the Banks, rather than accept responsibility themselves.


----------

