# Boxer Moran's "Keeping People in their Homes Bill"



## Brendan Burgess (26 Feb 2017)

This hasn't received much coverage.  It seems to be aimed at stopping repossessions.  Here is the main content:


KEEPING PEOPLE IN THEIR HOMES BILL 2017
Bill  entitled

An Act to provide that adequate consideration be afforded to the principle of
proportionality in the context of proceedings which are directed at the repossession of a mortgaged property in which the mortgagor ordinarily resides, and for that purpose to amend the Land and Conveyancing Law Reform Act 2009; and to provide for related matters.


2. The Principal Act is amended in Chapter 3 of Part 10 by substituting the following for
section 96(3)—
“(3) The  provisions  relating to the  powers  and rights  conferred by this
Chapter  apply  to  any  housing  loan  mortgage  notwithstanding  any
stipulation to the contrary and notwithstanding any powers and rights
expressly conferred under such a mortgage, but in relation to any other
mortgage, except where section 97 applies, or except where this Part
provides  to  the  contrary,  take  effect  subject  to  the  terms  of  the
mortgage.”.
Substitution of section 97 of Principal Act
3. The Principal Act is amended in Chapter 3 of Part 10 by substituting the following for
section 97—
“Taking possession
97. (1) Subject  to section 98, a mortgagee shall  not take possession of the
mortgaged property without a court order granted under this section,
unless the mortgagor consents in writing to such taking not more than
7 days prior to such taking.
(2) A mortgagee may apply to the court for an order for possession of the

mortgaged property and on such application the court may, if it thinks
fit, order that possession be granted to the applicant on such terms and
conditions, if any, as it thinks fit.
(3) In granting, adjourning, varying, postponing, suspending or executing
an  order  for  possession  of  a  mortgaged  property  in  which  the
mortgagor ordinarily resides or attaching terms or conditions to such
an order, the court shall have regard to all of the circumstances of the
case, including the proportionality of the order or proposed order by
reference to the considerations set out in subsections (4) and (5).
(4) In considering the  proportionality of  an order  or  a  proposed order
under  this  section,  the  factors  to  be  considered  by the  court  shall
include, without limitation, the following:
(a) whether the order being sought pursues a legitimate aim;
(b) whether the order being sought—
(i) is justifiable by reference to a pressing social need, and
(ii) is proportionate to the legitimate aim being pursued and is the
least  onerous means of achieving the legitimate aim,  based on
consideration of the following factors:
(I) the amount of the principal paid by the mortgagor in relation
to the total amount borrowed;
(II) the amount of interest paid by the mortgagor in relation to
the total amount owed;
(III) the amount the mortgagor is able to pay on a monthly basis
in relation to the amount sought by the mortgagee;
(IV) the suitability or otherwise of the mortgage to rent scheme;
(V) the suitability or otherwise of a lifetime mortgage;
(VI) the suitability or otherwise of the sale of the existing loan to
an approved housing body;
(VII) the  suitability  or  otherwise  of  a  Personal  Insolvency
Arrangement;
(VIII) whether  the  mortgagee  has  attempted  to  have  the  matter
resolved by reference to mediation;
(IX) the adherence to the Code of Conduct on Mortgage Arrears;
(X) obligations  imposed on regulated lenders  under  European
Union  (Consumer  Mortgage  Credit  Agreements)
Regulations 2016 (S.I. No. 142 of 2016); and
(XI) the  application  of  the  forbearance  measures  set  out  in
guidance  on  non-performing  loans  published  by  the
European Central  Bank,  including interest  only payments,
reduced  payments,  grace  period/payment  moratorium,

arrears/interest  capitalisation,  long  term  interest  rate
reduction,  extension  of  maturity/term,  additional  security,
sale by agreement,  rescheduled payments,  other alterations
of contract, new credit facilities, debt c0ns0lidation, partial
or total debt forgiveness,
(c) the  likely impact  of  such  an  order  on  the  human  rights  of  the
mortgagor and other household members by reference to the rights
which  they  can  expect  to  enjoy  pursuant  to  the  European
Convention on Human Rights or the EU Charter  of Fundamental
Rights, including but not limited to consideration of the following
factors:
(i) the  availability  of  suitable  and  affordable  alternative
accommodation that will allow the relevant family or household
to continue to live together;
(ii) where there are older  persons,  persons with disabilities,  other
vulnerable persons, or dependants in the household:
(I) the  extent  to  which  such  alternative  accommodation  will
ensure  their  independence,  social  and  occupational
integration and participation in life of the community;
(II) the extent  to which care and support  arrangements  are in
place for children and vulnerable members, and dependants
in the household; and
(III) evidence of an examination of the impact  of relocation or
repossession on such persons,  including whether  the  best
interests of any children have been prioritised;
(iii) the extent to which an order under this section will  affect  the
physical and mental health of all members of the household;
(iv) the extent to which an order under this section will intrude into
the personal sphere of the household, including the effect on the
maintenance of relationships with others; and
(v) the extent to which an order under this section will impact the
future  aspirations  and  opportunities  of  all  members  of  the
household,
(d) examination of all of the circumstances surrounding the execution
of  the  mortgage  contract,  including  the  level  and  extent  of
information provided, the position of the parties, legal advice given
in relation to the mortgage contract, vulnerability of the consumer,
the extent to which original lending decisions, made at the time of
granting  the  mortgage  application,  were  reasonable  and
responsible, and an evaluation of the application of—
(i) any unfair terms and any appropriate adjustments, and
(ii) Consumer  Protection  Codes  of  2006  and  2012  (where
applicable),

(e) the extent and availability of State support to the enforcing entity in
grants,  tax  relief  on  non-performing  loans,  subvention,  Central
Bank support, or other State supports; and
(f) the estimated costs, per week, to the State of providing—
(i) emergency  accommodation  and  alternative  housing  to  the
household, and
(ii) support  services  to  the  household  from State  resources  per
week.
(5) Where  the  enforcing entity is  not  the  credit  institution which first
granted the  loan or  mortgage  to the  mortgagor,  in considering the
proportionality of the order or a proposed order under this section, the
factors to be considered by the court  shall  in addition to the factors
provided for  in subsection (4),  also include,  without  limitation,  the
following:
(a) the amount paid by the enforcing entity for the purchase of the loan
or  mortgage  by reference  to the  amount  of  debt  outstanding in
respect of that loan or mortgage;
(b) in circumstances where paragraph (a) applies, whether the loan or
mortgage  was  also  offered  for  sale  at  that  reduced  cost  to  the
mortgagor;
(c) the value of the loan or mortgage on the enforcing entity’s balance
sheet, and the market value of the property at time of court hearing;
(d) the availability of tax relief for the enforcing entity in relation to
the  relevant  non-performing  loan,  or  in  respect  of  its  nonperforming
loans
generally.
(6) Subsections (3) to (5) apply—
(a) to  proceedings  initiated  after  the  coming  into  operation  of
subsections (3) to (5) which have been brought by a mortgagee
seeking an order for possession of a mortgaged property in which
the mortgagor ordinarily resides,
(b) to  proceedings  initiated  before  the  coming  into  operation  of
subsections (3) to (5) which have been brought by a mortgagee
seeking an order for possession of a mortgaged property in which
the  mortgagor  ordinarily  resides,  provided  an  order  for
repossession has not yet been granted by the court, and
(c) to  proceedings  initiated  before  the  coming  into  operation  of
subsections (3) to (5) which have been brought by a mortgagee
seeking an order for possession of a mortgaged property in which
the mortgagor ordinarily resides where an order  for repossession
has been granted but not yet  executed and in relation to which a
variation  or  suspension  of  the  repossession  order  is  now being
sought.

(7) In this section ‘household’ includes:
(i) a household comprising a person who lives alone; or
(ii) a  household  comprising  two  or  more  persons  who  have  a
reasonable requirement to live together,  which includes family
and shared homes,
and ‘household members’ shall be construed accordingly.”.


----------



## Seamus McKenna (27 Feb 2017)

Many thanks for posting the draft of the Boxer Moran bill for keeping people in their homes. I was successful in having a letter published in the Indo recently entitled "Funds snapping up people's homes are parasites, not vultures", which I believe is relevant (Sorry I cannot link to it as I do not meet the minimum requirements of the forum) / SMcK


----------



## Delboy (27 Feb 2017)

What repossessions? There are practically none in this country, a few hundred a year max with half of them being voluntary!
As Karl Deeter said on the radio last week, this bill will effectively turn Judges into Social Workers.


----------



## so-crates (27 Feb 2017)

- what a load of ... pandering to populists. If this is the way this country is going, no-one EXCEPT commercial enterprises will be able to get a mortgage.


----------



## Andy836 (27 Feb 2017)

That.Is.Comical. 

When a contract is no longer a contract.........


----------



## Vanessa (19 Apr 2017)

Maybe he should have run it by a constitutional lawyer first


----------



## so-crates (19 Apr 2017)

Or anyone with a solitary functional brain cell ...


----------



## trasneoir (27 Apr 2017)

"the extent to which an order under this section will impact the future aspirations and opportunities of all members of the household"
What if my aspiration is to keep a property without paying for it?


----------



## Delboy (18 Jul 2017)

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!


----------



## Andy836 (18 Jul 2017)

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!



So those who are paying their bills should pay higher bills than normal to cover people who won't/can't pay their bills............ Makes sense............... *shoot me*


----------



## cremeegg (18 Jul 2017)

I thought Dan O'Brien made the point that a more difficult repossession regime makes rates higher for everyone well. He seemed to largely miss making the point that the overall level of lending is surpassed due to the difficulty in repossessing. That is also contributing to homelessness.

BofI recently bought a large mortgage book from a vulture fund, proven performing mortgages. From societies point of view that money would have been better given out in new lending. More houses, more employment.


----------

