# What happens if I voluntarily surrendered my house?



## whatelse (11 Oct 2011)

Here's the brief...........

18months in arrears. Health wise- poor, unable to work. Awaiting on DA decision. No prospects of been able to afford ANY repayments. Have two young kids (2&3 years) was given a mortgage while still a College student! Hate living where I'm living now as am far from family, friends and need support. What happens if I voluntarily surrendered my house?


----------



## Time (12 Oct 2011)

They will attempt to sell it and then chase you for the shortfall.


----------



## bugler (12 Oct 2011)

That's the stock answer - but seeing as it looks like the OP won't have anything to contribute to the shortfall for the foreseeable so they will be chasing nothing.

Have you actually talked to the bank about your circumstances? As it concerns your very health then I would get moving and do what you feel you need to do. Open communications with the bank, explain the situation and why you need to move, and that you are prepared to surrender the property.

I'd like to think they'd be open to writing off some of the remaining debt at least, but who knows..


----------



## ClubMan (12 Oct 2011)

Have you approached the lender about your situation? That, rather than just acting unilaterally and precipitously, would be the more prudent course of action. Maybe look at this site first:

http://www.keepingyourhome.ie/


----------



## Bronte (12 Oct 2011)

You are in arrears and cannot afford the repayments. Then you should engage with your bank so they can start the process of letting you sell the property or selling it themselves. If you have no job, no income and no assets they will in all likelihood write off your debt. It will affect your credit rating for a few years which is not really something to worry about and will eventually be sorted.


----------



## Mongola (12 Oct 2011)

Sorry to hear about your cistcumstances. I would agree with the fact that you need to talk to your lender but make sure you talk to the RIGHt person in your bank!


----------



## whatelse (12 Oct 2011)

Thank you for the replies. I have met with the bank a few days ago and they said to pay ANYTHING into the account, something is better than nothing was their exact words.
I have done out my detailed budget and there is no ANYTHING! Every cent is accounted for and they well knew that as there wasn't one thing the bank could say for me to reduce payments/spending on.
When you say chase me for the shortfall how long will that last for? As I said I don't see things improving any time soon.
The longer I keep the house, the more interest, etc building up?


----------



## Pope John 11 (12 Oct 2011)

whatelse said:


> Here's the brief...........
> 
> .............was given a mortgage while still a College student!



Can you not take a case against the bank for giving you a house based on the above, surely this is not right!!!


----------



## Bronte (14 Oct 2011)

whatelse said:


> I have done out my detailed budget and there is no ANYTHING!
> 
> Every cent is accounted for and they well knew that as there wasn't one thing the bank could say for me to reduce payments/spending on.
> 
> The longer I keep the house, the more interest, etc building up?


 
You are correct the longer you keep the house the more arrears are building up.  Did the bank actually look at your budget?  And did they tell you there was no way you could pay anything to them.  Was this the local bank manager?


----------



## Ryandd (15 Oct 2011)

Im not anyway a legal expert but does anyone know if it is illegal to give back the keys if the house is in negative equity, house was purchased based on an independant bank valuation, in theory the house still belongs to the bank.  why would we be paying the shotfall, did any homeowner get advise as to the possibility of negative equity and the consequences this would inflict, I don't know if the banks not informing customers prior to the contract of the responsibilities of the purchaser if the house was to fall into negative equity, if some lost their money on an investment and wasn't properly advised they would be straight on to the ombudsman.  I just wonder if there is a case for the banks failing to properly advise customers of negative equity before buying.  They offered home insurance life assurance ppi and nothing to secure the householder against negative equity, just want to know your views on the matter, it may be off the wall but I just think we are being scape goats.


----------



## wbbs (15 Oct 2011)

Handing the keys of your house back to a bank employee does nothing except give a random stranger a set of keys to your house.   It does not give them possession of it, the legal work still has to be done, you can voluntarily surrender it legally or let them repossess it, voluntarily will cost you less probably in legal fees.

Then bank doesn't own the house, you do, they have a mortgage secured against it.

As for the negative equity aspect of it, would people have listened!  I was sick and tired of telling prospective mortgage holders that house prices do not always rise and that houses were too expensive but they looked at me like I was mad.   I remember asking a 27 yr old what was their hurry to buy the overpriced 3 bed semi at 250k in small rural town, they  told me prices always rise and that it would be worth 500k in a few years.  No amount of telling them that was not the case would do, they just did not believe me, strangely enough the valuer refused to value the house at 250k even though it was the sale price of that particular development, he felt it was also overpriced, the other houses had been sold at that price.


----------



## Ryandd (15 Oct 2011)

I do think people were of the impression that if they didn't buy now that house prices would keep rising and I would have thought at the time that house prices would have stablized but what happened was clearly as a result of a banking ecomomic disaster.  Just on the point of the mortgage is it not the owner that has the mortgage secured on the property.  I would have thought the bank can reposess the house if payments aren't met.   I know when I bought I was afraid of them rising to unreachable prices and I think thats the constant message relaid in the media and banks.   I appreciate you advising, but I believe the people who bought in those years did so because they genuinely feared house prices would keep rising if they didn't buy and the renting was seen as money down the drain and often overpriced for the properties rented so alot of factors to consider and weigh up.  I just wish the banks were honest with customerrs in warning them of consequences of negative equity as it never entered anyones head.  I believe that people feel a little sick and its not fair to add to the missery to those genuine people who set up homes and have now so much misfortune to deal with and no light at the end of the tunnel.  I wish the banks would admit some liability in these cases and act fairly when approached by distressed customers.


----------



## PiedPiper (17 Oct 2011)

Why would you think that you have to give up your home?  Nonsense start thinking of ways to keep it not lose it.


----------



## Steve Thatcher (17 Oct 2011)

Why can't people accept that they were also to blame. Many chased rising prices as a way to make a fast buck. Many got caught. prices go up as well as down. I sympathise with all those caught out. But the same thing happened hear in 1980 and 1990. It should have served as a warning. Prices can go up and they can fall.
Please accept some responsibility it is not all the fault of the lender.


----------



## ClaireM (17 Oct 2011)

Have you applied for Mortgage Interest supplement?

The state does expect you to pay €24 per week towards your accommodation and that will be the case whether you are renting and getting supplwmet, in local authority housing or getting mortgage Interest supplement.

Have you been to MABS? Have you done a standard financial statement for the bank under the MARP?

If you get MIS you may be able to stay in your home and hopefully as you are young at some stage in the future you will eb able to work and mark payments yourself again or the government have come up with a solution.


----------



## Bronte (18 Oct 2011)

PiedPiper said:


> Why would you think that you have to give up your home? Nonsense start thinking of ways to keep it not lose it.


 
Why do people want to cling on to their home when it is only a liability.  In the OP's case they cannot afford it and don't want to live in it.


----------



## Bronte (18 Oct 2011)

Steve Thatcher said:


> Why can't people accept that they were also to blame. Many chased rising prices as a way to make a fast buck. Many got caught. prices go up as well as down. I sympathise with all those caught out. But the same thing happened hear in 1980 and 1990. It should have served as a warning. Prices can go up and they can fall.
> Please accept some responsibility it is not all the fault of the lender.


 
Well said Steve, but it's rare on AAM that any over stretched borrower will admit that they were also to blame (along with the banks reckless lending and poor regulation)


----------



## bugler (18 Oct 2011)

PiedPiper said:


> Why would you think that you have to give up your home?  Nonsense start thinking of ways to keep it not lose it.



Did you actually read the OP's post? I know it would stop your whistlestop tour of telling people they don't have to pay anything and don't have to give up their house, but it may be worth a shot.


----------



## PiedPiper (18 Oct 2011)

Because they are not to blame simple as.  Are you on another planet, of course the guy in the street is not to blame for this individually or collectively, this is the fall out from globilization and corportate greed the manager of AIB cant be paid a lotto win as an annual salary unless some one is paying wake up and smell the coffee


----------



## whatelse (19 Oct 2011)

Bronte said:


> You are correct the longer you keep the house the more arrears are building up. Did the bank actually look at your budget? And did they tell you there was no way you could pay anything to them. Was this the local bank manager?


 
I met with head office in town- the arrears recovery dept. Yes they looked at my budget and could clearly see my income and outgoings. They said even if the MIS was paid in that would do. But I honestly can not see the point if I'm not happy living here, my health is poor and I need support from my family all the while interest & arrears just keep coming.


----------



## whatelse (19 Oct 2011)

ClaireM said:


> Have you applied for Mortgage Interest supplement?
> 
> The state does expect you to pay €24 per week towards your accommodation and that will be the case whether you are renting and getting supplwmet, in local authority housing or getting mortgage Interest supplement.
> 
> ...


 
I'm on the waiting list a while now for MABS. Yes I did the financial statement- that's the budget I was talking about. I may just have to move back in with family as I don't have e96 euros spare a month, if I did I would have been paying into my mortgage. I don't want to stay in this house given my current state of health and support I need. That's why I'm wondering what my options are and right now the only one I can see is to ask the bank to sell it or could I?


----------



## moycullen14 (19 Oct 2011)

PiedPiper said:


> Because they are not to blame simple as.  Are you on another planet, of course the guy in the street is not to blame for this individually or collectively, this is the fall out from globilization and corportate greed the manager of AIB cant be paid a lotto win as an annual salary unless some one is paying wake up and smell the coffee



I'm glad you lot weren't on the Titanic.......

'It's the Captains fault for going to fast....'
'No, it's the designers fault because the ship's rudder is too small'
'No, it's the Board of Trades fault for not insisting on enough lifeboats.....'

Gurgle, gurgle, gurgle.........

Doesn't matter a jot whose fault it is or was. What matters is what the government, banks and individuals are going to do.'

I would have thought that the biggest stick New Beginnings et al have is the threat of large-scale, co-ordinated action. If thousands of mortgage holders start refusing to play ball then the banks are in big trouble and all the moral arguments go out the window.


----------



## Kerrigan (19 Oct 2011)

moycullen14 said:


> I would have thought that the biggest stick New Beginnings et al have is the threat of large-scale, co-ordinated action. If thousands of mortgage holders start refusing to play ball then the banks are in big trouble and all the moral arguments go out the window.


 
Exactly.  I know I'm sounding like a parrott but this is what I've been trying to say on here.


----------



## Purple (19 Oct 2011)

PiedPiper said:


> Because they are not to blame simple as.  Are you on another planet, of course the guy in the street is not to blame for this individually or collectively, this is the fall out from globilization and corportate greed the manager of AIB cant be paid a lotto win as an annual salary unless some one is paying wake up and smell the coffee



If you close your eyes really tightly and wish really really hard you might be able to change reality into what you would like it ti be but I wouldn't bet on it.

Let me know how you get on.
Meanwhile here’s some facts;
Borrowers are adults.
They signed a contract to repay a loan. The banks side of the deal was that they leant the money to the borrower.
Some lenders can now not may the repayments on their loans.
The banks are entitled to act in accordance with the terms of the loan agreement that both parties signed.

By all means ignore the legalities and realities of the situation; otherwise the opinions you so freely express make no sense.


----------



## Purple (19 Oct 2011)

Kerrigan said:


> Exactly.  I know I'm sounding like a parrott but this is what I've been trying to say on here.



Yes, blackmail; that's what we need!


----------



## Bronte (19 Oct 2011)

moycullen14 said:


> If thousands of mortgage holders start refusing to play ball then the banks are in big trouble and all the moral arguments go out the window.


 
Then we would have anarchy.


----------

