Caroline Lennon Nally Posterwoman for mortgage arrears

Well done on the show Brendan. I think she is clever in that any time you got close to a bit more truth she went off on a tangent to avoid revealing more than she wanted, as in when you found out about the house she sold, instead of revealing how much, if any, she gained from the sale of the house, she brought emotion into the story by stating it was due to a breakup. As you say, this type of story is dangerous in that it is portrayed as typical of the cases where help is needed when it is anything but.
 
Brendan Burgess said:
Mortgage|€320k


She just does not want to pay the capital.

I am trying to reconcile the figures

.
Click to expand...


I must say it feels odd talking about someone on here when she is identified but I guess she's become a public figure and she is lobbying with her group.

There are long threads on this, but I'm not sure if I've missed why is she not paying capital? And why is her interest rate so low?

It would have been interesting to do this as a clean case study maybe without all the other detail on this thread? And then put in back in here. Like someone did with Mrs. Cornflake.

The benefit from previous house sales was presumably the deposit, an even higher clothing allowance, holidays, cars and home improvements. Unless some of it was eaten up by a divorce settlement.
 
Was Pascal Donohoe very sympathetic towards her in his comments on the programme? edit: He does come back and quiz her about paying at the end.

Caroline said that she is not looking for a debt write down. I am completely confused what she expects to happen.
 
She doesn't want to say the words "I am looking for a debt write-down" - but she clearly wants it. She prefers to deal in smoke, mirrors (or should that be "make-up mirrors") and fluffy language lest people see through her.
 
From her article in the Irish Independent 8 April 2012

Caroline Lennon Nally, a public servant who is fast sinking into mortgage arrears, is one of those still waiting for a tangible helping hand from the State. "I'd love to see something happening. All we have seen is a lot of talk," she said this weekend.


She bought her home for €385,000 in 2007, and has since invested €150,000 in it between mortgage repayments and stamp duty. She can no longer afford her €1,470 repayments since pay cuts and levies cut her income by €1,500 a month. A year ago, she offered to repay a sizeable sum to her lender but the bank refused to accept it. A financial adviser helped her come up other repayment proposals, but those too have been rejected. "I'm exhausted at the moment in that I really don't seem to be making any progress with my lender," she said. "I actively pursued my lender before I ever got into difficulties, knowing what was coming down the tracks, and it is just like banging my head against a brick wall."
Click to expand...

Elsewhere, she says that she has taken a 25% pay cut. So she must still have a net salary of €4,500 a month.
 
I cringe everytime this person gets airtime.

I think that no matter what the scenario or event, she will have a distorted view of it. Her views on her debts are distorted. Her view on the property are distorted. Her view on her entitlements are distortored.
I should clarify-distorted by her!

How else can one describe calling stamp duty and mortgage interest as an investment in ones home? They both add no value and are non transferable. Rather than being investments, they are just costs of buying a home or paying a mortgage.

I see no reason why a bank should not move to repossess here. She clearly has money, has signed a contract obliging her to pay monthly and has publically said she is not paying. If she was in the same situation income wise but as renter she would have to pay rent to keep her tenancy, so why does she not pay a bank the equivalent in interest at least?

That she paid stamp duty or x% interest rate, or that the banks destroyed her asset value or had her salary cut, are irrelevant arguements.

As I said, she has a distorted view on matters.
 
I listened to this live last night Brendan and if I knew a thread already existed here, I'd have posted at the time to say well done.
About time someone pulled up people like CLN.....she's been getting away unchallenged for years. I even think David Hall was knocked off stride for a few minutes as he's not used of seeing anyone on his side being challenged (though he did recover!!!)

She shrieked when she asked if she wanted a debt write down, saying thats not what she was after. But it clearly is despite all her claims of only wanting 'communication', whatever that is.
She seems to be also angling to say the loan was illegal in the 1st place....she said she's had her mortgage claim examined and the bank 'gave' her 50k too much.
There's no arguing with people like this

Her 'group' consists of 2,500 people she keeps on claiming but all I can find is her facebook page which has.....2,500 likes or followers or whatever it is you call it!!!

I get angry every time I hear her (or David Hall, or Ross Maguire, or Monica Leech and her new group, or The Freemen, or the Free Legal Aid people, or Geroge Mordaunt, or etc etc)...but perhaps it's no harm giving her airtime.....it really shows up the kind of people seeking debt write downs.
 
Brendan

It's not clear if her pay cut (€1500) at that particular time was Gross or Net. The Gross figure always looks more attractive when used to make a case.


Marion
 
Delboy +1. David Hall and Ross Maguire to be honest are pure opportunists and self promoters. There is no doubt that we will be having more "hard luck" stories from other characters. I can see people with 800k and 900k mortgages with a house valued at 450k wanting the mortgage written down to the current value of the house or less and who could not contemplate the idea of having to live in normal decent estate where houses might be valued at 250k. This would be intolerable for a tennis/golf/rugby club member to have to have to change their membership address to this new address.
 
Fair play to you Brendan,and thank God someone made the challenge.
It is utterly frustrating to hear CLN go on about her situation.
A couple of things struck me,
;1) some posters mentioned something along the lines of it being strange posting about her,and once or twice posters were requested not to speak about her being a public servant,her make up ,clothes,expenditure etc.

My thinking on this is that she has put herself out there as a poster child for those in debt,as mentioned she has been on a lot of media,and Facebook.
She also uses these items of expenditure and has mentioned on numerous occasions that she is a public servant,to justify not paying her debt,she obviosly sees this as relevant enough to be worth a mention,so I see no issue with anyone challenging it.
A bit like the Guards wife who said the child had to eat the cornflakes box! lots of people questioned that and suggested ways that wouldn't entail eating cardboard! Point is,if you put information into the public domain,don't be surprised or offended that people question/query it.
2). I would love to know what she would do if the interest rates had increased!

I do have sympathy for those who have no job,live in the middle of nowhere,have major issues with the property,pyrite,etc,but having CLN speak as one of those burdened with debt,does them no favours.


,
 
Dermot said:
I can see people with 800k and 900k mortgages with a house valued at 450k wanting the mortgage written down to the current value of the house or less and who could not contemplate the idea of having to live in normal decent estate where houses might be valued at 250k. This would be intolerable for a tennis/golf/rugby club member to have to have to change their membership address to this new address.
Click to expand...

Indeed..
I'd imagine the fact that their house has devalued,they are dealing with negative equity,may have lost their jobs and can no longer afford to keep their home is not a priority,
You have nailed it,it has to be the rugby/tennis club membership address.

Mind you I know someone who lives in a house worth 250k,and wouldn't dream of living in an area where the houses were worth a quarter of that....something to do with being in a particular parish,meaning her kids get into the local school,imagine that..tut tut...
 
Delboy said:
I get angry every time I hear her (or David Hall, or Ross Maguire, or Monica Leech and her new group, or The Freemen, or the Free Legal Aid people, or Geroge Mordaunt, or etc etc)...but perhaps it's no harm giving her airtime.....it really shows up the kind of people seeking debt write downs.
Click to expand...

Hi Delboy

I wouldn't lump all of those guys together.

I fully agree with you on Caroline Lennon Nally, David Hall, The Freemen, George Mordaunt
I mostly agree with you on Ross Maguire - but maybe I am being fooled by his articulateness
I haven't heard of Monica Leech's group.

But I completely disagree with you on FLAC.


  • They provide free legal information and advice to people who can't afford it.
  • Based on their experience, they have campaigned responsibly for years on the debt issue.
  • They have successfully backed legal challenges to ptsb's weird interpretations of HP agreements
  • They have produced well researched reports on debt.
  • They have devised protocols with the IBF on unsecured debt
  • The have run conferences on mortgage debt where they brought in experts who added hugely to the debate. After listening to them, I changed my mind on two fundamental issues.
  • Their submissions and proposals have always been reasonable and balanced.
FLAC and I don't always agree, but I always listen to their point of view and I am prepared to learn from their expertise and experience.
 
thedaras said:
;1) some posters mentioned something along the lines of it being strange posting about her,and once or twice posters were requested not to speak about her being a public servant,her make up ,clothes,expenditure etc.,
Click to expand...

Hi dara

The original thread was about bias in the Frontline programme. She was only one of 4 participants, and she had made a once-off appearance on a TV programme. I deleted many of the posts as they were personalised and some were nasty.

I have restored some of the deleted comments as she is no now a public figure and we know much more about her. She is refusing to pay anything towards her mortgage interest of €6,000 a year, yet she spends €2,600 a year on "clothes and grooming".
 
thedaras said:
A bit like the Guards wife who said the child had to eat the cornflakes box! lots of people questioned that and suggested ways that wouldn't entail eating cardboard!
Click to expand...

Just to clarify this, the Garda wife said there were days the family could only eat cornflakes as their main meals. That story was dissected and the conculsions were I think that they had salary cuts (like everybody) that they probably over extended on their mortgage but didn't want to reduce their lifestyle and deal with the new reality that most people have had to cope with. And their new reality was still a lot lot better than most people.

The eating the cornflake box was a separate story (Kerry I think) and it was a pure nonsense story. Something about a child who was so hungry they had tried to eat the box.
 
Ms. Nally Lennon. Having listened to the beginning of the pod case and seen her on TV about a year ago I think it's fair to comment on her.

I actually feel sorry for her now. In this sense only. She has a fine salary, (auditor with the HSE must pay well surely, even with 25% cuts) she will no doubt be entitled to early retirement with a large lump sum, presumably too her pension will also by high. So the bank have her number. How can she not see this ?

One fine day now as her non payments make her savings grow, as she continues to live without paying back her debts which are mounting the bank are going to slap her with orders to freeze her bank account to get the savings, a repossesion notice to seize the house, and an installment order on her salary to pay the NE, the court costs, the interest on interest and legal fees. And they will probably go after her lump sum and pension too.

And for a women who says she is so resilient, reasonable, prudent, not stupid, and intelligent she comes across as someone who will not acknowledge and deal with the simple reality of her own incorrect investment decision. She wants us to pay for her mistakes, even thought she actually can afford it and we certainly do not want to pay for her.

And she's making the classic mistake of considering the 150K she 'invested' in the propery as an investment. It was a cost of borrowing and transaction (mortgage repayments of capital and interest and I think she's lumping in stamp duty and legal fees there).

I did not understand her logic of not agreeing even to pay the interest only of 7K annually (Mortgage of 350K at 1.9%). That's not even 600 a month and pressumable a fine house, her own. I did not understand how she thinks interest only is 'glorified' renting with out the perks and here too she herself has decided it should be half that. I see no logic. She wants a write down plain and simple. To all her talents she forget to add honestly. Why can't she honestly tell us that she wants a write down of her bad investment which she can actually afford.

What is really really sad about all this is that there are genuine people who really need write downs. How do the media manage to put up this women as someone who deserves a write down. What is wrong with the media and investigative journalism.
 
Delboy said:
I even think David Hall was knocked off stride for a few minutes as he's not used of seeing anyone on his side being challenged (though he did recover!!!)
Click to expand...

To be honest, I think he was quite embarrassed by her. I thought he might come in or start sniping at me, but he kept his head down, literally and metaphorically, for the first part of the programme while Caroline and I analysed her position.

If I recall correctly, I don't think that he defended her at all during the programme, but of course he did generally attack the banks for not negotiating with borrowers.
 
Even though I may not agree with David Hall's views, I have always perceived him to be more constructive than many of the other 'defenders of mortgage holders'. He has tended to engage with the instruments of the state such as the courts as opposed to other people's strategy of talking to the archbishop! Maybe I am influenced by the fact that he has a successful business and less of a personal vested interest.
 
I think Bronte has hit it on the head. The best tool one can hold is keeping confidentiality. She is basically on a loser and any chance she had was blown once she stopped paying and going public about it. She is in the same mold as our friends in Killiney.
 
She reminded me more of Ann Marie Glennon Cully, the lady with the 'five star insurance claim' in Dublin 4. Underlying both situations is an understandably difficult circumstance but both have an incredible level of delusion. Maybe there is a curse of double barrel surnames?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top