Greg Connor:"more than 35% of mortgages arrears are strategic defaults"

Delboy; I did not say all strategic defaulters are Btl,s. From observation they make up the most in strategic default.

I have heard NO-ONE argue that there are no Strategic Defaulters.

What I clearly hear is that Banks are saying there are X % without any statistical facts.

Please give me a REASON to trust AIB ?

Without proper statistics I will NOT believe AIBs version I
 
I think Gerry Canning the following sentence is where AIB are coming from (From the Irish Times article).

Mr Duffy also said approximately 2,000 customers in arrears have cash deposits big enough to clear their debts.
Click to expand...

I read that as saying they have identified 2000 customers who hold money on deposit in excess of the arrears they owe.

That part at least seems pretty unequivocal to me. They have identified people with the means to clear their arrears who are chosing not to and labelling them as strategic defaulters.

It is not to say that a person has income and can afford the repayments, perhaps they have only their savings to live off and hence do not want to use them to clear down what they owe but certainly my suspicion would be that this is not the majority of that 2000 people.

The important question is... does that 2000 represent 20% of their arrears clients (irrespective of whether it is on a PDH or not).
 
I do not know if the 2,000 represent 20% of arrears customers.

What I do know is that Mr Duffy and AIB should be clearer and more responsible in coming out with unclear stats.

Has any solvent Banker agreed with AIB?

I accept there must be Strategic Defaulters .
 
They can ask for a P60 which will show earnings.
Unlike the good old days when they got the loan,
any request for proof of earnings via a P60 was hit or miss.
I know plenty of people who got false ones made.
If they are now looking for favourable treatment with their debts,
you can be sure they will want proper proof.
The power is still with the bank and they are entitled to demand proof of
whatever they want if the arrears customer wants any sort of help.

Believe me, I have filled in a Standard Financial Statement (10 pages long)
a few times and the bank want proof of everything.
Pretty much like getting a loan but in reverse.
Best of luck to anyone who thinks they can dupe the bank with any
strategic default.
 
Another nugget from Duffy yesterday:

AIB have found so far 500 mortgaged properties which were supposed to be PPR's but are now in fact rented out....and no payments have being made on them in 3 years+!

Gerry
if you want to hear people who claim there are no strategic defaulters....listen to David Hall or some of the stuff from New Beginnings. That's a good place to start with the denial
 

Self employed people can dupe who ever the like, especially bankers, if they have enough savvy.
 
..............................................
Delboy. If you read my comments I have NEVER said there are NOT strategic defaulters.
I have always said I would go after messers.
......................
My query is ,should we in any way trust selective picking of statistics?.
. Mr Duffy has found 500 PPR,s that are rented out. Looks like messers to me.NO DISPUTE .
Then ask yourself. AIB has waited 3 years+ to check these NON-PAYERS?
Then ask yourself ,do you know any COMPENTENT business who would wait 3+ years to check.

FINALLY; Ask yourself , why trust stats from any Bank?

How many times are we going to give unquestionning acceptance to what these people peddle?
AGAIN I REITERATE ; I HAVE NO TIME FOR MESSERS.
 
Fake P60's were always easy to obtain.

I still don't understand why they are accepted at face value by banks and other bodies.
 
Delboy said:
Only in Ireland.....

https://twitter.com/davidmurphyRTE


And some will still argue that there's no strategic defaulters in this country
Click to expand...


I don't think that' s the argument, David Hall accepts that there are SD's but he is saying that it is not the main issue. He is correct (and I am absolutely no fan of the man) I feell in this case, it is the bank trying to deflect and being allowed to deflect I might add.

Take a look at that statement above. What is shocking is that not one person asked the following questions:

1) Are the deposits actually in AIB? (Presume nothing).
2) How many of those 2,000 are in a formal restructure with the bank?
3) Why did AIB, in those negotiations, not use or insist that some (or all) of these deposits be used in the restructure?
4) If the 2,000 are not in a formal restructure then instead of dipping into these deposits (if indeed they are in AIB) why did AIB waste taxpayers money writing legal letters to them (if they are included in the "unresponsive" sector then this is what he said AIB did).
5) How many of the 2,000 are still employed and bringing in an income?

What's not shocking is what he said, what's shocking is what he didn't say and wasn't asked.
 
Commonsense; I am with you ,

Mr Duffy threw out an emotive statistic and let it hang out.
Your questions on the 2,000 make sense.

Why should we believe anything from a failed entity? In life would you believe people who had failed ? He was let spout out uncontested statistics.
He was let speak as though he could be trusted or believed.
He went home a happy man ,having been savaged by the sheep in the committee!
 
Last edited:


To be honest, he's doing it because he's allowed to do it, nobody is asking the real questions.


David Duffy basically said that "some" of the deposits in the bank were compromised, think about that for a moment.

Now I'm no banking expert, but it seems to me that Mr. Duffy wants to keep his deposits safe on one hand, but he's sticking his hand out to the taxpayer for more money to cover some of the losses that the bank (and those in arrears) can actually cover themselves.


Edit to add another question:

Re the 2,000 - how much money is involved?
 

All the stats they put out yesterday were later submitted to the committee for review. You can keep saying why should we trust the banks but that just being emotive and not dealing in plain and simple facts.

You wonder why they have'nt moved on the 500 in particular....I say the plain and simple reason would be the political reaction from every gombeen politican in the country. Plus the media would go into overdrive...Ivan Yates was bringing up the famine last night on TV3 when talking about repossessions!!!
And the Dunne judgement was only very recently reversed which had stopped most repossessions in any case.
 
I agree with common sense above.
All AIB mortgages have an "all sums due" clause, if these people had deposits in AIB they can simple commandeer them to the mortgage in arrears. My guess is that they have checked with their colleagues in other banks and have established that Mr. Murphy has €10k on deposit in BOI. Not sure what the data protection people would have to say about that passing of info...... But it must be infuriating for a local bank to see a loan going into arrears knowing there are funds to meet it.
 
Could some of the funds referred to by Duffy be held in joint names, and therefore not be touched by AIB? Say I held funds in trust for a child who was awarded funds from something like a court case, a bequest or an inheritance. What about with an older, infirm relative who trusted me. Do they seriously expect me to pay them the money that is my child's or that is being minded for a relative who is going to need full-time care in the future?
 


My understanding is that the money is on deposit and that this information came from the customer financial statements.

In this case I doubt very much that a customer would put a childs trust/compensation award or a relatives money into their own financial statements.
 

AIB never said that these funds were disclosed voluntarily. Depends on how AIB did the search through their accounts for names and addresses of people in default, and how they define deposits. ...
 
Delboy;

You are correct things can,t in this Limbo. At least now we are getting to the starting blocks. Let us see how things pan out twix now and New Year.

Brendan: I am not 100% sure that Mortgage should always be paid before other debts, eg if customer got Credit Union Loan as Deposit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register