Has Anyone found Danske to be forcing loans into default?

U

UnderClass

Registered User
Messages
8
Danske has recently placed my outstanding loans into default and are going all out to sell underlying properties.

One of five loans went into arrears for 3 months (for the first time ever) for small amounts (less than 1,500 in total). Because I hadn't cleared the arrears, they called in that loan at month 3 + 6 days. A month later the remaining loans (all of which were being fully serviced) were called in.

Theres been no contact from Danske by phone to discuss this at all.

Is this part of Danske's accelerated attempts to leave Ireland? Has anyone else experienced similar treatment?
 
Hi UnderClass

You need to take legal advice on this immediately.

The contract presumably allows this.

It raises very interesting questions for borrowers with multiple loans with the three banks who are trying to leave the market. The borrowers need to be especially careful about not going into arrears.

Brendan
 
Hi Underclass.
I am dealing with all of the banks and since January Danske are showing that they are not waiting around to get loans resolved. I have cases, where we are negotiating with them and in the background they are appointing receivers and taking legal action. They seem to want out and in a hurry.
Have you tried to contact Danske directly? I find that they will still be wiling to speak to you and try and get the issue resolved. However, I would call them asap, as they are not hangin around in taking action.
 
Thanks for responses Brendan and Commercial. I was wondering if my experience was shared by others, ie as soon as a small problem arose ( much of which was due to Danske shutting current accounts and delays/ teething problems that occurred as a 'normal' consequent of having to make alternative arrangements) Danske escalate to next levels WITHOUT any contact other than rainstorms of letters- i.e. no attempt on their part to get things discussed.

Its like the in the old cowboy movies from years back, set in the old wild west where the crooked banker calls in a loan from the sharecropper, knowing he cant pay, so that he can sell on to the railroad company.
 
Presumably these are all on investment properties and not home loans. This behaviour would not be allowed under the Mortgage Arrears Code.

Are they more aggressive on tracker mortgages than SVRs?

Although you are not protected by the Mortgage Arrears Code, these loans are still subject to the Consumer Protection Code and in particular, [broken link removed]

This applies to "“personal consumer” means a consumer who is a natural person acting outside his or her business, trade or profession;" . If you are a professional landlord with no other business, you are not a personal consumer. If you are a teacher with 5 buy to lets, you are a personal consumer.


8.3
Where an account is in arrears, a regulated entity mustseek to agree an approach (whether with a personal consumer or through a third party nominated by the personal consumer in accordance with Provision 8.5) that will assist the personal consumer in resolving the arrears.

8.9
In respect of a mortgage, where a third full or partial repayment is missed and remains outstanding and an alternative repayment arrangement has not been put in place, a regulated entity must notify the personal consumer, on paper on another durable medium, of the following:

  • the potential for legal proceedings and proceedings for repossession of the property, together with an estimate of the costs to the personal consumer of such proceedings;
  • the importance of seeking independent advice, for example from MABS; and
  • that, irrespective of how the property is repossessed and disposed of, the personal consumer will remain liable for the outstanding debt, including accrued interest, charges, legal, selling and other related costs, if this is the case.
8.12
Where arrears arise on an account and where a personal consumer makes an offer of a revised repayment arrangement that is rejected by the regulated entity, the regulated entity must formally document its reasons for rejecting the offer and communicate these to the personal consumer, on paper or on another durable medium.
 
Are the mortgages tied to each other? If only one went into arrears how can they call the others in as well? This seems heavy-handed if there are no arrears on the other loans. I don't have much advice for you but based on my previous dealings with Danske bank you need to have everything in writing & do not rely on what people tell you on the phone. Keep all records & push them. I found them difficult to deal with & disingenuous even before they wanted to pull out of Ireland. Good luck!
 
Butter said:
Are the mortgages tied to each other? If only one went into arrears how can they call the others in as well? This seems heavy-handed if there are no arrears on the other loans.
Click to expand...
Don't all banks operate like this- i.e. they 'pool' accounts and take an overall view of all borrowings? They call in loan 1, and if it is not cleared this then allows them to declare default and trigger calling in loans 2,3,4 & 5 as well. If they are not allowed to do this, I'd love to see something in writing so that I could try to challenge them. However I'm not very hopeful about such a challenge as I could see huge costs arising with great uncertainty about getting anywhere.

People in my position simply dont have the wherewithal to match the Banks in legal challenges as they could mount a legal 'war of attrition' that would quickly wipe out the personal borrower through legal fees, and they know that unfortunately.
 
Thanks for the invite to supply a detailed questionnaire Brendan. Right now I'm more than a little bit paranoid about leaving an internet trail that could identify me to Danske.

My rationale for coming on here was to see if I was alone in how I am being dealt with, OR if there is a systemic approach being adopted. I fell that the questions I have already raised, and my responses to them, while trying to help me resolve this problem, cannot be seen as simply self- serving.. I have stated a set of circumstance that others may equate with, and therefore find some succour in a group such as this one.

Completion of a detailed questionnaire that could identify me is of questionable value at this stage.

If my reticence is seen as intransigence, I apologize- that is not what I intend. However, THE BANKS have powers and abilities to use/misuse corporate funds to pursue both appropriate and venal actions in (at best) equal measure, that are targeted on the weak and those unable to afford the outrageous costs of legal representation and argument. The targets of their actions, i.e WE THE PEOPLE, on the other hand would appear to have NO powers.

A forum such as this one, is all that I have.

Hence my username: UnderClass.
 
UnderClass said:
People in my position simply dont have the wherewithal to match the Banks in legal challenges as they could mount a legal 'war of attrition' that would quickly wipe out the personal borrower through legal fees, and they know that unfortunately.
Click to expand...
Take them on as a lay litigant. I believe there is a group established that informally provides support to that end. Can't recall the details of it off the top of my head right now. By all accounts, there are numerous people representing themselves in property/loans/mortgage related cases right now.
 
serotoninsid said:
Take them on as a lay litigant. I believe there is a group established that informally provides support to that end. Can't recall the details of it off the top of my head right now. By all accounts, there are numerous people representing themselves in property/loans/mortgage related cases right now.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that. And indeed, its hopeful that there are avenues for such self- representation in these greatly liberated and enlightened times.

One hopes that the sentiments "That every man who is his own lawyer, has a fool for a client", highlighted by Henry Kett in 1814 as lazy thinking that would become simply accepted by Members of the Judiciary no longer applies in 2014.

Otherwise, my substantive points remain both undisturbed and non- addressed.
 
Perhaps I am naive but I cannot imagine in a court case that a judge would rule that five properties have to be sold under duress because one loan had three months of arrears on it. But I totally understand that the threat of that action means you have to look into your legal defence & that there are costs attached to that, unless you try to do it yourself as suggested.

What do your mortgage contracts actually state about the tie-in between the different mortgages? Is there an explicit statement that if you hold more than one mortgage and one is in arrears that they can all be called in? Have you managed to clear the arrears on that one loan?

I took a case against NIB (as it was at the time) to the FO. At that time a few similar cases were also being brought against them. I know for a fact that at least one person in the bank then was reading the posts on AAM about those cases. I can only assume that others were too. Whether that is still the case now with depleted numbers working for the bank in Ireland - I don't know.

I'm sorry I don't have better answers for you - the situation you're in sounds crazy & my previous experience with Danske was an eye-opener. I wish you the best of luck.
 
Many loan agreements include a "cross default clause". This means that if one loan goes into arrears the Bank can can in all other loans in the name of the same borrower. Check your loan documentation for such a clause. If its not there the Bank does not have a legal case to call in the other loans not in default!
 
Underclass;
If what you state on your opening Thread is fact; it means Danske are out to get you in any event.

Strongly suggest fill out the detailed Questionnaire as per Brendan.You can tweek things a bit to make it hard to ID you; at this stage though, Danske have nuff for doing ,without trawling AAM , if they are looking in AAM ,we have their attention!
It will not change Danskes methods should you be identified.
It appears Danske are being thuggish.
What I get from my viewing of AAM threads is some
1.Very good and genuine advice.
2. Some advice that goes off on a rant.
BUT ;
What I find on AAM is that the advice given, is generally of good quality.
It costs you nothing and can inform you of your options.
 
UnderClass said:
Thanks for that. And indeed, its hopeful that there are avenues for such self- representation in these greatly liberated and enlightened times. .
Click to expand...
The sarcasm isn't lost on me. If these were 'liberated and enlightened times', then there would be substantive resources made available by the state to lay litigants.

UnderClass said:
One hopes that the sentiments "That every man who is his own lawyer, has a fool for a client", highlighted by Henry Kett in 1814 as lazy thinking that would become simply accepted by Members of the Judiciary no longer applies in 2014.
Click to expand...
Fair enough but my view would be given the scenario you describe, what have you got to lose by trying. As it stands, you are defeated.
 
http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=187881

Yes I am happy to discuss with you
 
Underclass, check whether your investment properties were on the variable home loan rate or fixed home loan rate that then reverts to the variable home loan rate. If this is the case, you may have been overcharged by Danske Bank from February 2009 to November 2011.( see Brendan Burgess excellent detailed thread on the matter). If this is the case and the overcharged amount exceeds the loan arrears on the date the receiver was appointed over the property, you have a very strong case. You can either go to the F.S.O. or to the High Court. Even if the overcharged amount is not enough to cover the mortgage arrears but reduces the gap significantly you have a case. Best of luck. Root out those original Mortgage agreements.

Do not forget! you have only till February 2015 to complain to the Financial Services Ombudsman or institute legal proceedings.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Fin Crusader - that's an interesting point you made above regarding the reverting to home loan rate in (Changes made without permission in 2009) . I wonder if anyone here has any detail on cases where summary judgements were halted in their tracks using the fact of a 25 year interest only loan without provision for payment of capital was in place. This is cited in Patrick O'Riordan's CPD talk in 2013 (see below) - recent defences against bank claims - successes and failures as an item to check for in defending against a bank. My background: Voluntary sale of an investment property managed to the very end and presented to purchaser in pristine condition - and netting the bank an extra 30,000 had they brought in receivers cuts no mustard as they ruthlessly pursue a 120,000 judgement on someone they KNOW has no means to pay and a judgement is a waste of their money and the individual's mental and physical health and a judgement on their ppr for 12 years. ( I did my best and spent 6 years living like a hermit to keep teh house paid for - until basicalli I couldnt keep going - bank staff were shocked at how i managed it and had kept payments up for so long without fail) hey ho that's life and I'm not giving up on this without a fight. Be very grateful for any info on the 'provision for reypayment of capital' as a defence. (have others lines of defence also - and not the wishy washy wooly ones :) ) Thanks, Lone Star ;)
 
Lone star, was your investment property mortgage on the variable home loan rate or the fixed home loan rate that then reverted to the variable home loan rate., also look a Donna and Robert Millar v Danske bank on the courts website. The judgment was issued on the 30/09/2014 by Judge a Hogan reference no 422/2014. What stage legally are you at ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top