Z
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/...forgiveness-talks-with-developers-514906.htmlIt has been reported that NAMA is entering debt forgiveness talks with a number of property developers.
The Sunday Times has reported that around €37.5bn worth of loans given by banks to these developers will never be recovered.
umop3p! said:- The banks sold the loans to NAMA at a discount, with the taxpayer taking the hit on the discount.
- Property developers should now pay back NAMA
- Nama is now forgiving debt for the property developers.
- Government is increasing taxes, adding new taxes and doing cut backs to help pay for all this.
Is this correct?
Property is a dead end for money. The Japanese made the same mistake. You can't export houses and they do not create money or employment. (Rent is not creating anything)why should'nt they 'developers' NOT be bailed out! Surely what 'Ireland Inc.' needs now are these 'risk takers', these 'forward thinkers' to get us out of our present predicament.
Is it not time we buried the hatchet, stopped the blame game and get on with it. I mean only the really NAIVE, really thought that they were going to pay anything anyway.
I know where I'd like to bury the hatchet.why should'nt they 'developers' NOT be bailed out! Surely what 'Ireland Inc.' needs now are these 'risk takers', these 'forward thinkers' to get us out of our present predicament.
Is it not time we buried the hatchet, stopped the blame game and get on with it. I mean only the really NAIVE, really thought that they were going to pay anything anyway.
Why would the involvement of the original developers discourage subcontractors and suppliers from taking legal actions? I find it very hard to believe that paying the original developers was the best or most efficient way to wrap up these deals?I expect that many of the financing deals were very complex and could take years to sort out if handled in the normal way through the courts and then of course there are the actual buildings themselves, no doubt there will be all sorts of claims from subcontractors and suppliers against the buildings as well.
Why would the involvement of the original developers discourage subcontractors and suppliers from taking legal actions? I find it very hard to believe that paying the original developers was the best or most efficient way to wrap up these deals?
Why is it only property companies that are allowed to do this?
why should'nt they 'developers' NOT be bailed out! Surely what 'Ireland Inc.' needs now are these 'risk takers'
I think that doneee may have had his tongue firmly in his cheek.IMO this is pure rubbish. Why on earth should the developers be left off the hook.
I don't object to this principle, but how do they know who can do it cheaper, more expedient or better if they haven't gone to the open market. Why have they just assumed that a deal with the original developer is the best option?From a practical point of view I'd expect NAMA will be willing to do a deal with anyone who has something they need - if it is more expedient and cheaper to do so.
If the only way to get the relevant information was to pay the developers a hefty salary and a profit-share option, then we needed stronger legislation, to make sure that they handed over the information or spent their time in the 'joy until they did.Without their cooperation in providing information about what was agreed, providing affidavits and so on, NAMA will have nothing to counter any claims made by subcontractors or suppliers and so would have little choice but to accept such claims without a challenge.
Furthermore, if the developers failed to cooperate, NAMA would more than likely have to go through the process of putting each of the developers companies into liquidation in order to gain full charge of the properties involved. Again this would just add more expenses to the exercise.
Not true - it is absolutey a question of paying them. The example given shows the developer being paid a six figure salary for helping out NAMA, and the opportunity to profit share in the final outcome. How on earth did they determine that a deal with the developer was the best/only option for this? What alternatives did they consider, such as a deal with the developer's no.2 guy, or the developer's lawyer, or the developer's accountant? Why didn't they do an open market search for the skills and experience that they needed, like any other public sector consultancy contract?And in any case it is not a question of paying them, their companies are for all intense and purposes bankrupt already, so there is little or no chance in recovering the debts that would be written off.
why should'nt they 'developers' NOT be bailed out! Surely what 'Ireland Inc.' needs now are these 'risk takers', these 'forward thinkers' to get us out of our present predicament.
Is it not time we buried the hatchet, stopped the blame game and get on with it. I mean only the really NAIVE, really thought that they were going to pay anything anyway.
At the end of WW2, the NAZIS ran to far away lands something similar to the Irish Property developers. What we need is an Irish version of Simon Wiesenthal, to round up these gangster Bankers and developers who simply fail to honour their commitments.
Not true - it is absolutey a question of paying them. The example given shows the developer being paid a six figure salary for helping out NAMA, and the opportunity to profit share in the final outcome. How on earth did they determine that a deal with the developer was the best/only option for this? What alternatives did they consider, such as a deal with the developer's no.2 guy, or the developer's lawyer, or the developer's accountant? Why didn't they do an open market search for the skills and experience that they needed, like any other public sector consultancy contract?
How about a piece of legislation making it a criminal offence for a director not to cooperate fully with the liquidator?Without their cooperation in providing information about what was agreed, providing affidavits and so on, NAMA will have nothing to counter any claims made by subcontractors or suppliers and so would have little choice but to accept such claims without a challenge.
Furthermore, if the developers failed to cooperate, NAMA would more than likely have to go through the process of putting each of the developers companies into liquidation in order to gain full charge of the properties involved. Again this would just add more expenses to the exercise.
And in any case it is not a question of paying them, their companies are for all intense and purposes bankrupt already, so there is little or no chance in recovering the debts that would be written off.
Jim.
How about a piece of legislation making it a criminal offence for a director not to cooperate fully with the liquidator?
Put the cap at 15 years in prison. Since it’s a criminal offence extradition shouldn’t be too much of a problem.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?