NAMA, developers not buying back their own properties

Developers are people who make money from property.
The people in Nama are legal eagles, estate agents and bean counters.
We need people in NAMA who know how to get the most return out of property.
It seems clear from this that we have entirely the wrong set of people running Nama.
 
JoeBallantin said:
The plan is to chase developers for every penny owed, apparently.


The only way for a developer to have loans written off is if they declare themselves bankrupt, otherwise they should remain on the hook.
Click to expand...

Well the banks are not chasing people for everything owed apparently judging by the news that Anglo, on our behalf, offered to let Sean Quinn off the hook. They are such nice people at Anglo. Wonder what other 'deals' are being offered, particularly the deals Nama is offering delelopers and their wives.
 
Well I was saying that months ago... that the banks should be prevented from making deals with other peoples money.

We real need leadership, with real toughness. Instead we have incompetent talkers.

I agree it's horrendous,.. and that huge corruption is likely happening right now, and a favoured class is continuing to be favoured.

The lack of transparency virtually guarantees corruption.
 
Sunny said:
Because it is against the law for developers or anyone connect to them to buy the land. It is in the NAMA legislation. As far as I know, buyers have to sign a declaration confirming this and it is a condition of sale.

.
Click to expand...

I see this has been in the news recently. So are developers or connected persons able to buy back their property from Nama?
 
"NAMA chairman Frank Daly has strongly indicated that the agency wants permission from the Government to sell assets back to developers who have already defaulted on the repayment of their loans."

Surely if they have the means to purchase these properties now then they are in a position to repay some/all of the loans they defaulted on?
 
Firefly said:
"
Surely if they have the means to purchase these properties now then they are in a position to repay some/all of the loans they defaulted on?
Click to expand...


They don't need the means if Nama gives them the money.
 

Interesting looking back on this thread.

What do you think now about trust in NAMA now that so far one person in NAMA bought a Nama property.

It's time too for everything to be public as we the public can trust nobody. An I'm putting Nama staff on a par with politicians and bankers in my esteem.
 
More fun and games for the boys


http://www.independent.ie/incoming/...dervaluation-allegations-at-pac-29852620.html

Meanwhile vulture funds are now buying mortgage books and will not be subject to proper regularity scutiny or obligations. No doubt this will lead to many evictions next year. That's a neat way for banks to be let off they hook, they sell the problem on to anonomous vultures.

What is actually more interesting about Nama is the previous occupation of Daly, who did a revenue deal with the Bailey brothers. Nice to be able to get a revenue deal, when you're rich. But it's all legit and the system is fair, transparent, legal, above board, yada yada yada.
 
Dear Bronte:

Tis the season of goodwill so I will drink (one) to that.
Dear Bronte (3 drinks later) Bloody Vultures , at least they sort out corpses.
Dear Bronte (too many drinks) . You mean the Vultures missed the Bankers?

Hard to make the mess up ;
Let us kill our angst for a few days.
Happy Christmas
 
Hi Bronte

I heard some of the presentation by the NAMA boys to the Oireachtas Committee today and they gave a good account of themselves.

I heard a FG member of the Committee saying he was heartened by their defence.

NAMA is a huge organisation. I have heard it reported that it's the biggest property firm in the world. Most of its staff are very good and honest. Of course, some are going to misbehave. The potential criminal sanctions for someone misbehaving with regards to NAMA are very high.

NAMA is a commercial organisation. As such, it must keep its business confidential to some degree.
 
Brendan Burgess said:
NAMA is a commercial organisation. As such, it must keep its business confidential to some degree.
Click to expand...

It's not a normal commercial organisation though is it?

Why must it's business be confidential, if we the tax payers are paying for it?
 
Suppose that I had a property to sell. I know the market reasonably well, and know my own circumstances. I am confident that a buyer can be found who is willing to pay €250k, and if I get that price I am not financially destroyed.

Should I go to an EA and give the instruction to sell to the first person who offers €250k? No, I might tell the EA that €250k is my minimum price, but it is his/her job to get the best price achievable. So the property is advertised at a slightly optimistic price of €280k.

Should you, as a potential purchaser, be privy to information about my financial position, about my own judgement of the minimum market value of the property, or my conversations with the EA?
 
Padraigb said:
Should you, as a potential purchaser, be privy to information about my financial position, about my own judgement of the minimum market value of the property, or my conversations with the EA?
Click to expand...

No, but we should be entitled to know whose loanbook was bought, for how much, and how much it was sold for. It doesn't have to be immediately if that would give too much commercial information. Alternatively the figures should be open to scrutiny by say a goverment committee such as PAC.

And we should also know that those buying are not those who originally owned it, or related persons. Or persons linked/related to Nama staff or ex staff.
 
Bronte said:
If this proposal is such a good idea, why did we have Nama in the first place?
Click to expand...

People seem to overlook the reason we had NAMA in the first place.

It was there to rescue the banks so that they could start lending again.It was not there to bail out the developers.

By selling their loans to NAMA, it forced the banks to recognise the losses in their book and thus gain a clearer understanding of what capital was required.

By putting loans from different lenders into one manager, it also meant that the market was managed. That all these properties did not flood the market at the same time, causing an even greater fall in prices.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register