Over 8 years of non payment and no repossession

Delboy said:
Is Maguire effectively advocating strategic default?
Click to expand...

I wondered about that myself.

Forget about the current case for the moment. You have a family. Your lender has got an order for possession of your family home with a stay of 6 months and you are in deep negative equity. Do you pay your mortgage in the meantime, or do you save up your money to pay the deposit required when you are renting?

I certainly would not criticise anyone for not paying their mortgage in this situation.

Likewise, if you are planning on applying for a PIA, you should probably build up a fund to pay for it.

You are in mortgage arrears and facing legal action for possession. I would strongly advise anyone facing this situation that they should pay what they can. The more you pay, the longer you will get to stay in your home.

The problem is the legal system we have which does not allow lenders to repossess a home when the borrower pays nothing at all for 8 years. The lenders could not get an order for possession in this case, for whatever reason. Then they got an order and the guy agreed to move out and then applied for a PIA and did not move out.

People will naturally exploit any weaknesses in the system. The government, Central Bank and the Courts Service should look at the system and fix it so that people who pay nothing are out within about 6 to 12 months.

Brendan
 
To be honest, if I was about to lose my house in a few months I'd probably stop paying too (I would presume my credit record was shot to pieces at that stage so it wouldn't be a concern not paying the mortgage for a while).
But I'd not be expecting to still be in the house 8 years later having paid nothing in the meantime. I'd not expect to be there in even 8 months time!
 
noproblem said:
I hope an example is made of them and all within the full enforcement of legal protocols. For once it will set the right and proper example.
Click to expand...

What ever they have managed to get away with, so far, they done deserve this blood thirsty ripping apart from key board warriors. They are exploiting the legal system in this country, because its there to be exploited.

It sickens me too, that this goes on day in day out in court, and no one seem to be able to call a halt to this absolute pathetic abuse of a dysfunctional system, and the more you frustrate it, the better it seems for you .

Dont have a go at the people, have a go at the system.
 
Apples and oranges there Brendan,

You are mixing up a genuine mistake with a system that promotes legal abuse.

No one likes to see the abuse of the system, but, If my family were in such limbo, and while I would consider myself to have a pretty good moral compass, I too would look to protect what I can for as long as I can, given that the ridiculous legal profession allows for such shenanigans to play out in our courts every day.

Hence, I dont like to see people persecuted for playing with a dysfunctional legal system. Its been set up to be abused, yet most are not aware unless you have the money to hire a skill set to abuse it. Change the flamin system by all means, and you can be sure you wont see these charades taking place, and there is no other word than charades, although, you wont get many votes from the legal profession to do this, they are absolutely loving this the longer it goes on.
 
LS400,
you do whatever it is you want to do but there's right and wrong, regardless of "the system". Don't for one minute tell me those guys are the good guys and NO, I don't consider myself a keyboard warrior. Very easy for some to make assumptions, but when you go mortgage free for 8 years and get called to order you don't go calling your mates in the media to raise sympathy for your new born and the circumstances you find yourself in because of a choice you made. You might like to blame it on the system, I don't and for very good and obvious reasons.
 
So if his debt doesn't accrue any further interest (it will), then he can pay off in full his debts in 27 years at his current rate of pay (he would be 75 by then). I imagine there's somewhere to rent if he can afford €3700 a month.
 
@ Noproblem,
That's exactly it. We have a system that allows you not to pay you mortgage for 8 years and counting, and yet still you frustrate the system.

What your doing is blaming the kid for toddling out of the open crèche instead of the keepers of the crèche. Much easier target.

This will be like Groundhog Day where folk will blame the kids for years to come. Channel your energy into changing an utterly broken system, for it suits legislators when they can be absolved of any wrong doing here.
 
Oh dear, whatever happened to trust and decent people. There's no system totally foolproof if you have people like that and it doesn't make any difference what walk of life that it's in.
 

He described the Clontarf house as “very modest and normal” and that its value was only high “due to the location as distinct to the property being a trophy home.”
Click to expand...

That's not entirely true. It's a bit more than a modest and normal house, although the location does play a notable part in its value.

He could accomodate his family in a somewhat smaller house, in another area, no problem.

So, why not downsize and then make regular repayments - the downsizing would generate some cash to reduce the debt, then his €3,700pm would make a greater impact on his overdue debt?
 
MrEarl said:
So, why not downsize and then make regular repayments - the downsizing would generate some cash to reduce the debt, then his €3,700pm would make a greater impact on his overdue debt?
Click to expand...

Why should he move to a smaller, less well located house when he doesn't have to.

I agree with previous posters, the failing here is in the legislation and its enforcement.

The question is why hasn't he been evicted.
 
MrEarl said:
So, why not downsize and then make regular repayments - the downsizing would generate some cash to reduce the debt, then his €3,700pm would make a greater impact on his overdue debt?
Click to expand...
The sale of the house will go towards paying down the 1.2 million owed so there's no equity left for the poor chap.
 
cremeegg said:
The question is why hasn't he been evicted
Click to expand...


And that simple 8 word line is the Nub of the issue. Why would you vacate when you dont really have to. Would anyone really want to downsize when you can drag this episode out for years to come, and take advantage of a weak "system", and then downsize.
 
One could also call them squatters, wouldn't like them beside me. With their record i'm guessing they might find it difficult to avail of social housing. Be interesting though to find out what will happen next
 
noproblem said:
With their record i'm guessing they might find it difficult to avail of social housing. Be interesting though to find out what will happen next
Click to expand...

Hmmm,
A certain individual may rock on up to the door with some iCare leaflets..
 
They would not qualify for social housing, so they would not qualify for MTR.

But they both have good jobs so they can easily afford to rent a modest house somewhere.

They will not be homeless.

Brendan
 
I cannot imagine living with that level of stress for years, going to bed and waking up every day waiting for the postman to deliver registered letters, summonses, etc., or getting a fright every time the phone rings thinking it could be your solicitor or worse. That added to the normal pressures of life itself like starting and raising a family? No, thanks!!

But I suppose some people can compartmentalise better and grow thicker skin than others...
 
I think a key item is when would they have been able to start repaying 3,700 as I assume it is not just this month out of the blue. Setting aside difficulty in getting a mortgage due to the current situation, that their current levels of income and the deposit they have would not allow them to buy a similar property. Evident in comments from the article about rent is that they fear that if they have to rent they won't be able to save more of a deposit to buy a similar house.

In general my assessment of the current strategy is
1. Vulture fund wants to sell house and get the cash upfront and move on. It won't have the infrastructure or part of their business plan to accept a monthly repayment and small lumpsum.
2. Ronans strategy is to now show he can start repayments monthly and is willing to resolve the issue. They will then try and through the courts(?) force vulture fund to accept the proposal?

Thoughts?

I have to admit I would fight tooth and nail as well to keep it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register