Rip Off Ireland - Reviews

Status
Not open for further replies.
MOB said:
You might as well complain about the inefficiency of 200 individual motorists each having to go through a petrol station forecourt to fill their cars. It's not really relevant that all that petrol was delivered by a single tanker delivery, is it?
Click to expand...

Sorry, but that is a ridiculous statement.

If I want to buy petrol, I go to the station, I fill my car, I pay the station, I drive off. Transaction complete. If I want to buy a new apartment, I don't just call to the builder's office and hand over the money, and then the apartment's mine?
 
While Eddie Hobbs' programme was interesting and very entertaining, I wouldn't accept all his points - much of it was entertainment mixed with facts which were guaranteed to "wind us up".

He indicated the number of professionals whose charges are based on percentages and questioned why this should be so. This included Surveyors, Solicitors and Architects and Auctioneers. What I'd like to know is: What is the difference in the work done in purchasing a house worth 500,000E compared to one of 750,000E or more? Obviously the percentage system brings a greater reward the more expensive the property. The Q is - is that justifiable? The government, via Stamp Duty, is happy to be in on that act.

I accept MOB's point that Eddie's claim that a piece of land sold to a developer who then built 200 houses on it represented 200 survey duplications was disengenuous. However, I cannot see the need for a mortgaged house owner being charged the full whack all over again upon remortgaging the same property, the deeds never having left the Building Society and with no change in ownership. A repeat Survey would be justifiable but not Solicitor's fees. My understanding is that a much simpler conveyancing system exists in Scotland for a fraction of the professional charges here. Joe Sod made this point and I fully concur.

Orginally quoted by MOB
I don't think you are really on to a winner by suggesting that the legal profession should align its billing methods more closely to those of the medical profession.
Click to expand...
Why not? Medical Doctors will declare their fees, in advance, for consultations and procedures when asked. It would be a sad day if they timed every consultation and charged accordingly as I understand is the norm with many Solicitors - including time spent on phone calls.

By the way Teabag your response to ClubMan
I think that was your first posting but thanks for your input anyway.
Click to expand...
is not accurate - by a distance! ClubMan's posts on AAM number 7,634 but he's been absent recently. Only saying this in case you didn't know. Apologies if you did.
 
"If you were to offer a 'special deal' on conveyancing in an estate where you had done the initial conveyance to the developer, how much would you reduce your price by?"

Hi Rainyday;

The answer to this specific question would normally be nil. However, if I was buying more than one house in an estate, it would certainly be feasible for me to give a discount to each house purchaser. In practice, this is what actually happens, albeit in a relatively informal way - I am more inclined to take new business for existing local housing estate purchases than I am for purchases in other areas.

I would guess that reading the title to an estate (and raising various queries as appropriate) might take up to 25% of the total time spent on a file. Also, this is the expensive time (i.e. generally has to be a solicitor, whereas a lot of the other time spend on a conveyancing file is work that can be done by well trained support staff.) So I suppose that it would pay me to give a discount of €200 per unit or thereabouts if I was doing a batch of house purchases in the same estate.

CCovich: imperfect analogy I admit, but the point I was seeking to make is that the fact that a transaction has already occurred in relation to a product (i.e. purchase of site by developer) does not really lessen the transaction costs on a division and re-sale of that product. (i.e. subdivision and development as a housing estate).

Hi Sherib,

"However, I cannot see the need for a mortgaged house owner being charged the full whack all over again upon remortgaging the same property, the deeds never having left the Building Society and with no change in ownership."

I agree. There is no good legal reason why this should happen, and it does not require any change at all to our legal system. A couple of points do arise. Firstly, if a mortgage is over €254k after top-up, further stamp duty needs to be paid, and this increased figure then needs to be registered in the land registry. Secondly, some lenders will require a fresh mortgage deed for a further advance, for reasons which have never been satisfactorily explained to me. Generally, PTSB will look for a fresh mortgage deed, while BOI, AIB, NIB will not. However, PTSB will sometimes handle the top-up loan in-house (so the borrower doesn't need to get a solicitor at all). Overall, there is no great consistency in this area, and there should be. For a solicitor, the top-up mortgage is not a money spinner - we try to avoid it if at all possible, because we cannot charge an economically viable fee without the client (justifiably) feeling hard done by.


On transparency of fees, of course a doctor will tell you what something will cost; So will a solicitor. But does this equate to transparency?
The consumer is generally not in any sort of position to assess if the price quoted represents good value. When you say that "It would be a sad day if they timed every consultation and charged accordingly " I am afraid I have to disagree slightly. As a business, doctors and solicitors have this in common - they have no stock on which they can put a mark-up; all they have to sell is their own time. Sometimes, I can save a six figure sum for a client with 10 minutes work plus 20 years study, experience and knowledge. That is when I put aside my time sheet and have a "wee chat" with the client. Sometimes a surgeon can charge €4,000 for a procedure (and maybe a lot more for all I know - I am, thankfully, not a large consumer of medical services) which takes an hour, plus two follow-ups of an hour each, together with the experience and reputation which makes that surgeon the one in demand for this procedure. Will the surgeon attempt to justify a charge of €1333 per hour? Of course not. While time billing is not always appropriate (at least not from the supplier's perspective!), it is transparent. I think more transparency is probably not a bad thing for the consumer.
 
THanks MOB - Roughly what percentage discount would the €200 represent (I'm guessing somewhere between 10%-20% - right?)

I was thinking about a slightly different scenario to the one you outline. I was thinking about a case where the developer recommends a solicitor in much the same way that he may recommend a tile supplier or a bathroom supplier. So the solicitor does the necessaary studying of the title up front, and can then offer all purchasers on that estate a bargain rate - Is this feasible? I guess there might be some concern about the independence of the solicitor in this case. Are there any other issues?
 
Grumpy said:
This is really a "letting off steam" thread.
New policy on LOS has killed it.
I suggest a rethink.
Click to expand...
Hi Grumpy - I'd love to hear your views on this. Can I suggest you expand on your views on this issue. Rather than diverting this discussion, can you post on this thread?

I'm unclear what you think has been killed - LOS or this topic or what?
 
"So the solicitor does the necessary studying of the title up front, and can then offer all purchasers on that estate a bargain rate - Is this feasible? I guess there might be some concern about the independence of the solicitor in this case."

It is feasible; it does happen; I disapprove, and so does the Law Society, for the reason that it is difficult to be in a position of arguing with a builder on behalf of your client (as happens in perhaps 10% of cases) while relying on th esame builder for referral of business. However, if I might give a plug to the much maligned auctioneer, it is common for the estate agent to make recommendations to hosuoe purchasers. In Dublin, I believe that this process has become a little mercenary (referral fees, induceements etc.) but in a rural area it is certainly worth asking the auctioneer for a recommendation, because the chances are that he will recommend the same solicitors over and over for a particular estate (though he will be careful not to recommend the same solicitors for every estate - as what goes around comes around)
 
Bank Manager said:
Didn't see the programme, but I'm intrigued to know what sending nappies to a minister is supposed to achieve
Click to expand...

A few postbags full of nappies is supposed to send a signal to the minister that the peasants are not happy.

Have you a better idea ?

Solicitor mumbo jumbo, begrudgery & apathy have killed this topic.
 
Forgot to mention that the ratings were a total success for the show according to last night's Evening Herald(!) they were over 500k which for summer is quite substantial. Well done Eddie & I for one will be tuning in next Monday.
 
Teabag said:
Solicitor mumbo jumbo, begrudgery & apathy have killed this topic.
Click to expand...
Whether you agree with him (?) or not any reasonable reader must admit that MOB's posts are always well constructed, fact based and usually very helpful. To accuse him of mumbo jumbo is out of order in my opinion.
 
The Cement situation

The price of bulk cement in Ireland is the same as in Europe generally, around €70 a ton.

The price in Germany is around €45 a ton. There is massive overcapacity due to the economic downturn in Germany. Some cement producers have gone bust because €45 is not an economic price to produce cement at.

It would cost a lot more than €10 a ton to transport it to Ireland. It would be a major logistical operation involving shipping along the Rhine and operatin storage facilities.

This makes more sense than Eddie's claims about cement. However, if anyone has any more detailed information, I would be interesting in hearing it. In particular, it surprises me that cement could be €45 a ton in Germany and €70 a ton in neighbouring countries. I just don't get that.

Brendan
 
I am sure that MOB's topics are very well constructed but I dont think that when people think of Rip-Off Ireland they necessarily think of rip-off legal fees. This topic should be about the costs of normal day-to-day things such as food, petrol, drink etc etc.
Rip off Professionals is a topic for another day. And there is a legal forum on this site for conveyancing discussions/arguments. I have only ever used a solicitor once and I found the fees fairly reasonable.

Viva la revolution ?
 
I didn't see the whole programme but judging by this EH did deal with allegedly "rip-off" conveyancing fees and/or practices in the programme so discussion of this issue - by MOB and others - certainly is relevant to this thread.
 
Each show will address different issues. The one I was at was about 'fun' i.e. drinking, eating out, getting a haircut. The message was very much the same though, it's the government's fault. (I'm not agreeing/disagreeing with this, it just seemed pretty obvious that this is the point being made in both shows I have seen).


Teabag-this thread is entitled Rip Off Ireland (should be Rip Off Republic)-Reviews. It is not about the cost of day-to-day living. The show attacked solicitors and conveyencing. People have the right to agree with this, and solicitors have the right to defend themselves. You are trying to act as a 'moderator' where you have no right to. If you want a thread devoted to groceries, why don't you set one up, or join the thread that Lemurz started?
 
just on the petrol station analogy (1 conveyance leading to 250 others is like complaining because the fuel tankers load has to be transferred to the 250 cars using it, via the petrol pump)

when you leave the petrol station you have a product, you werent charged for the service of getting it from the fuel store to your petrol tank. It is the service fee that people are complaining about. And, ok, theres more to conveyancing to filling petrol so a fee is appropriate, just how much of a fee is the question.

I think the more substantive points re conveyancing were:

1. Should it be limited to legal profession? (think not. For instance, Joe Punters can be Registered Trademark/Patent Agents, once they pass the exam, why not the same for conveyancing. Only need the Leaving Cert to do the exam).
2. Should there be a better system than the current dissection of title? Dont know enough about this but suspect theres a better way - Scotland mentioned - wasnt there a similar type suggestion re house sellers, that they might pay to have a solicitor do the title search and have it available for inspection by potential purchasers (if any doubts re independence of solicitor then make that report a statutory report - like the audit report).
3. Should there be a % fee? Cant see the logic in this, if its a bigger transaction in terms of complexity then fair enough, but the mere value shouldnt influence it. And I dont think insurance is an argument for this - as far as I'm aware, professional indemnity isnt that expensive and the cover is substantial.
 
Betsy Og said:
when you leave the petrol station you have a product, you werent charged for the service of getting it from the fuel store to your petrol tank.
Click to expand...
This analogy seems somewhat fallacious. Surely the costs of running the petrol station itself (e.g. buildings, fixtures/fittings, staff, light/heat/electricity etc.) are subsumed into the pump price for fuel? You are not just paying for fuel but also (at least in part) for all the ancillary costs - not to mention profit. In fact, one might argue that the service/ancillary costs built into fuel prices are even less transparent than the service costs charged by professionals such as solicitors. Ultimately the analogy is somewhat redundant.
 
It seems to me the issues raised by Eddie Hobbs regarding % conveyancing costs remain valid and have not been addressed. They were summarised by Betsy Og:

1. Should it be limited to legal profession?
2. Should there be a better system than the current dissection of title?
3. Should there be a % fee?
Click to expand...
These costs represent a sizeable burden of expenditure for the average person further increased by stamp duty.

MOB agreed there was "no good legal reason" why a person re-mortgaging their home should have to pay legal fees all over again on the same property.

It appears from this that the fault lies with the Building Society - PTSB in the case instanced by me. Six years ago I remortgaged my home to a total sum of £60,000 (no additional stamp duty required). The legal costs came to approx. £900.00. I consulted another Solicitor to see if I could get a smaller quote. The answer was no.

MOB agrees "there is no great consistency in this area, and there should be". The Q is: Is it the remit of the Law Society, the Building Society or our government to eliminate this duplication of legal fees? Since top up mortgages are not uncommon these days, this is not a trivial issue.
 
Brendan
I don't know if it was in the broadcast but Eddie made the point that he has no problem paying for his waste. Very few of us do. The reason it was in the show was to highlight the use of regressive taxes that hit the worst off hardest and also to show how the state deals with people who oppose it. Both valid points i think.

I notice many people here commenting on how simplistic the show was. It had to be. The lies that it was trying to set straight are very simplistic.

When the government claims to be running a low tax economy and when they claim to be tackling the cost of housing those lies are presented in childlike terms.

If you get more info on the cement keep us posted.

Rd
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Menu
Log in
Register