The 12 month moratorium is significantly reduced

[Brendan Burgess]

47.
d) ...legal proceedings may commence three months from the date the letter is issued or eight months from the date the arrears arose, whichever date is later,

This is how I read this (The RTE News had a slightly different interpretation)

Example 1
1 Jan 2014 Arrears rise
30 November 2014 MArp finishes
28 February 2015 they can begin legal action - 14 months later

Example 2
1 Jan 2014 Arrears rise
30 March 2014 MARP finishes

30 June 2014 is 3 months later, but must wait until

30 August 2014 is the earliest date legal action can begin i.e. a minimum period of 8 months

 

[Bronte]

Do these changes make any actual real difference whatsover? The banks are in no hurry to begin legal proceedings, they are in no hurry to repossess etc.

 

[Brendan Burgess]

It frees up the banks to begin proceedings against those who should be repossessed.

It makes no difference whatsoever to anyone who is attempting to address the situation.

 

[Bronte]

I think it's only a tactical change, now they can threaten more. Don't believe they want to repossess, based on what I've seen.

 

[Brendan Burgess]

Hi Bronte

There are some borrowers who simply won't face reality, and the banks have to repossess th em through the courts.

There are others who will only take the issue seriously when they get a court summons. The bank is now free to send this earlier.

Brendan

 

[demoivre]

I think it's only a tactical change, now they can threaten more. Don't believe they want to repossess, based on what I've seen.

Dunne ruling is still there preventing some repossessions and in cases where there is negative equity and a house is repossessed, the shortfall has to be dealt with. For many that shortfall will be dealt with by bankruptcy imo.