• Due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software, some users were "banned" when they tried to change their passwords at the end of February. This does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you were affected by this, please us viua the Contact us link in the footer.

1/3 to 1/2 of Buy to let Investors withholding Mortgage Payments in Strategic Arrears!


IbrahaimMohamad

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 5, 2013
Messages
4,221
1/3 to 1/2 of Buy to let investors withholding Mortgage Payments in Strategic Arrears!

Gregory Connor over at the Irish Economy Blog contends that:" Among the buy-to-let subset, the proportion of strategic arrears in Ireland is likely higher than 35%, and may be greater than 50%, reflecting the particular features of this sub-market (wealthier households, a larger proportion purchased near the height of the boom). "


The Irish Economy » Blog Archive » How Large Are Strategic Arrears in the Irish Mortgage Market?

This is a huge problem for the taxpayer and those who rely on any State Services. Very wealthy people are chancing their arm and seeking to strong arm the banks into giving them a debt write down.

They know that given their negative equity they are not candidates for bank loans to mop up cheap property at the bottom of the market. They are trying to help themselves to debt relief.

There is evidence to suggest that the growth of mortgage arrears is linked in many cases to these strategic arrears where people who can afford repayments choose not to pay their negative equity property loans.

Again there is a prospect particularly with wealthy borrowers that they will inherit more wealth in the course of their lives.

Many will be desperately seeking to secure debt write downs before they come into their inheritances.
 


SilverSpurs

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 27, 2009
Messages
5,550
1/3 to 1/2 of Buy to let investors withholding Mortgage Payments in Strategic Arrears!

Gregory Connor over at the Irish Economy Blog contends that:" Among the buy-to-let subset, the proportion of strategic arrears in Ireland is likely higher than 35%, and may be greater than 50%, reflecting the particular features of this sub-market (wealthier households, a larger proportion purchased near the height of the boom). "


The Irish Economy » Blog Archive » How Large Are Strategic Arrears in the Irish Mortgage Market?

This is a huge problem for the taxpayer and those who rely on any State Services. Very wealthy people are chancing their arm and seeking to strong arm the banks into giving them a debt write down.

They know that given their negative equity they are not candidates for bank loans to mop up cheap property at the bottom of the market. They are trying to help themselves to debt relief.

There is evidence to suggest that the growth of mortgage arrears is linked in many cases to these strategic arrears where people who can afford repayments choose not to pay their negative equity property loans.

Again there is a prospect particularly with wealthy borrowers that they will inherit more wealth in the course of their lives.

Many will be desperately seeking to secure debt write downs before they come into their inheritances.
This is the moral hazard of debt write downs. Once you give it him why should I pay my mortgage???
 

DuineEile

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
14,939
This is the moral hazard of debt write downs. Once you give it him why should I pay my mortgage???
Moral Hazard my Arrse.
Home purchasers got stung by poor government, incompetent regulators and greedy shortsighted banks. There is no moral hazard not following through with a contract in a rigged market.

To reverse the question. Why should someone get a house for a 1/3 of the price someone else paid for it? Do you not see moral hazard in allowing that scam to be completed?


D
 

IbrahaimMohamad

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 5, 2013
Messages
4,221
Moral Hazard my Arrse.
Home purchasers got stung by poor government, incompetent regulators and greedy shortsighted banks. There is no moral hazard not following through with a contract in a rigged market.

To reverse the question. Why should someone get a house for a 1/3 of the price someone else paid for it? Do you not see moral hazard in allowing that scam to be completed?


D
But the investors were planning to own other people's homes ! That was the whole objective. The borrowed money and contracted to pay it all back witht he prevailing rates of interest.
 

ger12

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2011
Messages
48,254
Moral Hazard my Arrse.
Home purchasers got stung by poor government, incompetent regulators and greedy shortsighted banks. There is no moral hazard not following through with a contract in a rigged market.

To reverse the question. Why should someone get a house for a 1/3 of the price someone else paid for it? Do you not see moral hazard in allowing that scam to be completed?


D
But I didn't buy those magic beans for a second or third property. Can I sue, I dunno, because my tax money will eventually pay for someone else's magic beans?
 

IbrahaimMohamad

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 5, 2013
Messages
4,221
But I didn't buy those magic beans for a second or third property. Can I sue, I dunno, because my tax money will eventually pay for someone else's magic beans?

There should be some kind of a law to criminalise landlords collecting rents and not paying a mortgage!
 

ShoutingIsLeadership

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 17, 2011
Messages
50,439
Where is the evidence that this man hasn't just plucked these figures from his ar$e?
 

DuineEile

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
14,939
But the investors were planning to own other people's homes ! That was the whole objective. The borrowed money and contracted to pay it all back witht he prevailing rates of interest.
I was never an investor. I bought a house to live in it. I have ended up €500k in the red over it.


D
 

carruthers

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2008
Messages
4,193
Whatever about family homes, buy to lets should be repossessed and re sold as a matter of urgency. Anyone found to have withheld rent should be held liable for the entire debt.

Family homes. Debt for equity and move on.
 

DuineEile

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
14,939
There should be some kind of a law to criminalise landlords collecting rents and not paying a mortgage!
That's fine, as long as when the property is idle the owner doesn't have to pay property tax etc on it.

OR. Allow the owner to force the bank to take possession and ownership of the property so the owner doesn't have to pay tax for something he is not getting.

D

And what about people who didn't buy buy to let's, but were encouraged by the banks to rent out their house. Or people who have moved to smaller homes, and rented out their property
 

ShoutingIsLeadership

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 17, 2011
Messages
50,439
The mortgage debate has to be THE most boring debate on p.ie, at this stage.
 

zakalwe1

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
5,305
There should be some kind of a law to criminalise landlords collecting rents and not paying a mortgage!
i can't believe i'm doing this...but you are getting 2 likes from me for your posts here.
common sense.
 

zakalwe1

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
5,305
That's fine, as long as when the property is idle the owner doesn't have to pay property tax etc on it.

OR. Allow the owner to force the bank to take possession and ownership of the property so the owner doesn't have to pay tax for something he is not getting.

D

And what about people who didn't buy buy to let's, but were encouraged by the banks to rent out their house. Or people who have moved to smaller homes, and rented out their property
1. why not? he/she will be marketing their house on the basis that services are nearby (roads, sewage, electricity) supplied by the state.
2. absolutely not, unless there is a put/call option over the property (extremely unlikely) the borrower should have no say on what he wants to do at a whim.
3. i can sympathise with people encouraged by the banks to rent out the house. but don't believe there are any as
(a) you lose principle private residence relief (ppr)
(b) lose out on mortgage interest relief (TRS)
(c) would now switch the mortgage from owner-occupier to investor and therefore lose tracker or lower SVR.
(d) would lose any protection under the family home act.
so for a bank to advise any customer to rent out their home, without pointing out the above, would be liable to a courtcase.
 

elliebee

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2011
Messages
5,002
I was never an investor. I bought a house to live in it. I have ended up €500k in the red over it.


D
Surely purchasers are responsible themselves for paying such crazy money for houses.

Much of the cash borrowed went towards kitting out the entire house and garden. Crazy.
 

daveL

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 29, 2010
Messages
19,591
1/3 to 1/2 of Buy to let investors withholding Mortgage Payments in Strategic Arrears!

Gregory Connor over at the Irish Economy Blog contends that:" Among the buy-to-let subset, the proportion of strategic arrears in Ireland is likely higher than 35%, and may be greater than 50%, reflecting the particular features of this sub-market (wealthier households, a larger proportion purchased near the height of the boom). "


The Irish Economy » Blog Archive » How Large Are Strategic Arrears in the Irish Mortgage Market?

This is a huge problem for the taxpayer and those who rely on any State Services. Very wealthy people are chancing their arm and seeking to strong arm the banks into giving them a debt write down.

They know that given their negative equity they are not candidates for bank loans to mop up cheap property at the bottom of the market. They are trying to help themselves to debt relief.

There is evidence to suggest that the growth of mortgage arrears is linked in many cases to these strategic arrears where people who can afford repayments choose not to pay their negative equity property loans.

Again there is a prospect particularly with wealthy borrowers that they will inherit more wealth in the course of their lives.

Many will be desperately seeking to secure debt write downs before they come into their inheritances.
simple solution... don't write down their debt
 

Happytolearn

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 23, 2011
Messages
3,520
Whatever about family homes, buy to lets should be repossessed and re sold as a matter of urgency. Anyone found to have withheld rent should be held liable for the entire debt.

Family homes. Debt for equity and move on.
I'm withholding rent. After many failed (and well documented) attempts to negotiate with my bank it was the only way to get their attention. I have no intention of spending it. Three months now - Their ears are ******************************ing up.
 

DuineEile

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
14,939
Surely purchasers are responsible themselves for paying such crazy money for houses.

Much of the cash borrowed went towards kitting out the entire house and garden. Crazy.
Ah.

But I haven't PAID. I have an opportunity to redeem the crazy.


d
 

New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top