FG policies make housing more expensive yet again

Baron von Biffo

Well-known member
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
16,252
Yes but your sight is clearly very poor

A quarter of a century ago, Ireland adopted the EU Directive on unfair contract terms in consumer contracts (UCTD) setting out the means for consumers to enjoy these European consumer rights. In recent times, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has applied these consumer protections to mortgages as consumer contracts. Irish consumers, however, have yet to fully enjoy these protections, with reluctance by courts and the relevant regulatory State bodies to subject standardised non-negotiable mortgage contracts to scrutiny


Basically as well as having the worst tenant rights in Europe , Ireland has dragged its heels on viewing mortgage agreements in terms of consumer contract law.

Rather, it has been left to individual consumers and their
advocates to present the EU law, and for Irish courts to incorporate this developing EU
jurisprudence into the highly charged legal arena of mortgage repossession cases, where
any slight deviation from the established norms could – as it were – ‘frighten the horses’
of global financial flows into Irish property portfolios. Indeed, the obligation to protect
the mortgage industry from a rise in consumer rights


Also , love the way you despise those fighting repossession but trust banks despite the fact that they illegally took thousands off Tracker mortgages to increase the payees repayments
Since you challenge others to answer questions perhaps you'd answer this one which you didn't address in the reply above.


Is there any other EU country that would allow a non-payer to occupy a property for years and force the lender to incur huge, and unrecoverable, expense to get them out?
 


Disillusioned democrat

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
16,288
Since you challenge others to answer questions perhaps you'd answer this one which you didn't address in the reply above.


Is there any other EU country that would allow a non-payer to occupy a property for years and force the lender to incur huge, and unrecoverable, expense to get them out?
Probably not, but then again is there any other EU country with governments that seem to believe the value of ones house is the be-all-and-end-all of economic success?

FG have allowed forbearance exist for 9 years and have allowed the banks hide behind this as a reason to charge interest rates (masking the fact of course that they can because they're effective monopolies), yet the banks make massive profite.

Ask yourself a different question - is there any other EU country where banks that drove the country over the cliff and had to be bailed out at tax payers expense are now making massive profits again and not being charged tax????
 

brughahaha

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 1, 2009
Messages
15,895
Since you challenge others to answer questions perhaps you'd answer this one which you didn't address in the reply above.


Is there any other EU country that would allow a non-payer to occupy a property for years and force the lender to incur huge, and unrecoverable, expense to get them out?
Couldn't tell you, but seeing as your the one outraged and claiming we're unique in not evicting people , its incumbent on YOU to give examples ...err not me

It also suppose your utterly ignorant of the political connotations and background to evictions in Ireland

But then you're a FGer so like the Black and Tans you probably think evictions were and are no bad thing either
 

Baron von Biffo

Well-known member
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
16,252
Couldn't tell you, but seeing as your the one outraged and claiming we're unique in not evicting people , its incumbent on YOU to give examples ...err not me

It also suppose your utterly ignorant of the political connotations and background to evictions in Ireland

But then you're a FGer so like the Black and Tans you probably think evictions were and are no bad thing either

There are no political connotations or background that justify the state supporting one class of person stealing from another.
 

Barroso

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2011
Messages
5,137
There are no political connotations or background that justify the state supporting one class of person stealing from another.
Maybe you should take that particular beef up with the parties who were in government for the last 9 year, FG in pride of place, ably assisted first by Labour and then by FF.

All and any legal matters that are causing difficulties today are our inheritance from these 3 parties. You could drag in the PDs and the Greens if you wanted, but the reality is - despite the PDs success in getting their policies applied - those two parties were mere footnotes to the big two-and-a-half.
 

brughahaha

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 1, 2009
Messages
15,895
There are no political connotations or background that justify the state supporting one class of person stealing from another.

Oh just too funny from a supporter of the party that paid out unsecured Bondholders and supported the bailout of the Banks
:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
 

Round tower

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
7,799
Couldn't tell you, but seeing as your the one outraged and claiming we're unique in not evicting people , its incumbent on YOU to give examples ...err not me

It also suppose your utterly ignorant of the political connotations and background to evictions in Ireland

But then you're a FGer so like the Black and Tans you probably think evictions were and are no bad thing either
So do u believe that people who got morgages in the good times and for i reason or another they have paid nothing or very little. Has not engaged with the differnt solvent agencies should be allowed stay in the house infefinetaly
 

Baron von Biffo

Well-known member
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
16,252
Maybe you should take that particular beef up with the parties who were in government for the last 9 year, FG in pride of place, ably assisted first by Labour and then by FF.

All and any legal matters that are causing difficulties today are our inheritance from these 3 parties. You could drag in the PDs and the Greens if you wanted, but the reality is - despite the PDs success in getting their policies applied - those two parties were mere footnotes to the big two-and-a-half.
I think the problems go back farther than that. Back to the foundation of the state in fact.

Prior to independence we opposed British laws, but when we began to govern ourselves we made no attempt to foster respect for our own laws.

We simply never developed a proper civic culture.
 

Barroso

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2011
Messages
5,137
I think the problems go back farther than that. Back to the foundation of the state in fact.

Prior to independence we opposed British laws, but when we began to govern ourselves we made no attempt to foster respect for our own laws.

We simply never developed a proper civic culture.
This is fair comment in so far as it goes, but we cannot change the past.
What we can do though is evaluate what our governing parties have done in recent times and decide whether they are living up to expectations.
The three parties who have ruled for the last hundred years have been judged and found wanting. Their replacements (and I do not mean SF alone here, but a combination of them with various other parties and like-minded independents) seem to be on the way, but haven't quite arrived yet.

I say we give them further support until they get enough votes and seats to try their policies.
 

Baron von Biffo

Well-known member
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
16,252
This is fair comment in so far as it goes, but we cannot change the past.
What we can do though is evaluate what our governing parties have done in recent times and decide whether they are living up to expectations.
The three parties who have ruled for the last hundred years have been judged and found wanting. Their replacements (and I do not mean SF alone here, but a combination of them with various other parties and like-minded independents) seem to be on the way, but haven't quite arrived yet.

I say we give them further support until they get enough votes and seats to try their policies.
To keep things in perspective here. SF gained 14 seats on their 2016 result. Labour gained 18 in 1992 and 17 in 2011.

Those gains have long since been reversed and almost forgotten.
 

wombat

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
34,210
To keep things in perspective here. SF gained 14 seats on their 2016 result. Labour gained 18 in 1992 and 17 in 2011.

Those gains have long since been reversed and almost forgotten.
Not much point in pointing out the bleeding obvious to the present cheerleaders. :)
 

Mickeymac

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2010
Messages
41,799
To keep things in perspective here. SF gained 14 seats on their 2016 result. Labour gained 18 in 1992 and 17 in 2011.

Those gains have long since been reversed and almost forgotten.

Only prob with that Buff, you are comparing apples with oranges😂😂 you really are a funny old guy😂
 

wombat

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
34,210
Yeah, but when historians are reading this in 2120 they'll be saying how prescient I was. Immortality will be mine!
I doubt historians will be interested in P.ie, the Journal of Psychiatry, on the other hand.......
 

Barroso

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2011
Messages
5,137
To keep things in perspective here. SF gained 14 seats on their 2016 result. Labour gained 18 in 1992 and 17 in 2011.

Those gains have long since been reversed and almost forgotten.
You are absolutely correct here, but at the same time you are trying to explain away the real change that is happening in Ireland's political system.
Neither you nor I can foretell the results of the next election, but we can judge what has happened in the past and try to extrapolate.

The Labour party went up and back down again on several occasions - the two times you mention, they were poised to grow, and went into coalition as a junior partner. If their vote on both occasions was a vote for change, and this is a reasonable assumption, they blew it by going into coalition and lost their newer voters.

SF, on the other hand, has also tapped into a desire for change, and this desire has led to slow, incremental growth in votes and TDs. They have now got two possibilities - going into government as an equal partner, and promoting change in this way, or going into opposition.

If they go into government, we can assume that they will be able to implement some of their program - and will be judged on how well they do so. If they do well, they could expect to consolidate at the next election, if they do badly, they would lose votes and seats. And this is fair enough.
If they go into opposition, they can expect to grow at the next election unless the government deals with the issues that have led to people voting for SF in recent times.
There is nothing automatic about SF gains disappearing in the same way that Labs gains disappeared; of course, it may happen, but they are a different party from Labour with a different program, and in any case will be judged on the efforts they have made and the successes they have achieved.
 

Baron von Biffo

Well-known member
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
16,252
You are absolutely correct here, but at the same time you are trying to explain away the real change that is happening in Ireland's political system.
Neither you nor I can foretell the results of the next election, but we can judge what has happened in the past and try to extrapolate.

The Labour party went up and back down again on several occasions - the two times you mention, they were poised to grow, and went into coalition as a junior partner. If their vote on both occasions was a vote for change, and this is a reasonable assumption, they blew it by going into coalition and lost their newer voters.

SF, on the other hand, has also tapped into a desire for change, and this desire has led to slow, incremental growth in votes and TDs. They have now got two possibilities - going into government as an equal partner, and promoting change in this way, or going into opposition.
But the 'change' vote and the 'slow incremental' vote are distinct groups.

The latter has been built up by assiduous clientelist tending over years and those voters have been told that the primary cause of all their woes is The Establishment parties of FF and FG.

SF is only party that 'listens' to them but sure what can they do when they're not in government.

The obvious difficulty for SF is that when eventually do get into government the lives of those people won't change dramatically.

That puts SF firmly in the 'there all the same' category.

As recently as the local elections the 'change' vote wasn't with SF and the party hasn't put down any roots in it. Those voters have very high expectations and will readily hammer the party that lets them down.

If they go into government, we can assume that they will be able to implement some of their program - and will be judged on how well they do so. If they do well, they could expect to consolidate at the next election, if they do badly, they would lose votes and seats. And this is fair enough.
If they go into opposition, they can expect to grow at the next election unless the government deals with the issues that have led to people voting for SF in recent times.
There is nothing automatic about SF gains disappearing in the same way that Labs gains disappeared; of course, it may happen, but they are a different party from Labour with a different program, and in any case will be judged on the efforts they have made and the successes they have achieved.
I can't see any reason to believe that that will happen.

FG would argue, and with justification, that they've done well with the shambles they took over in 2011 and it would be churlish to deny them credit for the solid Brexit support for Ireland that they built in the rest of the EU. But for all that they got no credit from the voters.

Similarly with Labour in 1997. They'd implemented almost everything from their 1992 manifesto but still were savaged by the voters.

You believe that SF will be credited for implementing part of their programme but I don't think that will be the case. Party members will give a standing ovation for n% success to date, but the voters won't.

They voted for their own home and if they don't have it by the next GE then SF wont get their vote. And the same with health and rents and everything SF is promising.

Remember that the other parties will now be in opposition and they'll happily repay SF in their own coin for all the criticism, opportunism and populism they dished out over the years.

Every failure, real or imagined, will be trumpeted to the heavens and any successes will be minimised.

You're right of course to say that it's not guaranteed that SF would lose seats after a term in government, but the day they have their first cabinet meeting in the Aras I'm off to see what odds the bookies will give me on them losing 15+ seats at the following GE.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top