Comments

  1. MarcoM

    An excellent and most relevant piece, Karl!

    One word captures the essence of the attitude of your interviewee: “.. they (the banks) don’t want to crystallise THEIR losses”. Excuse me, lady. The loss is still yours! This is what psychologists call Cognitive Dissonance.
    The reason this attitude exists is because of a massive BLUNDER by the government. They decreed that banks are not allowed to repossess the primary home of (most) people who are seriously in arrears. I am not sure why they chose to do this, but I suspect the government doesn’t want front page stories of weeping women holding babies outside their repossessed home.
    The consequences of this socialist soft belly approach are:
    * Cutting supply of family homes to the housing market which (as Karl points out), artificially causes prices to rise in Dublin
    * The banks are likely to need further capital because they cannot recoup as much as they should from these strategic defaulters. [even Credit Default protection on the “solid” Bank of Ireland trades at 330bp, which still implies a 1 in 4 chance of default in the next 5 years!)
    * The tax payer ends up footing the bill; austerity will have to continue for longer while the banks remain loss-making (and we own most of them!).

    I am loath to defend the banks; I was livid when they raised the SVR after the ECB cut. But I have no sympathy for your woman in the interview. Together with her RIPs, she should also lose her primary home and her Company Directorship if she doesn’t keep paying. The government, through their incompetence, is responsible for this, more so than the banks!

  2. HARRY MARKOPOLOS

    The Banks whom you sell products (mortgages) for, are the main culprits in this Mr Deeter.
    I don’t see why you are taking the side of the banks over the side hundreds/thousands of distressed clients that you sold products for Mr Deeter.
    Do your loyalties lie with corrupt/criminal bankers Karl?
    And if so, why??
    If this lady bought 6 buy to lets to provide income for herself,
    she probably stumped up hundreds of thousands of her own money in deposits, stamp duty and mortgage payments.
    Now she has only €12k (that the bank will probably take) to show for it?
    The bankers destroyed this woman’s wealth/pension Karl.
    They destroyed the wealth/pensions of millions of people.
    They destroyed the country.
    Wake up and smell the coffee man.
    You are trying to defend the un-defendable.
    Are you sure you are not suffering from banker induced Stockholm Syndrome Karl?

  3. David McCarthy-Smith

    What year was Irish Permanent, via High Court, ordered to allow Mortgagee to select their fire Insurer (I. P. formerly restricted to their ‘sweet deal’ Insurer). The change was late ’80s or early 90s? Anybody the url to Court Case change? Thanks

Leave a Comment

Awesome! You've decided to leave a comment. Please keep in mind that comments are moderated.

*