Skip to main content

Talking Property...

The blame game for the boom is well underway, says Isabel Morton...


LAST SEPTEMBER, I rather boldly suggested that we might all consider suing the banks. I am now interested to hear that it is to come to pass. Investors are planning to sue Anglo Irish Bank.

Given what we now know about the specific circumstances of that particular bank, it is understandable that investors, who lost a lot of money, are now somewhat sore about it all.

However, the idea that property developers are also considering suing Anglo Irish Bank is not quite as easy to fathom, particularly as they are suing based on the grounds that the bank behaved negligently by breaching the guidelines of sensible lending practices.

My initial reaction to this news was: that the property developers have some nerve; and that they hadn’t a hope in hell of succeeding.

But, having thought about the basis of their argument, I could see that the same argument might actually be applicable to many of the loans and mortgages obtained by the rest of us mere mortals over the past decade or so.

Of those who were lucky enough (now debatable) to get a bank loan to buy property, many received a 100 per cent mortgage plus (in many cases) extra financing to cover the stamp duty, legal expenses and funds for renovating or furnishing the property.

Others were encouraged by the Government to invest in Section 23 and Section 50 properties and other enticing schemes, which enabled the investor to get tax relief on their rental income. It was, according to the Government, a win/win situation for all involved. And indeed, for a while it was.

The banks made big bucks selling loans and mortgages to the developers, builders and of course, the property buying public. The Government, in turn, raked in fortunes on stamp duty, VAT and income tax. And because the world was skipping along gaily and property prices were increasing annually, the developers were able to sell on their properties at a profit, pay back their bank loans and gear up again for future projects.

Needless to say, nobody was complaining at the time, with the exception of the first-time buyers whose attempts to get on the first rung of the property ladder became like chasing a mirage. Every time they thought they were nearly there, it would disappear from before their eyes.

The banks made sure to do their own bank valuations (for which the prospective borrower invariably had to pay) and they supposedly applied the rigours of their “stress tests” to ensure that the borrower would be able to service their mortgage.

And the borrowers were delighted that the bank had confidence in them. After all, the banks were professionals and they were giving out loans and mortgages to people all day, every day – so they should know. And, if they had faith in you and/or your project and were prepared to put their money where their mouth was, you in turn, had faith in them.

What we all forgot was that banks are just like shops, except that they sell money. And bankers are effectively salespeople: the more they sell, the higher the bonus.

Almost overnight it seemed that everyone who could borrowed to invest in property. Not just the mega rich, but the ordinary working person who felt that property would provide them with an income for their retirement, provide for them in their old age and would be an investment for their children’s future.

It was in the banker’s interest to make it easier for us to borrow money, and equally it was in the Government’s interest not to attempt to stem the flow of tax and stamp duty into their coffers. So it was in both their interests to stay silent, play the game and ignore the potential repercussions.

But in the same way as retailers and service providers are subject to the rules and regulation of the National Consumer Agency and the ombudsman, financial institutions are subject to regulations and are overseen by the financial regulator.

Did the banks break their own set of rules and guidelines?

Did the financial regulator ensure that the guidelines were being adhered to?

If the answer to either or both of these questions is in doubt, then the next step is legal action.

Borrowers could sue the banks for lending them more that the recommended guidelines.

The banks would then sue the financial regulator for failing to regulate.

The financial regulator would in turn sue the Government for failing to ensure that they, the financial regulators, were actually regulating. And the Government would then increase our taxes to cover the costs.

Simple really and perhaps not half as far fetched as it might initially appear.



Report by Isabel Morton - Irish Times.

Popular posts from this blog

Property Crash Homes For Sale...

Hundreds of repossessed homes in Ireland to be sold by auction... UK property consultancy Allsop to hold auction in April at Dublin's Shelbourne hotel: Flats in Ireland that could have fetched €150,000 in the Celtic Tiger years are to be put on the market for as little as €25,000 (£21,000) in the country's first ever mass auction of repossessed homes. And, in a sign of how wide the property crash is, the latest item to turn up in liquidation sales in Dublin is a job lot of 15 cranes, including a pair towering over Anglo Irish Bank's half-built headquarters in the city's docklands. "Tower cranes were among the most sought-after heavy plant and machinery 10 years ago," Ricky Wilson of Wilsons Auctions says. "You couldn't buy them quick enough. Now they are left idle for two or three years on sites." He has 15 cranes worth €500,000 going on sale on 26 March, with German, Dutch and Polish buyers expressing interest. But it is the auction ...

Young, Irish And Out Of Here...

As the government continues to pump billions into our much discredited banking system, many Irish people unable to find work here are facing into a future outside of this country. John Downes, News Investigations Correspondent, spoke to some of the new Irish diaspora about their recent experiences of emigration... By any stretch of the imagination, they were a startling set of figures, prompting echoes of a past which we thought we had left behind. According to ESRI data released last week, we can expect net emigration of 60,000 in the year to this April – and a further 40,000 by April 2011. That's almost 1,000 of our best and brightest leaving every week. Yet the ESRI's predictions are simply the latest – if most stark – indications of a return to mass emigration among Ireland's unemployed, as the downturn has continued to take its toll. In September, for example, the Central Statistics Office revealed that Ireland witnessed a return to net emigration for the first time si...

As Featured On Dublin Postcards, Ad's, U2 Video...

I see in the Irish Independent today an item concerning a favourite, Dublin landmark, of mine... "THEY have featured in numerous postcards and a very famous Guinness ad, but perhaps their most important cameo appearance came when they featured in U2s 'Pride (In The Name Of Love)' video. However, Dublin City Council does not believe the Poolbeg chimneys are iconic enough to place on their Record of Protected Structures. Following a request from Cllr Dermot Lacey (Lab) to have the landmark ESB chimneys placed on the protected record, city councillors heard that city planners had conducted a survey, history and full assessment of the chimneys. They concluded from this that while the Poolbeg chimneys were considered to be of a certain level of architectural, social and historical significance, they were not of sufficient value within the meaning of the Planning and Development Act, 2000. Complex The twin red and white chimney stacks measure 680 feet in height and were construc...