Advertisement
#Open journalism No news is bad news

Your contributions will help us continue to deliver the stories that are important to you

Support The Journal
Dublin: 6°C Sunday 28 February 2021

Comment #1414855 by marty

marty Jul 25th 2013, 1:12 PM #

So you could owe a bank €2 Million, they’ll be nice to you.

The smaller the amount, they’ll harass you. Nice shower of Bankers!

| Share | Report this comment

Read the article where this comment appeared:

Permanent TSB tells customer in arrears of €200 to sell her house

Permanent TSB tells customer in arrears of €200 to sell her house

The woman’s case was reviewed recently as she has been on an interest-only payment plan for around three years.

REPLIES

    Favourite Ted Carroll
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Jul 25th 2013, 1:28 PM

    If you owe the bank €100K it’s your problem, if you owe the bank €30 million it’s their problem!

    1154
    Favourite mattoid
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Jul 25th 2013, 1:48 PM

    and if the bank owes billions its the taxpayer’s problem, apparently…

    1285
    Favourite gerbreen
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Jul 25th 2013, 2:11 PM

    4.5 bn given to them and they paid bonuses shortly after that. Bad as the rest. Incompetent is as about as much as weak irish governance will give us .. justice along way off

    538
    Favourite Gearóid O Machain
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Jul 25th 2013, 2:16 PM

    jail the bankers!!

    593
    Favourite Ann Reddin
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Jul 25th 2013, 2:25 PM

    This lady needs to check out current legislation regarding harassment due to an outstanding debt followed by a trip to her local Garda station to make a complaint under the ” Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act 1997.

    “Demands for payment of debt causing alarm, etc.

    11.—(1) A person who makes any demand for payment of a debt shall be guilty of an offence if—

    (a) the demands by reason of their frequency are calculated to subject the debtor or a member of the family of the debtor to alarm, distress or humiliation, or

    (b) the person falsely represents that criminal proceedings lie for non-payment of the debt, or

    (c) the person falsely represents that he or she is authorised in some official capacity to enforce payment, or

    (d) the person utters a document falsely represented to have an official character.

    (2) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £1,500.(equivalent in euros)

    493
    Favourite Ann Reddin
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Jul 25th 2013, 2:29 PM

    I should have included this section as well

    Harassment.

    10.—(1) Any person who, without lawful authority or reasonable excuse, by any means including by use of the telephone, harasses another by persistently following, watching, pestering, besetting or communicating with him or her, shall be guilty of an offence.

    (2) For the purposes of this section a person harasses another where—

    (a) he or she, by his or her acts intentionally or recklessly, seriously interferes with the other’s peace and privacy or causes alarm, distress or harm to the other, and

    (b) his or her acts are such that a reasonable person would realise that the acts would seriously interfere with the other’s peace and privacy or cause alarm, distress or harm to the other.

    (3) Where a person is guilty of an offence under subsection (1), the court may, in addition to or as an alternative to any other penalty, order that the person shall not, for such period as the court may specify, communicate by any means with the other person or that the person shall not approach within such distance as the court shall specify of the place of residence or employment of the other person.

    (4) A person who fails to comply with the terms of an order under subsection (3) shall be guilty of an offence.

    (5) If on the evidence the court is not satisfied that the person should be convicted of an offence under subsection (1), the court may nevertheless make an order under subsection (3) upon an application to it in that behalf if, having regard to the evidence, the court is satisfied that it is in the interests of justice so to do.

    (6) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable—

    (a) on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £1,500 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to both, or

    (b) on conviction on indictment to a fine or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years or to both.

    274
    Favourite Rob Mahony
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Jul 25th 2013, 2:58 PM

    Yes jail them all..even the innocent ones. Actually jail anybody who even considers banking as a career.

    283
    Favourite Ciaran Harford
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Jul 25th 2013, 3:54 PM

    Good input there rob. Clown

    321
    Favourite Terence MacSwiney Field
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Jul 25th 2013, 4:34 PM

    “10.—(1) Any person who, without lawful authority……….” The banks have “lawful authority” – you need to update yourself on the legislation

    101
    Favourite Ann Reddin
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Jul 25th 2013, 4:42 PM

    They lose their “lawful authority” the minute they break the rules as set down by MARPS, which currently stands at 2 phone calls per month and 1 letter.

    258
    Favourite Ciaran Harford
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Jul 25th 2013, 4:49 PM

    Correct me if I’m wrong but they sent one letter and called her once. No? I’m pretty sure this wouldn’t be upheld in complaint circumstances. Have heard terrible stories of twice daily calls etc though.

    129
    Favourite Gráinne Duggan
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Jul 25th 2013, 5:38 PM

    I don’t understand how any of that would apply, Anne. She’s not being harassed, and the bank have been allowing her the facilty of interest only payments. They didn’t have to do that. It’s terrible, but I can’t see anything illegal in basically calling in the debt.

    148
    Favourite Brian Mc Court
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Jul 25th 2013, 7:03 PM

    12 bankers dislike this

    56
    Favourite Joural Censorship
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Jul 25th 2013, 7:03 PM

    Current rate for breach of constitutional rights ; 100,000 euro .
    Every Irish Citizen has a right to sovereignty.
    P.T.S.B. “colluded” for want of a better word to falsify accounts for Anglo and as far as I know vice a versa.
    This resulted in the loss of sovereignty.
    So Helen and every other Irish Citizen ; You are owed 100,000 euro for every member of your family.
    Furthermore when the bank guarantee was signed both A.I.B. became owned by the citizens. This brought them directly under the equality principles of the Constitution ; A.I.B. charged 3 per cent o its variable interest rate while P.T.S.B. was charging over 4 per cent; this is discrimination as both banks had public interest directors. That’s another 100,000 euro for every P.T.S.B. mortgage holder i the country who is a Irish citizen.
    I short when the banks broke the country they negated their hoe loans mortgage books ; Free house for everyone folks !
    No need to thank me; I’m happy knowing that you know and I hope it gets rid alot of the false stress that is being brewed up by the banks and the government !
    It’s a political party backed ponzi scheme in my opinion and they are illegal ; negative equity combined with loss of sovereignty in my opinion.
    Fell free to spread this info.!

    100
    Favourite Joural Censorship
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Jul 25th 2013, 7:06 PM

    you get the gist ; the old thumbs are never the best for typing.

    46
    Favourite Ciaran Harford
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Jul 25th 2013, 7:19 PM

    Where’s this 100K for all going to come from Joural? Better get on to the IMF there and get us some more bailout money. Sure stroll down the courts there and submit your documents. I wouldn’t mind a hundred grand. Thanks for sorting that for us. Or since we own the banks now are we liable for it. Ok I’ll give you 100k and you give me 100k.

    32
    Favourite Johnny Ace
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Jul 25th 2013, 9:09 PM

    Ann, the three contacts rule in the CCMA was replaced in the new code introduced on 01 July. There is no defined limit anymore. Although you cite chunks of legislation, you don’t say which provisions you consider to have been broken? Though overall this looks harsh, I don’t see anything illegal myself.

    60
    Favourite Debbie Smith
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Jul 25th 2013, 10:43 PM

    The Irish government needs to call in the debt on the bankers. It’s bailed them out with the people’s money.

    47
    Favourite Joural Censorship
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Jul 26th 2013, 12:19 AM

    Ciaran ; If they can’t pay the they go bankrupt; because that’s what they did i 2008 ad you ad me are paying through the teeth.
    Amount of money on deposit in irish banks in 2008 ; 90 billion ; cost to secure this 64 billion and interest to the troika.
    Lets assume that 20 billion on deposit was beloging to foreign hedge funds from vgermany and france.
    So the govt. have surrendered our sovereignty for 6 billion just to keep the debt alive. The bondholders have been paid so the people have been kept in penury for 6 billion.
    It would have been far better to secure Irish Citizen’s deposits and let as the government were ordered (or mandated as they say themselves) to do.
    The Anglo tapes prove that there was skullduggery afoot ; people have killed themselves over this while the bankers go to testimonials in London;
    Wake up and close your bank account and tell your bank that you will be back to them with the new details for the old direct debit ; They broke the law our constitution ; you owe the nothing only scorn !
    1.4 billion transferred from state funds into A.I.B. and every other pension fund (which are supposed to be regulated) broke ! For what A.I.B. pension fund to be fully loaded Because of the bankers “property rights ”
    Come on for God’s sake do you not recognise a thief when you see one ?

    23
    Favourite Nick Hill
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Jul 26th 2013, 12:51 AM

    All thumbs wiped? Because of the liars comment? They lied through their teeth during the first stress test. A clear case of hiding unfavourable data. There’s a word for that!

    24
    Favourite Ann Reddin
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Jul 26th 2013, 2:24 AM

    @ Ciaran,

    people are being harassed by their bank before being given an interest only mortgages. Had she been aware of this particular law she could have stopped the banks hassling her in the first place. Most people want to pay back their debts and are stressed enough without the banks ringing them 10+ times a day, (I spoke to one woman recently whose bank phoned her 14 times in the space of 6 hours, and it is thanks to this type of aggressive action by banks that the suicide rate has risen sharply in the last 4 years. Banks aren’t too keen on “interest only” and only offer it if they firmly believe that the homeowner wont willing hand back the keys to them. I know this from people I have spoken to who are in the process of and/or at risk of eviction. The legislative information I provided above is for anybody who reads this and not just specifically for this lady. I would therefore suggest that anyone who has been harassed by their lending institution prior to July 1st go to their local garda station and make a complaint.

    16
    Favourite Catrina L. Fletcher
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Jul 26th 2013, 2:37 AM

    as Donald replied I didn’t even know that any body can earn $7035 in 4 weeks on the internet. have you seen this page… w­w­w.C­a­n9­9.c­o­m

    2
    Mute Bernadette Connell Lanigan
    Favourite Bernadette Connell Lanigan
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Jul 26th 2013, 4:54 AM

    YES. Ann. You go girl!

    10
    Favourite Denis McClean
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Jul 26th 2013, 11:10 AM

    Even if she, along with the rest of us, now own the debt.

    1
    Favourite Gadfly
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Jul 26th 2013, 2:08 PM

    We need s Parnellite type movement

    6
    Favourite ColindeB
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Jul 26th 2013, 2:43 PM

    So Ann, are we going to let every mortgage holder in the country live in their house for free?

    Do you want to extend that largesse to tenants as well or are they expected to pay every cent to keep the rest of the market propped up?

    6
    Favourite Ann Reddin
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Jul 29th 2013, 2:08 AM

    I find that the only people who come out with that line ColindeB are usually part of the “I’m all right Jack” brigade who believe that there is no such thing as someone who cant afford to pay their mortgage only those who choose not to.

    6