Ulster Bank is to sell 5,200 non-performing mortgages to affiliates of so-called vulture fund Cerberus for €1.4 billion.

The portfolio of loans includes around 2,300 mortgages relating to private homes and around 2,900 mortgages covering buy-to-let properties.

Good times

Ulster Bank to sell non-performing loans worth €1.4bn to Cerberus (RTÉ)

Last week:  Pass The Parcel

Sponsored Link

85 thoughts on “More Prey

  1. Col

    More chancers.
    From the article:
    “Ulster Bank says these mortgages have been, on average, in arrears for 34 months”
    If I took that much time off paying my rent, I’d have a very tidy deposit for my own place.

          1. Col

            The thing is, I could pay a mortgage, but supply is very limited, so I’m stuck renting and trying to save for a deposit.
            Meanwhile, some people have got away without paying for years.

    1. Cian

      Average mortgage above is €270K; this would be about €1200/month (on 25-year mortgage) x 34 months = 40K

      Some of these are buy-to-lets – so it is possible that they have been rented out for the last 3 years and the landlord is charging rent – but not paying the mortgage.

  2. DDT

    the absolute greed of Irish banks is disgusting. In making this deal people will, without question, lose their homes, many becoming homeless. The banks know this and just really don’t care at all. It’s horrible even knowing we share the same land with soulless c***s like them.

    1. Cian

      What? the 2,900 people who got buy-to-let mortgages and aren’t paying them back? What are the odds that most of these 2,900 properties are being rented out – and the landlords are keeping the money and NOT paying the bank. You have sympathy for defaulting landlords? Jeez…

      …and the “vulture” funds won’t destroy the houses – so there will the same number of homes.

      1. jimmy

        That name seems pretty familiar
        Seems to me after the dodge NAMA deal this should be blocked by the Irish government pending a full investigation into who the other bidders were and why Cerberus got the deal
        An open public enquiry
        This company now will turf these home owners on the street and of course make massive profits on rental

  3. Boj

    Real question…if I missed 1 mortgage payment would/could I be classed as non-performing? What are the criteria? If I contact the bank to express some worry without missing payment, do they shift me onto a different list?

    1. Cian

      Boj – yes I believe so.

      But if it was a one-off and you are now paying in full and on time – then the bank wouldn’t want to sell it off – as they would have to offer a (large?) discount on it to the seller.

      1. Boj

        Ta Cian. I’m a very good boy but it was a question that’s been with me for a while. I just wanted to know how easy is it to get onto the bold boy list?

    2. DDT

      thats what they were talkin about last week, loads of people got eviction letters for not paying mortgages, but 7000 people got the letters too even tho they never missed payments. the government have literally sold us out.

        1. DDT

          i don’t know where it is. it was all over the place, loads of sites. go find it yourself. remember the comment from varadkar when he was told about it, he said “news to me” and there was uproar because he didnt even know about it. then there was that counselor lad on twitter who was raging coz he met all his repayments but got a letter, and everyone was rippin into him because he’s FG and supported these actions, until it effected him.

          1. Owen C

            I think this is the PTSB loan sale, where people were current on their primary mortgage, but were in arrears on their investment property. PTSB wrapped them up together for the sale (cos the primary mortgage would be relevant to any repossession and insolvency proceedings brought via the investment property arrears)

          2. Owen C

            But it wasn’t anywhere near 7,000. It would have been a few hundred BTL investors who had both their BTL mortgage and their primary mortgage with PTSB.

      1. SB

        I think it may have been where people had multiple mortgages, and ONE was in arrears – but they complained that they got letters about the *performing* one (eg their residence) though they ‘never missed payments’. The complainers never mentioned the other *non-performing* one (eg their buy-to-let) they had though. The bank explained that as the mortgages were linked, they had to be lumped together – too messy otherwise. Seems fair enough to me. Anyway, if they have been paying their home loan, no judge is going to throw them out of it.

    3. Dr_Chimp

      A loan that is in arrears for more than 90 days is considered non-performing. This was the internal rule of most banks but the european banking authority has defined as such now. The central bank records this data and you can see it for loans in arrears from 90-180 days, 180-360 days and so on up to loans in arrears for more than 720 days ( which seems to be just over €7bn at the moment)

      However, I think if you engage with the bank you can get re-classified under some sort of “forbearance” or “restructuring” category but up until you reach an agreement you would be a NPL.

      1. Anne

        Aren’t you always in arrears with a mortgage.

        So if you missed a payment once, and continue to make your normal payments, you’re in arrears until the missed payment and accumulated interest is paid back to where the outstanding debt would be as if you didn’t miss the payment, is that it?

        1. Dr_Chimp

          I think in the case where you miss one and keep paying you would use each successive payment to pay the payment you missed so that you would only ever be 30 days in arrears rather than continually building up interest and time (And eventually falling into non performing category). I suppose the quantum and length of arrears are the important questions because it would be absolutely ludicrous if someone who only missed one payment and built up penalty interest as you described was bundled into a loan sale lile this

      2. Owen C

        Even after the restructuring agreement is in place, you’ll still be classified as a non performing loan for a probationary period afterwards (12-18 months typically). But this is only if the restructuring agreement formally carves out the arrears portion – this is the problem PTSB has with its so called ‘split mortgages’ which are basically a restructured mortgage that has a warehoused part on the side, payable at a undetermined date in the future (most likely when the house is sold). They never formally carved out the warehoused part and never wrote it down to zero, just kinda parked it on the side with no interest payable or compounding on it, but as a result the whole loan, even the performing restructured part, is considered non performing. AIB seemed to carve them out properly, writing the value of the warehoused part down to zero on the books (though the obligation remains with the borrower) and allowing the restructured part to become performing again over time.

  4. b

    Boj, I think even if you kept on top of all your payments you’d be classed as ‘non-performing’…

  5. Cian

    That figure of €1.4 billion is interesting.
    Is that how much Cerberus paid for it (BS: Ulster Bank is to sell 5,200 mortgages […] for €1.4 billion.)
    Is that how much the loans were for (RTE: Ulster Bank to sell [..] loans worth €1.4bn )
    Or is that the total amount owed (outstanding principal + arrears)

  6. Cian

    I just had a brilliant idea – the Government should
    1. Buy these loans at the cut-down price.
    2. Evict everyone – use the army to kick people out
    3. Use the now-empty houses as social accommodation


    1. Martco

      I often wondered how many people within this NPL trap are genuine but haven’t engaged because (although the end result will be them losing the house no matter what happens next & they know it) they don’t want likes of Cerberus on their backs for the rest of their lives looking for debt repayment…there was a one off debt amnesty like the driving licenses years ago paid for by govt for 1000 houses that’s surely cheaper than building 1000 houses, no?

      1. Anne

        The ordinary Joe doesn’t get debt right off.. that’s for the banks, and massive discounts are for the Vultures.

        1. b

          that’s not true. there’s a huge amount of people that have got restructured deals. the data is readily available

          1. anne

            No it doesn’t. You might get to park some of the mortgage but the bank will own a percent of the house..

          2. Col

            I’m going to get the biggest mortgage possible and then just stop paying so I can get one of those “restructure” deals. Yay!

        2. Peter Dempsey

          Why should Joe A get a write off and Joe B and John C get refused? Impossible to do this fairly.

  7. Kieran

    If people think these people are on easy street by not paying their mortgage for years,why dont they join the party ,and stop paying theirs

  8. MaryLou's ArmaLite

    Ulster Bank customers have been subsidising these chancers for years, about things they ran out of road

  9. Kieran

    People that think these people are on easy street by not paying their mortgage for years,should really join the party and stop paying theirs.

  10. Anne

    David McWilliams says it best –


    In the past eight years, huge tracts of Ireland have been sold by Nama at deep discounts to vulture funds. This went on under the radar, in effect transferring enormous wealth out of Ireland to foreigners. Maybe it wasn’t the Cromwellian plantations, but it is hard to think of another country whose own government sanctioned such a fire sale of national assets.

    In the next few months, the courts will decide how many of Ireland’s small businesses will be handed over to these funds. This transfer of assets is taking place right under our nose. It is a disaster for the country, for the society and for the capital base of the economy, and yet it is legal.

    But then again, so too was slavery – once.

    1. Peter Dempsey

      Worth 800k. Owe 400k. Offer 303k.

      Why not sell it, repay the 400k and buy a smaller house with the remainder?

      1. b


        why should the bank accept less than is owed when the asset that the loan is secured on is worth way over the loan outstanding

        1. Cian

          If the bank accepts less money than is owed they need to charge other customers more. So higher interest rates. Higher charges.

          1. anne

            That’s the business they’re in…accepting less than they’re owed. It’s called a mortgage.

            There was no talk of any write off of the remaining amount.

          2. Rob_G

            “That’s the business they’re in…accepting less than they’re owed. It’s called a mortgage.”

            ‘Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt’.

          3. anne

            Here you are again quoting me, with nothing to say. The likes of you need the obvious explained.

            At what stage is the tens & hundreds of millions profit passed onto customers? The profit is relative according to that other fool.. there’s always more to be made shur.

          4. SB

            This case particularly annoyed me. They initially offered €150K to settle, looking to get the rest written off. Why would the bank write off hundreds of thousands – and lumping the debt on variable mortgage holders instead – when there’s plenty of equity in the house? And how come the couple are in arrears in the first place, if they can suddenly come up with €303K to offer the bank?

          5. anne

            They were sick..you know had health issues..i.e. couldn’t work. Did you read the article at all?

            they probably begged borrowed & stole from every family member to try & come up with a figure the gougers might be happy with. Are you saying negotiating is bad? The debt was made of arrears.. that’d be interest tacked on, on top of interest… i.e. profit, money that the bank pay 0 percent interest on.

            This is not passed on to every other mortgage holder ye shower of numpties.

            Yer really interested in the financial well being of the vulture fund in question here for some strange reason.

          6. Rob_G

            It is strange example to pick to illustrate the perfidy of the evil banks and vulnerability of the poor homeowners who can’t pay*

            *their €1 million house notwithstanding

          7. anne

            It wasn’t a million as you well know because I posted the ad from Daft for you already… it’s an example of how the vultures operate.

            795k for a house in Dublin is not gonna get you on MTVs cribs or anything..so u might shut ur pie hole.

          8. Cian

            anne you don’t seem to understand money.

            The bank borrows money from bigger banks and lends people that money and the people pay it back with interest, the bank pays back the bigger bank. The bank’s profit is in the difference in interest between what it borrows and lends.

            Even if a person doesn’t pay their repayment – the bank still has to pay the bigger bank. So the bank is out of pocket. So the bank adds that amount to the person’s debt. The bank also incurs the cost of chasing the money, staff, postage, lawyers, days in court. All of this costs need to be paid for.

          9. anne

            Thanks for that lesson again.

            This crowd Shoreline DAC (Designated Activity Company..whatever) who wanted the Gilson family home come hell or high water, purchased a huge portfolio of mortgages from IRBC, at very substantial discounts.

            35 Billion is what the Irish taxpayer put into IRBC.

          10. Anne

            And seeing as how Shoreline DAC, was only set up in 2014, but the Gilson’s remortgaged in 2008, it would appear that they did not take out the loan directly with Shoreline ( if they offer that service even.)

            (i.e. Shoreline got it at a discount, in a bundle)

            Shoreline Residential Designated Activity Company was set up on Wednesday the 12th of February 2014. Their current address is Dublin 2, D02 Yw24, and the company status is Normal. The company’s current directors Thoms Bather, John James Hennessy and Jeffrey Johnston have been the director of 151 other Irish companies between them; 37 of which are now closed. This Irish company shares its Eircode with at least 63 other companies.

          11. Cian

            @anne “35 Billion is what the Irish taxpayer put into IRBC.”
            and how much did they get out? You do realise that the money from the vulture funds for the loan book comes back to the taxpayer?

            How much did IBRC cost in the end?

      2. anne

        They might be attached to the place..

        regardless..this tells you how they operate.. others won’t have as much equity. Others will be out on the streets or in Garda Stations or family hubs, or B n Bs.

        1. Cian

          If someone puts their house up as collateral against a loan – if they don’t pay the loan – their house gets sold.
          If you don’t want to lose your house – don’t use it as collateral.

          1. Owen C

            if they really need their home to live in, they shouldn’t so recklessly use it as collateral for a loan then

          2. Cian

            €100,000 of the mortgage was to cover liability in respect of Mr Gilson’s business. Did you read the article at all?

          3. Owen C


            if you get sick, who should foot the bill for your outstanding obligations? In this case you seem to think the bank should, but surely either private medical insurance (payment protection insurance) or social welfare (ie the taxpayer to now explicitly pay for someone to continue living in their low LTV house) are the correct mechanisms for such a payment? I’d be interested to hear your views on this.

          4. Anne

            OK listen up.
            My views are as follows;
            people get sick, recessions happen – orchestrated as they are. People need to be kept in their homes where possible. Agreements to restructure loans should be put in place asap, so that huge amounts of interest don’t build up. People often get back on their feet, hopefully without losing their home. It’s too late for people whose houses were taken off them with the tracker scandal..

            The Irish gov. are complicit in enslaving us to Vulture funds. We didn’t bail out the banks for this. Nama was a disaster, but not for some.

            I also think it’s gas questioning relatively ordinary peoples’ sense of responsibility, when in the background they borrowed from a basket case of a bank, which the taxpayer had to bail out to the tune of 35 billion.

          5. Owen C


            “People often get back on their feet, hopefully without losing their home”

            They are in arrears what appears to be 8 years (or 20% of the entire duration of the loan), and have been in contact with their lender over the arrears for 4 years. They are both pensioners with health issues. The loan is due for full repayment next year. They are not getting back on their feet in this situation. The situation was unsustainable and the collateral backing up the loan was more than enough to pay back the loan (and leave them with some money to start over). The judge, in a fairly rare occurrence in these situations, was quite critical of their behaviour and unwillingness to sell the home much earlier so that arrears stopped building up.

          6. anne

            The judge also thought the house was underestimated in value..which she was incorrect on.

            It’s all a bit subjective & irrelevant in terms of what equity a judge deems is in a property. She’s not a valuer.

          7. Rob_G

            @ Anne – if someone, even with all of the restructuring and interest-only arrangements in the world, is simply incapable of paying back their mortgage – what then? Should the banks be able to evict then?

          8. anne

            Then the state will have to house them. Or leave them to Garda stations & hotels as they’re doing..

  11. Anne

    Peter McVerry –


    He said that the majority of people now presenting as homeless have come from the private rental sector where they were evicted because the landlord was selling the property or carrying out renovations.

    Fr McVerry also pointed out that there are 43,000 mortgages in distress in the country, what will happen when they are repossessed?

    “That could create an avalanche of homelessness and we won’t be able to cope with it.”

  12. b

    this odd. there’s another poster above with the same name as me. I didn’t make those comments ( the non performance one)

    1. Rob_G

      He has a different avatar… I preferred when BS has those space invader avatars, I was able ot more easily tell the different posters apart.

  13. Anne

    Beaucamps seem to be the solictiors of choice for the Vultures I’ve noticed.

    Also Pepper group.


    Shoreline Residential DAC (Shoreline) purchased a portfolio of mortgage and personal loans from Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Limited. Shoreline appointed Pepper to service this portfolio from 25 August 2014. While Shoreline is not a regulated entity, Pepper is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland to undertake credit servicing.

    Ever try to buy a house that’s been repossessed by a Vulture fund and being managed by Pepper? It’s great crack altogether. Lots of secrecy. The Vultures do seem to be selling properties with the tenants in situ also..they’ve likely been told by the gov. they don’t want the bad press.

Comments are closed.

Sponsored Link