Michelle Mulherin (Mayo, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the matters raised in this Bill. As long as many of our citizens struggle with mortgage debt, we have to keep revisiting this issue. The banks have been given targets and timelines for restructuring and dealing with individuals in arrears. I welcome that the number of private dwelling home mortgage accounts in arrears declined by 25,000 during 2014 and that more than 115,000 restructuring arrangements are in place. However, home owners in mortgage arrears continue to encounter serious problems with their banks despite assurances given by the latter to the Taoiseach and the Government.

The stories that home owners recount of their experiences in dealing with banks bring into doubt the latters' assurances that they are engaging meaningfully or doing their utmost to avoid putting people out of their homes. The banks are occupying parallel universes when it comes to dealing with mortgage arrears. These problems are manifest in the county registrars' courts around the country. These courts are where we can find empirical evidence of how the banks are dealing with people. The cases are often uncontested because people are overwhelmed, owe the money and end up in court. The issues that are being revealed are very troubling. In many cases, people have made no payments on their mortgages for three or four years, which is a considerable length of time for any family or individual to live with the fear of losing a home.

The legal proceedings for repossessing a home, which the banks are entitled to pursue, appear to career along with little regard to the process the Government has put in place whereby banks engage meaningfully with people in arrears to ensure that putting someone out of his or her home is the last resort. On the legal side, civil bills issue and proceedings go undefended because the individuals concerned believe they are dealing directly with the banks and therefore do not file a defence. The solicitor goes into court to say the case is undefended and that there was no appearance but the individual, who is representative him or herself, complains that he or she contacted the bank repeatedly only to be put on to different people each time. There is no resolution other than questions about how the debt will be paid. The individual might be asked to submit a proposal but there is still no resolution. There is no meaningful engagement and it appears in many cases that individuals are getting through to glorified call centres where their details are taken and questions are asked about what is going to be done. Unless these individuals can get help from MABS or legal practitioners working on a pro bonobasis, they are left high and dry by the banks.

We all know if we do not pay our mortgages the banks are entitled to repossess our properties but that is an old conversation and we should have moved on to the point where the banks recognise they have been rescued at the expense of the taxpayer. They owe more to society than their obligations under a mortgage agreement and they need to be continuously pressed in that regard. In County Mayo, 100 cases for final possession orders are being pursued by the banks every month. Many of these are adjourned repeatedly because banks cannot present evidence that they have complied with the code of conduct on mortgage arrears. Solicitors are being instructed by the banks while customers in arrears are trying to engage. It is ridiculous that such people should end up in court. There is no evidence that the banks are distinguishing between people who were unwise to borrow in the first place and have no hope of repaying the loan, strategic defaulters and those who are in difficulty because they lost their jobs and who may come into better times in the future.

The Government has to press harder on the banks. With money never cheaper to borrow, the same provision given to State in extending the terms of repayment of the national debt should be offered to borrowers whereby they could extend the terms of the loan on their family homes to 50 or 60 years. Those who will never afford to repay their loans need a more extensive mortgage to rent scheme to allow them to remain in their homes. This is a pressing issue that is not going away.

See this speech in context