Gerard Craughwell (Independent) | Oireachtas source

On Committee Stage, I pointed out that we have been caught in this position because receivers are obliged, when they take possession of an asset, to maximise its value for the person who appoints the receiver. I recently came across a case involving an excellent landlord who got into difficulty. He kept the rent for a group of people I know at the same level for the best part of seven years.He is a decent man trying to run a business. Given that he had overstretched himself with a couple of other apartments and had lost tenants, he suddenly found himself in a situation in which there was a repossession order on the lot. He agreed to allow the business to go into receivership and the receiver decided vacant possession was the only way. This resulted in seven families being given their marching orders. That is wrong.

The mistake we made when we bailed out the banks was that we did not force them, where they were taking back buy-to-let properties on which the landlords were unable to meet the costs, to establish letting agencies and run the tenancies themselves. If we had, we might not have the homeless problem and rental escalation we have today. That is spilt milk and there is very little we can do about it. While I am open to what the Minister of State has to say about amendment No. 33, I am inclined to support it.