Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
JUSTICE MINISTER Alan Shatter has welcomed a report today that Allied Irish Banks (AIB) is preparing to write-off a portion of some customers’ mortgage debts in the new year.
The Irish Examiner reports today that the bank’s head of arrears Garry Stran has said that about 30 per cent of borrowers who have had mortgages restructured and are working with the bank could have a portion of their debt written off.
According to the paper, he said that writing off debt “where people are doing the very best they can is absolutely appropriate” but ruled out any wholesale debt forgiveness.
Shatter said that the comments were welcome and said that it was of “crucial importance” that debt forgiveness be an option but only in limited circumstances.
He said in a statement: “It is clear that any such arrangements can only apply to those who truly cannot pay as opposed to those who will not pay and that there cannot be “wholesale debt forgiveness”.
It is, however, of crucial importance that debt forgiveness be an option available and applied by financial institutions in dealing with the circumstances of individuals under enormous financial stress and who are in reality effectively insolvent.
The Minister said that he had consistently pointed out the importance of banks and other financial institutions engaging in debt forgiveness “where it is clearly warranted” and where there was no prospect of a person being able to discharge their debt fully.
Shatter also confirmed that the long-awaited Insolvency Bill will be enacted through both the Dáil and the Seanad by 20 December with a view to it being operative early next year.
The legislation proposes that a person with debts of between €20,000 and €3 million, including mortgage debt, could enter a personal insolvency arrangement whereby their debts are taken over by a trustee who deals with creditors.
If debtors do not agree to the arrangements then a borrower can seek to declare themselves bankrupt.
Crucially the law proposes to reduce the amount of time it takes for a person to discharge themselves from this bankruptcy from 12 to three years but some argue the law does not go far enough.
Concerns have been raised about debtors having to sell items of sentimental value such as jewellery, what defines a reasonable standard of living after items are sold to help settle debts and how much discretion is left to the banks and the courts.
Shatter said of the legislation in his statement today: “For debtors it holds out the prospect of their continuing to occupy and own their family home and of real hope for the future.”
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Sentence is still too lenient. 4 times the legal limit, kills one person and paralysis for another.
I listened to the mother of Kate being interviewed on Newstalk and thought she was a lovely, brave woman going through a terrible time. She did not think it would serve any purpose a drunk driver going to prison. She asked that no one get into a car being driven by someone who had been drinking.
We would all be safer if you drink but not drive.
“Out of line with other decided cases” – which clearly must have been too lenient as well! So judges perpetuate their inadequate sentencing because of precedent.
It seems to be the very flawed system on which our entire legal system operates. Basically an original mistake gets extended forever.
This again leaves a huge question mark over the severity of the sentence handed out yesterday to the ex fireman who had consensual sex with a 16 year old and got 7 years in prison. Murdering one person and paralysing another is only four years.
You can’t have consensual sex with a minor. They cannot give consent. This, however, is a disgrace and no deterrent. Judges are totally out of touch with the real world.
If I had too much to drink, killed someone with a weapon and claimed it was an accident? What sentence would I get, If any and the judicial system is a joke in this country.
As I said yesterday completely incompetent Judges…..joke
How the Fcuk is that allowed?
Politicians allow it, they have a bar in their workplace and consume alcohol while working.
They should have doubled his sentence for having the neck to appeal. Outrageous decision.
This country and its judicial system are an absolute joke. What kind of an example does this give. 4 years for what he did. His first sentence was too lenient in my eyes.
An embarrassment
Wonder if I paralysed a judges daughter would I just get the 1 year?
Hold on went from seven to four years. He should of been dragged out and shot.
Can this also set a precedent,for appeal, for that drink drivers sentence last week? On the basis of this, what sentence should have been imposed on the idiot in Donegal. The judiciary in this country is a shambles.
The problem seems to be that there is no central authority issuing guidelines so you have each judge in their own little fiefdom sentencing people according to their own interpretation of the law. We really need minimum sentences and a system where if a judge feels that a particular case warrants a lesser sentence due to mitigating circumstances the case is referred to a higher court.
There should be a mandatory minimum sentence for anyone who kills or maims another person by driving while drunk. Say 12 years and lifetime ban from driving with no chance of appeal, this would act as a good deterrent.
€206877
This is how much the state will save by this appeal. Its in the states interest to grant these appeals. This is why we have laughable sentencing laws. The state is far more interested in money than its citizens. We have seen this again and again. Money trumps life.
http://www.iprt.ie/prison-facts-2
How much will the paralysed women receive for care help?
If only Dexter Morgan was real
Is that judge off his nut? If anything the original sentence was too lenient!
It shows the courts are getting more comfortable with this type of crime hence the low sentence
So they’re trying to extend the sentence in that Donegal case while reducing the sentence in this one? Does our legal system have any clue what it’s doing?
Another nonsense sentence for causing such devestation due to being an idiot behind the wheel driving drunk. These judges are clearly blotto when they hand down these terms.
Who cares what you said.
F*ck off troll.
10 years . End of story
Sentencing in this country especially for drink driving road accidents are a disgrace.
A central tenet of democracy is that the branches of Government must be independent of each other. The executive enacts legislation and the judiciary interprets the wording of a given statute when it is tested by way of using it to prosecute a crime. The judges’ interpretation becomes a precedent for other cases of a similar nature into the future. This is called “common law” and is equally as binding as legislation, and is used throughout the land. Sentencing is limited by a variety of factors: legislation, “mandatory sentencing”, and the concept of “fairness.” This chap’s sentence has to be proportionate to those who previously did similar and with a similar outcome. The Victim Impact Statement serves no function other than to give the victims a voice (make them “feel better”.)
Excuse the language but that’s a FN joke. No justice here at all.
have your say