CORK REPOSSESSION CASES

1

Mortgage Repossession Hearings before the Cork County Registrar: Myth versus Reality Seamus Coffey Department of Economics, University College Cork

CORK REPOSSESSION CASES

2

Repossession Hearings before the Cork County Registrar: Myth versus Reality

1 Introduction During 2015 the outcomes in 892 civil possession cases were tracked in the lists of Cork County Registrar. The data was collected across 24 sittings from April to November and is limited to possession cases for residential property involving mortgages. In total 1,683 individual case listings are included in the sample. Of these 79 resulted in the granting of a possession order while 182 were struck out or adjourned generally. The data show that if 100 cases were listed before the County Registrar the outcomes, on average, would be: 

12 could not proceed as notice would not be served on the borrower



9 would be struck out



2 would be adjourned generally to no future date



2 would be transferred to the Judge’s List for a hearing there



20 would be adjourned as per the practice direction



40 would be adjourned on the request of the lenders



15 would see the lender proceed with their application for a possession order Of which: 

10 would be refused by the County Registrar and the case adjourned



5 possession orders would be granted Of which:  4 would be PPRs or former PPRs  1 would be a BTL and  at least 2 would be vacant

This paper describes the dataset, the outcomes in the cases heard and, in particular, some of the characteristics of the loans when orders are granted and refused. There is also some

CORK REPOSSESSION CASES

3

summary data from the Cork City and Cork County Sheriffs on the number of evictions that have taken place. The findings show that the most common outcome when a case is listed is for it to be adjourned. The banks proceed with an application for a possession order in around 15 per cent of listing and a possession order is granted in around one-third of these. For the period analysed, more than twice as many cases were struck out or adjourned generally compared to those cases which resulted in the granting of a possession order. So far in 2015, 31 possession orders have been executed by the County and City Sheriffs and, of these, 23 of the properties were vacant at the time the possession was taken. 2 Background The motivation for the study is relatively straightforward. Following the repair of the lacuna in the law identified in the Dunne Judgment and the setting of Mortgage Arrears Resolution Targets (MART) for lenders there was a very large increase in legal proceedings issued against mortgage borrowers beginning in the middle of 2013. Figure 1 Court Proceedings Issued Number of court proceedings issued by lenders for PDH properties, 2009-2015 3600

Court Proceedings Issued

3000

Number

2400 1800 1200 600 0 2009 2010 2011 2012 Source: Financial Regulator: Mortgage Arrears Statistics

2013

2014

2015

CORK REPOSSESSION CASES

4

In the past two years 20,000 legal proceedings have been issued in the courts for possession of Primary Dwelling House (PDH) properties.1 The increase in legal proceedings resulted in many references to a ‘tsunami of repossessions’ and the motivation of this study is to see if evidence of this impending tsunami can be observed in the courts. So far it cannot. There is going to be an increase in the number of court orders granted and this can already be seen in the aggregate data published by the Financial Regulator as shown in Figure 2. Figure 2 Court Possession Orders Number of possession orders granted and number of court-ordered repossessions executed for PDHs, 2009-2015 500

Number

400

Court Orders Granted Court-Ordered Repossessions

300 200 100 0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Source: Financial Regulator: Mortgage Arrears Statistics

2014

2015

Figure 2 also shows that the number of court-ordered repossessions that are executed is around 40 per cent of the number of court orders that are granted. 1 With most BTL mortgages lenders can appoint a rent receiver to the property rather than seek a possession order. The receiver can manage the property, if desired, and collect the rent but also has the authority to sell the property on behalf of the bank.

CORK REPOSSESSION CASES

5

3 Sittings, Cases, Applicants and Respondents in the Sample Sittings and Individual Listings The data was collected in the civil possession hearings of the County Registrar in the Easter, Trinity and Michaelmas court terms of 2015. Most of the sittings were heard by the Cork County Registrar though some were heard before visiting registrars.2 Table 1 Cork County Registrar civil possession hearings in the sample Term

Sitting

Easter

Trinity

Michaelmas

Total

1 2 3 4 5 6* 7 8 9 10 11* 12 13 14* 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Date April 13, 2015 April 15, 2015 April 20, 2015 May 11, 2015 May 13, 2015 May 18, 2015 June 10, 2015 June 15, 2015 June 24, 2015 July 08, 2015 July 15, 2015 July 22, 2015 July 29, 2015 July 30, 2015 October 07, 2015 October 08, 2015 October 14, 2015 October 21, 2015 October 28, 2015 November 04, 2015 November 11, 2015 November 18, 2015 November 25, 2015 November 26, 2015 December 09, 2015 December 16, 2015

Total Removed Relevant Listings Listings Listings 69 4 65 81 1 80 50 1 49 46 6 42 96 3 93 62 1 61 102 1 101 52 1 51 64 2 62 100 5 95 28 0 28 99 3 97 90 3 87 87 2 85 89 6 83 84 1 83 57 1 56 50 2 48 91 2 89 71 1 70 38 4 34 90 1 89 69 1 68 69 1 68

1,734

2

These sitting are those marked with an asterisk.

50

1,683

CORK REPOSSESSION CASES The first sitting of the County Registrar’s court to form part of the sample was the first sitting of the 2015 Easter term which took place on the 13th of April.3 A further 23 sittings were held up to the 26th of November. Table 1 shows that they were a total of 1,734 individual case listings across the 24 sittings.4 Of these 51 were removed from the sample. Removed cases include civil possession cases involving non-bank plaintiffs for all property and cases with bank lenders for non-residential property. A number of listings were removed because they were not included on the published legal diary.5 Accounting for these issues means that the sample to be analysed included 1,683 individual listings across the 24 sittings. Appearances by Separate Cases Table 2 shows the number of times separate cases were listed in the sample. It can be seen that the 1,683 individual listings correspond to 892 separate cases. Over 80 per cent of the listings relate to cases seen multiple times in the sample. Table 2 Number of list appearances for separate cases Appearances Cases Per cent Listings Per cent One 323 36.2 323 19.2 Two 354 39.7 708 42.1 Three 208 23.3 624 37.1 Four 7 0.8 28 1.7 Total 892 100.0 1,683 100.0

3 The first sitting attended was that of the 16th March 2015 and the data collection was designed based on this observation of the process. 4 The table shows that there will be five more sittings of the County Registrar before the end of the Michaelmas term. The listings from these sittings will be added to the data once available. 5 The outcomes of these listings were recorded but could not be linked to a case reference number. All cases included as late additions to sittings were adjourned or given a new return date.

6

CORK REPOSSESSION CASES

7

Table 3 shows when the legal proceedings for these cases were issued. The Dunne Judgment in 2011 meant that new legal proceedings could not be initiated until the lacuna introduced by the 2009 Land and Conveyancing Act was remedied. Table 3 Number of cases by year of filing Year Cases Per cent 2009 1 0.1 2010 3 0.3 2011 0 0.0 2012 4 0.5 2013 116 13.0 2014 411 46.1 2015 357 40.0 Total 892 100.0

Respondent Borrowers Table 4 shows the number of respondent borrowers named in each case. Just over 40 per cent of cases are against a single-named borrower while four of the cases had three named respondents. It can be seen that the majority of cases were against joint borrowers. Table 4 Number of respondent borrowers Number of Respondents 1 2 3 Total

Cases 363 524 5 892

Per cent 40.7 58.7 0.6 100.0

CORK REPOSSESSION CASES

8 4 What happens

Actions of the lenders Notice not served and/or case struck out. In order for a case to be heard the respondent borrower must be served formal notice of the proceedings. Table 5 shows that of the 1,683 case listing, 204 could not proceed because notice had not served on the borrowers in advance of the sitting. Table 5 Instances of notice not served and cases struck out

Notice Not Served Case Struck Out Inactive Listings Active Listings Total Listings

Listings Per cent 204 12.1 151 9.0 355 21.1 1,328 78.9 1,683 100.0

Service issues may arise if the borrowers cannot be located to have notice of the proceedings served on them or because the borrower has engaged with the bank following the issuing of the legal proceedings and the bank has decided not to effect formal service on the borrower prior to the date the case is listed to appear. When a case comes before the court that has not been served a new return date for the case is given to a future sitting of the County Registrar. The median gap to the next return date for these cases is 84 days. Table 5 also shows that 151 cases were struck out. The reasons, where available, why lenders asked for cases to be struck out are given in Table 6.

CORK REPOSSESSION CASES

9

Table 6 Reason why cases are struck out Reason

Struck Out

Restructure Agreed Resolved Legal Issue Surrendered Property Sold Arrears Cleared Arrears Capitalised Loan Cleared Term Extension Bankruptcy Resumed Payments Not Stated Total

21 10 6 8 6 7 2 1 1 1 1 87 151

Per Cent 14.3 7.1 4.3 4.3 4.3 3.6 1.4 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 57.9 100.0

Cases that proceed. Table 5 shows that, after the 355 inactive listings for reasons of service or because they were struck out, there are 1,328 active listing in the sample. Table 7 gives the initial action of the applicants when these were called in court. It can be seen that by far the dominant action of the applicants is to adjourn the proceedings which occurred in more than 80 per cent of active listings. Applicants proceeded with their application for the possession order in less than 20 per cent of active listing. The table also shows that nearly 27per of the listings in the sample were adjourned as per a practice direction of the President of the Circuit Court. This practice direction requires an adjournment on the first occasion all possession cases for residential property are listed after service has been effected and accounted for just under onethird of the adjournment applications in the sample by the lenders.

CORK REPOSSESSION CASES

10

Table 7 Actions of applicants by lender Action Listings Per cent Practice Direction Adjournment 355 26.7 Other Adjournment Applications 721 54.3 All Adjournments 1,076 81.0 Proceed with Application for Possession Order 244 18.4 Strike Out the Proceedings 6 0.5 No Instructions/Not Present 2 0.2 Total 1,328 100.0

In 686 out of the 892 cases in the sample the banks have never proceeded with the application for a possession order in the sittings observed. Of course, this includes most of the cases which were struck out (though there were two cases struck out where the lender had previously proceeded with their application for a possession order), the 61 instances where proceedings have yet to be served to the borrowers, and the 145 cases which were adjourned per the practice direction on their last court listing, i.e. the lenders could not yet proceed with their application as this adjournment is automatic. The most recent action by the applicants in the 892 cases is given in Table 8. Table 8 Most recent actions of the applicants in their cases Cases Notice Not Served Case Struck Out Inactive Cases Practice Direction Adjournment Other Adjournment All Adjournments Proceed Strike Out Active Cases Total Cases

Cases

61 151 212 145 369 514 160 6 680 892

Per cent 6.8 16.9 23.8 16.3 41.4 57.6 17.9 0.7 76.2 100.0

CORK REPOSSESSION CASES

11

Table 7 showed that in the individual listings there have been 1,076 applications to adjourn to a later date the repossession proceedings being taken by the lenders while Table 8 showed that there are 514 cases where on the most recent listing of the case the lenders sought to adjourn the proceedings The reasons for these adjournments are given in Table 9. Table 9 Reasons for adjournment applications Reason

All Adjournments Per cent Applications, listings

Practice Direction Adjournment Alternative Repayment Arrangement Standard Financial Statement received Making an Application to amend the Civil Bill Waiting for a Certificate of Rateable Valuation Insolvency Service Involved Property is up for sale Other Reason Total

355 449 86 62 26 13 41 44 1,076

33.0 41.7 8.0 5.7 2.4 1.2 3.8 4.1 100.0

Most Recent Per Adjournments cent Applications, cases 145 28.2 205 39.9 48 9.3 37 7.2 21 4.1 7 1.4 17 3.3 34 6.6 514 100.0

What the borrowers do Across all 1,683 listings the borrowers are present and/or represented in court around 26 per cent of the time. If proceedings have not been served, the expected attendance of the borrowers is to be absent.

CORK REPOSSESSION CASES

12

Table 10 Borrower attendance by listing Borrower Count Per cent Absent 1,042 61.9 Present 212 12.6 Represented 211 12.5 Both 14 0.8 Sub-total 1,479 87.9 Not Served 204 12.1 Total 1,683 100.0

Even taking account of issues of service the borrower is absent in over 70 per cent of the occasions when proceedings that have been served are before the County Registrar. However, the rate of borrower attendance varies by the action the bank intends taking in the case. Table 11 Borrower attendance by action of applicants, per cent Borrower Count Absent, % Present, % Represented, % Both, % Total, %

Strike Adjourn Of which: Proceed Total Out PDA Other 157 1,076 355 721 244 1,479 66.5 77.8 91.7 74.1 40.6 70.4 18.0 9.6 3.2 12.4 30.3 14.3 14.4 12.2 5.1 12.9 26.2 14.3 1.1 0.4 0.0 0.7 2.8 1.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Borrowers are absent more than 90 per cent of the time when the proceedings are to be struck out. Borrowers are absent around 75 per cent of the time when the proceedings are to be adjourned. The attendance for practice direction adjournments, i.e. the first time a case appears on the list after being served, is higher than for other adjournments in on-going cases. Borrowers are absent for 66 per cent of practice direction adjournments and for almost 80 per cent of other

CORK REPOSSESSION CASES

13

adjournments. When the lender wishes to proceed with their application for a possession order the borrower is absent around 40 per cent of the time.

5 The Outcomes Outcomes by individual listing and separate case The outcomes seen across the 1,683 individual listings and 892 separate cases are shown in Table 12. Cases that have not been served are given a new return date. Cases that are adjourned are adjourned to a later date while cases that are adjourned generally are not given a future date but the applicant is at liberty to apply to the court to re-enter the proceedings against the borrower. Some cases which are adjourned are transferred to the Judge’s List. This will happen if the borrower indicated to the County Registrar that they have a valid legal defence which requires adjudication by a judge. There are other minor matters which require a case being transferred to the Judge’s List. If this issue is resolved the matter may return to the Registrar’s List. Table 12 Outcomes by individual listing and separate case Outcome New Return Date Case Struck Out Adjourned Generally Case Adjourned Transferred to Judge's List Order Granted Total

Listing Per cent Case Per cent 203 12.1 61 6.8 151 9.0 151 15.1 34 2.0 32 2.9 1,176 69.9 531 62.8 40 2.4 38 3.9 79 4.7 79 8.5 1,683 100.0 892 100.0

CORK REPOSSESSION CASES

14

In the sample, possession orders were granted in around five percent of listings with 8.5 per cent of the cases concluding with a possession order (so far).6 The circumstances surrounding the granting of these possession orders is addressed in Section 6. Of the 79 orders, 30 orders were granted in the six sittings of the Easter term; 40 were granted in the eight sittings of the Trinity term; while only nine have been granted in the ten sittings so far in the Michaelmas term. When a case requires a new return date because service has not been effected the median gap to the next return date is 84 days. When a case as adjourned the median gap to the next listing is 119 days. Eight adjournments of more than 300 days have been granted. Table 13 Summary statistics of time to next listing, days

Return Date Adjourn Date

Minimum Maximum Mean Median Count 13 203 87.6 84 203 7 364 132.7 119 1,174

Outcomes compared to bank actions. The opening actions of the applicants and the outcomes of each listing are given in Table 14. It can be seen that of the 204 occasions when service had not been effected the case was given a new return date for 203 of them. The sole exception was transferred to the Judge’s List and this case has since return to the Registrar’s List. Almost all strike out applications made by the lenders are accepted but there have been six instances where strike applications have been refused. These are because jurisdictional issues with possible cost implications could not be clarified for the court. All adjournment requests 6

There is one case where an order was granted that subsequently appeared on the list for a later sitting at which it was adjourned generally. It is possible that this listing was in error.

CORK REPOSSESSION CASES

15

have been acceded to with most of these back to the County Registrar, though 34 were adjourned generally where an application must be made to re-enter the proceedings, while 20 adjournment applications resulted in the case being transferred to the Judge’s List. Lenders proceeded with their application for a possession order in 244 (14.5 per cent) of the 1,683 listing in the sample. The most common outcome is for these applications to be adjourned. This was the outcome in 146 out of the 244 applications made. The lenders were granted 79 possession orders. These represents 32.4 per cent of the occasions when they applied for an order and 4.7 per cent of the listings in the sample. Table 14 Outcomes compared to opening action of applicant

Applicant Actions Not Served Strike Out None Adjourn PDA Other Adjourn Proceed Total

204 157 2 355 721 244 1,683

New Return Date 203 203

Struck Out 151 0 0 0 0 151

Case Outcomes Adjourned Adjourned Generally 0 6 0 2 1 350 33 672 0 146 34 1,176

Judge's Order List Granted 1 0 0 0 0 4 0 16 0 19 79 40 79

There are 75 cases that have re-appeared in the sample after a previous application for a possession order was adjourned. In 42 of these cases the lenders requested an adjournment at the next sitting with the most common reason being because the borrower was engaging in some form or another. Two of the cases were struck out and there were 31 instances of the lenders making another application for a possession order. Of these 31, 19 were once again refused and adjourned by the County Registrar, three were transferred to the Judge’s List and nine orders were granted. Of the 19 that were adjourned

CORK REPOSSESSION CASES

16

a second time against the wishes of the lender7, seven have re-appeared before the court. In three of these the banks made an application to adjourn the proceedings even though on the previous two listings they have proceeded with their applications for possession orders. There are four cases in the sample where the banks have proceeded three times for a possession order. None of these have resulted in the granting of a possession order. Two of them have been transferred to the Judge’s List and two have been adjourned to a future sitting of the County Registrar. Value of borrower attendance Length of adjournments. Borrowers get longer adjournments if they are present in court. Table 15 shows that the median length across all adjournments is 119 days. However, the median for borrowers who are absent is 112 days compared to 133 days when borrowers are present. This difference is largest for practice direction adjournments which are required when cases first appear after service has been effected. Borrowers who are present in court get a median practice direction adjournment of 153 days compared to 105 days for borrowers who are absent. The only exception is for adjournments imposed by the County Registrar. Here when borrowers are present the median adjournment is 109 which is not significantly different from the median when the borrower is absent.8

7

This only refers to actions and outcomes in the observed sample and does not necessarily represent to overall number of possession applications the lenders have made in these cases. 8 The benefit for these borrowers of attending in this instance is shown in is shown in the Table 21.

CORK REPOSSESSION CASES

17

Table 15 Length of adjournments in days by presence of borrowers Borrower Minimum Maximum Mean Median Count All Adjournments Absent 7 364 126.1 112 797 Present 28 329 146.7 142 377 TOTAL 7 364 132.7 119 1,174 Of which: Practice Direction Adjournments Absent 56 Present 28 Sub-total 28

224 252 252

107.4 151.1 122.8

105 153 112

234 116 350

Applicant Adjournments Absent 22 Present 35 Sub-total 22

364 329 364

134.7 160.5 140.0

120 154 126

531 139 670

Registrar Adjournments Absent 7 Present 36 Sub-total 7

328 245 245

121.9 126.7 124.4

108 109 109

32 122 154

Affecting the outcome. If borrowers are present orders are less likely to be granted when the lenders wish to proceed with their application for a possession order. Excluding those were the possession order was granted by consent there were 234 instances where the lenders wished to proceed with their application.9 Of the 98 cases where the borrower was absent a possession order was granted 65 times (66.3 per cent). Of the 136 cases where the borrower was present an order was granted 4 times (2.9 per cent).

9

This excludes the ten instances where the orders were granted by consent. In total there were 244 instances where applicants proceeded with their application for the possession order. These nine instances were excluded from the discussion in this section as the borrower was not present to seek to affect the outcome.

CORK REPOSSESSION CASES

18

Table 16 Outcomes of proceeded cases by attendance of borrower Borrower Absent Present Consent Total

Total Adjourned Adjourned Generally 98 25 0 136 121 0 10 244 146 0

Judge's Order List Granted 8 65 11 4 10 19 79

Struck Out 0 0 0

6 Orders Granted and Refused There have been 244 occasions where the lenders have proceeded with their application for a possession order before the County Registrar. Of these 79 (32.4 per cent) have concluded with the granting of a possession order. This section analyses the 79 orders granted and the 165 instances when an order was refused. Orders granted The borrower was absent from the court in more than 80 per cent of the instances where an order is granted. Borrowers have been present and/or represented in court when 13 orders have been granted but in nine of these the borrower was consenting to the order. There were 4 borrowers present who did not consent to the order being granted against them though none explicitly requested that the order not be granted. Table 17 shows that more than half of the orders have been granted against single-named borrowers. Table 17 Borrowers with orders granted against them Respondents Number Per cent One 41 51.9 Two 38 48.1 Three 0 0.0 Total 79 100.0

CORK REPOSSESSION CASES

19

The history, where available, of the loans associated with the possession orders is given in Table 19. The data here only relate to those loans where these details are provided court and not to the full set of loans on which the 79 possession orders were granted. Unsurprisingly most of the loans originated between 2005 and 2008 while most of the first defaults took place in 2010. There are 24 loans in the set of 79 orders granted where both the originating year and the year of first default are available. Of these 24, eight had defaulted within two years of the loan drawdown and another eight had defaulted four years after their drawdown. Table 18 Loan milestones (where available) where orders are granted

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total

Loan Year First Default Number Per cent Number Per cent 1 2.0

2 1 1 5 7 13 9 9 2 1

3.9 2.0 2.0 9.8 13.7 25.5 17.6 17.6 3.9 2.0

51

100.0

1

3.0

4 6 3 11 5 1 2

12.1 18.2 9.1 33.3 15.2 3.0 6.1

33

100.0

Last Payment Number Per cent

1 2 6 12 13 9 16 8 67

1.5 3.0 9.0 17.9 19.4 13.4 23.9 11.9 100.0

CORK REPOSSESSION CASES

20

The current balance outstanding on the loan(s) was given in 60 of the 79 instances when a possession order was granted. The median balance was €227,0000. There were four orders granted with outstanding balances of less than €100,000 and five orders where the amount owing was greater than €400,000. The original loan amount was provided when 39 of the orders were granted (median €202,000) and it is possible to compare the original amount drawn down to the current outstanding balance in 33 of these. The ratios of the current balance outstanding to the original amount drawn down are summarized in Table 19. Table 19 Current balance, payment and arrears (where available) where order granted

Current Balance, € Ratio of Current Balance to Loan Amount Monthly Payment, € Level of Arrears, € Arrears in Monthly Payments Equivalent

Maximum 836,000

P75 Mean 295,758 244,640

Median 227,294

P25 Minimum Count 167,045 43,000 60

2.01

1.27

1.21

1.16

1.07

0.88

33

4,000

1,143

1,005

885

682

258

53

122,583

65,222

52,412

50,000

33,090

15,000

72

98.70

61.0

52.23

51.98

43.12

16.72

53

There were only three instances (when the figures were provided) of orders being granted when the current balance was less than the original amount drawn down. In all other instances where such a comparison was possible the current balance exceeded the original amount with a median ratio of 1.16. The level of arrears on the mortgage accounts were given in 176 listings relating to 160 separate cases. The arrears in the instances where an order was granted are also summarised in Table 19 with the arrears also given in terms of the current monthly payment (where available).

CORK REPOSSESSION CASES

21

There were six instances of orders being granted where the amount of arrears was less than €20,000. However, on average, the arrears in these cases were equal to over 40 monthly payments or nearly 3½ years of missed payments. Only one of these six accounts with had any payment since the end of 2013. When an order is granted a stay is usually imposed meaning that the order cannot be executed until the period of the stay has elapsed. As Table 20 shows the most common stays are for 6 months or 3 months. Between them these account for more than 70 per cent of the stays imposed. Only four of the orders were granted with no stay in place while a stay is 18 months was imposed in one instance. Table 20 Stays on orders granted Stay None 1 month 2 months 3 months 4 months 6 months 9 months 12 months 18 months Total

Orders 4 3 4 17 1 39 5 5 1 79

Per cent Absent Consented Present 5.1 3 1 0 3.8 0 3 0 5.1 4 0 0 21.5 15 1 1 1.3 1 0 0 49.4 34 4 1 6.3 4 1 0 6.3 4 0 1 1.3 0 0 1 100.0 65 10 4

Some details are provided on the type of property against which the order is granted. In the main it will be PDHs or properties bought with a PDH mortgage which became BTLs. Across the 79 orders granted, 35 of the properties were described as PDHs, 10 as BTLs and 1 as a holiday home. 17 of the properties were known to be vacant at the time order was granted

CORK REPOSSESSION CASES

22

while several others were assumed to be vacant. Many of those classed as BTL were being let out but the rent was not being paid to the lender to cover the mortgage. Who doesn’t have orders granted against them? As shown in Table 14 there were 165 occasions where the lenders had an application for a possession order refused. Of these, 146 were adjourned back to the County Registrar and 19 were transferred the Judge’s List. In 133 out of these 165 instances of a possession order being refused the borrowers were present or represented in court. Some summary characteristics where orders are refused are provided in Table 21. Table 21 Loan milestones (where available) where orders are refused Loan Year Number Per cent 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total

1

4.4

3

13.0

1 2 2 2 6 5

4.4 13.0 8.7 8.7 26.1 21.7

23

100.0

First Default Number Per cent

1

5.6

3

16.7

4 1 3 4 1 1

22.2 5.6 16.7 22.2 5.6 5.6

17

100.0

Last Payment Number Per cent

1 1 1 8 5 8 13 18 55

1.8 1.8 1.8 14.6 9.1 14.6 23.6 32.7 100.0

CORK REPOSSESSION CASES

23

Although these loans show more evidence of more recent payments when compared to those loans where orders were granted it can be seen that there are three instances where the last payment on the account was in 2010 or earlier with the possession order still being refused. There are 31 instances here where the last payment received was in 2014 or 2015. In 16 of these both the amount of the last payment and the required monthly payment were provided to the Cork. For these 16 the median amount of the last payment received was €361. This compares to a median required monthly payment of €1,260. Some of the characteristics of these accounts are summarised in Table 22. Table 22 Current balance, payment and arrears (where available) where order refused

Current Balance Ratio of Current Balance to Loan Amount Monthly Payment, € Level of Arrears, € In Monthly Payments Equivalent

Maximum P75 736,048 327,803

Mean 269,788

Median 241,080

P25 Minimum 178,336 38,000

Count 48

1.40

1.09

1.00

1.02

.87

.59

17

4,380

1,581

1,285

1,071

844

331

44

214,769

78,640

59,640

51,000

35,000

8,846

75

97.7

70.8

52.7

49.5

38.6

16.52

38

7 Repossessions and Evictions Figures from the Cork City and Cork County Sheriffs show if the possession orders granted are translating into evictions. The following is from the Cork City Sheriff’s office: The number of repossessions lodged in the City Sheriff’s Office to date in 2015 is 10. Six of these Orders were on behalf of lending institutions and of these three are pending and three have been executed. Of the three executed two were vacant. The Cork County Sheriff’s office have said the following:

CORK REPOSSESSION CASES

24

49 repossession orders were lodged in the County Sheriff’s Office in 2014 and 73 to date in 2015. Of the 49 orders in 2014, 28 were executed, although 25 of them were unoccupied properties. Of the 2015 orders, 28 have been executed, with 21 of those properties unoccupied at the time of the eviction. In total across Cork there have been 31 possession orders executed to the end of November. Of these, 23 were vacant at the time the possession was taken. The data from the courts indicate the many properties are vacant at the time the order is granted but it is likely that others only become vacant after the stay has passed as execution of the order by the Sheriff becomes imminent. 8 Conclusion We know there has been a very large increase in the number of legal proceedings issued in relation to defaulting mortgages. The dataset here allows an insight into the outcomes that result in the cases that have been heard before the Cork County Registrar from April to November of 2015. The findings suggest that the borrowers and the lenders are coming to alternative repayment arrangements in a large number of cases and that many of the proceedings will be struck out or adjourned generally. But there will also be a rise in the number of orders granted. Even then there is still some opportunity for the borrower and the lender to reach an agreement meaning that not all orders will be executed. There will be a rise in repossessions in cases where properties are vacant or where borrowers are making absolutely no effort to engage with their lender but it will not be a tsunami.