ALMOST ONE in four cases listed before the High Court's weekly chancery summonses hearing yesterday resulted in orders for possession. The court also heard concern expressed about legal costs for householders facing such proceedings.
Orders were granted for nine properties, including three family homes, before Mr Justice Brian McGovern. Thirty-eight cases had been listed.
In one case involving a family home, the defendant, a mother of four, broke down in tears as she told the court how her partner had to give up on his landscaping business as there was very little work available, and that their four young children all lived at home.
She said she hoped to discharge arrears of €18,500 through the sale of 17 acres of land adjacent to the house. Counsel for Start Mortgages reminded the court that one acre of the land was subject to a query as someone was laying claim to it, and that arrears of €1,000 a month were accruing as "only €100 a week is being paid".
The judge said that while he was mindful of the defendant's situation, he had to follow the law. However, he granted a stay of six months on the order for possession to give the defendant and her partner "a chance to get back on their feet".
Mr Justice McGovern also gave another chance to the defendant in another Start Mortgages case. She said she had hoped to receive mortgage subsidies from the HSE and to sell her car with the aim of repaying some of the arrears which amounted to €52,960.
"My home and my life are far more important to me than a car will ever be," she told the court.
The judge said the sale of her car would only pay a fraction of the arrears but adjourned the case until February 9th to give her a chance, as long as the monthly repayments of €3,290 were met.
In granting stays on orders for possession, the judge took Christmas into account.
In a case involving IIB Homeloans, the judge granted a stay of four months on a possession order "because of the time of year it is".
Mr Justice McGovern was critical of Start Mortgages, which provides loans to people who have difficulty getting mortgages elsewhere. Referring to the subprime lender, he said: "I sometimes wonder why the people who have the most cases in the list are in the list for a reason. They lend money to people who can't afford to pay."
If they had been more careful about whom they lent money to, they might not be in this position, he added.
The judge also said the legal costs in High Court repossession cases seemed extremely punitive.
A solicitor acting pro bonofor a woman who lost her family home had complained that mortgage companies were taking cases unnecessarily to the High Court.
The solicitor claimed mortgage companies were taking cases to the High Court for amounts that fell within the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court, which greatly added to the costs. Costs were then being sought against the defendants who were already unable to meet their mortgage repayments.
Just over a year ago, Ms Justice Elizabeth Dunne ordered an investigation into "excessive" legal fees charged to people fighting to prevent their homes from being repossessed by subprime mortgage lenders. The investigation was called for after a couple were ordered to pay €12,100 in legal fees to redeem mortgage arrears of €8,255.83.