Home Payments Ltd. Payments Agency Closed - Great Stress for Clients

[CMK]

Cheers all, and great site.

It's indicative of the order of priorities for the elite here that regulation of these kinds of outfits, and loan sharking in particular, has never been considered. Invisible Ireland is left to make its own way, again. It'll be a rough Christmas for may Home Payments clients, and I don't think being asked to stump up EUR 100 household charge is going to help matters given the level of debt many will have to get into to make good their loses. No bailouts here.

In a parallel possible world a slice of the EUR 200,000,000 million BoI bond for payment on Monday would make its way to Home Payments clients. But the Gombeen Men and their EU comrades don't do 'nice'.

[Holly]

Well that's easy for you to say.

It is only easy because it was such an obvious racket waiting to go belly-up, CMK.

I have some knowledge of this outfit and they provided a service to people who banks refused to service

You call cheating the poor providing a good service?

who often didn't have the numeracy or literacy skills necessary to fully operate a bank account.

My grandmother didn't have much in the way of numeracy and literary skills but she was way too poor to pay her debts and then pay some nice man extra on top of that by way of a commission.

Reading bills, understanding changes, understanding terms and conditions, calculating how much to put aside to pay this bill this week and that bill next week etc, etc, were/are difficult tasks for most in that 23%.

The working class poor did this as a matter of routine necessity and managed quite well to pay their debts with honor.

Far better to leave it to a nice man who collects some money every week or, better still, have your wages paid directly to a company like Home Payments who'll look after these things for you and look after your finances generally.

Not on your life! And those rent collectors who knocked on the door every week were not known for their niceness either.

....
It's a useful service and I'm sure it's one that a lot of TU members, as well as people who are retired or unemployed, would use.
....

People got by without such a scam before they came on the scene, CF, and the retired and unemployed who did use it are badly burnt now.

Crazy or not, there have been similar savings schemes for donkey's years.
People regularly paid weekly money toward Christmas hampers, t.v. license, etc.
In return they had the peace of mind that comes with not fearing the appearance of a bill or forking out for Christmas all in one go.
It seems old and dated, but served a purpose.

Christmas Clubs were and are altogether different from what these operators were up to, Griska, usually run not for profit in the locality by shops and associations.

Its only a matter of time until life bites you in the ass, and when it does I hope you learn to empathise.

You are out of line, eamo, in mistaking my incredulity at the foolishness of the unfortunate customers with a lack of empathy and in presuming to know the circumstances of my own life and what difficulties I might have overcome.

[C. Flower]

It is only easy because it was such an obvious racket waiting to go belly-up, CMK.



You call cheating the poor providing a good service?



My grandmother didn't have much in the way of numeracy and literary skills but she was way too poor to pay her debts and then pay some nice man extra on top of that by way of a commission.



The working class poor did this as a matter of routine necessity and managed quite well to pay their debts with honor.



Not on your life! And those rent collectors who knocked on the door every week were not known for their niceness either.



People got by without such a scam before they came on the scene, CF, and the retired and unemployed who did use it are badly burnt now.



Christmas Clubs were and are altogether different from what these operators were up to, Griska, usually run not for profit in the locality by shops and associations.



You are out of line, eamo, in mistaking my incredulity at the foolishness of the unfortunate customers with a lack of empathy and in presuming to know the circumstances of my own life and what difficulties I might have overcome.

Holly, are you aware that some people had been using this firm for 40 years ? They paid fees for it, but they got a service, and people using banks for these things pay fees too.

From what I've heard, it operated very much like a Christmas Club and in fact was used as one.

I don't accept at all that these people shouldn't be bailed out. Quinn customers have, and the banks customers have, so why shouldn't they be bailed out.

[C. Flower]

RTE - speaker from National Consumer Agency? Saying that because it was not Regulated there can be no compensation paid.

They will try to negoiate with ESB, mortgage payments etc. so that people don't have to pay again, if they paid once into Home Payments Ltd.

That seems very vague to me.

Captain Con suggested that it should in fact have been regulated...

She is also saying that legislation is ready to pass on this, and its being pushed back.
Wants it passed

People can contact her.

LCA.ie

1890432432

There may be about 20,000 people who used the firm's services.

Confirms that they got no interest on their deposits.

Agrees that there is a need for this service.

[TotalMayhem]

They will try to negoiate with ESB, mortgage payments etc. so that people don't have to pay again, if they paid once into Home Payments Ltd.

Fat chance.

[C. Flower]

Fat chance.

I agree with you.

The Government should deal with it. There are, say 20,000 customers, and the average loss is unlikely to be more than 1,000 euro...

For heavens sake, its chickenfeed. Half of the wages of the head of the ESB, for one year.

[TotalMayhem]

Chickenfeed or not, it's the customers who owe the ESB, insurances, etc. and not the now defunct Home Payment Ltd. And guess who they will go after in order to get their money?

Wouldn't do the ESB much good to disconnect the offices of Home Payment Ltd, now would it?

[C. Flower]

Chickenfeed or not, it's the customers who owe the ESB, insurances, etc. and not the now defunct Home Payment Ltd. And guess who they will go after in order to get their money?

Wouldn't do the ESB much good to disconnect the offices of Home Payment Ltd, now would it?

I agree with you, that's why I think they should be bailed out.

[CMK]

Holly, you're arguing against a straw man. The final part of my post that you're responding to was categorical that the whole financial services industry must be viewed as predatory in nature. Home Payments were merely on the second lowest rung of financial predators (above money lenders and loansharks).

Yes, Home Payments were exploitative and charged a premium. But, eh, in that respect they only differ in degree from mainstream banks. Many working people managed to look after their affairs without recourse to outfits like Home Payments, I agree with you there. Nonetheless, the fact that they appear to have had nearly 20,000 clients, concentrated in areas of Dublin, suggests that they were meeting a clearly expressed need.

Look, the principles of Gombeenism dictate how and by what mode genuine social needs are met. And perhaps the core principle of Gombeenism is that servicing genuine social needs should generate an income and profit for well connected individuals and their families. Yes, there should have been, and should be today, a service, run on a not for profit basis, to help those with literacy or numeracy problems, run their financial affairs, which can be quite complex. But instead, Home Payments and others like it emerged eventually to generate enough wealth for their owners to allow the latter to begin investing in the property market.

The principle of Gombeenism outlined above is driving the privatisation of health in this state, where we have public services contracting coupled with private clinics popping up like mushrooms after rain. And, surprise, surprise, the owners of said hospitals are, invariably, well embedded in the Gombeen nexus of banking, politics, property, law and medicine. Similar disasters are incubating there.

And another key principle of Gombeenism - absolute relentless mercilessness towards the vulnerable - will dictate the response to the collapse of Home Payments. 30 million would probably cover the losses of those affected - a nano scale bailout - but it won't happen and it won't even be conceived of. They'll go to the way but the golf club fees of nationalised bank employees and upper managements will still be paid.

[TotalMayhem]

30 million would probably cover the losses of those affected - a nano scale bailout

Could be "the cheapest bailout in the world". Really!

[CMK]

It would actually be 'the cheapest bailout in history'. But poor old Brian Lenihan would be spinning in his grave if he thought the government were going to hand over cash, that should rightfully be going to bondholders, to vulnerable citizens instead. Thankfully for his memory the entire political class are behind him on that.

[Captain Con O'Sullivan]

There should never be an organisation like this operating outside regulatory control. In fact thinking about the duties ascribed to the Financial Regulator's office which is now a constituent office of the Central Bank I think a case could be made that the FR has and had a duty to regulate that company.

The fact that it didn't regulate it may actually be a legal factor in forcing the government to intervene.

There is more of a case here for government intervention than there ever was for propping up Anglo Irish bank.

[Captain Con O'Sullivan]

Had a look at the Central Bank/Financial Regulation website;

'Introduction to Payment Institutions

Payment Institutions

A ‘payment institution’ is defined in the Payment Services Directive ('Directive') as a legal person (i.e. must be incorporated - sole traders cannot be authorised) that has been granted authorisation in accordance with Regulation 18 of the European Communities (Payment Services) Regulation 2009 ('Regulations') to provide and execute payment services throughout the European Community.

The Directive was transposed by S.I. No. 383 of 2009 European Communities (Payment Services) Regulations 2009 which became effective in Ireland on 1 November 2009. The Central Bank of Ireland ('Central Bank') is the competent authority for the purpose of implementation of the Directive. Payment institutions must obtain authorisation from the Central Bank in order to provide payment services. The provisions of the Regulations will apply to persons providing ‘payment services’.

http://www.centralbank.ie/regulation...s/default.aspx

Looks to me as I've said that the Central Bank Financial Regulator has a statutory duty or at least a duty under European law to regulate such companies. If it has failed to do so then there should be a case available against the Financial Regulator. The Consumer Services Agency should be on to this.

[TotalMayhem]

Just spotted this myself.

Was Home Payment was an illegal operation then? A matter for the Gardai?

[C. Flower]

Had a look at the Central Bank/Financial Regulation website;

'Introduction to Payment Institutions

Payment Institutions

A ‘payment institution’ is defined in the Payment Services Directive ('Directive') as a legal person (i.e. must be incorporated - sole traders cannot be authorised) that has been granted authorisation in accordance with Regulation 18 of the European Communities (Payment Services) Regulation 2009 ('Regulations') to provide and execute payment services throughout the European Community.

The Directive was transposed by S.I. No. 383 of 2009 European Communities (Payment Services) Regulations 2009 which became effective in Ireland on 1 November 2009. The Central Bank of Ireland ('Central Bank') is the competent authority for the purpose of implementation of the Directive. Payment institutions must obtain authorisation from the Central Bank in order to provide payment services. The provisions of the Regulations will apply to persons providing ‘payment services’.

http://www.centralbank.ie/regulation...s/default.aspx

Looks to me as I've said that the Central Bank Financial Regulator has a statutory duty or at least a duty under European law to regulate such companies. If it has failed to do so then there should be a case available against the Financial Regulator. The Consumer Services Agency should be on to this.

Nailed it. If this law applies, the State was aware of these firms but did nothing to enforce the law. The Company is not wound up, so should be required, if applicable, to get authorisation now.