Rich should not be different when it comes to debts
If Nama is to retain any credibility, it must take tough action on cynical transferring of assets, writes Celia Larkin
IWAS reading about the controversy surrounding the transfer to their wives of assets by some developers in Nama and I thought, "damn it, I should have got married". Then at least I could be guaranteed of holding on to any assets while walking away from the debts incurred in my little shop. You may remember I had to close the business last summer.
My debts are piddly little things compared to the billions we've heard discussed but if I don't continue to pay them, I risk losing my home. I'm single, you see, so I can't transfer my assets into the hubby's name.
I'm not complaining. The way I look at it, I took the risk with the business and I'll take the hit. After all, if I had made millions (not very likely with a couple of beauty salons but you get my meaning) I'd be quite happy to keep the profits. So I figure that when I lost, I had to be prepared to pay up.