Anglo directors loans

Laminations

WTF? Can someone explain what is happening here? Directors who loaned themselves millions are now having in excess of 80% written off their loans by Anglo.

www.rte.ie/business/2010/0331/anglo.html

Why would they write off a cent when these people retain their mansions in cape cod and holidays in porto banus? Why are they getting an 80% discount when NAMA is only getting a 50% discount? How were they allowed lend themselves money without the collateral or ability to repay?

Its gotten to the point where i wouldo't blink an eye if a mark chapman type character paid them a visit

snow ghost

Thieves in the Temple Laminations... the corrupt establishment here, that leech off the rest of Irish society to augment their ignoble house of cards, are filling their bellies at the trough of avarice and self-preservation while they watch others starve in an economic famine.

JonathanAnon

this is absolutely ridiculous. They said on the radio that they are PERSONALLY responsible for the loans. The whole board of directors should have been in custody since the day the sh1thouse was nationalised. Also heard (DriveTime Radio One today) that David Drumm has fled the country, him also personally responsible for millions in loans..

Others texted in to say that Seanie was on a plane to Malaga yesterday. He gets free first class seat cos he was nominated to the board of Aer Lingus by the Drumcondra crook. What are the chances of him coming back, with him personally responsible for €87m of loans.

Every day there is a new kick in the teeth for the decent people of Ireland from these elitist scum.

FINGAL FAN

This news is truly incredible. 109 million given to these crooks is to be written off at the same time as working people in negative equity are being pursued for every last cent . Its enough to have you in total despair.

uberwolf

before the mob get too riled up, banking 101.

A bank is required to hold all assets on the balance sheet at a level which they can demonstrate is recoverable. Any value in excess of what is now recoverable is written down.

This exercise is entirely separate to the pursuit of that loan and the borrower for every last red cent. Writing down a loan does not forgive a cent of that loan.

Christ, it's like the time the Sun newspaper had the English nation so riled, paediatrician's offices were being targeted by mobs upset by paedophiles.

ei.sdraob

FINGAL FAN wrote: »

This news is truly incredible. 109 million given to these crooks is to be written off at the same time as working people in negative equity are being pursued for every last cent . Its enough to have you in total despair.

its ok their children will be paying too

its all for the good of the party erm country :P

Liam Byrne

uberwolf wrote: »

A bank is required to hold all assets on the balance sheet at a level which they can demonstrate is recoverable. Any value in excess of what is now recoverable is written down.

This exercise is entirely separate to the pursuit of that loan and the borrower for every last red cent. Writing down a loan does not forgive a cent of that loan.

But surely writing it down as not "recoverable" means that they don't believe it's recoverable, regardless of any "pursuit" ?

It's either "recoverable" or it isn't.

And remember that this is the bank that wrote off €7 million of Sean Fitzpatrick's loans.

snow ghost

uberwolf wrote: »

before the mob get too riled up, banking 101.

A bank is required to hold all assets on the balance sheet at a level which they can demonstrate is recoverable. Any value in excess of what is now recoverable is written down.

This exercise is entirely separate to the pursuit of that loan and the borrower for every last red cent. Writing down a loan does not forgive a cent of that loan.

Christ, it's like the time the Sun newspaper had the English nation so riled, paediatrician's offices were being targeted by mobs upset by paedophiles.

Have you a link to that sun story, I'm not aware that the British government sank billions - at the expense of the nation - into corrupt paediatricians' offices in England?

Dress it up how you will - gilding the lily doesn't detract one iota from the inherent wrong doing regarding this debacle.

Sometimes the mob are correct, despite the myopia of those who wish to ridicule their opinions.

thebaldsoprano

The RTE article does seem to confirm uberwolf's description:

Former chairman Sean FitzPatrick personally owed the bank more than €85m at the end of last year. But the bank's accounts show that it anticipates that almost €68m of this may not be re-paid.

The figure for former chief executive David Drumm was just over €8.3m, with the bank setting aside €6.7m for possible non-repayment. Most of this is linked to a loan given to Mr Drumm to buy shares in the bank. It is currently the subject of legal action by the bank.

Maybe they're figures indicating how much Anglo can get from Fitzpatrick and Drumm, mansions included.

uberwolf

Liam Byrne wrote: »

But surely writing it down as not "recoverable" means that they don't believe it's recoverable, regardless of any "pursuit" ?

prudence requires that it is written down.
History and capital requirements both acknowledge that the prospect of default on mortgage loans is far less than commercial loans.
What I know of fingers Fitzpatrick is what I've read in the papers, but lets face it. With no income stream, and lending against a speculative oil field off the coast of Africa, they have to write it down. The OP wants to know why he was given the money in the first place. Well we all know the answer, and it's a fair question! I suspect though that it was 'legal', however improper.


The non irish banks have also been aggressively writing down all their Irish mortgage books, but IMO the Irish banks have not been quite as aggressive. That write down will not be readily individually identifiable, and will not attract the same individual media attention.

Liam Byrne

uberwolf wrote: »

prudence requires that it is written down.

If so, it's sickening to observe that them being "prudent" for the first time in ten years suddenly benefits their mates.......the same mates that ironically benefitted from them being "imprudent" during the boom and losing all their money so they had to come begging to us :mad:

Lenihan has a HELL of a lot to answer for as to why he guaranteed this cesspit. :mad:

hallelujajordan

Liam Byrne wrote: »

If so, it's sickening to observe that them being "prudent" for the first time in ten years suddenly benefits their mates.......the same mates that ironically benefitted from them being "imprudent" during the boom and losing all their money so they had to come begging to us :mad:

Lenihan has a HELL of a lot to answer for as to why he guaranteed this cesspit. :mad:

How does it benefit their mates ? This story is being totally misrepresented and sensationalised in true Daily Mail style. All Anglo are doing is making provision on their books that the loans may not be paid back ! This action does not write off any debt or give anyone a discount !

If the bad debt is transferred to NAMA then NAMA will (as they have made clear) use all the powers available to them in the law to recover as much of the loan as possible. There is no protection for the mansions in Cape Cod or the Holidays in Porto Banus as represented by the OP . .

ei.sdraob

hallelujajordan wrote: »

How does it benefit their mates ? This story is being totally misrepresented and sensationalised in true Daily Mail style. All Anglo are doing is making provision on their books that the loans may not be paid back ! This action does not write off any debt or give anyone a discount !

If the bad debt is transferred to NAMA then NAMA will (as they have made clear) use all the powers available to them in the law to recover as much of the loan as possible. There is no protection for the mansions in Cape Cod or the Holidays in Porto Banus as represented by the OP . .

by making that "provision" they can turn around to the taxpayer and ask for more money

and thats what they are doing

Liam Byrne

hallelujajordan wrote: »

If the bad debt is transferred to NAMA then NAMA will (as they have made clear) use all the powers available to them in the law to recover as much of the loan as possible. There is no protection for the mansions in Cape Cod or the Holidays in Porto Banus as represented by the OP . .

"All the powers available to them", eh ? Let me ask you this; if the money or property or belongings (cars or whatever) have been signed over to a wife or sons or daughters, does NAMA have the power to get it back ?

If it's a limited company that then goes bankrupt, does NAMA have the power to get the money back ?

Laminations

These are personal debts. Writing them down in terms of what they think is recoverable while sean fitzpatrick has the money to jet off on holiday, while he has a roof over his head, is disgusting. And if the banks are revaluing these loans based on what they think is recoverable to less than 20% of their worth than we are being ripped off with NAMA getting just 50% discount. If a loan is deemed as unrecoverable it means its unlikely to be paid.

Did you all see Charlie Bird call to David Drumms mansion in Cape Cod on the 9 o clock news? Drumm had the cheek to tell Charlie to have some respect! These guys idea of broke is unbelievable, i'd love to be their idea of broke.

Laminations

If the bank is writing down these loans then the taxpayer will have to make up the shortfall. Is that sensationalist? It is surely sensational. Its a f***ing disgrace.

nesf

Liam Byrne wrote: »

"All the powers available to them", eh ? Let me ask you this; if the money or property or belongings (cars or whatever) have been signed over to a wife or sons or daughters, does NAMA have the power to get it back ?

That's for the Courts to decide. The bank can take them to court and argue that they changed ownership purely to evade losing them and the court can decide that this is true and rescind the change of ownership or whatever the procedure is.

nesf

Laminations wrote: »

If the bank is writing down these loans then the taxpayer will have to make up the shortfall. Is that sensationalist? It is surely sensational. Its a f***ing disgrace.

The bank hasn't written off the loan, they merely put aside money as provisions against possible losses. They haven't written off the money yet and are still trying to get it paid out, they're just required by regulation to do this if there is any reasonable chance of them not getting the full amount back. That's all.

snow ghost

hallelujajordan wrote: »

How does it benefit their mates ? This story is being totally misrepresented and sensationalised in true Daily Mail style. All Anglo are doing is making provision on their books that the loans may not be paid back ! This action does not write off any debt or give anyone a discount !

If the bad debt is transferred to NAMA then NAMA will (as they have made clear) use all the powers available to them in the law to recover as much of the loan as possible.

- Which in effect means the debt is essentially written off and people are given discounts... nothing sensational about that - it's simply the reality of what is going to happen. Do you seriously think the debts will be even mostly recovered?

It should be the criminal assets bureau recovering this money not NAMA... then your point might have some pragmatic credibility.

Laminations

nesf wrote: »

The bank hasn't written off the loan, they merely put aside money as provisions against possible losses. They haven't written off the money yet and are still trying to get it paid out, they're just required by regulation to do this if there is any reasonable chance of them not getting the full amount back. That's all.

If they were really trying to get the money back, Sean Fitzpatrick wouldn't have the spare cash to be jetting off to the sun. When the man is in sack cloth they can start 'making provisions'

snow ghost

nesf wrote: »

That's for the Courts to decide. The bank can take them to court and argue that they changed ownership purely to evade losing them and the court can decide that this is true and rescind the change of ownership or whatever the procedure is.

I'm not sure the Irish courts will have much juristiction over Drumms mansion in Cape Cod - which, I think(?) I'm right in saying he has already put in others names.

Then there is the the long protracted and costly judicial process they would have to follow to take it through the courts, which they will argue is not in the tax payers interest because the debtors don't have the ability to pay.

I see your point, but don't share your faith that this will be anything other than, one-way or another, a de facto write off of these debts.

Diairist

24th March : The bank has confirmed that 70 staff out of a total of 1,240 in Ireland, Britain and the US received 'modest' pay increases, where roles and responsibilities have changed since the completion of a voluntary redundancy programme. per http://www.rte.ie/business/2010/0324/anglo.html

nesf

snow ghost wrote: »

I'm not sure the Irish courts will have much juristiction over Drumms mansion in Cape Cod - which, I think(?) I'm right in saying he has already put in others names.

Then there is the the long protracted and costly judicial process they would have to follow to take it through the courts, which they will argue is not in the tax payers interest because the debtors don't have the ability to pay.

I see your point, but don't share your faith that this will be anything other than, one-way or another, a de facto write off of these debts.

Overseas assets will indeed be tricky though I imagine there are bilateral agreements about this kind of thing between Ireland and the US. We'll just have to wait and see what happens I'm afraid. I sincerely doubt we'll see all the cash gotten back but I wouldn't expect the directors to get off with a golden handshake either given the change of management and bringing in of international people into the picture.

nesf

Laminations wrote: »

If they were really trying to get the money back, Sean Fitzpatrick wouldn't have the spare cash to be jetting off to the sun. When the man is in sack cloth they can start 'making provisions'

Yeah, unfortunately this is Ireland and such things don't happen. Whatever his sins he's entitled to the same treatment as any other debtor and the bank has to try and come to a reasonable accomodation with him before they can go chasing him in court over his assets.

hallelujajordan

Laminations wrote: »

If the bank is writing down these loans then the taxpayer will have to make up the shortfall. Is that sensationalist? It is surely sensational. Its a f***ing disgrace.

Jesus wept . . enough already with the misreporting and the sensationalism. No loans to Fitzpatrick or others have been written off and no matter how many times you say it, it still won't be true.

The bank are taking the financially prudent measure of estimating the volume of the loan they think they can recover.

NAMA will use all the measures available to it in Irish law to recover as much of the money that they can. Whether you like it or not Fitzpatrick (like every other Irish citizen) is entitled to the protection of the law. Ultimately, the courts will decide what assets can be seized in recovering this money. The determination of the state to do everything it can to recover this money was evident a couple of weeks ago when Fitzpatrick spent a night in a jail cell !

Laminations

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Jesus wept . . enough already with the misreporting and the sensationalism. No loans to Fitzpatrick or others have been written off and no matter how many times you say it, it still won't be true.

The bank are taking the financially prudent measure of estimating the volume of the loan they think they can recover.

NAMA will use all the measures available to it in Irish law to recover as much of the money that they can. Whether you like it or not Fitzpatrick (like every other Irish citizen) is entitled to the protection of the law. Ultimately, the courts will decide what assets can be seized in recovering this money. The determination of the state to do everything it can to recover this money was evident a couple of weeks ago when Fitzpatrick spent a night in a jail cell !

Firstly, i dont think i said 'written off' once. I've said written down. Secondly if they are reckoning that Sean Fitzpatrick and the other directors will only be able to pay back less than 20%, how much did NAMA buy these loans for, because if it was near to the average of 50% then we were had, and the taxpayer will make up the shortfall. If the books are now showing that more of these loans are bad then Anglo will require more money from the taxpayer. We'll pay either way for Seanies holidays and Drumms house. What are the negotiations? It seems the fruits of the negotiations are that Anglo is realising they cant repay. So the directors are in no bargaining positions. Freeze all assets and accounts, redirect payment of pensions into servicing the loans and start immediate proceedings to seize their houses. They can get rent allowance for a flat on dominic street.

Ps. Seanie spending a night in a jail cell does not make the government look serious but i'm glad they fooled someone.

Edit: apologies, if i had looked back at my posts i'd have seen i did say 'written off'. My mistake

whynotwhycanti

hallelujajordan wrote: »

The determination of the state to do everything it can to recover this money was evident a couple of weeks ago when Fitzpatrick spent a night in a jail cell !

Really, that shows the determination of the state. Or maybe that was, what would you call it, oh a PR stunt, something to appease the very unhappy citizens. Maybe that will be the last of his dealings with the Gardai, he wasn't charged and may never be charged. There is no punishment for white collar crime in this state.

If i walk into a post office and steal a hundred euro, ill end up in jail. If I become a director of a bank and give myself a 100 million euro, and then do not pay it back, nothing will happen to me. Where is this money they borrowed, has it just vanished into thin air.

You seem confident the state can get some of this money back, maybe not all but some. Until that happens, i will base my assumptions on what the state has done to date, which leaves me with absolutely no confidence they will get those personal loans repaid. You call it sensationalising it, your utter confidence that it will be repaid is beyond sensationalism, it is delusional.

hallelujajordan

whynotwhycanti wrote: »

Really, that shows the determination of the state. Or maybe that was, what would you call it, oh a PR stunt, something to appease the very unhappy citizens. Maybe that will be the last of his dealings with the Gardai, he wasn't charged and may never be charged. There is no punishment for white collar crime in this state.

If i walk into a post office and steal a hundred euro, ill end up in jail. If I become a director of a bank and give myself a 100 million euro, and then do not pay it back, nothing will happen to me. Where is this money they borrowed, has it just vanished into thin air.

You seem confident the state can get some of this money back, maybe not all but some. Until that happens, i will base my assumptions on what the state has done to date, which leaves me with absolutely no confidence they will get those personal loans repaid. You call it sensationalising it, your utter confidence that it will be repaid is beyond sensationalism, it is delusional.

I don't think I ever indicated confidence that the state would get some or all of this money back . . Frankly I don't have any such confidence.

I am arguing against the blatant misreporting on this thread that is indicating that in some way or other there is a government policy to protect their friends in Anglo and to transfer their debts to the taxpayer while they continue with their jet-set lifestyles. This is clearly not the case. There is an ongoing criminal investigation into the actions of Fitzpatrick and co. . . If he can be charged, he will be and if the courts can convict him of criminal charges they will. Unfortunately however, Fitzpatrick is protected (like all of us) by the law. . . If he didn't commit a criminal offence he cannot be charged.

hallelujajordan

Laminations wrote: »

Firstly, i dont think i said 'written off' once. I've said written down.

You opened this thread with the following sensationalist misreporting . . . .

Laminations wrote:

WTF? Can someone explain what is happening here? Directors who loaned themselves millions are now having in excess of 80% written off their loans by Anglo.

www.rte.ie/business/2010/0331/anglo.html

Why would they write off a cent when these people retain their mansions in cape cod and holidays in porto banus? Why are they getting an 80% discount when NAMA is only getting a 50% discount? How were they allowed lend themselves money without the collateral or ability to repay?

Its gotten to the point where i wouldo't blink an eye if a mark chapman type character paid them a visit

whynotwhycanti

hallelujajordan wrote: »

I don't think I ever indicated confidence that the state would get some or all of this money back . . Frankly I don't have any such confidence.

I am arguing against the blatant misreporting on this thread that is indicating that in some way or other there is a government policy to protect their friends in Anglo and to transfer their debts to the taxpayer while they continue with their jet-set lifestyles. This is clearly not the case. There is an ongoing criminal investigation into the actions of Fitzpatrick and co. . . If he can be charged, he will be and if the courts can convict him of criminal charges they will. Unfortunately however, Fitzpatrick is protected (like all of us) by the law. . . If he didn't commit a criminal offence he cannot be charged.

Well this is the thing, maybe these shady dealings would be better dealt with by CAB as opposed to NAMA. I don’t know, getting away with over 100 million of combined loans, not repaying them, Drumm over in Cape Cod having pretty much fled the country. If our legislation cannot cover this happening, and then prosecute those responsible, then it has to be amended or new regulations drafted. If not, this will all happen again, maybe even worse. Sure AIB have been bailed out before, looks like they didn't learn form their last mess up.

I think, even though it is still being denied, it is well know that the relationship between senior level FF politicians and the directors of Anglo was very close nit, too damn close nit for my liking. There was an article in the NY Times last week, from a well accredited economist that said NAMA was the product of the current government being lobbied by a combination of developers, bankers and other politicians. It is not perhaps the best solution to the mess but is perhaps the best solution to protect the close nit circle.

hallelujajordan

whynotwhycanti wrote: »

Well this is the thing, maybe these shady dealings would be better dealt with by CAB as opposed to NAMA. I don’t know, getting away with over 100 million of combined loans, not repaying them, Drumm over in Cape Cod having pretty much fled the country. If our legislation cannot cover this happening, and then prosecute those responsible, then it has to be amended or new regulations drafted. If not, this will all happen again, maybe even worse. Sure AIB have been bailed out before, looks like they didn't learn form their last mess up.

I think, even though it is still being denied, it is well know that the relationship between senior level FF politicians and the directors of Anglo was very close nit, too damn close nit for my liking. There was an article in the NY Times last week, from a well accredited economist that said NAMA was the product of the current government being lobbied by a combination of developers, bankers and other politicians. It is not perhaps the best solution to the mess is perhaps the best solution to protect the close nit circle.

I'm with you . . I would love to see CAB get involved here if the legislation would allow it . . Not sure that it will though if they haven't committed a criminal offence.

whynotwhycanti

hallelujajordan wrote: »

I'm with you . . I would love to see CAB get involved here if the legislation would allow it . . Not sure that it will though if they haven't committed a criminal offence.

Well as i say, legislation has to be updated, if not, the next time this happens, it will be even worse. There really has to be laws drafted that prevent white collar crime.

Laminations

Ok i can see how the initial post can be misleading but saying 'you only have to pay back 20%' vs. 'we think you can only pay back 20%' revalues the loan and leaves the taxpayer with the bill. My point has nothing to do with the ongoing criminal investigations. Its about the fact that a man with debts of 80million can fly off on holiday and remains living in a mansion in wicklow. He has already defaulted on 7million in interest repayments. Whats the hold up? Seize his assets and freeze his accounts and get Drumm out of that house in Cape Cod, how can he even claim it as a homestead or stay over there, he's not american!
The cogs are moving far too slowly for me.

hallelujajordan

Laminations wrote: »

Ok i can see how the initial post can be misleading

. . or blatantly incorrect

. My point has nothing to do with the ongoing criminal investigations. Its about the fact that a man with debts of 80million can fly off on holiday and remains living in a mansion in wicklow. He has already defaulted on 7million in interest repayments. Whats the hold up? Seize his assets and freeze his accounts and get Drumm out of that house in Cape Cod, how can he even claim it as a homestead or stay over there, he's not american!
The cogs are moving far too slowly for me.

The hold up is the law . . If the state acts in contravention of the law then these guys are far more likely to get off without paying a cent. . If we follow the appropriate legal route, however unpalatable it may be for you and I in the short term, we are likely to have a more successful outcome in the longer term.

tech77

hallelujajordan wrote: »

I am arguing against the blatant misreporting on this thread that is indicating that in some way or other there is a government policy to protect their friends in Anglo and to transfer their debts to the taxpayer while they continue with their jet-set lifestyles. This is clearly not the case.

Surely Fitzpatrick and co. living in absolute penury (if necessary) until the 100 odd million they owe is serviced (if ever) is the only way this issue can be reconciled.
Would you agree with this?

hallelujajordan

tech77 wrote: »

Surely Fitzpatrick and co. living in absolute penury (if necessary) until the 100 odd million they owe is serviced (if ever) is the only way this issue can be reconciled.
Would you agree with this?

Yes, in principle I would agree with you . . I would take all of their assets off them and do my very best to ensure they go to jail . .

Now, I can rant about that on boards to make me feel better (although it doesn't . . it just makes me more angry) or I can respect the law and allow it to do its job.

To be clear I am not (and never will) defending Fitzpatrick & Co. I am defending government policy in relation to F & Co and trying to add some balance against the misreporting that is going on here. .

Laminations

Kenny says €109million written OFF directors loans.

Coughlan says directors will be pursued vigorously for the repayments.

I suppose my difficulty is with their definition of the word vigorous.

snow ghost

To all those who have faith that the state will pursue these debts and justice will be served, please remember that the state is still being run by the same people who nurtured the environment where these shady dealings flourished and who also appointed the banking regulators that were meant to prevent such things.

Whilst I admire your faith, I cannot share it in anyway whatsoever given the history and actions of this government.

History shows us that organisations of power are rarely willing to sacrifice those who are intrinsicly linked to them and essentially know too much - i.e. the current government and their cronies are in up their eyeballs and it wouldn't be in their interests for the whole dirty truth to come out by serving up these bankers' heads on a platter, anymore than ithe Catholic Hierarchy was willing to put at risk their power by properly dealing with paedophile priests.

People had faith in Church a few years ago - but the truth eventually came out... the same will happen with this government and the bankers.

paddyland

hallelujajordan wrote: »

To be clear I am not (and never will) defending Fitzpatrick & Co. I am defending government policy in relation to F & Co and trying to add some balance against the misreporting that is going on here. .

You are defending the honour and dignity of a corrupt and rotten political party who are fundamentally responsible for allowing this horrendous and shameful state of affairs go uncontrolled to the point it is at today, and who even now are scrambling to limit the damage to their own party as much as possible, despite the terrible consequences to the economy or the taxpayers of this country they purport deceivingly to represent.

As a party, they are UNFORGIVEABLE, and I fail to understand why anyone even at this late stage would continue to argue their corner. Don't even bring the opposition into it, we are talking about Fianna Fáil, THEY were the ones in government, THEY were the ones who presided over years of mismanagement and negligence, and THEY were the ones who cosied with the perpetrators of this rot. FF all the way. The sooner they are not just removed from government, but ANNIHILATED as a political force in this country, the sooner we may try to pick up the pieces and run this country for it's people, instead of solely to the benefit of a corrupt boy's club.

dan_d

We can't trust the state to bring these guys to justice! It took them 18 bloody months, even to just ADMIT that things had been done badly, and with no regulation. They won't do anything to these guys for fear they upset the status quo.
What we need very very badly, and following up on tuesday's announcements is a careful review of existing legislation (or the lack thereof) and drafting in of new legislation to allow people who behave like this to pay....dearly. Enough to deter any future "developers", bank boards or politicians from ever doing this again.
No doubt a few clauses could be inserted to catch all the current offenders in some way too.
While everyone in the country is responsible in some way, there are those in charge that were trusted to run the country and it's financial institutions and they proved they can never be trusted again.

Liam Byrne

Laminations wrote: »

I suppose my difficulty is with their definition of the word vigorous.

Really ? My issue is their definition of the word "pursued".

Remember FF looking up trees ? :rolleyes:

hallelujajordan

dan_d wrote: »

We can't trust the state to bring these guys to justice! It took them 18 bloody months, even to just ADMIT that things had been done badly, and with no regulation. They won't do anything to these guys for fear they upset the status quo.
What we need very very badly, and following up on tuesday's announcements is a careful review of existing legislation (or the lack thereof) and drafting in of new legislation to allow people who behave like this to pay....dearly. Enough to deter any future "developers", bank boards or politicians from ever doing this again.
No doubt a few clauses could be inserted to catch all the current offenders in some way too.
While everyone in the country is responsible in some way, there are those in charge that were trusted to run the country and it's financial institutions and they proved they can never be trusted again.

Totally agree that everyone in the country needs to shoulder responsibility although others here will argue (probably quite rightly) that they had no hand or act in the boom.

Also agree re: new legislation although it will be difficult to enact retrospectively.

Disagree with your comment that the state won't do anything . . they are currently doing everything they can . . NAMA have been given the power in law to pursue these debts and I have no doubt that those responsible for NAMA (who incidentally are independent to the government and driven by people from across the floor like Alan Dukes !) will do everything in their legal power.

paddyland wrote: »

You are defending the honour and dignity of a corrupt and rotten political party who are fundamentally responsible for allowing this horrendous and shameful state of affairs go uncontrolled to the point it is at today, and who even now are scrambling to limit the damage to their own party as much as possible, despite the terrible consequences to the economy or the taxpayers of this country they purport deceivingly to represent.As a party, they are UNFORGIVEABLE, and I fail to understand why anyone even at this late stage would continue to argue their corner. Don't even bring the opposition into it, we are talking about Fianna Fáil, THEY were the ones in government, THEY were the ones who presided over years of mismanagement and negligence, and THEY were the ones who cosied with the perpetrators of this rot. FF all the way. The sooner they are not just removed from government, but ANNIHILATED as a political force in this country, the sooner we may try to pick up the pieces and run this country for it's people, instead of solely to the benefit of a corrupt boy's club.

How about we stay on topic here. . You are attacking me because you know I am a member of Fianna Fail . . Fine, I'm able for it . . . but its not relevant to this thread. . All I am defending here is government policy in relation to the pursuit of debts from the Anglo Directors. The fact is that there is nothing else the government can do within the law and if FF were replaced in the morning by any other party, policy in relation to these directors would not change.

Lets not drag this into another "Who caused the crisis " thread !

Liam Byrne wrote:

Really ? My issue is their definition of the word "pursued".

Remember FF looking up trees ?

Except it isn't Fianna Fails job to pursue them. It is NAMA who will operate independently from government and who have independent, international experts advising them.

Laminations

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Really ? My issue is their definition of the word "pursued".

yeah very true, that I suppose is also my issue.

And Fitzpatricks definition of broke.
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/broke-exanglo-chief-cant--pay-back-euro70m-loan-2096935.html

FORMER Anglo Irish chief Sean FitzPatrick has told the bank he is effectively broke and cannot repay the €70m he owes in unpaid loans.

broke adj, colloq 1 having no money; bankrupt. 2 short of money; hard-up.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/business/business-news/disgraced-fitzpatrick-i-did-not-flee-14752088.html

Speaking by mobile phone, Mr FitzPatrick confirmed he was abroad, but refused to say where he was. He has previously been seen in an upmarket |district of Marbella in Spain.

He is either broke or he is not.


If he has the money to swan off to spain then whatever about them saying they are pursuing him for money owed, they are definitely not vigorously pursuing him.

AlekSmart

The hold up is the law . . If the state acts in contravention of the law then these guys are far more likely to get off without paying a cent. . If we follow the appropriate legal route, however unpalatable it may be for you and I in the short term, we are likely to have a more successful outcome in the longer term.

From what I can see this little burst of Garda Involvement is little more than a fig-leaf in attempt to restore this Governments modesty.

I`m quite confident that those Gardai who possess enough specialist Financial Investigative knowledge would dearly have loved to interview Mr FitzP and his entire Management "Team" the day after the lid was flipped on the Anglo conspiracy.

However,it took 9 weeks before the first Garda "raid" on Anglo HQ which I would suspect unearthed very little of substance,except perhaps a faint smell of burnt insulation from the Shredding machines.

It`s only when we factor-in the other totally unconnected Flights of Earls such as Derek Quinlan,Bernard Madoff..sorry MacNamara,David Drumm along with quite a few less well known "High Net Worth Individuals" that we dozy proles may begin to see a pattern emerging.

The "Majesty of the Law" pattern as outlined by Halleujahjordan is of course highly desireable in any organized society

However when we start delving into all of these Property Heavy deals we MUST take note that each deal required the direct involvement of an entire raft of legal types from Solictors Clerks all the way up to Judges of the Higher Courts.

That direct involvement then,to my mind,opens up an appaling vista of conflict in relation to any meaningful legal approach to lessen the financial and societal impact on the "Ordinary Joe".

Oddly enough I suspect the Sean Quinn connection offers the best chance yet of smoking the sleeping partners out...lets see how it pans out....all supposing that Sean agus a cheile don`t up sticks for India or Russia in the meantime ?

ei.sdraob

hallelujajordan wrote: »

and who have independent, international experts advising them.

name one

hinault

By writing down the debt, this doesn't mean that the debt is written off.

Anglo will chase Fiztpatrick, McAteer, Bradshaw and Drumm for the money owed.

pigeonbutler

hinault wrote: »

By writing down the debt, this doesn't mean that the debt is written off.

Anglo will chase Fiztpatrick, McAteer, Bradshaw and Drumm for the money owed.

And are doing so...

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/broke-exanglo-chief-cant--pay-back-euro70m-loan-2096935.html

The bank are suing him in the High Court for the debt. Would the mob like to suggest how else a creditor should seek repayment of a debt?

As has been explained ad nauseum, the accounting treatment is required to be prudent. In the same vein, the banks have "written down" thousands of mortgages that are in arrears, that does not mean that those individual mortgage holders owe a single cent less than they did before the bank adjusted their accounts.

hinault

Anglo should consider selling the directors debt to the Viper.

Kill two birds with the one stone.

so to speak.
ahem

bobbyBear

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Lets not drag this into another "Who caused the crisis " thread !

Answer: Fianna Fail?

snow ghost

hinault wrote: »

By writing down the debt, this doesn't mean that the debt is written off.

Anglo will chase Fiztpatrick, McAteer, Bradshaw and Drumm for the money owed.

Of course they will, they'll also go chasing after rainbows and find Darby O'Gill sitting on a Big Pot of Gold at the end. :rolleyes:

snow ghost

pigeonbutler wrote: »

And are doing so...

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/broke-exanglo-chief-cant--pay-back-euro70m-loan-2096935.html

The bank are suing him in the High Court for the debt. Would the mob like to suggest how else a creditor should seek repayment of a debt?

As has been explained ad nauseum, the accounting treatment is required to be prudent. In the same vein, the banks have "written down" thousands of mortgages that are in arrears, that does not mean that those individual mortgage holders owe a single cent less than they did before the bank adjusted their accounts.

The only 'mob' I see are the gangsters in the dail and their golden circles.

Only an accountant or a FF die-hard could be so blind to the reality that there are major political issues, nefarious nepotism and blatant corruption impacting this issue, and as such it can't be viewed in a narrow tunnel of mere accountancy practise.