Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Newbridge Credit Union's "Special Manager"
Options
-
13-01-2012 8:03pm#1Interesting development today at one of Ireland's most roguish credit unions as it emerged that the commercial court has appointed a"special manager" to Newbridge.
The Commission on credit unions last year indicated that 27 credit unions were in serious need of recapitalisation (reserves<7.5%).
http://www.finance.gov.ie/documents/publications/reports/2011/credit.pdf
Interestingly, Newbridge Credit union is open tomorrow, along with most large credit unions. Although all CU deposits up to €100,000 are protected, it will be interesting to see if this incident resonates at all with its members, in Newbridge or elsewhere.Tagged:0
Comments
-
Interesting development today at one of Ireland's most roguish credit unions as it emerged that the commercial court has appointed a"special manager" to Newbridge.
The Commission on credit unions last year indicated that 27 credit unions were in serious need of recapitalisation (reserves<7.5%).
http://www.finance.gov.ie/documents/publications/reports/2011/credit.pdf
Interestingly, Newbridge Credit union is open tomorrow, along with most large credit unions. Although all CU deposits up to €100,000 are protected, it will be interesting to see if this incident resonates at all with its members, in Newbridge or elsewhere.
My wife passed it today and it was very full with people. I am assuming they were doing exactly what I intend to do tommorrow morning, which is removing all my savings. Considering there will be a genuine run on the bank, I would bet that it will be closed early with much shouting by the board that this injustice was caused by the central bank. (a familiar story taken from AIB, BOI, Anglo etc)
Last years AGM (which I attended) was a joke. No explanation of very odd loans and or the bad debt provision. Normally you can get a small multiple of your savings as a loan and your savings are locked in until final payment. They handed out loans to developers, breaking their own rules, with no cover whatsoever. Some of those properties have gone to NAMA and one large apartment complex in the town at langton cross had the glory of being NAMA's first sale. This is one of the losses the credit union got hit with.
We were given a great deal of promises that all was fine at the AGM and we personally kept our money there on the basis that the banks were not much better and there was a slight risk of loosing savings to a failed bank. As of 12 months ago that was a real prospect.
Last years accounts showed they were well ahead of the loan to savings ratio required by the central bank including the current well flagged level of 10%. I can only assume that they had to face much bigger debts this year and that killed the ratio.
Newbridge is not a wealthy town and I would compare it to Tallaght in relation to demographic with crap policing to boot. It is very conceivable that a large number of the town cannot pay off loans regardless of how small they are. That will put the nail in the Credit union coffin.0 -
This is dissapointing news for the vast majority of credit unions which were well run and stuck to their core operating principles. I'd imagine that other credit union will see a big increase in withdrawals as peoples concerns grow.0
-
Interesting development today at one of Ireland's most roguish credit unions as it emerged that the commercial court has appointed a"special manager" to Newbridge.
The Commission on credit unions last year indicated that 27 credit unions were in serious need of recapitalisation (reserves<7.5%).
http://www.finance.gov.ie/documents/publications/reports/2011/credit.pdf
Interestingly, Newbridge Credit union is open tomorrow, along with most large credit unions. Although all CU deposits up to €100,000 are protected, it will be interesting to see if this incident resonates at all with its members, in Newbridge or elsewhere.
My wife passed it today and it was very full with people. I am assuming they were doing exactly what I intend to do tommorrow morning, which is removing all my savings. Considering there will be a genuine run on the bank, I would bet that it will be closed early with much shouting by the board that this injustice was caused by the central bank. (a familiar story taken from AIB, BOI, Anglo etc)
Last years AGM (which I attended) was a joke. No explanation of very odd loans and or the bad debt provision. Normally you can get a small multiple of your savings as a loan and your savings are locked in until final payment. They handed out loans to developers, breaking their own rules, with no cover whatsoever. Some of those properties have gone to NAMA and one large apartment complex in the town at langton cross had the glory of being NAMA's first sale. This is one of the losses the credit union got hit with.
We were given a great deal of promises that all was fine at the AGM and we personally kept our money there on the basis that the banks were not much better and there was a slight risk of loosing savings to a failed bank. As of 12 months ago that was a real prospect.
Last years accounts showed they were well ahead of the loan to savings ratio required by the central bank including the current well flagged level of 10%. I can only assume that they had to face much bigger debts this year and that killed the ratio.
Newbridge is not a wealthy town and I would compare it to Tallaght in relation to demographic with crap policing to boot. It is very conceivable that a large number of the town cannot pay off loans regardless of how small they are. That will put the nail in the Credit union coffin.
Damien 360
A "special manager" is a good thing for this company. Read michael noonans piece on the web. It does not mean there were shady goings on, there are regulatory concerns and it was clearly stated on the news that it is entirely solvent and secure - And I sincerely hope you have solid back up for your statement above on a public forum - stating that "they gave loans to developers ...... Some of these properties are now with NAMA......this is one of the losses they got hit with " How exactly would you have that detailed info - irresponsible loose talk like this is unfair to a local business when you clearly have not got your facts right.
At least be factual and not sensationalizing gossip you heard elsewhere.0 -
Only if the other alternative is winding up.Damien 360
A "special manager" is a good thing for this company.
In day to day life, in terms of what we expect from our financial institutions, having an official appointed to the institution from the central bank following o from concerns for its financial position is not "a good thing"
Depends what you mean by solvent. Newbridge had to make provision on €20 million of its bad debt in 2010 alone. It's likely that more concerns arose over year-end provisions for 2011. If there were to be a run on Newbridge Credit Union, the solvency of that credit union can and should be legitimately questioned. Obviously, the DoF cannot exactly publish that on its website, can it?it was clearly stated on the news that it is entirely solvent and secure0 -
The central bank are not going to go to the courts and use their special powers if everything is rosy in the garden. Todays Irish times has an interesting article: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2012/0114/1224310245967.html
If it is true that there was a history of regulatory breaches, I would my opinion that the regulator is doing the right thing and this action will ensure that the small minority of credit unions that were not acting correctly will now straighten themselves out.
Has Newbridge Credit Union board issued a statement yet?
In the long run this will strengthen credit unions.0 -
Advertisement
-
According to the RTE 8am news the "Special Manager" is being paid his hourly rate even though he's being appointed for an indefinite period .
Nice to know the Central bank tried to get value for money :rolleyes::rolleyes:0 -
When the central bank makes a move the public the media and politicans cheer and say that it is right. The central bank were fully engaged with Newbridge credit up to an including the day the bank went off to the courts ex-Parte (without telling the credit union or inviting it to defend the action) and installed a special manager at a cost of 423 euro per hour or on a conservative working week of 37 hours that comes to 813,000 per year and that may not include vat @ 23% this bill under the legislation will be picked up by the credit unions members. The registrar of credit unions has refused to allow newbridge credit union call its annual general meeting, the accounts are ready and agreed with the auditors. It appears that the manager employed by the credit union will have to be sent on gardening leave. its a pity the bank did not investigate the mis-selling of bonds to credit unions with the same gusto as he appears to have in taking action against credit unions.
I would ask you to remember that credit unions were the only institution lending to ordinary joe's for the last three years as the bank were and are still are not working. There are a number of serious questions need to be answered in this case namely
Why was th application made ex-parte to the courts as there was no urgency in the matter this move denied the credit union the right to reply?
(make the matter sub-judice and silence the board)
Why is the board of directors forbidden communicate directly with the members or issue a statement unless it is cleared by the central bank?
Why is the credit union not permitted to hold its AGM or call a special general meeting to give the members the opportunity to be fully informed?
Why is the Special Manager costing 423 euro per hour and was any time line put on his appointment?
I think the public have a right to be fully informed before unfair and unjust hubris is poured on descent people doing a voluntary job in running their credit union, yes I think this is the most important point voluntary effort built up newbridge credit union it now appears that officals from Dublin have come down to put the boot in Please make your voices heard give the members the right and the opportunity to me heard a Special general meeting of Newbridge Credit union Now and get answers to the questions0 -
Interesting development today at one of Ireland's most roguish credit unions as it emerged that the commercial court has appointed a"special manager" to Newbridge.
The Commission on credit unions last year indicated that 27 credit unions were in serious need of recapitalisation (reserves<7.5%).
http://www.finance.gov.ie/documents/publications/reports/2011/credit.pdf
Interestingly, Newbridge Credit union is open tomorrow, along with most large credit unions. Although all CU deposits up to €100,000 are protected, it will be interesting to see if this incident resonates at all with its members, in Newbridge or elsewhere.
interesting to see by your location that you have voted with your feet similar to Denis O'Brien, and others a bit like shouting instructions on how to swim from the river bank0 -
credit unions cannot afford tribunal rates of pay0
-
later10 is a tax exile?whitleydonal wrote: »interesting to see by your location that you have voted with your feet similar to Denis O'Brien, and others a bit like shouting instructions on how to swim from the river bank
0 -
Advertisement
-
Damien 360
- And I sincerely hope you have solid back up for your statement above on a public forum - stating that "they gave loans to developers ...... Some of these properties are now with NAMA......this is one of the losses they got hit with " How exactly would you have that detailed info - irresponsible loose talk like this is unfair to a local business when you clearly have not got your facts right.
At least be factual and not sensationalizing gossip you heard elsewhere.
That is a statement of fact. It was said by the chairman at the AGM, which I attended, that they gave money to developers but refused to name either the properties or the developer. You hardly think that 38,000 members manged to default on €20 million in one year alone ? I asked specifically about this when I stood up and asked questions of the board at the same AGM. They may have seen this coming as they gave the contract for legal services to the same company without going to tender, even though the bill increased substantially. That was another serious bone of contention with members that night and was brought to light by another legal company director present.
There is a huge cue there this morning. Mostly elderly people.
A search of RTE website would identify the properties in question at langton cross in Newbridge
This is a picture of them
0 -
I would presume the €423 per hour is for more than one person.?...
I do hope Newbridge CU have not been making stupid loans to people..?
or putting money into non capital guaranteed investments..???
I always felt there was a greater responsibility to safeguard members
savings , than lending the savings to risky borrowers ......
striving for growth all the time , can lead to a greater tolerance for undue
risk..
CU's provide a great service , many churn millions of euros in
savings in and out as well as loans in and out.....ie ( savings deposits and
savings withdrawals , borrowed loan amounts and repaid loan amounts)
It really is a huge service to communities....( I wish Newbridge well)0 -
whitleydonal wrote: »
I would ask you to remember that credit unions were the only institution lending to ordinary joe's for the last three years as the bank were and are still are not working. There are a number of serious questions need to be answered in this case namely
Why was th application made ex-parte to the courts as there was no urgency in the matter this move denied the credit union the right to reply?
(make the matter sub-judice and silence the board)
Why is the board of directors forbidden communicate directly with the members or issue a statement unless it is cleared by the central bank?
Why is the credit union not permitted to hold its AGM or call a special general meeting to give the members the opportunity to be fully informed?
Why is the Special Manager costing 423 euro per hour and was any time line put on his appointment?
I think the public have a right to be fully informed before unfair and unjust hubris is poured on descent people doing a voluntary job in running their credit union, yes I think this is the most important point voluntary effort built up newbridge credit union it now appears that officals from Dublin have come down to put the boot in Please make your voices heard give the members the right and the opportunity to me heard a Special general meeting of Newbridge Credit union Now and get answers to the questions
With the name Whitley it is a safe bet that you are a Newbridge head. You know that there are plently of channels for a local organisation to get info out. The problems would not have arisen if the credit union stuck to it's own lending rules as set down in its charter. If the central bank feels the current board of directors are not suitable (they have'nt changed in years) then a court date with no right of reply may be the only option.Your last 2 sentences referencing the Dublin officials coming down labels that point. They do not wish a kind of South Kerry attitude of the big city folk coming down to sort out the country bumpkins.0 -
Park Royal wrote: »I would presume the €423 per hour is for more than one person.?...
I do hope Newbridge CU have not been making stupid loans to people..?
Not since the bust in 2008 they have'ntPark Royal wrote: »or putting money into non capital guaranteed investments..???
This worries me as a lot of money is tied up in the banks and I was not sure from the accounts given if that was cash or bonds/investmentsPark Royal wrote: »I always felt there was a greater responsibility to safeguard members
savings , than lending the savings to risky borrowers ......
striving for growth all the time , can lead to a greater tolerance for undue
risk..
That is their ethos but that was lost during the boom when they loaned silly amounts with the property as security0 -
http://www.newbridgecu.ie/content.asp?section=112
I hope the above is true. If it is, what is the central banks concern ?0 -
If a credit union is going to have a 3 grand a day leech forced onto it's payroll, are the owners of the credit union going to be told what's going on?
A one sided anecdotal view from a board member of a local credit union (other than Newbridge but on the regulator watchlist) mentioned that loan repayments inward are exceeding new loans out at a rate of 3:1 due to the limits imposed by the regulator.
The credit union are told to appoint the regulator's choice of auditor, in addition to their existing firm and pay out of it from credit union funds, but the members and board are not permitted to see the resulting reports.
The credit union aren't permitted by the regulator to hold an AGM to inform the members / owners of the bank what is going on. The members don't get to unelect directors even though their maximum term is up.
And the existing directors are of the opinion that the regulator has in the past forced them to overstate bad debts which have not materialised in the last years, so there will be an overstated profit the next time they are permitted to make public a set of accounts. Which is not a good thing, and auditors should not be allowing this.
And at the same time the disgusting loan sharks are appearing to make headway in the place. Apparently it's better for desperate stupid people at Christmas to borrow at 1000%, than for the government to take on any new risk.
Even though there are two reserves before the government gets hit.
Also the government needs to come out and say who dreamed up this 1 billion in arrears for credit unions and why. It seems to be a number plucked off the top of someone's head, that neither the regulator nor the ICLU have knowledge of.
As for that 250 million regarding the credit unions in last years budget 'to be injected'.
Many credit unions have tonnes of cash that they are not permitted to lend (for Newbridge, looks like €53 million forced into Irish banks by the government regulations). Not permitted to lend to members, nor to business at anything like a sustainable level.
Stuck in lower interest dodgy bloody banks, for 90 day max investments.
So is that 250 million going to be another bank subsidy fed through the credit union, that credit union members are forced to pay for?
-- edit --
I am aware that I may be getting false information, all the more reason to be able to be permitted to see the independent audit reports that we're paying for.0 -
If a credit union is going to have a 3 grand a day leech forced onto it's payroll, are the owners of the credit union going to be told what's going on?
So much for salary caps in banks when the regulator can ignore this and appoint a consultant at a rate of €824,850 per annum.
Reading previous posts, the directors wern't very forthcoming last year themselves!The credit union aren't permitted by the regulator to hold an AGM to inform the members / owners of the bank what is going on. The members don't get to unelect directors even though their maximum term is up.
Agree with you on this, however does anyone other than the directors know the true extent of the problems in NCU. The regulator obviously doesn't believe the directors anymore.And the existing directors are of the opinion that the regulator has in the past forced them to overstate bad debts which have not materialised in the last years, so there will be an overstated profit the next time they are permitted to make public a set of accounts. Which is not a good thing, and auditors should not be allowing this.
Loan sharks are rife again and sound prudent credit unions are being restrictedAnd at the same time the disgusting loan sharks are appearing to make headway in the place. Apparently it's better for desperate stupid people at Christmas to borrow at 1000%, than for the government to take on any new risk.
1Billion which reduced to €250million in the budget and I'd imagine will end up much less when everything is sorted. But the scaremongering can have devasting effects. Because overall the credit unions are strong they themselves will cover these costs without the need of bailouts from europe. The Credit Union model which has is effective is being attacked but politicians are of the regulator and seem unwilling to defend the one this which is working.Also the government needs to come out and say who dreamed up this 1 billion in arrears for credit unions and why. It seems to be a number plucked off the top of someone's head, that neither the regulator nor the ICLU have knowledge of.0 -
The 439 euro is for one person the manager assistants are to be paid between 15 to 430 per hour it seems that the appointment of the office is just a legal term the whole thing is a disgrace no doubt at this cost the must be worth it, this is coming from the same people who made such a good job of supervising the banksPark Royal wrote: »I would presume the €423 per hour is for more than one person.?...
I do hope Newbridge CU have not been making stupid loans to people..?
or putting money into non capital guaranteed investments..???
I always felt there was a greater responsibility to safeguard members
savings , than lending the savings to risky borrowers ......
striving for growth all the time , can lead to a greater tolerance for undue
risk..
CU's provide a great service , many churn millions of euros in
savings in and out as well as loans in and out.....ie ( savings deposits and
savings withdrawals , borrowed loan amounts and repaid loan amounts)
It really is a huge service to communities....( I wish Newbridge well)0 -
whitleydonal wrote: »The 439 euro is for one person the manager assistants are to be paid between 15 to 430 per hour it seems that the appointment of the office is just a legal term the whole thing is a disgrace no doubt at this cost the must be worth it, this is coming from the same people who made such a good job of supervising the banks
Rates of pay like that are normally reserved for directors of large publicly quoted companies. They tell the shareholders that they should be paid this as they could loose their job in a flash as they are solely responsible for any issues that effect earnings and thereby the share price. Is this special manager responsible/accountable in any way ? That rate of pay is unforgiveable.0 -
If a credit union is going to have a 3 grand a day leech forced onto it's payroll, are the owners of the credit union going to be told what's going on?
A one sided anecdotal view from a board member of a local credit union (other than Newbridge but on the regulator watchlist) mentioned that loan repayments inward are exceeding new loans out at a rate of 3:1 due to the limits imposed by the regulator.
The credit union are told to appoint the regulator's choice of auditor, in addition to their existing firm and pay out of it from credit union funds, but the members and board are not permitted to see the resulting reports.
The credit union aren't permitted by the regulator to hold an AGM to inform the members / owners of the bank what is going on. The members don't get to unelect directors even though their maximum term is up.
And the existing directors are of the opinion that the regulator has in the past forced them to overstate bad debts which have not materialised in the last years, so there will be an overstated profit the next time they are permitted to make public a set of accounts. Which is not a good thing, and auditors should not be allowing this.
And at the same time the disgusting loan sharks are appearing to make headway in the place. Apparently it's better for desperate stupid people at Christmas to borrow at 1000%, than for the government to take on any new risk.
Even though there are two reserves before the government gets hit.
Also the government needs to come out and say who dreamed up this 1 billion in arrears for credit unions and why. It seems to be a number plucked off the top of someone's head, that neither the regulator nor the ICLU have knowledge of.
As for that 250 million regarding the credit unions in last years budget 'to be injected'.
Many credit unions have tonnes of cash that they are not permitted to lend (for Newbridge, looks like €53 million forced into Irish banks by the government regulations). Not permitted to lend to members, nor to business at anything like a sustainable level.
Stuck in lower interest dodgy bloody banks, for 90 day max investments.
So is that 250 million going to be another bank subsidy fed through the credit union, that credit union members are forced to pay for?
-- edit --
I am aware that I may be getting false information, all the more reason to be able to be permitted to see the independent audit reports that we're paying for.
Thank you for your comments I am a director of a credit union for over 20 years, you are spot on with most of your comments our credit union for instance has liquidity of 62% reserves of 18% a dividend reserve that we were no allowed distribute to the members of 7 million a provision for bad and doubtful debts of 23%. We are currently restricted in how much we can lend we are not allowed to put money on deposit for longer than 3 months. we are not allowed to buy government bonds the central bank must know something we dont. the central bank agenda appears to be to destroy the credit unions and force people back to the money lenders. we are not allowed to take restructured loans from MABS without taking a full impairment for such loans as a result we no longer deal with MAB cases. I remember that the figure required for credit unions off the tom of someones head was 1 billion that was revised downwards to 500 million now you tell me its 250 million
i would have full confidence in this process if the mandrins from the central bank were not involved please please please can we have transparency around this whole process the bank todate have gagged credit union boards bullied auditors and freightened members for no reason. The members need to employ their own independent experts to expose this farcs and power play by the central bank0 -
Advertisement
-
Rates of pay like that are normally reserved for directors of large publicly quoted companies. They tell the shareholders that they should be paid this as they could loose their job in a flash as they are solely responsible for any issues that effect earnings and thereby the share price. Is this special manager responsible/accountable in any way ? That rate of pay is unforgiveable.
the majority of senior partners in legal firms charge at that hourly rate and much more. It doesn't necessarily equate to money into his/her back pocked.0 -
-
With the name Whitley it is a safe bet that you are a Newbridge head. You know that there are plently of channels for a local organisation to get info out. The problems would not have arisen if the credit union stuck to it's own lending rules as set down in its charter. If the central bank feels the current board of directors are not suitable (they have'nt changed in years) then a court date with no right of reply may be the only option.Your last 2 sentences referencing the Dublin officials coming down labels that point. They do not wish a kind of South Kerry attitude of the big city folk coming down to sort out the country bumpkins.
No I am a dub did you not notice that the banks are cured I hope the central bank will not give the credit unions the same medicine0 -
badgerbroc11 wrote: »
Agree with you on this, however does anyone other than the directors know the true extent of the problems in NCU. The regulator obviously doesn't believe the directors anymore.
It was audited during the year by the regulator appointed auditors.
It's the manager who is there every day who is being sidestepped.
There's a post I saw on another site suggesting that the regulator went to the high court at 4pm for permission to appoint a manager, and only then approached Ernst and Young.
(http://www.independent.ie/national-news/central-bank-takes-over-running-of-thirdlargest-credit-union-in-state-2988848.html)
And that this move was as a response to a bank rush because a of caller to a local radio station making claims.
Can anyone local verify that?The Credit Union model which has is effective is being attacked but politicians are of the regulator and seem unwilling to defend the one this which is working.
They are providing rumour and speculation with fertiliser instead of releasing the actual information that is in their possession, through the independent audits by the regulator's appointed auditors that were reported as nearly complete in January 2011.
We get filleted snippits such as the interim annual report 2011
http://www.finance.gov.ie/documents/publications/reports/2011/credit.pdf
Then the newspapers go off with this and in the same week claim that anywhere from 29 - 79 credit unions are in difficulties.
The same report says3.6 Loan-to-asset ratios
3.6.1 In Table 6 the loan-to-asset ratio is documented. On this count Irish
credit unions appear to be significantly under-lent. During this period,
the loan-to-asset ratio for the sector rose from 47.45% in 2006 to
52.11% in 2008. However, since 2008 this ratio has contracted quite
quickly to 47.63% in 2009 and then to 42.45% in 2011.
If the credit union was one institution, then there would be little issue.
Earning Interest on loans to members at €546.47m, investment income €207.76m. Loans that had to be written off €107.44m in 2010, less than 2% of loans.
The biggest reason for the change in cost-to-income ratio is the skyrocketing provision for bad debts as the regulator changed the rules for minimum reserve requirements; amount that has been set aside from €269.54m in '08 to €738.41m in 2011.
So am I reading it right that it would take 7 years of the same level of bad debts writeoffs, and zero new provision made, to chew up the reserves?
What's the extra government 250 million going to do?
And as for the super-manager5.1.3 The safe and sound operation of each credit union is the responsibility of its democratically elected officials and management. All credit unions should be required to have robust governance arrangements.
In particular, there should be a clear organisational structure with well
defined, transparent and consistent lines of responsibility
I think the regulator has botched this recommendation. Who is this manager meant to be accountable to?
And an Ernst and Young manager too. The auditors with "a case to answer" for Anglo.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2011/0915/1224304142170.html0 -
It was audited during the year by the regulator appointed auditors.
It's the manager who is there every day who is being sidestepped.
There's a post I saw on another site suggesting that the regulator went to the high court at 4pm for permission to appoint a manager, and only then approached Ernst and Young.
(http://www.independent.ie/national-news/central-bank-takes-over-running-of-thirdlargest-credit-union-in-state-2988848.html)
And that this move was as a response to a bank rush because a of caller to a local radio station making claims.
Can anyone local verify that?
They are providing rumour and speculation with fertiliser instead of releasing the actual information that is in their possession, through the independent audits by the regulator's appointed auditors that were reported as nearly complete in January 2011.
We get filleted snippits such as the interim annual report 2011
http://www.finance.gov.ie/documents/publications/reports/2011/credit.pdf
Then the newspapers go off with this and in the same week claim that anywhere from 29 - 79 credit unions are in difficulties.
The same report says
If the credit union was one institution, then there would be little issue.
Earning Interest on loans to members at €546.47m, investment income €207.76m. Loans that had to be written off €107.44m in 2010, less than 2% of loans.
The biggest reason for the change in cost-to-income ratio is the skyrocketing provision for bad debts as the regulator changed the rules for minimum reserve requirements; amount that has been set aside from €269.54m in '08 to €738.41m in 2011.
So am I reading it right that it would take 7 years of the same level of bad debts writeoffs, and zero new provision made, to chew up the reserves?
What's the extra government 250 million going to do?
And as for the super-manager
I think the regulator has botched this recommendation. Who is this manager meant to be accountable to?
And an Ernst and Young manager too. The auditors with "a case to answer" for Anglo.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2011/0915/1224304142170.html
let the credit union publish their annual accounts that are available complete and signed off by the indpendent auditor to the members publish the truth now0 -
I am perplexed at the appointment of a special manager to Newbridge credit union with a click of the fingers an investigation can be ordered yet the central bank refuses to discuss why it will not release the confidential report into wrongdoing by Davy Stockbrokers in selling bonds to credit unions. I have attached the Stock exchange statement released at the time. This statement was released the day after the delivery of a budget by the Minister for Finance. No one will explain why this matter was covered up.
the central bank accuses credit unions of making inappropriate investments on one hand and refuses to publish a report that is clearly in the credit union and public interest on the other.
this report was known about when the Financial Services Ombudsman was in the high court on the very same matter but the inner circle still operates, we changed the Financial Regulator but the changes did not go far enough. please read the attached and form your own opinion. Davy refused to give permission for the publication of the report the wrong doer had a veto0 -
whitleydonal wrote: »I am perplexed at the appointment of a special manager to Newbridge credit union with a click of the fingers an investigation can be ordered yet the central bank refuses to discuss why it will not release the confidential report into wrongdoing by Davy Stockbrokers in selling bonds to credit unions. I have attached the Stock exchange statement released at the time. This statement was released the day after the delivery of a budget by the Minister for Finance. No one will explain why this matter was covered up.
the central bank accuses credit unions of making inappropriate investments on one hand and refuses to publish a report that is clearly in the credit union and public interest on the other.
this report was known about when the Financial Services Ombudsman was in the high court on the very same matter but the inner circle still operates, we changed the Financial Regulator but the changes did not go far enough. please read the attached and form your own opinion. Davy refused to give permission for the publication of the report the wrong doer had a veto
Very good link and content Donal - I completely agree with you .
there are bully boy tactics, and backside covering behaviours being used here on credit unions - also, if this was such an "urgent" issue that they had to go to court etc rtc why did this not surface in the MANY audits (The regulators ever popular close friends ) Grant Thornton ( who were forced on them) did - including the fact that the final audited accounts as i have been told have been with the regulator since October last year, so why come up with this carry on now - a whole 4 months later.
Mr. elderfield just wants to be seen cracking his money grabbing whip! He is Suceeding in getting the taxpayer to put there money back in to the banks that we are already paying for as a result of imbeciles in this country!0 -
I am a director of a credit union for over 20 years
And I am sure you have been a very good and diligent director but 20 years is too long for anyone to be director.0 -
I am a director of a credit union for over 20 years
And I am sure you have been a very good and diligent director but 20 years is too long for anyone to be director.
Amen - I must disagree, 20 years experience is invaluable now days - you wouldn't say that to someone who had their own business for 20yrs ? Oh it's time to give that up now your too long at it, bring in someone with little experience they will be better ! It requires a mixture of experience and new blood.
On a different note - Martin heydon td - is a total idiot for making that irresponsible statement today about it being too early to tell if it will close - the Special Manager told the members the plan is to keep it open and make it stronger!!! Idiot td's !!!!!!0 -
Advertisement
-
whitleydonal wrote: »Thank you for your comments I am a director of a credit union for over 20 years, you are spot on with most of your comments our credit union for instance has liquidity of 62% reserves of 18% a dividend reserve that we were no allowed distribute to the members of 7 million a provision for bad and doubtful debts of 23%. We are currently restricted in how much we can lend we are not allowed to put money on deposit for longer than 3 months. we are not allowed to buy government bonds the central bank must know something we dont. the central bank agenda appears to be to destroy the credit unions and force people back to the money lenders. we are not allowed to take restructured loans from MABS without taking a full impairment for such loans as a result we no longer deal with MAB cases. I remember that the figure required for credit unions off the tom of someones head was 1 billion that was revised downwards to 500 million now you tell me its 250 million
i would have full confidence in this process if the mandrins from the central bank were not involved please please please can we have transparency around this whole process the bank todate have gagged credit union boards bullied auditors and freightened members for no reason. The members need to employ their own independent experts to expose this farcs and power play by the central bank
Those are some very pertinent issues Whitleydonal,and are deserving of some equally pertinent replies from all involved,right up to the Minister for Finance.
The Newbridge CU incident appears to be the chosen first-battle site for the Central Bank's NEW !! IMPROVED !! regulatory mechanisms.
However,I see the current Newbridge machinations as yet more reasoning for a FULL revelation of the events of October 2008 and the Irish Banking Industry's house call to Minister Lenihan.
I am confident that Brian Lenihan and an ill-prepared group of semi-competent Senior Civil Servants were ambushed by a well briefed,well motivated,confident group of Bankers and Advisers,who remain most keen to maintain their anonymity.....Until this secret confessional seal is broken then ALL current Irish Government fiscal policy remains highly suspect.Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.
Charles Mackay (1812-1889)
0
Advertisement