Ivan Yates banKruptcy case dismissed

Laminations

http://m.rte.ie/news/2012/0821/attempt-to-have-ivan-yates-made-bankrupt-dismissed.html

This is an odd one. Is Yates arguing he can pay the 'correct' amount owed, which is likely still in the region of 3m? On what evidence is he saying the bank agreed to freeze interest on his debts, a claim they deny? I'd imagine he'd need some proof of this if it's a 'substantial issue that requires litigation'. Why couldn't the judge have expedited this and asked Mr. Yates how much he believed he owed and whether he could pay that amount back? And why did AIB make such a cock up on issuing notice, filing the required documents with the appropriate office and keeping tight records of their communications with Yates re the interest??

Gloomtastic!

Does this mean he's got off paying €3million-odd. Or just he's got off being made bankrupt, for now?

johnnyskeleton

Gloomtastic! wrote: »

Does this mean he's got off paying €3million-odd. Or just he's got off being made bankrupt, for now?

The latter.

Laminations

Yes the latter. But the point of bankruptcy is to declare the person as unable to pay their debts. Whether its 3.6m or 3m is Yates able to pay it back?

And how are bank records, debtors agreements and communications with debtors so ambiguous or wrong that they can lodge such an incorrect figure? Or at least how can they lodge a figure open to such dispute?

oppenheimer1

Laminations wrote: »

Yes the latter. But the point of bankruptcy is to declare the person as unable to pay their debts. Whether its 3.6m or 3m is Yates able to pay it back?

And how are bank records, debtors agreements and communications with debtors so ambiguous or wrong that they can lodge such an incorrect figure? Or at least how can they lodge a figure open to such dispute?

They charged interest on monies due after they were directed to freeze the debts as far as I know. There were other incorrect charges relating to the administration of the business.

Laminations

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

They charged interest on monies due after they were directed to freeze the debts as far as I know. There were other incorrect charges relating to the administration of the business.

But were they directed to freeze the interest? By who? From my reading Yates is claiming they told him they'd freeze the interest. They are dating they did not. He either has proof or he doesn't? That aside, can he pay back the amount minus the disputed interest minus disputed receiver fees? If he cannot then he should be declared bankrupt, there is little point arguing over the amount that he can't pay back..

And who is responsible in AIB for messing up procedure so badly in terms of filing documents and giving appropriate notice??

Sand

And who is responsible in AIB for messing up procedure so badly in terms of filing documents and giving appropriate notice??

Irish banks are completely and totally incompetent with amateurish direction and a semi public sector attitude. This shouldn't be a surprise anymore.

imme

Politics OP & Mods?

What does a bankruptcy related case have to do with Politics.

In relation to the case, I don't like it when people go after technicalities as a way to get out of things. Yates does seem to have gone after technicalities but that's not to say that its not legal.

I like it when people face the repercussions and don't look for ways around them.

imme

Sand wrote: »

Irish banks are completely and totally incompetent with amateurish direction and a semi public sector attitude. This shouldn't be a surprise anymore.

God be with the days when they were free living and free loving declaring profits of a billion each, declaring mark you, not necessarily making.

God be with the days indeed. :rolleyes: x 1,000,000,000. (that's a rolleyes by a billion by the way. )

Laminations

imme wrote: »

Politics OP & Mods?

What does a bankruptcy related case have to do with Politics.
.

Well in so much that he's a ex politician and his bankruptcy has been postponed pending other litigation while no such stay of execution was offered to others (like Quinn)

K-9

imme wrote: »

Politics OP & Mods?

What does a bankruptcy related case have to do with Politics.

In relation to the case, I don't like it when people go after technicalities as a way to get out of things. Yates does seem to have gone after technicalities but that's not to say that its not legal.

I like it when people face the repercussions and don't look for ways around them.

He's an ex-FG Minister and presented a political commentary programme until recently so I think it is of interest here. PM me if you've any queries.

imme

Laminations wrote: »

Well in so much that he's a ex politician and his bankruptcy has been postponed pending other litigation while no such stay of execution was offered to others (like Quinn)

"Ex-politician", he's out of politics for ten years.

Sean Quinn applied to be declared bankrupt, that's the difference.

imme

K-9 wrote: »

He's an ex-FG Minister and presented a political commentary programme until recently so I think it is of interest here. PM me if you've any queries.

He's out of politics for the last ten years. He didn't present a political commentary programme, he presented a news programme.

No, I don't have any queries, just asked the question "politics"?.

I'm not sure if there's a need for the BOLD :P

I suppose lots of things unrelated to politics, more to do with current events get lumped into politics threads. But then there isn't a current events thread.

K-9

imme wrote: »

He's out of politics for the last ten years. He didn't present a political commentary programme, he presented a news programme.

No, I don't have any queries, just asked the question "politics"?.

I'm not sure if there's a need for the BOLD :P

I suppose lots of things unrelated to politics, more to do with current events get lumped into politics threads. But then there isn't a current events thread.

There is a current events thread, it's called in the news. I've made my decision on it so pm me if you've any queries as per the forum charter.

imme

K-9 wrote: »

There is a current events thread, it's called in the news. I've made my decision on it so pm me if you've any queries as per the forum charter.

what kind of queries could I have. Thanks anyway.

liammur

I think the bank have acted very unfairly in this instance. It makes you also wonder about the Quinn situation. Yates was willing to give over the family farm and future income.
'
The court papers reveal that Mr Yates offered to hand AIB the proceeds of a sale of his family farm on the outskirts of Enniscorthy, Co Wexford, once worth €25m, plus a share of his future income, if the bank agreed to settle its claim.

The bank turned down the offer, even though it is a better deal than can be recovered if he is made bankrupt, the court papers claim.'

What else could he have done? And taxpayers paying these banks, I'm tempted to close down my bank accounts with some of these.

nuac

Yates seems to have made a reasonable proposal. Bank shot from the hip forcing the bankruptcy, and it has backfired.

Congrats to the Yates legal team

TheTurk1972

Yates has a ministers and a TDs pension.
So he has a good income no matter what country he is in or whether he has another job or not.
How can he be allowed to go bankrupt anywhere?

Bits_n_Bobs

Interesting enough piece in the Indo about this

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/brendan-oconnor-be-afraid-be-very-afraid-of-the-banks-3210075.html

It more or less says that Yates is claiming AIB is vindictively pursuing him to bankruptcy due to his public criticisms of the bank, while ignoring larger debtors.

While it is admittedly rather conspiratorial, nothing that these bailed out cretins do would surprise me.

Laminations

Bits_n_Bobs wrote: »

Interesting enough piece in the Indo about this

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/brendan-oconnor-be-afraid-be-very-afraid-of-the-banks-3210075.html

It more or less says that Yates is claiming AIB is vindictively pursuing him to bankruptcy due to his public criticisms of the bank, while ignoring larger debtors.

While it is admittedly rather conspiratorial, nothing that these bailed out cretins do would surprise me.

While I don't like that argument of 'why are you coming after me if you're not going after them' aka the Quinn argument, I'd tend to agree with him. It doesn't get Yates off the hook for the position he is in. It just questions the consistency of the banks in dealing with the heavy-hitter debtors.

Five years on, and the Wexford TD is in an entirely different position as ACC, Ulster Bank, AIB and Bank of Scotland (Ireland) circle his prized assets so they can get back the €40m they're collectively owed.
Mr Wallace's biggest lender ACC has secured a judgment order compelling him to repay €19m -- money he admits he hasn't got.

And not a sniff of Bankruptcy proceedings against Mr. Wallace.

antoobrien

Laminations wrote: »

And not a sniff of Bankruptcy proceedings against Mr. Wallace.

Proceedings like this are slow, with forcing a person into bankruptcy being the last resort of lenders. How long is Yeats in trouble after all?

ACC only got their judgement against Wallace earlier this year. If you'll recall the length of time it took to resolve the Beverly Cooper Flynn libel/potential bankruptcy case, there's a long way to go before MJ Wallace is subjected to enforced bankruptcy proceedings.