Sean Fitz arrested?

Cyrus · 18-03-2010 6:28pm

pah wrote: »

No I don't disagree with it and TBH the loans don't really bother me it's the shifting of Billions between accounts and banks to falsify records and to deceive for the purpose of making gain that I have a problem with.

Do you disagree with me that he has deceived and made gain?

Remember my earlier post where the Act defined gain as

(b) “gain” includes a gain by keeping what one has, as well as a gain by getting what one has not, and

Would you not agree his whole plan was to deceive and confuse in order to keep what he has? And I'm not talking about his personal finances but the balance sheets that he was responsible for? If he didn't keep up the charade though this would then have led to his own loans being questioned.

Therefore I argue that his deception was a means to an end in one sense to hold on to his loans and assets because as soon as the defecit came to light his personal finances would be under threat.

i was actually referring to the other post about the personal loans and i thought that your quoting of the act related to those loans too not the deposit transfer, sorry

Cyrus · 18-03-2010 6:29pm

jmayo wrote: »

One thing that strikes me is that I have never really noticed you posting on this forum before in the 3 odd years I have been on here.
Yet in one day you have been quiet prolific on this one topic.
And then you ask why people accuse you of defending him ?
All your posts have been trying to either find excuses for his behaviour or make light of his actions.

i have been a boards member for years and post a lot in different areas, this arrest just happened to interest me, surely im perfectly within my rights to take part in the debate

ei.sdraob · 18-03-2010 6:29pm

another datapoint

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/former-anglo-chief-fitzpatrick-arrested-by-fraud-squad-2103443.html

Over a period of eight years up to 2007, Mr Fitzpatrick, 61, temporarily transferred loans with Anglo Irish Bank to another bank before the annual report was audited.

It later emerged that the loan reached as much as €129m at one point in 2007.

there must be some laws in place about interfering with an audit, otherwise what's the point of auditing companies? sure everyone can just move money around before the accounts/audits have to be done

no harm at all

also

Earlier this month Anglo Irish Bank began legal action against Mr FitzPatrick to try to recover loans of €70m.

Cyrus · 18-03-2010 6:31pm

ei.sdraob wrote: »

another datapoint

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/former-anglo-chief-fitzpatrick-arrested-by-fraud-squad-2103443.html

there must be some laws in place about interfering with an audit

again i refer you to:

Ireland's financial regulator said: "While it does not appear that anything illegal took place in relation to these loans, the financial regulator was of the view that the practices surrounding these loans were not appropriate. As a result, we advised Anglo Irish to ensure that these loans are reported in the annual accounts for 2008."

Laminations · 18-03-2010 6:33pm

pah wrote: »

TBH the loans don't really bother me it's the shifting of Billions between accounts and banks to falsify records and to deceive for the purpose of making gain that I have a problem with.

The loans dont bother you? They wouldn't bother me at all if we didnt have him now saying he cant pay while still living in a gated mansion.

While Anglo can place a claim on the FitzPatrick home, if it is owned by both spouses the bank cannot take possession.

The loans held by Mr FitzPatrick are understood to be "fully recourse", which means Anglo can seek judgments against any assets it wants.
It may be more difficult to get judgments against assets outside Ireland.
Mr FitzPatrick owns a share in an oil well in Nigeria, for instance.

These elite siphoned their money into family and joint accounts and off shore assets and now the taxpayer has to foot the bill?

ei.sdraob · 18-03-2010 6:34pm

Cyrus wrote: »

again i refer you to:

Ireland's financial regulator said: "While it does not appear that anything illegal took place in relation to these loans, the financial regulator was of the view that the practices surrounding these loans were not appropriate. As a result, we advised Anglo Irish to ensure that these loans are reported in the annual accounts for 2008."

the regulator :cool: yes

if the regulator actually did its job Anglo wouldn't be declaring 15billion loss or for that matter there would have been no need for NAMA

Mr. Incognito · 18-03-2010 6:40pm

the law doesnt always deal in right and wrong

?????? What? Of course it does. Have you studied law?

"While it does not appear that anything illegal took place in relation to these loans, the financial regulator was of the view that the practices surrounding these loans were not appropriate. As a result, we advised Anglo Irish to ensure that these loans are reported in the annual accounts for 2008."

This was in the context of the AMOUNT of the loans. It is not illegal to issue loans. The amounts were excessive. Not illegal but excessive.
The hiding of the loads is a legal matter and not for the regulator to comment on. That's a matter for the DPP. The regulator only oversees financial regulation not criminal offenses.

jmayo · 18-03-2010 6:40pm

Cyrus wrote: »

i have been a boards member for years and post a lot in different areas, this arrest just happened to interest me, surely im perfectly within my rights to take part in the debate

Yes you are perfectly entitled to do so.
But it does strike me as somewhat weird when you suddenly appear and are quiet vocal on this one topic and then claim you are not defending him or bankers ?

Cyrus wrote: »

again i refer you to:

Ireland's financial regulator said: "While it does not appear that anything illegal took place in relation to these loans, the financial regulator was of the view that the practices surrounding these loans were not appropriate. As a result, we advised Anglo Irish to ensure that these loans are reported in the annual accounts for 2008."

Yeah of course we all know the financial regulators have a different slant on what is right and wrong.
They definetly had difficulty with things which most of us would see as bordering on theft, like for instance banks over charging customers and taking money they are not due.

The loans held by Mr FitzPatrick are understood to be "fully recourse", which means Anglo can seek judgments against any assets it wants.
It may be more difficult to get judgments against assets outside Ireland.
Mr FitzPatrick owns a share in an oil well in Nigeria, for instance.

Maybe seanie sigend up to one of those letters from Nigeria and bought into a worthless well left to him by his long lost uncle Idi ?

Laminations · 18-03-2010 6:43pm

the law doesnt always deal in right and wrong

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

?????? What? Of course it does. Have you studied law?

Is it wrong what he did?
Is it still wrong if he doesn't get charged, found guilty or go to jail?

Cyrus · 18-03-2010 6:46pm

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

?????? What? Of course it does. Have you studied law?

This was in the context of the AMOUNT of the loans. It is not illegal to issue loans. The amounts were excessive. Not illegal but excessive.
The hiding of the loads is a legal matter and not for the regulator to comment on. That's a matter for the DPP. The regulator only oversees financial regulation not criminal offenses.

indeed i have

of course the principal of the law is to help differentiate between right and wrong, it doesnt always deal in right and wrong,

for example anglos treatments of seanies loans is seen here by most as wrong, however at the time it was widely reported that it wasnt illegal and i would doubt that that has changed

how do you define the amounts of the loans as excessive by the way? in hindsight they are but again at the time i would imagine they were secured on assets that i was believed were worth in excess of the amounts

pah · 18-03-2010 6:49pm

Laminations wrote: »

The loans dont bother you? They wouldn't bother me at all if we didnt have him now saying he cant pay while still living in a gated mansion.

Well yeah ok, what I meant was that they didn't bother me in principle, as in before the downfall.

The facts as stated by you above do bother me.

Cyrus · 18-03-2010 6:50pm

jmayo wrote: »

Yes you are perfectly entitled to do so.
But it does strike me as somewhat weird when you suddenly appear and are quiet vocal on this one topic and then claim you are not defending him or bankers ?

it strikes me as wierd that you have an issue with me posting,

i have an interest in the irish business world and this topic interests me

Laminations · 18-03-2010 6:53pm

Cyrus wrote: »

how do you define the amounts of the loans as excessive by the way? in hindsight they are but again at the time i would imagine they were secured on assets that i was believed were worth in excess of the amounts

Debatable. Anglos risk assessments, if anything like Irish Nationwides, may have involved little more than a nod and a wink. He is the boss, who would deny their boss a loan? The thing is, he shouldn't have been looking for a loan from his own institution.

Cyrus · 18-03-2010 6:53pm

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

This was in the context of the AMOUNT of the loans. It is not illegal to issue loans. The amounts were excessive. Not illegal but excessive.
The hiding of the loads is a legal matter and not for the regulator to comment on. That's a matter for the DPP. The regulator only oversees financial regulation not criminal offenses.

im interested to hear how you define the hiding of the loans as illegal

Cyrus · 18-03-2010 6:55pm

Laminations wrote: »

Debatable. Anglos risk assessments, if anything like Irish Nationwides, may have involved a little more than a nod and a wink. He is the boss, who would deny their boss a loan? The thing is, he shouldn't have been looking for a loan from his own institution.

i agree re the risk assessment

however he was perfectly within his rights at the time to borrow from anglo

Mr. Incognito · 18-03-2010 7:00pm

ndeed i have

of course the principal of the law is to help differentiate between right and wrong, it doesnt always deal in right and wrong,

First off that statement is a contradiction. Secondly...
What? What do you think Equity is? It is about good conscious, moral dealings and is flexible to be used in conjunction with the common law. If that is not dealing in right and wrong I don't know what is.
If you don't mind me asking- what type of law did you study? Did you take a module in college in some far flung course? You don't seem to have any grasp of anything here only what is being reported in the media, the media says this and the media says that, example:

for example anglos treatments of seanies loans is seen here by most as wrong, however at the time it was widely reported that it wasnt illegal and i would doubt that that has changed

I work as a tax solicitor and deal with companies legislation every day. It's blatantly obvious to me that there a host of illegal transactions here. Just because the Indo doesn't report it for fear of libel doesn't mean that they don't exist.

im interested to hear how you define the hiding of the loans as illegal

And you say you studied law? Did you happen to sleep through company law? Directors duties- Companies Act 1963. Misleading shareholders or participators is illegal.

Cyrus · 18-03-2010 7:18pm

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

First off that statement is a contradiction. Secondly...
What? What do you think Equity is? It is about good conscious, moral dealings and is flexible to be used in conjunction with the common law. If that is not dealing in right and wrong I don't know what is.
If you don't mind me asking- what type of law did you study? Did you take a module in college in some far flung course? You don't seem to have any grasp of anything here only what is being reported in the media, the media says this and the media says that, example:

I work as a tax solicitor and deal with companies legislation every day. It's blatantly obvious to me that there a host of illegal transactions here. Just because the Indo doesn't report it for fear of libel doesn't mean that they don't exist.

And you say you studied law? Did you happen to sleep through company law? Directors duties- Companies Act 1963. Misleading shareholders or participators is illegal.

First off i will be very interested to see if he is charged with a criminal offence in hiding the loans, if that act was illegal why was he not charged when it was uncovered, surely this incident on its own was prosecutable in isolation?

secondly you are the one that said that no one has ever been prosecuted for white collar crime here, still maintain that the law is all about right and wrong?

thirdly if we are having a go at each for not knowing what we are talking about, your teaming and lading post was most confusing

finally not that its any of your business really, i studied B&L in UCD some moons ago, and im an accountant

sceptre · 18-03-2010 7:22pm

jmayo wrote: »

Yes you are perfectly entitled to do so.
But it does strike me as somewhat weird when you suddenly appear and are quiet vocal on this one topic and then claim you are not defending him or bankers ?

"New" people (heavens to betsy) come to the Politics forum all the time. Deal with the view of the "new" people if you choose but questioning their rationale for having an interest for little reason other than you think it's "somewhat weird" is personalising the discussion. And as you probably well know we don't do that. So neither do you please.

/mod

kippy · 18-03-2010 7:24pm

Cyrus,
People are obviously very emotional about the last 24 months or so, sometimes more emotional than logical and as such people want to see others punished for the perceived wrong doing that took place. Believe you me, there was wrong doing, legal, ethical and moral in the past 10 years, from the very top of our political establishment (Bertie speaking of suicide for naysayers (http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0704/economy.html) to the regulators, bankers, developers and indeed even some by the man on the street.
The simple facts at the moment are that very few/no one has ever done time in this country have ever done time for such acts and that very few politicans have been caught red handed " on the take" so to speak.
Thats why when someone like Fitz gets arrested for questioning people are hopeful that at last some form of justice may be served.
I've given you three reasons why the guy is currently being questioned (who knows, there may be more reasons and indeed there may be more people to be questioned) and these three reasons all appear to be at the very very least extremely "shady" occurances which I would find hard to believe dont break some law. Hence people are "baying for blood".

I hope that there is some hard evidence against Fitz and those of his ilk who rode the tiger into the ground and for which we will all be paying for the next 10-20 or 30 years.

For me personally the chief de tat is Bertie himself. The guy sickens me and always has.
His lack of memory and absolute codswallop of fiction he spouted out at the various tribunals together with his now use of our tax payers money to swan off around the world doing book signings and speeches frankly sickens me. I dont however ever see him being brought to task for whats happened in this country. Indeed I dont see any of the other cowboys being brought to task either and this arrest may just be a smoke screen to take the heat of the Anglo losses this year.

So Cyrus, while you comments basicilly asking that people wait till the true facts emerge and that innocent until proven guilty are somewhat admirable (in that you are on your own on that) the blind facts are that Fitz presided over the biggest corporate loss in the states history and in that period some of the most shady deals in the states history took place.
He wasnt getting paid millions a year to be able to walk away without taking the hit for what happened.

Laminations · 18-03-2010 7:25pm

Although i completely disagree with Cyprus's defensive stance trying to find loopholes and reasons that Seanie shouldn't be convicted, i agree re the law and right and wrong. The law is only concerned with what can be proven. Like i asked, you like me think what Seanie did was wrong. Will your opinion change if he isn't charged or found guilty or jailed? There are plenty of things that are wrong that people get away with.

kippy · 18-03-2010 7:28pm

Cyrus wrote: »

First off i will be very interested to see if he is charged with a criminal offence in hiding the loans, if that act was illegal why was he not charged when it was uncovered, surely this incident on its own was prosecutable in isolation?

secondly you are the one that said that no one has ever been prosecuted for white collar crime here, still maintain that the law is all about right and wrong?

thirdly if we are having a go at each for not knowing what we are talking about, your teaming and lading post was most confusing

finally not that its any of your business really, i studied B&L in UCD some moons ago, and im an accountant

No one is ever charged with anything here until the facts are established. This also allows for an investigation to gather the facts.
Theres every chance he wont be charged yet either.

We're dealing with some very intricate laws here and in the past few years financial institutions world wide have skirted through laws and juristictions hence I would believe such cases involve a lot of evidence gathering and interviews.

I never studied B&L in UCD and I am not an accountant.

Mr. Incognito · 18-03-2010 7:33pm

The reason that we have never had a conviction is quite simple.

Political will to go after these people has never been there. Bertie was hardly going to hunt down Charlie when he was the chap that co signed the blank cheques as minister for finance with no bank account.

Anyway- this is all speculation until he is charged.

I'll be interested to see what he is ultimately charged with.

Laminations · 18-03-2010 7:36pm

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

I'll be interested to see what he is ultimately charged with.

Treason

the gardai need to decide around about now whether to charge him, detain him for longer or let him slide back to his mansion.

pah · 18-03-2010 7:41pm

Cyrus wrote: »

and im an accountant

Ah! :rolleyes:

IrishTonyO · 18-03-2010 7:45pm

He's detention has been extended for another 12 hours

pah · 18-03-2010 7:48pm

Laminations wrote: »

Treason the gardai need to decide around about now whether to charge him, detain him for longer or let him slide back to his mansion.

I doubt there'll be any charges after the detention, file to DPP I'd say

Mr. Incognito · 18-03-2010 7:49pm

He's detention has been extended for another 12 hours

Very interesting. I would have expected him to give the aul no comment. Say nothing incriminating, have a lawyer present and defend the charges as they fall due.

Maybe he's talking...... going to be a lot of nervous people out there if he's striking some sort of plea bargain for info on the rest of the developers and shady practices.

MaceFace · 18-03-2010 8:15pm

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Very interesting. I would have expected him to give the aul no comment. Say nothing incriminating, have a lawyer present and defend the charges as they fall due.

Maybe he's talking...... going to be a lot of nervous people out there if he's striking some sort of plea bargain for info on the rest of the developers and shady practices.

No plea bargains in Ireland me lad. He could tell a lot of stories, most of them would be embarrising but not really against the law. He would probably be incriminating himself in the process.

I expect him to be released without charge with a file to the DPP. Not because of any conspiracy theory hide it under the carpet and let it blow over type thing but just that no one wants to make any mistakes and it is better to do it right and slow than hasty with errors.

An important thing which Comrade Hook said today, that regardless of the conviction or sentence he receives, he has had a bad fall from grace and his life is a total mess (apart from a nice house and money stashed away, which I expect he will need to pay legal fees).
He will probably be made an example of which will make most people on this board happy but not result in the real changes required to "the system".

Liam Byrne · 19-03-2010 12:08am

Cyrus wrote: »

again i refer you to:

Ireland's financial regulator said: "While it does not appear that anything illegal took place in relation to these loans, the financial regulator was of the view that the practices surrounding these loans were not appropriate. As a result, we advised Anglo Irish to ensure that these loans are reported in the annual accounts for 2008."

This would be the regulator that had no interest in doing his job ?

I'd take anything he said with a pinch of salt, tbh - he has zero credibility.

He'd probably claim that not doing the job that he was paid to do wasn't illegal either.

pah · 19-03-2010 4:58am

http://www.examiner.ie/home/arrested-114927.html

Arrested for an offence of False Accounting under Section 10 alright.

Booyah!! :P:P:P

pah wrote: »

Section 10

False accounting.

10.—(1) A person is guilty of an offence if he or she dishonestly, with the intention of making a gain for himself or herself or another, or of causing loss to another—

(a) destroys, defaces, conceals or falsifies any account or any document made or required for any accounting purpose,

(b) fails to make or complete any account or any such document, or

(c) in furnishing information for any purpose produces or makes use of any account, or any such document, which to his or her knowledge is or may be misleading, false or deceptive in a material particular.

(2) For the purposes of this section a person shall be treated as falsifying an account or other document if he or she—

(a) makes or concurs in making therein an entry which is or may be misleading, false or deceptive in a material particular, or

(b) omits or concurs in omitting a material particular therefrom.

(3) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on conviction on indictment to a fine or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years or both.

ei.sdraob · 19-03-2010 9:13am

pah wrote: »

http://www.examiner.ie/home/arrested-114927.html

Arrested for an offence of False Accounting under Section 10 alright.

Booyah!! :P:P:P

yeh

as they mentioned on prime-time last night

moving around billions between banks and then marking it as customer deposits and not interbank lending is dodgy as hell

bamboozle · 19-03-2010 9:37am

Regarding this on Primetime last night, what suprised/shocked/scared me most was the fact that the Financial Regulator had been informed on up to 50 occasions of these 'inter-bank' loans between Anglo and ILP yet stood back and did nothing until late in 2008.
Surely this raises serious questions as to what the hell the Financial Regulator was actually doing during the Celtic Tiger.

Are we likely to see other arrests? I remember reading in the last year of some loan given down in Kerry of over 1 million, a deposit of €100 euro was given, in my mind whoever approved that loan needs to be examined and i'm sure there are many more similar cases and examples of developers being given loans with little or no surity etc.

bamboozle · 19-03-2010 9:40am

MaceFace wrote: »

No plea bargains in Ireland me lad. He could tell a lot of stories, most of them would be embarrising but not really against the law. He would probably be incriminating himself in the process.

I expect him to be released without charge with a file to the DPP. Not because of any conspiracy theory hide it under the carpet and let it blow over type thing but just that no one wants to make any mistakes and it is better to do it right and slow than hasty with errors.

An important thing which Comrade Hook said today, that regardless of the conviction or sentence he receives, he has had a bad fall from grace and his life is a total mess (apart from a nice house and money stashed away, which I expect he will need to pay legal fees).
He will probably be made an example of which will make most people on this board happy but not result in the real changes required to "the system".

i'd imagine the house is in the wife's name!!!

MaceFace · 19-03-2010 9:41am

ei.sdraob wrote: »

yeh

as they mentioned on prime-time last night

moving around billions between banks and then marking it as customer deposits and not interbank lending is dodgy as hell

Surely if these transactions were illegal, we should see arrest of hundreds more people?
Seanie didn't do it all by himself. A Vincent Brownski guest last night suggested there would be around 40 people in Anglo who would have worked on these transactions, but it would have been signed off by the regulator, and then what about the people who received the payments at Irish Nationwide. Did they know the nature of the transaction?

The question though is if the investigation is around the billions of short term deposit from ILP or if it is the hiding of personal loans with Nationwide?

Cyrus · 19-03-2010 9:44am

pah wrote: »

Ah! :rolleyes:

Problem with accountants aswell do we? what pray tell do you do Pah?

kippy wrote: »

I never studied B&L in UCD and I am not an accountant.

i only posted what i studied and what i am under direct questioning from a solicitor

:D

Obviously i have rubbed some people up the wrong way, which wasnt really my intention. my view on the whole thing is that until someone is seen being lead to mountjoy in cuffs im not that sure that there will be any jail time served.

People want to see Seanie in jail, in many peoples eyes he is the very definition of what went wrong in this country, a lot of people feel that he has personally stolen money from them, and in many ways the actions of his bank has taken money from us all.

But looking at what people feel he will be charged with:

a) directors loans and non disclosure of them - loans themselves were not illegal, not disclosing them breaches co law, but will he be jailed for this? cant see it

also this is the only 'crime' that he will have acted alone in, everything else implicates a lot of people, both within and outside of anglo

b) the transfers of monies from IL&P to shore up the BS and hence misleading investors. Im sure this is a criminal offence under some piece of legislation, at the least its a dereliction of directors duties but also as our friend pah has pointed out it probably falls under section 10 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act

this offence implicates the whole anglo board aswell as senior management in IL&P, it will be interesting to see who, if anyone is jailed over this.

i would also put the qn to you, if you want to see someone jailed for the above, where do you stand on the other irish plcs?

All of the banks in 2008 understated the amount of provisioning required against bad debts on their balance sheet, shoring up the balance sheet and misleading investors,

any plc involved in property would have had friendly valuations of properties that should have been impaired etc etc

should the management of all these companies be charged aswell?

c) the golden circle business , to me i it seems like it should be illegal but i dont know if technically that it is? i would be very surprised if those guys hadnt taken detailed legal advice before doing something like this.

again our friend seanie wasnt acting alone here, and the more people involved, i think the less likely that we will see anyone goto jail

maybe i will be proven wrong.

Finally, the reason that i dont post in politics very often is that i think my politics wouldnt be that welcome here

the only party whose policies i agreed with were the PDs and the only political leader that i had any time for was Michael MacDowell. Of the current lot i believe Brian Lenihan has done a good job in difficult circumstances and the prospect of a labour/FG Gilmore/Kenny government scares the bejaysus out of me:)

kippy · 19-03-2010 9:50am

Cyrus wrote: »

Problem with accountants aswell do we? what pray tell do you do Pah?

i only posted what i studied and what i am under direct questioning from a solicitor :D

Obviously i have rubbed some people up the wrong way, which wasnt really my intention. my view on the whole thing is that until someone is seen being lead to mountjoy in cuffs im not that sure that there will be any jail time served.

People want to see Seanie in jail, in many peoples eyes he is the very definition of what went wrong in this country, a lot of people feel that he has personally stolen money from them, and in many ways the actions of his bank has taken money from us all.

But looking at what people feel he will be charged with:

a) directors loans and non disclosure of them - loans themselves were not illegal, not disclosing them breaches co law, but will he be jailed for this? cant see it

also this is the only 'crime' that he will have acted alone in, everything else implicates a lot of people, both within and outside of anglo

b) the transfers of monies from IL&P to shore up the BS and hence misleading investors. Im sure this is a criminal offence under some piece of legislation, at the least its a dereliction of directors duties but also as our friend pah has pointed out it probably falls under section 10 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act

this offence implicates the whole anglo board aswell as senior management in IL&P, it will be interesting to see who, if anyone is jailed over this.

i would also put the qn to you, if you want to see someone jailed for the above, where do you stand on the other irish plcs?

All of the banks in 2008 understated the amount of provisioning required against bad debts on their balance sheet, shoring up the balance sheet and misleading investors,

any plc involved in property would have had friendly valuations of properties that should have been impaired etc etc

should the management of all these companies be charged aswell?

c) the golden circle business , to me i it seems like it should be illegal but i dont know if technically that it is? i would be very surprised if those guys hadnt taken detailed legal advice before doing something like this.

again our friend seanie wasnt acting alone here, and the more people involved, i think the less likely that we will see anyone goto jail

maybe i will be proven wrong.

Finally, the reason that i dont post in politics very often is that i think my politics wouldnt be that welcome here the only party whose policies i agreed with were the PDs and the only political leader that i had any time for was Michael MacDowell. Of the current lot i believe Brian Lenihan has done a good job in difficult circumstances and the prospect of a labour/FG Gilmore/Kenny government scares the bejaysus out of me:)

A solicitor no less.

Right,
If it is found that there were others at director level and indeed the Financial regulator at the time, who were complicit or knew about these transactions and the transactions or work around them are found to be in breach of some laws then yes, they to should be investigated and stand trial for this.........will that happen......probably not.

Cyrus · 19-03-2010 10:05am

kippy wrote: »

A solicitor no less.

and not just any solicitor, a tax solicitor

ei.sdraob · 19-03-2010 10:15am

bamboozle wrote: »

Regarding this on Primetime last night, what suprised/shocked/scared me most was the fact that the Financial Regulator had been informed on up to 50 occasions of these 'inter-bank' loans between Anglo and ILP yet stood back and did nothing until late in 2008.
Surely this raises serious questions as to what the hell the Financial Regulator was actually doing during the Celtic Tiger.

Are we likely to see other arrests? I remember reading in the last year of some loan given down in Kerry of over 1 million, a deposit of €100 euro was given, in my mind whoever approved that loan needs to be examined and i'm sure there are many more similar cases and examples of developers being given loans with little or no surity etc.

yeh its crazy alright

thats the second primetime show that's showing the regulator to have been doing absolutely nothing

ei.sdraob · 19-03-2010 10:17am

MaceFace wrote: »

Surely if these transactions were illegal, we should see arrest of hundreds more people?
Seanie didn't do it all by himself. A Vincent Brownski guest last night suggested there would be around 40 people in Anglo who would have worked on these transactions, but it would have been signed off by the regulator, and then what about the people who received the payments at Irish Nationwide. Did they know the nature of the transaction?

The question though is if the investigation is around the billions of short term deposit from ILP or if it is the hiding of personal loans with Nationwide?

like the guy said its only a matter of time that more people are brought in for questioning

who knows how deep this rabbit hole goes

SerialComplaint · 19-03-2010 10:27am

Let's hope that Sean had a good night's sleep on some pi$$-stained mattress in a cold cell, with just his Louis Copeland suit jacket for warmth. I'm sure the breakfast roll from the local Spar and tea in a plastic cup isn't quite what he is used to, but maybe he needs to start getting used to a slight drop in his standards.

FlutterinBantam · 19-03-2010 10:58am

Cyrus wrote: »

Obviously i have rubbed some people up the wrong way, which wasnt really my intention. my view on the whole thing is that until someone is seen being lead to mountjoy in cuffs im not that sure that there will be any jail time served.

People want to see Seanie in jail, in many peoples eyes he is the very definition of what went wrong in this country, a lot of people feel that he has personally stolen money from them, and in many ways the actions of his bank has taken money from us all.

But looking at what people feel he will be charged with:

a) directors loans and non disclosure of them - loans themselves were not illegal, not disclosing them breaches co law, but will he be jailed for this? cant see it

also this is the only 'crime' that he will have acted alone in, everything else implicates a lot of people, both within and outside of anglo

b) the transfers of monies from IL&P to shore up the BS and hence misleading investors. Im sure this is a criminal offence under some piece of legislation, at the least its a dereliction of directors duties but also as our friend pah has pointed out it probably falls under section 10 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act

this offence implicates the whole anglo board aswell as senior management in IL&P, it will be interesting to see who, if anyone is jailed over this.

i would also put the qn to you, if you want to see someone jailed for the above, where do you stand on the other irish plcs?

All of the banks in 2008 understated the amount of provisioning required against bad debts on their balance sheet, shoring up the balance sheet and misleading investors,

any plc involved in property would have had friendly valuations of properties that should have been impaired etc etc

should the management of all these companies be charged aswell?

c) the golden circle business , to me i it seems like it should be illegal but i dont know if technically that it is? i would be very surprised if those guys hadnt taken detailed legal advice before doing something like this.

again our friend seanie wasnt acting alone here, and the more people involved, i think the less likely that we will see anyone goto jail

maybe i will be proven wrong.

Finally, the reason that i dont post in politics very often is that i think my politics wouldnt be that welcome here the only party whose policies i agreed with were the PDs and the only political leader that i had any time for was Michael MacDowell. Of the current lot i believe Brian Lenihan has done a good job in difficult circumstances and the prospect of a labour/FG Gilmore/Kenny government scares the bejaysus out of me:)

Never apologise for your point of view Sir.

No point in handing over the forum to a hard core who want to promulgate a particular view.

No hidden meaning or agenda to that, just never be afraid to articulate your views even though you may be pilloried for it

If it's any consolation I thought McDowell was a good 'un too .

ei.sdraob · 19-03-2010 11:05am

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

If it's any consolation I thought McDowell was a good 'un too .

oh dear god :eek:

i have a place on my personal grudge shelf reserved just for him

bamboozle · 19-03-2010 11:07am

ei.sdraob wrote: »

yeh its crazy alright

thats the second primetime show that's showing the regulator to have been doing absolutely nothing

yet what really p1sses me off is that our disgraced Regulator is forced to resign, not only does he get a full pension but he also gets 6 months of his salary paid in case he's needed to take any calls from his former co-workers and his pension of €140K a year is greater than the salary of the sitting head of the US Fed Reserve Ben Bernanke who earns $183,500 in what is arguably the most important financial role in the world.

For the record, Bernanke has a BA from Harvard and a PHD from MIT, Neary joined the civil service after 1 year studying greek in UCD and spent 30 years in the civil service.

bamboozle · 19-03-2010 11:08am

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Never apologise for your point of view Sir.

No point in handing over the forum to a hard core who want to promulgate a particular view.

No hidden meaning or agenda to that, just never be afraid to articulate your views even though you may be pilloried for it

If it's any consolation I thought McDowell was a good 'un too .

McDowell was excellent, his problem was he did what was he felt was right rather than what was politically right, hence his low popularity, if our current TD's shared his integrity we'd be in a far better place.

dan_d · 19-03-2010 11:37am

bamboozle wrote: »

yet what really p1sses me off is that our disgraced Regulator is forced to resign, not only does he get a full pension but he also gets 6 months of his salary paid in case he's needed to take any calls from his former co-workers and his pension of €140K a year is greater than the salary of the sitting head of the US Fed Reserve Ben Bernanke who earns $183,500 in what is arguably the most important financial role in the world.

For the record, Bernanke has a BA from Harvard and a PHD from MIT, Neary joined the civil service after 1 year studying greek in UCD and spent 30 years in the civil service.

Horrors!!!
Things I'm happier not knowing. Don't need the level of anger in my life that those facts produce!!!!

jmayo · 19-03-2010 12:52pm

Cyrus wrote: »

indeed i have

how do you define the amounts of the loans as excessive by the way? in hindsight they are but again at the time i would imagine they were secured on assets that i was believed were worth in excess of the amounts

They were excessive when compared to directors loans at similar sized banking institutions worldwide.
They were even in excess of the director loans given out by major banks like Rabobank, RBS, etc AFAIK

Cyrus wrote: »

it strikes me as wierd that you have an issue with me posting,

i have an interest in the irish business world and this topic interests me

No the reason it strikes me as weird in that you claim you are not defending banks/bankers and yet your are very vocal in this one doign exactly that.
If you were posting to the same level in every business related thread then it wouldn't have struck me as weird.

Cyrus wrote: »

im interested to hear how you define the hiding of the loans as illegal

It is failing to declare interests, misleading the company published accounts and AFAIK a breach of directors rules as part of company law ?

Cyrus wrote: »

i agree re the risk assessment

however he was perfectly within his rights at the time to borrow from anglo

No one is questioning his right to borrow money, they are questioning his hiding of these loans so that they didn't appear in the company accounts.
Also they are questioning how excessive they were and how they are now not being repaid. :mad:

sceptre wrote: »

"New" people (heavens to betsy) come to the Politics forum all the time. Deal with the view of the "new" people if you choose but questioning their rationale for having an interest for little reason other than you think it's "somewhat weird" is personalising the discussion. And as you probably well know we don't do that. So neither do you please.

/mod

I have no problem with new posters, I welcome them.
I only raised the point that it is weird that poster suddenly arrives on one particular thread, makes excuses for individual being discussed, tries to make light of their probable misdemeanours and yet claims they are not defending them in any way ?

BTW it would be nice if you or one of your colleagues were so quick to warn other posters, who happen to be mods, from personalising the discussion by making personal remarks about people's ability :rolleyes:

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

...
If it's any consolation I thought McDowell was a good 'un too .

Oh dear God :mad:

bamboozle wrote: »

McDowell was excellent, his problem was he did what was he felt was right rather than what was politically right, hence his low popularity, if our current TD's shared his integrity we'd be in a far better place.

Yeah he knew what was right and what was politically right :rolleyes:
You do remember how he had such a terrible time trying to figure out if it was right or wrong to withdraw support from a taoiseach who was wasting taxpayers money in a tribunal, all the while coming up with cock and bull stories that very few believed as to why he had no bank account and had wads of foriegn currency in his safe.

Yeah the man will be remembered for his principled stand on this issue. :rolleyes:

MaceFace · 19-03-2010 12:55pm

jmayo wrote: »

Oh dear God :mad:

Yeah he knew what was right and what was politically right :rolleyes:
You do remember how he had such a terrible time trying to figure out if it was right or wrong to withdraw support from a taoiseach who was wasting taxpayers money in a tribunal, all the while coming up with cock and bull stories that very few believed as to why he had no bank account and had wads of foriegn currency in his safe.

Yeah the man will be remembered for his principled stand on this issue. :rolleyes:

These are strange times indeed. When I find myself agreeing with jmayo, something must be wrong

Drumpot · 19-03-2010 1:29pm

bamboozle wrote: »

McDowell was excellent, his problem was he did what was he felt was right rather than what was politically right, hence his low popularity, if our current TD's shared his integrity we'd be in a far better place.

T.D's get elected by the people of this country . . We need the electorate to demand that kind of integrity before we will have T.D.'s that feel they can actually do things how they feel they should be done .

The very fact that McDowell didn't "dance the dance" of political posturing and didnt get reelected in itself is a damning indictment of our culture and what is important to us as a society . .

While there are of course politicians who deserve to be sacked and possibly even arrested, people cant just ignore the fact that we, the people of Ireland vote these people in . .We have to take our own responsibility and be accountable for some of the people that walk the halls of the Dail . .

I always say that you only believe the spin or the lies that you want to. . Everybody in Ireland wanted to be rich and the lie that they could all have it was something we all wanted to believe. . The main criminals in this whole collapse need to be held accountable . . However the real criminal thing would be if we didnt learn . . I dont have much confidence in our society and expect to see at least 1 or 2 more bank scandals in my lifetime . . Until we stand up collectively and say, "do you know what we were all part of the mistakes that made this country get down on its knees . . But we want to be better and we want a better society and we will work hard together to achieve it . ." , we will only ever be a bunch of self invested individual groups just looking out for ourselves . . Ireland is not a country, its an Island of individuals . .

Liam Byrne · 19-03-2010 1:36pm

Drumpot wrote: »

The very fact that McDowell didn't "dance the dance" of political posturing and didnt get reelected in itself is a damning indictment of our culture and what is important to us as a society . .

While I would agree with the posters above re McDowell (in general), and the fact that you knew where you stood with him, whether agreeing or disagreeing, there's one MASSIVE blot on McDowell's CV, and that's the fact that he didn't pull the plug on Ahern when the scandal came to light.

While I can't speak for everyone (but it would appear that at least jmayo agrees with me) - THAT is the reason I wouldn't have voted for him again.....nothing to do with his overall principles or approach, just the fact that he let us down badly when the PD "watchdog" was required the most.

Cyrus · 19-03-2010 1:56pm

jmayo wrote: »

No the reason it strikes me as weird in that you claim you are not defending banks/bankers and yet your are very vocal in this one doign exactly that.
If you were posting to the same level in every business related thread then it wouldn't have struck me as weird.

ill post where and when i choose and i certainly dont feel that i need to justify my actions to you,

i wasnt defending him or making light of anything, merely trying to put a little balance into the lock him up and throw away the key direction the thread has taken,

as of yet he hasnt been charged much less convicted

Sean Fitz arrested?

Comments