nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Quinn Family Sues Irish State for €4.5bn

2rkehij30qtza5

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/sectors/financial-services/quinn-family-sues-state-for-4-5bn-for-loss-of-businesses-1.1837417

Quinn Family to sue state for €4.5bn!

More taxpayers' money......just when we thought this country might have been turning a corner...

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

suicide_circus

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Despite him being a scumbag chancer I'm glad someone is finally having a go at the central bank for its gross incompetence and/or corruption.

Yep it dosnt look like anyone else is gonna take them or the regulator to task for their gross incompetence

Specialun

If he wins there wont ever be a pothole in fermanagh again

Specialun

suicide_circus wrote: »

What exactly did they done to him?

They raped him on facebook

kevohmsford

Still people I know are defending Sean Quinn. Very strange to say the least.

This article is a decent read.

http://www.thejournal.ie/sean-quinn-anglo-bankrupt-671638-Nov2012/

upstairs for coffee

So Quinn lost badly in a bet and is now trying to wrangle his way out of his loss?

thebaz

surely the state should counter sue him , if he and his family owe the state billions, while the majority of decent and law abiding citizens are enforced to endure years of austerity , thanks to the gambling of a select greedy few , including the Quinns. They took a gamble and lost , such is life , but this family think the state should bale them out , cause the lost . One thing is for sure if Mr. Quinn's gamble had come in , would he have shared his winnings with the state and its less well healed citizens ?

jcon1913

shruikan2553 wrote: »

They didn't protect him from his own stupidity.

How is that the fault of the state?

Collie D

Can somebody explain to me on what grounds he thinks he can do this? I'm a bit thick. From what I can read he is suing them for giving him a loan he couldn't pay back? Is that right? Surely he doesn't think he could win that? And surely he's smart enough to know he couldn't win? Am I missing something?

Maphisto

Collie D wrote: »

Can somebody explain to me on what grounds he thinks he can do this? I'm a bit thick. From what I can read he is suing them for giving him a loan he couldn't pay back? Is that right? Surely he doesn't think he could win that? And surely he's smart enough to know he couldn't win? Am I missing something?

That's the way I see it as well. Do ever get the feeling though that there's one rule for us, the thickees, and there's another rule for the people with mates in FF or FG, or the local Garda Super :mad:

Son Of A Vidic

Santana Full Sabotage wrote: »

Quinn Family Sues Irish State for €4.5bn

I wonder is he deducting from his settlement claim, the value of his gold stash that he has allegedly hidden away.

Dan_Solo

suicide_circus wrote: »

Yep it dosnt look like anyone else is gonna take them or the regulator to task for their gross incompetence

Can we sue FF/FG/GP/SF for implementing the bank guarantee that fcuked us over for 100 billion?

Robbo

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Can we sue FF/FG/GP/SF for implementing the bank guarantee that fcuked us over for 100 billion?

There have been many crank litigants (and TDs trying to seek imortality)who've already tried. Turns out you can't just make up new areas of law based on incoherent rage and something you half remember from a John Grisham film.

Dartz

Santana Full Sabotage wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/sectors/financial-services/quinn-family-sues-state-for-4-5bn-for-loss-of-businesses-1.1837417

Quinn Family to sue state for €4.5bn!

More taxpayers' money......just when we thought this country might have been turning a corner...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't he the recipient of an illegal loan?

Didn't the bank loan him money, to invest back in the bank itself?

Maphisto

Robbo wrote: »

There have been many crank litigants (and TDs trying to seek imortality)who've already tried. Turns out you can't just make up new areas of law based on incoherent rage and something you half remember from a John Grisham film.

Are you saying this Quinn litigation won't get past the first post?

ScumLord

I think this case could be interesting though. Up until now it's been the state pointing fingers and diverting the attention onto all their former allies. Now the people they burned are making their counter move and I expect the dirty secrets to come out in this round.

Collie D

Dartz wrote: »

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't he the recipient of an illegal loan?

Didn't the bank loan him money, to invest back in the bank itself?

So if the loan was illegal surely both parties are at fault. As I said in my earlier post I'm sure I'm missing something so forgive my ignorance but wouldn't that be akin to a passenger in a stolen car suing the driver for whiplash?

CB19Kevo

The state is primarily at fault for the whole fiasco.
Regulator should be held to account,Thats not to say Quinn has clean hands in this situation.

Robbo

Maphisto wrote: »

Are you saying this Quinn litigation won't get past the first post?

Nope, that's not what I'm saying. If I was to place a bet on this Quinn business, it'll run for some time.

folan

are the quinns trying to sue the state because anglo are guilty of fraud?

can i sue the government because starbucks gave me cold coffee?

Dan_Solo

Collie D wrote: »

So if the loan was illegal surely both parties are at fault. As I said in my earlier post I'm sure I'm missing something so forgive my ignorance but wouldn't that be akin to a passenger in a stolen car suing the driver for whiplash?

It's more like a stolen car being handed on to another criminal who then crashes it and tries to sue the car's owner TBH.

ScumLord

folan wrote: »

are the quinns trying to sue the state because anglo are guilty of fraud?

can i sue the government because starbucks gave me cold coffee?

You probably can, yes. Whether you'd win or not is another story.

Dan_Solo

folan wrote: »

are the quinns trying to sue the state because anglo are guilty of fraud?

In a way it's genius, because the government will hand over 4.5bn to Quinn just to make sure not one of their cronies ever get convicted of anything.

foxtrot101

Can all those who have had to pay that 2% levy on their insurance policies since Quinn Insurance went belly up sue the Quinns? Its cost 126 million so far and could run to 1.64 billion over 25 years.

Maphisto

Dan_Solo wrote: »

In a way it's genius, because the government will hand over 4.5bn to Quinn just to make sure not one of their cronies ever get convicted of anything.

Yep, that's what I'm afraid of.

folan

Dan_Solo wrote: »

In a way it's genius, because the government will hand over 4.5bn to Quinn just to make sure not one of their cronies ever get convicted of anything.

no one in government will ask questions. no one in the courts will ever get their hands on it. the nation will sit by and say nothing. there has never been any fallout from this type of thing ever.

4.5bn from where?

wendell borton

I did have some sympathy for the Quinns at the start, but this one showes them up as utterly arrogent.

InReality

I thought he said he was going to pay all he owed back..

How can the Quinns afford all these court cases if they have no money ?

What is going on ?

folan

InReality wrote: »

I thought he said he was going to pay all he owed back..

How can the Quinns afford all these court cases if they have no money ?

What is going on ?

how else can he pay it back if he doesnt get it from the state!

hes using the ole noggin there

porsche959

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Despite him being a scumbag chancer I'm glad someone is finally having a go at the central bank for its gross incompetence and/or corruption.

Must agree to an extent, though it's kind of a case where I hope both parties lose.

tritium

Collie D wrote: »

So if the loan was illegal surely both parties are at fault. As I said in my earlier post I'm sure I'm missing something so forgive my ignorance but wouldn't that be akin to a passenger in a stolen car suing the driver for whiplash?

More like sueing the council because the traffic light was broken as you sped past at 200 mph