Thomas Byrne (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I tried to follow proceedings on the monitor when I was not here because I was involved in a different matter today. I apologise if my questions have been asked already and if they have been the delegation can close me down. Will AIB comment on the mis-selling of payment protection policies and the associated Central Bank investigation? How many AIB customers were involved and what is the total cost to the bank?

The Chairman raised the issue of payment processing services. It seems that as we are entering a cashless society many small businesses will be put severely at risk because the costs of having the machines is prohibitive in the first place. Generally my barber or the dry cleaners cannot take a Laser card. Unless a business is a high volume cash shop such as a newsagent or grocery it will not be able to take them. The local farm shop will not take them. Swipe cards are being introduced with a value of under €15. Businesses that depend on such transactions will be at a severe disadvantage because they do not have the machines. It would be a help to small businesses if the costs were reduced. I realise this is not only a matter for AIB. There are various companies involved in this area and I understand AIB is involved in a joint venture, but it seems to be a major issue and it will get worse for these businesses as the take-up of these swipe cards becomes more widespread.

The standard financial statement for mortgages comes from the Central Bank requirement. It seems to be the most extensive means test conducted by anyone in this country. It is more extensive that the medical card or social welfare means test. A social welfare means test does not take account of expenditure, only one's income. The medical card uses three or four items of expenditure as a way of reducing one's income for the purposes of getting a medical card but the standard financial statement goes into remarkable detail in respect of expenditure going out. It seems to be a burden on the banks and it give the banks a bad name because people have no wish to be dealing with the banks, especially when someone has a bad experience and it gets out. The process could be dramatically simplified. We could have standard levels of income or percentages of income to correspond to a mortgage. A mortgage could be no more than 30% or 35% of one's gross or net income, whatever way it works out. Does AIB foresee any difficulty with that or does it wish to see this changed? Is this a burden on the bank? It is humiliating for people to have to list their expenditure to banks in ways not required by the State.

The advanced forbearance options referred to include split mortgages, trading down, voluntary losses and mortgage-to-rent. However, I do not see shared equity solutions, although a split mortgage may be a type of arrangement.

Was the Ms Justice Dunne judgment discussed earlier?