Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Wednesday, 22 May 2013

Select Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality

Land and Conveyancing Law Reform Bill 2013: Committee Stage

2:40 pm

Photo of Stephen DonnellyStephen Donnelly (Wicklow, Independent) | Oireachtas source

It is very important that the PIP should be able to return to the judge and state that he or she has considered the situation, that he or she has put together a proposal which meets the guidelines relating to the insolvency service, that it is the same sort of proposal being accepted by lenders X, Y and Z and that the bank to which it has been put is refusing to play ball. The latter might state that it is not interested, that the house has equity in it and that it is taking that equity and applying the veto. This also goes to another amendment we will be discussing later. It is extremely important that a PIP should be in a position to return to a judge in order to give to him or her the type of evidence to which I refer. However, no PIP is going to do that. The Minister said so himself. If a PIP is of the view that the bank will not agree to a proposal, then he or she will not spend any more time working on it. We have a problem because there will be borrowers who will be unable to gain access to a PIP. As the Minister stated, PIPs are highly-trained business people and they will know that certain banks will not accept proposals of a particular type. They will inform borrowers that they are not going to get anywhere because it will not be possible to reach agreement with the banks and then bid them goodbye. Borrowers will be stuck on the side of the street with nowhere to go. That is the problem we face and I do not see any solution to it.

I hope the number of people who will be affected in this way will be tiny but there is no doubt that it will happen. Perhaps it might be possible to establish a central fund which could be used in respect of a limited number of cases. If a judge believes it might be possible to develop a proposal, if the borrower involved tries to come up with one and if the PIP he or she approaches states that it will not be possible to provide assistance because of the threat of non-payment, surely something should be done in such circumstances. Perhaps moneys could be provided out of a central fund in order that the borrower in question might consult a PIP, have the situation explained to him or her by the latter and then go back before the judge.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.