Thomas Byrne (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Another issue of concern for me is that of debt collectors calling to people's homes, which ties into the unlicensed moneylender issue. There is a great deal of secrecy in this area, including by licensed companies. Moneylenders generally do not display the name of the company over the door. In many cases, the names do not suggest that the business is that of moneylending. A couple come to mind but I will not mention them now. However, in my view this adds to the secrecy of the whole operation. Three different premises come to mind that display no information which would suggest that the businesses therein are moneylenders. Perhaps there is a need for amendment of the regulation in this area. A person who opens an accountancy or solicitor's practice is required to display their name on the business premises. If this provision were to apply across the board, it could help to open up the market in terms of the supply of information to consumers. What is the difference to the consumer between a licensed company which does not display its name above the door of its premises and an unlicensed company which does likewise? I am not sure there is much, if any, difference. This issue needs to be addressed.

The Consumer Credit Act provides for the taking of a case to the Circuit Court in respect of the excessive interest rate charges, with the Circuit Court having the authority to vary interest rates in credit agreements, including moneylending agreements. Are any such cases ever taken? Would such cases be taken by the borrower or the Central Bank on behalf of the borrower?