Mr. Shane O'Sullivan:

Let us clarify the figure of 1,518. Of those, some 1,000 are categorised as being in legal proceedings and the number above that are not in legal proceedings but refer to voluntary sales.

With regard to the point about rent receivers, we must distinguish between rent receivers and fixed charge receivers. The rent receiver is engaged on behalf of the borrower and is engaged in scenarios where there are tenants in place and rent is being paid, but it is paid to the borrower, not the lender. The rent receiver is appointed on behalf of the borrower and the tenants continue to pay rent but the money goes to the lender rather than the borrower. More often than not, the property can be left in disrepair over a period so the rent receiver has an obligation to tidy up the property. It is a win-win situation in that the tenant gets to remain in the property and, if it is in disrepair, it is tidied up; the lender receives the rent that it had not received in the period up to the appointment; and the borrower, as a consequence, is now in a position to work with us to see what we can do to keep the property in his or her portfolio.

The fixed charge receiver is a different case and we do not appoint them. We have never done so and do not intend to do it. The fixed charge receiver has the authority to liquidate the asset and to sell the property without going through the traditional legal process that one goes through with a rent receiver in a buy-to-let property. In that scenario, the tenants tend to fare less well and it can lead to tenants having to vacate the premises sooner than they would want. From the perspective of Permanent TSB, we do not appoint fixed charge receivers and do not intend to do so. We have rent receivers in a small number of properties, some 360 accounts, which amount to about 700 properties. Where we have them in place, it works because there is a contribution to the mortgage, the tenant remains in place and the property is not vacated as part of a court process.