Mr. Brendan O'Connor:

When a receiver is appointed, they take over the property and they have statutory duties. The receiver makes the decisions. It is obviously more attractive from a property perspective to have a tenant in the property, so having a sitting tenant is not an issue. We would comply with all the rules around landlords, etc. Typically, if the tenant has a deposit, they get it back if they want to move on, but in many cases where a buy-to-let property goes into receivership and is eventually sold, it is sold to another investor. Selling it with a tenant in situis more attractive than not having a tenant in situ. I am pretty happy from our governance perspective. I do not believe there is a code of conduct per seor best practice among the banks but the idea of a rent receiver has been around for quite some time and it is quite developed.