Mr. Paul Joyce:

There could be scenarios where there would be a difference when someone knew and when someone ought to have known. For example, there has been considerable recent publicity about people having been unfairly taken off tracker mortgages with a look-back and complaints mechanism put in place. Hypothetically, I could envisage a lender claiming that that was in the public domain, that there was redress available for having been wrongfully taken off a tracker mortgage and that those who did not make a complaint at the time it was in the public domain certainly should have known they had time to make a complaint.

I absolutely take the Deputy's point that the time at which the person knew or ought to have known may be simultaneous but it is conceivable that in an instance like that, it would not be. It raises a very important issue of consumer knowledge. By and large the provider has the expertise and the financial knowledge, but many consumers, who simply have to avail of financial services as part of everyday life, do not necessarily have the financial expertise to understand products, and to understand when they ought to have made a complaint and when the clock starts to run. It is a very important discussion. During the debate on 6 October there was a suggestion that the Office of the Attorney General would have to look at this in some detail. Thankfully, we are only at the stage of the heads of the Bill, but it certainly requires considerable clarification and discussion.