Ms Francesca McDonagh:

It is there twice because it is a consistent and fair reflection of what happened. Work was ongoing before I arrived. There was an ongoing discussion and challenge between the Central Bank and the Bank of Ireland regarding which customers should be included. There was a lot of work and discussion between senior management and the board. Nobody was trying to take an exclusively legalistic approach. There was a clear intent and endeavour to include customers' perspective. I will give two examples. The benefit of the doubt was given to customers where we had undercharged. I spoke of the 3,400 marginal errors where we had slightly overcharged customers and which we have corrected and redressed. There were 2,000 cases where we undercharged. That was an operational error - our error - and we did not return to the customers and tell them they owed us money as a consequence of our operational error. That is a simple example of where the bank did the right thing. During much of the discussion around contractual or consumer protection, the voice of the customer was in the room. The bank had a senior, very accomplished executive to be the voice of the customer and to give the customer perspective, which I think is good.

On reflection, and coming in with a fresh perspective and in agreement with the board, with a very clear mandate, I think that it could have gone further. My view is that in order to be more customer-centric, the voice of the customer could have been an external voice rather than an internal employee. It could have been more of a consumer advocate, to be a critical friend and constructive voice to challenge some of the thinking.

I do not want to pre-empt the review and have already mentioned this, but the opportunity to improve the clarity and consistency of wording is something that we should do and to go further on it. That is something I would like to do.

When I arrived, working with a team, we looked at the journey purely from a customer perspective. We did not have technical or legal counsel in the room for this exercise. We imagined a customer, it could be a member of staff or someone who is in the pre-2006 group or a regular switcher, and what they would have experienced at every step of the life of their mortgage? That provided a different prism through which to view the issue and it allowed us to see matters from their perspective. Those are examples of where we could have - and now have - gone further.