Pearse Doherty (Donegal, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Would the fact that they have split the mortgages into two different contracts, for example, the non-performing and the performing part, have a bearing on it? Would it be a bearing on it that, for example, Permanent TSB has to have the full warehouse portion paid at the age of 65 as compared to AIB, which does not have that stipulation? As Mr. Groarke can see from the ECB criteria, which was outlined to my colleague yesterday in the European Parliament, it will be deemed as non-performing if one has to use the underlying collateral to pay back the loan. Given the criteria that Permanent TSB uses, of course, that is the scenario because come the age of 65, one has to sell up to pay back the split mortgage whereas AIB does not have that.

Is it maybe the case that Permanent TSB has got seriously bad legal advice in the structuring of its split mortgages which has now found it in a situation where its split mortgages are deemed as non-performing and that other banks' split mortgages are deemed as performing? I will question AIB on this but I can only go on what AIB has told us in this committee on a number of questions that its split mortgages are deemed as performing under the current rules.