Pearse Doherty (Donegal, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Can I just make one point before I conclude? I wrote to the Governor of the Central Bank last May. There were two parts to what I wrote. One part was a protected disclosure, which the Central Bank is investigating, but the other part, which I am happy to talk about, was in relation to an out-of-court settlement that happened in respect of Permanent TSB and a prevailing rate case. This was covered extensively in the media at the time, particularly in The Irish Times. The Irish Independentwould have covered it as well. Permanent TSB settled with a customer on the prevailing rate but with a confidentiality clause. As Ms Rowland will know there are hundreds if not thousands of people who will argue with Permanent TSB that they are on the wrong rate, that they are within scope and that the bank is wrong. They will argue that they are on the wrong rate as a result of the prevailing rate. The situation I am extremely concerned about is where somebody is willing to take on the system, put his or her money on the line, go to the courts and all of the rest of it and where Permanent TSB will settle on the steps of the court but with a confidentiality clause which means nobody else will know why it settled or why that risk was removed from the bank.

As I said, I wrote to the Central Bank in May. I got a response that dealt with the protected disclosure and saying that I would get a response to the other part. To my knowledge I did not get that response but that could be my mistake. Can the witnesses explain to me what action the Central Bank has taken in relation to the out-of-court settlement and the confidentiality clause that has been placed on this individual? It is my understanding, although we can never be sure because there is a confidentiality clause, that this is extremely like the cases that are before the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman, if not quite identical to them. The Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman has no insight into these cases, and he has responded to my letter. He asked me to bring it to the attention of the Central Bank. I am quite interested to hear this, because this is not the first time I have raised an out-of-court settlement and a gagging clause with the Central Bank.

There is another issue that I have asked the Central Bank to investigate which affects thousands of customers, but maybe it is for another day. It is about payment protection, and I have engaged with, and provided a dossier to, the Central Bank on that issue.

I just want to focus on the tracker rate, the prevailing rate and out-of-court settlements. Can the witnesses explain what powers and what reach the Central Bank has to look under the bonnet in terms of that case?