Ms Derville Rowland:

That is one of the issues that we took issue on. There are two ways to read a lack of documentation. It could be read that generally speaking, things would have been done fine, but actually, that was one of the areas that we challenged on. We said that in the absence of any documentation, the customer should have the benefit of that absence, that is, the benefit of the doubt should go to the customer where the bank cannot demonstrate that the sale was suitable. The Cathaoirleach asked if we were not surprised. Sometimes I am not surprised with the lack of documentation, particularly when we are going back to investments that were made in 2002 to 2006. I am not saying it is right, but having the unfortunate role of investigating banks out of the legacy period, it has been the case that-----