Ms Sarah Shovlin:

We should not have to be here today because there should be a fully funded, end-to-end scheme but that is not the case. It is evident that the Government and banks are completely disjointed on the workings of this scheme. I wish to inform the committee of the horrendous experience my family has been through in trying to engage with the defective blocks scheme and our existing mortgage provider, EBS. With the launch of a scheme in 2020, I quickly engaged an engineer. His report stated that our Bison slabs were supported with a 2N block and that the house needed to be demolished; we were distraught. In January 2021, we applied for the defective blocks scheme and notified EBS the same day that the house was affected. We requested information and advice on how best to proceed with the existing mortgage. The response of EBS was to issue a standard financial statement, although we were not in arrears.

EBS then advised that a working group was in place to address the situation relating to defective blocks. We followed up five months later, but EBS still had no direction from its working group. During a further follow-up contact from our side in August 2021, EBS reiterated that normal lending criteria resulted in no approval of a top-up mortgage for us. At no point in this eight-month communication did EBS draw our attention to the covenants of our mortgage terms and conditions. Members can imagine our utter dismay when in March 2023, as we started demolition of our house, which coincided with the creation of this group, I learned that demolition triggered an immediate default, as per the terms and conditions of our mortgage. In two and a half years of constant communication with EBS, it never once mentioned that we would be in default. If this is not a case of dereliction of duty, I honestly do not know what is.

We duly requested a special exemption in March, which was issued, in relation to demolition. The letter from EBS did not cover any of the other covenants that were also in breach since before 2021, such as the damage default clause that my colleagues have spoken about. Two and a half years on, EBS has yet to identify or offer a product that meets the very special needs of our situation as the owners of homes built using defective blocks. It has not engaged in a meaningful way and has demonstrated a clear lack of understanding of the scheme and the circumstances we find ourselves in.

I would like assurance that all banks will categorise defective block homeowners as vulnerable. There is no evidence that EBS has done this in our situation to date. I ask each member here today to ensure that this happens for all defective block homeowners. Normal lending criteria cannot apply to this situation: age, stress tests, and loan-to-value, LTV, ratios are not applicable. We need short-term cash funding, supported by the grant and longer term low-cost funding, to reinstate the bank's asset, which is our home.

It is not only EBS with whom we have engaged in the last two and a half years. In December 2021, we complained to the Central Bank. The case number is 0004055. The Central Bank refused to take any action. It stated:

[W]e are aware that most of the commercial banks have put in place dedicated advisors for those customers who are impacted by mica or pyrite. I would suggest bringing your case to your mortgage provider for your lender to review.

This response was not helpful. EBS then went on to encourage me to go to the Ombudsman, if necessary. I had already been to the Ombudsman in July 2021 regarding the situation and our lack of support from our mortgage provider. That case was 309597. The only solution proposed by EBS at that time was: to review our accounts for affordability under "normal lending criteria", or we were offered a payment break on a full moratorium or interest-only basis. EBS did confirm that it had a full suite of options available if we were in financial difficulty. It must be noted that the bank would profit from the solutions it offered and these options would cost us thousands in the long run. No one should be profiting from this humanitarian disaster. Banks need to acknowledge the complexity and difficulty defective block remediation creates and engage in a collaborative and positive manner offering practical and workable solutions for both short-term and longer term funding. The banks need to be part of the solution on a scheme that does not offer 100% redress.

I will move on to the scheme that has been in place since Monday. The 10% retention is still in place for this. If a local builder is doing two, three or perhaps four defective block homes in a year, he will need significant cashflow of up to €180,000 a year. Many builders in the area will not be able to sustain this and therefore will not take on this type of work.

In addition to the lack of engagement by the banks, the Government continues to contribute to the problems we face. We are paying a 5% levy on all concrete products used to reinstate my home. We are paying VAT on all purchased materials and labour, which adds thousands to my rebuild - thousands that we do not have, and we cannot borrow.

The new scheme should also bring some relief to the registered landlords of the country. However, with a 20-year charge clawback, what incentive is there for a landlord to fix a home? Do any members here today have a rental property as their pension fund, with a 20-year clawback? I doubt it.

I reduced the size of my home but I still cannot make the scheme finances work. Without funding, the entire scheme is not workable, and my project will be stalled, others will never get started and the bank's asset will never be reinstated as things stand. Having raised my case with the Ombudsman, the Central Bank and our current lender, with no solutions forthcoming, I ask each member here today where we should turn now.