Results 28,541-28,560 of 35,924 for speaker:Pearse Doherty

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform: Bi-annual Review 2013: Financial Services Ombudsman (5 Mar 2014)

Pearse Doherty: How many companies have been affected by the three strike rule?

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform: Bi-annual Review 2013: Financial Services Ombudsman (5 Mar 2014)

Pearse Doherty: Would it be preferable if the number were reduced to one, given that in the executive summary the witnesses have mentioned the name and shame rule - that is not what it is officially called - has assisted the office but, more important, has assisted consumers because they are afraid of it and, obviously, are dealing better with the issues? Would that be of more assistance from the office's...

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform: Bi-annual Review 2013: Financial Services Ombudsman (5 Mar 2014)

Pearse Doherty: Yes.

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform: Bi-annual Review 2013: Financial Services Ombudsman (5 Mar 2014)

Pearse Doherty: Can I ask a final question which follows on from what the Chairman and I started with? Does the Financial Services Ombudsman Council still exist?

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform: Bi-annual Review 2013: Financial Services Ombudsman (5 Mar 2014)

Pearse Doherty: Are the original members appointed in 2008 still in place?

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform: Bi-annual Review 2013: Financial Services Ombudsman (5 Mar 2014)

Pearse Doherty: The organisation's website "About Us" shows that appointment in 2008 is only for a five year term, which would mean the term would have been up in October 2013. I do not see any reference to new appointees replacing the five who were appointed in 2008. They should have been allowed to remain in those positions for only five years.

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform: Bi-annual Review 2013: Financial Services Ombudsman (5 Mar 2014)

Pearse Doherty: Were all five individuals replaced?

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform: Bi-annual Review 2013: Financial Services Ombudsman (5 Mar 2014)

Pearse Doherty: The law setting up the council provides that a member of the council will hold office for a period not exceeding five years.

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform: Bi-annual Review 2013: Financial Services Ombudsman (5 Mar 2014)

Pearse Doherty: Why are the original five still on the council given that they were appointed on 29 October 2008?

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform: Bi-annual Review 2013: Financial Services Ombudsman (5 Mar 2014)

Pearse Doherty: How are those two members still on the original council, given the section I have just read out?

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform: Bi-annual Review 2013: Financial Services Ombudsman (5 Mar 2014)

Pearse Doherty: So they have been reappointed. That is fine. We were talking about the issue, for which I argued forcefully and which was accepted by the Government, that a description of the upheld claim could be given by the Financial Services Ombudsman. Mr. Prasifka said the office is statutorily debarred from doing that. Is that correct?

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform: Bi-annual Review 2013: Financial Services Ombudsman (5 Mar 2014)

Pearse Doherty: The Financial Services Ombudsman is not permitted to provide a description as contained in the original legislation.

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform: Bi-annual Review 2013: Financial Services Ombudsman (5 Mar 2014)

Pearse Doherty: Mr. Prasifka claims the statutory instrument in question came from the Minister for Finance.

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform: Bi-annual Review 2013: Financial Services Ombudsman (5 Mar 2014)

Pearse Doherty: The statutory instrument came from the Financial Services Ombudsman Council. It did not come from the Department of Finance and or from the Minister but from your own council which sets regulations on how the office deals with these matters.

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform: Bi-annual Review 2013: Financial Services Ombudsman (5 Mar 2014)

Pearse Doherty: Can we clarify the following issue? A person was involved in this matter which was supported across the House. Amendment No. 77 to the legislation specifically allowed for a description of a complaint to be given in an upheld complaint. A lengthy debate on the issue took place over a number of days and it was the Financial Services Ombudsman Council, not the Minister for Finance or the...

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform: Bi-annual Review 2013: Financial Services Ombudsman (5 Mar 2014)

Pearse Doherty: Does the witness now acknowledge that it is within the council's gift to set its own rules and regulations in accordance with section 57BD of the original Act and amended by the legislation we dealt with last year. Therefore, it is completely within the council's gift to outline the regulations in the form it will report, as it has done, as long as it is laid before the Houses and has the...

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform: Bi-annual Review 2013: Financial Services Ombudsman (5 Mar 2014)

Pearse Doherty: The Financial Services Ombudsman Council did not seek-----

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform: Bi-annual Review 2013: Financial Services Ombudsman (5 Mar 2014)

Pearse Doherty: Why not? This was a major part of the debate in the House on the way the Financial Services Ombudsman would report.

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform: Bi-annual Review 2013: Financial Services Ombudsman (5 Mar 2014)

Pearse Doherty: So it is a bureau. There is the council which advises the office and sets regulations and the bureau comprising the witnesses which furnishes this report, but this was done hand-in-glove. The council and the bureau worked hand-in-glove on this matter right through the whole process. The bureau knew this was the type of statutory instrument that would have been given effect. Is that correct?

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform: Bi-annual Review 2013: Financial Services Ombudsman (5 Mar 2014)

Pearse Doherty: There is an appeal in respect of tracker mortgagers, independent of the Office of the Financial Services Ombudsman. I know from referring people that adjudications from the office of the Financial Services Ombudsman are in limbo until that appeal takes place. How many tracker mortgage cases would be awaiting the outcome of the appeal?