Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 123: To ask the Minister for Finance the way it is possible that certain persons whose loans have been, or are in the process of being, transferred to the National Assets Management Agency reportedly continue to engage in significant property deals in other jurisdictions without making any serious attempt to discharge debts owed to the banks and NAMA; if his attention has been drawn to reports of certain high profile developers successfully relocating to other jurisdictions; if his further attention has been drawn to comments made by the Chairman of NAMA to the effect that many developers whose loans have been, or are in the process of being, transferred to NAMA inappropriately continue to lead lives of luxury, thumbing their noses at the ordinary taxpayers who have to foot the bill for bank bailouts and to take on the risk of inherent in the NAMA project; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [25101/10]

Brian Lenihan Jnr (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am aware that the Chairman of NAMA has reiterated that NAMA intends to enforce security on borrowers who fail to demonstrate either the will or the capacity to deliver on debt reduction targets. In this regard, the Chairman made it clear that NAMA will require each borrower to set out how he plans to reduce his debt significantly over a three to five year horizon. Failure to demonstrate the capacity to do so would leave NAMA with no option but to foreclose. The Chairman also made it clear that NAMA reserves the right to recover arrears at any stage if it emerges that a debtor recovers the capacity to repay his or her debts.

I am also advised that NAMA has informed borrowers whose loans have transferred to it that the Agency will be very stringent in terms of any management costs allowed to them as part of their business plans.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 124: To ask the Minister for Finance if the transfer of the first tranche of loans to the National Asset Management Agency has been fully completed for all participating institutions; if a significant amount of loans scheduled for transfer to NAMA in the first tranche were subject to very significant discounts of up to 100%, due to the deficiencies of legal title and documentation; if the discount was then challenged by the credit institutions; the loans, if any, originally scheduled for transfer to NAMA in the first tranche that are now not being transferred due to a challenge by the relevant credit institution to the transfer price or haircut or where significant losses are incurred by a credit institution on loans which had been scheduled for transfer to NAMA but, due to a challenge in respect of the transfer price or haircut, they remain on the books of the credit institution, and if he proposes to replenish from State funds any resulting negative. [25102/10]

Brian Lenihan Jnr (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The transfer of the first tranche of loans to NAMA from the five participating institutions concluded in May 2010. The total transferred was some €15.3 billion and the consideration paid was €7.7 billion, making an overall discount of 50% on this tranche.

I am advised by NAMA that some of the loans transferred have been subjected to 100% discounts because of various legal deficiencies. In a number of other cases, institutions asked for additional time in order to remedy deficiencies. This was granted by NAMA subject to strict deadlines and, in most of those cases, appropriate remedial action was taken by the institutions. Where an institution failed to remedy the deficiency, the full discount was applied.

Where a valuation remains in dispute between NAMA and an institution, the loan is not left with the institution; it is acquired by NAMA. The institution may only challenge that valuation under Section 121 of the NAMA Act 2009. After completion of all transfers from the institution, Section 122 of the Act provides for disputes on the overall portfolio valuation to be referred to a Valuation Panel for review providing certain criteria are fulfilled.