Neasa Hourigan (Dublin Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

507. To ask the Minister for Finance the circumstances in which NAMA agreed to write of £100 million debt owed by a company (details supplied); the reason NAMA was unable to recoup any funds from the sale by the company of the 146 apartments it was set up to develop; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20233/22]

Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

By virtue of Sections 99 and 202 of the NAMA Act, NAMA is legally precluded from disclosing confidential debtor information, including specific details relating to secured assets or confidential arrangements reached with debtors.

While NAMA is legally constrained from providing detailed responses to the issues set out in the Deputy’s query, NAMA advises that assertions contained in the query are misrepresentative of the factual situation. NAMA has at all times operated within the statutory obligations set out in the NAMA Act, primarily to obtain the best achievable financial return from its acquired assets and to protect or otherwise enhance the value of those assets.

Noting its obligations regarding debtor confidentiality, NAMA can respond only in general terms to the Deputy’s query regarding the criteria used for managing a debtor’s debt. Any debt management by NAMA is a carefully considered process and is generally undertaken only when all secured assets have been sold with proceeds remitted towards debt repayment and all potential further avenues for recourse to the debtor have been exhausted.  Otherwise, holding residual debt indefinitely, with no remaining assets to realise, incurs an annual administrative cost to NAMA and ultimately the taxpayer. The Deputy will note that the write-off of outstanding debt does not typically represent a loss to NAMA. This is because potential losses were crystallised to the participating institutions when NAMA acquired the loans.