Latest news with #JohnStanleyPurcell
Irish Times
24-05-2025
- Business
- Irish Times
Fifteen years, €24.3m and 1,384 pages later, was the Irish Nationwide inquiry really worth it?
The ability of corporate lawyers and big-name accountancy firms to make hay in good times and bad is borne out in the final cost of the regulatory investigation and inquiry into Irish Nationwide Building Society (INBS) , which collapsed during the financial crisis after receiving a €5.4 billion taxpayer bailout. The €24.3 million Central Bank bill, revealed on Wednesday as 15 years of investigations and inquiry came to an end, lends itself to fantasy alternative uses. It could have paid for 540 teachers on a starting salary; 56 housing tsars, based on the salary current National Asset Management Agency (Nama) chief Brendan McDonagh would have earned had he ended up taking the job; or, if you were feeling particularly flaithúlach, about 200 X-ray scanners along the lines of the one bought by the National Gallery eight years ago but never used. Three firms alone shared €10 million of the inquiry fees: accountancy group EY and law firms Arthur Cox and Mason Hayes & Curran. READ MORE [ INBS inquiry finds litany of regulatory breaches by collapsed lender Opens in new window ] But was the drawn-out affair worth it? Especially when, in the end, the only one of five former senior INBS figures put forward for inquiry a decade ago, after a five-year initial investigation into the failed lender, was still in focus. That individual, INBS's former finance director John Stanley Purcell (71), has been fined €130,000 for his role in a series of regulatory breaches at the lender before its collapse during the financial crisis, and disqualified from holding a senior position in a financial firm for four years. Between 2018 and 2021, three of the men – former chairman Michael Walsh; one-time head of commercial lending Tom McMenamin; and former head of UK commercial lending Gary McCollum – reached settlements with the regulator, resulting in individual fines of €20,000-€200,000 and disqualifications of up to 18 years. In 2019, the inquiry permanently 'stayed' the case into Michael Fingleton , now 87, as he was in ill health after a suffering a stroke. [ Michael Fingleton for beginners: Former head of Irish Nationwide faces civil trial Opens in new window ] The High Court is, however, currently hearing a civil case against Fingleton brought by the Irish Bank Resolution Corporation (IBRC), which took over INBS in 2011, for alleged negligent mismanagement of the lender. It follows failed bids that Fingleton's enduring powers of attorney – his wife, Eileen, and son, Michael jnr – brought all the way to the Supreme Court to stop the case going ahead. Proceedings such as this are possible because Irish legislation allows for individuals who lack capacity – or are even deceased – to sue or be sued in civil courts. The bar is higher for Central Bank inquiries, where the person concerned must have capacity to give evidence and speak to their own actions. The drawn-out nature of the investigation and inquiry is regrettable and undermined the process. Of course, there was a period of lost time between 2015 and 2018 when Fingleton and Purcell challenged the constitutionality of legislation that gave the Central Bank the power to hold such an inquiry. But the inquiry itself was unwieldy, spread over a number of modules, with substantive hearings occurring sporadically over 105 days between December 2017 and July 2021. It would take almost a further three years before the inquiry delivered its findings to Purcell in April 2024. The inquiry panel decided that 27 of the 42 so-called suspected prescribed contraventions – or regulatory breaches – INBS was alleged to have committed between 2004 and 2008 were proven. Purcell participated in 13 of these, it found. While INBS itself admitted a series of regulatory breaches in a settlement agreement with the Central Bank in 2015, this carried no weight in the inquiry. The case essentially had to be relitigated, with the inquiry finding first against INBS before concluding whether an individual participated in the contravention. But the final report does provide plenty of colour on individual loans where INBS broke its own policies, mainly as it built up a large commercial property portfolio in the UK, but also lent to projects in France, where the focus was on French Riviera and ski resorts, and Italy. One example was INBS's participation in a £336 million (€399 million) loan with UK banking group HBOS to a buyer – whose identity is redacted – of 869 pubs in the UK. This is known to relate to pubs giant Admiral Taverns' purchase of a portfolio from rival Punch Taverns, as the latter struggled with a mountain of debt. INBS provided £59 million of the loan and had a 25 per cent profit-share arrangement on the side. It was approved by the board on April 24th, 2007. Problem was, the inquiry found that most of the funds had been drawn down eight days earlier – with no sign of INBS's urgent credit decision approval procedures being used to get around this. The inquiry found that INBS failed to seek personal guarantees, as required by its policies, from the owners of the company – members of the London-based Landesberg and Rosenberg property families. It also extended the term of the loan without appropriate approvals. At the end of 2009, INBS had written off the entire facility, plus follow-up funding and interest, totalling £64.3 million. Central Bank officials insist lessons have been learned from its first public inquiry. These resulted in new guidelines in 2023 and helped inform a complete overhaul of the regulatory regime, including legislative changes that now make it much easier to hold finance executives to account for failings on their watch. Crucially, the regulator can now sanction individuals without having to find initially against their firm. Individuals will always be more inclined to resist agreeing to settlements than firms. Some will be right. But the fact that the INBS inquiry persisted to the bitter end should act as a powerful deterrent to wrongdoing. Perhaps, then, it was worth it.
Irish Times
21-05-2025
- Business
- Irish Times
INBS inquiry finds litany of regulatory breaches by collapsed lender
The written decision of the regulatory inquiry into Irish Nationwide Building Society (INBS), published on Wednesday, concludes a litany of regulatory breaches occurred in the run up to the 2008 property crash – as the lender repeatedly issued large sums to developers without proper paperwork, security and internal approvals. The inquiry panel decided that 27 of the 42 so-called suspected prescribed contraventions (SPC) – or regulatory breaches – INBS was alleged to have committed between 2004 and 2008 were proven. Its former finance director John Stanley Purcell, alone among five former INBS figures originally subject to inquiry not to have settled or had proceedings dropped by the time case had concluded, participated in 13 of these, it found. One example case in the report related to a £155 million (€184 million) loan to a borrower (whose name is redacted) to purchase a 7.8-acre site in London in 2007 with planning for 948 flats and commercial and retail outlets and follow-up £26.3 million facility early construction loan. READ MORE These breached the lender's own policies because three-year audited accounts were not sought from the borrower, which was incorporated in 1997, and loans were advanced prior to a quorate credit committee meeting. There was also no evidence personal guarantees, required by INBS when the borrower was a private company, were sought. The loans would ultimately be transferred to the National Asset Management Agency (Nama). [ EY, Arthur Cox and Mason Hayes main winners from €24.3m INBS inquiry Opens in new window ] INBS also failed to set a formal policy on profit-sharing lending, in spite of warnings from regulators from 2004 that its commercial lending should be 'conducted in a prudent and responsible way', according to the report. Profit-share lending, where INBS would take a cut of gains from a development project, eventually represented 65 per cent of INBS's €8.18 billion commercial loan book by the time of the 2008 crash. [ Irish Nationwide Building Society inquiry cost reaches €24.3m Opens in new window ] The inquiry concluded that rapid growth of profit-share lending between 2004 and 2008 meant the board could not have properly considered individual loans. For example, in July 2006 board minutes showed that 40 loans were approved at a single board meeting involving in excess of €450 million. In October of the same year 38 loans totalling more than €500 million were given the nod. 'It is clear that the sheer volume of loans that were presented to the board for approval made it virtually impossible for the board to apply appropriate oversight and rigour in approving these loans,' the report said, adding that the profit-share deals were particularly complicated as they often included repayment moratoriums, up to 100 per cent funding, the use of special purpose vehicles, and very large sums of money. This made them very vulnerable in a property market downturn. While the inquiry accepted Mr Purcell was not directly involved with day-to-day commercial lending, it said he was a board member and was aware of regulators' concerns 'that commercial lenders were, in some cases, not obtaining the required information from borrowers in order to properly assess their capacity to repay the loan being provided.' Between 2008 and 2010, INBS suffered financial losses in excess of €6 billion, leading to a €5.4 billion taxpayer bailout. It ultimately collapsed.
