Claim banks misled Nama 'outrageous'

[BoyRacer]

Claim banks misled Nama ‘outrageous’ - Simon Carswell → irishtimes.com/newspaper/ire … 24447.html

AGENCY CRITICISED: THE FORMER chief executive of the Government’s debt management agency, Michael Somers, has criticised the National Asset Management Agency (Nama) over allegations it was misled by the banks.
Dr Somers, now a Government-appointed director of Allied Irish Banks, said claims made at the Public Accounts Committee last week that the banks misled the agency about the value of their property loans were “outrageous”.
If Nama had evidence of this, they should provide it or withdraw the claims and not hide behind parliamentary privilege, he said.

there is more

[coc]

My head hurts. Does this fucker have an evil twin or something?

[ncallanan]

McDonagh is telling the truth.
viewtopic.php?f=50&t=24926

[jabaar]

Outrageous indeed but the dogs on the street know the banks (and developers) avoided realistic valuations ahead of handing over to NAMA, it was NAMA’s job to sort through the pile but the timing pressure could not have allowed complete and thorough evaluation, no doubt huge errors were allowed through. Having said all that, does NAMA not have recourse in terms of the banks still being on the line for losses?

[Libero]

@ncallanan

McDonagh is telling the truth.
viewtopic.php?f=50&t=24926

McDonagh’s job, under the NAMA Act 2009 (esp. section 203), is to report incidences of criminal behaviour (e.g. fraud) to the Gardai, and other misbehaviour to the relevant regulatory authorities (in the case of banks, the CBFSAI).

The Act does not say he can opt out of that obligation and instead generally b1tch about the situation and gently suggest that certain unnamed people and institutions have questions to answer.

[Negative_Covenant]

It is an offence to mislead NAMA. The public are sick of hearing about bankers doing terrible things but nothing being done about it. Somers is right. NAMA should put up or shut up. If they were mislead then start the prosecutions. However, if they were not mislead and they ballsed up their projections themselves then they should admit it.

Somers’ intervention is good for AIB but possibly bad for individual bankers who may have told porkies. If McDonagh is being straight up then he should give all the evidence to the Gardai and then say he has done so. It shouldn’t be long until there is a prosecution. Fair play to Somers for forcing his hand.

If NAMA do not report individuals and specific incidents then we will have to assume they are being misleading themselves.

BTW, afaik McDonagh enjoys no Parliamentary privilege speaking at a commitee.

[Bostonorberlin]

@BoyRacer

Claim banks misled Nama ‘outrageous’ - Simon Carswell → irishtimes.com/newspaper/ire … 24447.html

AGENCY CRITICISED: THE FORMER chief executive of the Government’s debt management agency, Michael Somers, has criticised the National Asset Management Agency (Nama) over allegations it was misled by the banks.
Dr Somers, now a Government-appointed director of Allied Irish Banks, said claims made at the Public Accounts Committee last week that the banks misled the agency about the value of their property loans were “outrageous”.
If Nama had evidence of this, they should provide it or withdraw the claims and not hide behind parliamentary privilege, he said.

there is more

dont say nuttin bout somers
the mans a legend
patriot … or didnt you know
if only we could find some more cuntry wood be sorted,
luckily they posted dem patriot jobs up on monster.ie… hopefully we get some more supplicants , going rate is 1 million squids per year …
thepropertypin.com/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=34460&p=453452&hilit=somers#p453452

[BrendanG]

Dail watchdog to recall NAMA chief over ‘backtracking’ on bank evidence
independent.ie/national-news … 64680.html
Friday December 17 2010

THE Dail’s spending watchdog is recalling the head of NAMA amid concerns he may be “backtracking” on previous evidence he gave about bank loan valuations.

Chief executive Brendan McDonagh told the Public Accounts Committee last month he did not disagree with comments that NAMA had been given “false and misleading information” by the banks about the value of their toxic loans.

The committee subsequently wrote to the Garda Fraud Squad, the Financial Regulator and the Director of Corporate Enforcement to request an investigation.

But Fianna Fail TD Ned O’Keeffe said it had now been reported that NAMA had no evidence to back up these claims – and that Mr McDonagh’s comments had been misinterpreted.

“I think he should be disciplined for misleading us here,” he said.

Committee chairman Fine Gael TD Bernard Allen said Mr McDonagh would be recalled next month to discuss his “reported backtracking”.

“We will give him an opportunity to clarify his evidence about the banks misleading NAMA,” he said.

Last month NAMA said it had been given information by the banks that led it to believe a 30pc discount on loans would be the correct price to pay. But it then found that a 58pc discount was the proper price – thus the banks were paid a €20bn less.

Michael Brennan

[ncallanan]

Please tell me Ned O’Keeffe is retiring

[The_Unwelcome_Guest]

@ncallanan

Please tell me Ned O’Keeffe is retiring

How 'bout Batt?

[BoyRacer]

Dail watchdog to recall NAMA chief over ‘backtracking’ on bank evidence → independent.ie/national-news … 64680.html

THE Dail’s spending watchdog is recalling the head of NAMA amid concerns he may be “backtracking” on previous evidence he gave about bank loan valuations.
Chief executive Brendan McDonagh (right) told the Public Accounts Committee last month he did not disagree with comments that NAMA had been given “false and misleading information” by the banks about the value of their toxic loans.
The committee subsequently wrote to the Garda Fraud Squad, the Financial Regulator and the Director of Corporate Enforcement to request an investigation.

there is more

Nama chief accused of ‘misleading’ Dáil committee → irishtimes.com/newspaper/fin … 38529.html

Mr McDonagh appeared before the committee in November. During the meeting Fianna Fáil TD Michael McGrath said there was a need to investigate the fact that “false, misleading information” was provided to the agency in a systematic way.
This could have led to a “huge overpayment by the taxpayer” to the banks. He knew this was a serious charge, but “the evidence is overwhelming”.
Mr McDonagh told the meeting last month that he did not disagree with the points being made by Mr McGrath.

there is more

hmmm

[BoyRacer]

Nama ‘does not suspect’ it was misled by banks - MARTIN WALL → irishtimes.com/newspaper/fin … 37232.html

The controversy erupted last month when Nama’s chief executive Brendan McDonagh told the committee that he did not disagree with comments by Fianna Fáil TD Michael McGrath that there had been a clear pattern of false and misleading information being fed by the banks during last year.
“We received a response from Mr McDonagh this week. Nama’s letter does not refer any matter to us in respect of the conduct of any regulated entity,” said Mr Elderfield.
“Further, Nama’s letter informs us that it does not have a valid basis to suspect that there has been any criminal offence or other contravention of the Nama Act.”

there is more

Mr. McDonagh should be sacked or resign rather than be allowed to withdraw the claim.

[V4Victory]

@BoyRacer

Nama ‘does not suspect’ it was misled by banks - MARTIN WALL → irishtimes.com/newspaper/fin … 37232.html

The controversy erupted last month when Nama’s chief executive Brendan McDonagh told the committee that he did not disagree with comments by Fianna Fáil TD Michael McGrath that there had been a clear pattern of false and misleading information being fed by the banks during last year.
“We received a response from Mr McDonagh this week. Nama’s letter does not refer any matter to us in respect of the conduct of any regulated entity,” said Mr Elderfield.
“Further, Nama’s letter informs us that it does not have a valid basis to suspect that there has been any criminal offence or other contravention of the Nama Act.”

there is more

Mr. McDonagh should be sacked or resign rather than be allowed to withdraw the claim.

Of course they were’nt misled. How can you be misled when you’re “In on the game”?

[Larry]

^^ From the IT piece ^^

Staff assigned to work in Nama are employees of the National Treasury Management Agency. The NTMA has given the committee details of the number of staff paid at particular levels rather than details of specific payments. It said 16 members of staff are being paid more than €200,000 per year. A further 22 staff were receiving between €150,000 and €200,000 a year.

A further 65 NTMA staff are on salaries of between €100,000 and €150,000, while 202 staff are earning incomes of up to €100,000.

So there are more than 100 staff in the NTMA earning more than €100,000 pa, and if I’m reading it right, that’s 1/3 of all people working there (assuming the 202 earning up to €100,000 constitutes all other salary earners there).

The piece also says that:

Mr McDonagh has been recalled to give evidence before the committee in early January on this issue and in relation to salary scales paid to senior executives in the organisation"

“Senior executives”? Does that refer to those 100 people on €100,000+? If so, it means that 1/3 of people in the NTMA are considered “senior executives”. And if not, it means that there are significant numbers of middle-ranking executives (no fewer than 65 and up to 87) earning more than €100,000. One of those things must be true.

[yoganmahew]

Claims that bank shareholders will be entitled to sue directors, auditors and management for fraudulent reports “outrageous” says director, auditor and manager sources… Repeat after me Mr. McDonogh “Nothing was done wrong, no-one is to blame, no monies paid can be recovered, no-one has to go to jail, no-one can sue…”

[V4Victory]

@yoganmahew

“Nothing was done wrong, no-one is to blame, no monies paid can be recovered, no-one has to go to jail, no-one can sue…”

under CURRENT laws … wait wait wait the world is constant change

[BoyRacer]

Tensions between Nama and Central Bank over loans investigation call - Cliff Taylor → sbpost.ie/news/ireland/tensi … 53610.html

Nama chief executive Brendan McDonagh is to stand by comments he made to the Dáil Public Accounts Committee, which referred to misleading indications given by the banks about the likely write-down on loans to be transferred to the agency.
Nama is understood to believe that the Financial Regulator should investigate the basis on which AIB and Bank of Ireland both told the Stock Exchange in September 2009 that their Nama discounts would be less than 30 per cent.

**Nama undertook a loan-by loan examination over the past year, which led it to conclude that the loans it was taking on from the banks were worth much less than the banks had indicated in their Stock Exchange announcements and in information provided to the Minister for Finance, Brian Lenihan, which he relayed to the Dáil, also in September 2009.
**there is more

[yoganmahew]

Good man Mr. McDonagh. There is yet hope.

[namawinelake]

I think this looks serious for NAMA and I think the agency’s defence of its first draft Business Plan in October 2009 has been a sorry episode because by laying the blame for inaccurate inputs at the doors of the banks, they are avoiding ownership. And there is something poetic about the fact that the NAMA CEO’s words at the Committee hearing appear to be coming back to bite him on the backside. NAMA need to take ownership of its words and actions and that includes its business plan which aims to deliver a Net Present Value of €1bn over 10 years.

[yoganmahew]

One issue with regards to this that is yet to be teased out is the whisperings the banks were putting out about the size of haircuts they would endure. Officially to the stock exchanges, the big banks were saying about 30%; unofficially through their tied brokerages, they were putting the whisper of sub-20% haircuts out. See here for example:
businessandleadership.com/le … aircut-est

Davy Stockbrokers has upped its estimate on the ‘haircut’ or discount to be applied to the bad loans bought from the Irish banks by the Government’s National Asset Management Agency (NAMA), as result of a proposal contained in the most recent NAMA Bill that banks will share a portion of the risk.

In a note to investors issued this morning, Davy upped its predictions on the NAMA ‘haircut’ by 4-5pc.

This, Davy said, would bring to 25pc the discount applied to AIB loans, and 20pc in the case of Bank of Ireland (BoI).

The new NAMA Bill was published yesterday and Davy said the risk-sharing proposal contatined in it suggested “some incremental pain for the banks in addition to our original ‘haircut’ estimates”, which were 20pc for AIB and 16pc for Bank of Ireland.

(11 Sep 2009)

It is inconceivable to this poster that Davys would come up with estimates so low unless they were being fed the information. There was a phoney war going on for six months in 2009 where the banks were downplaying the cost of NAMA to them (and thereby downplaying their capital requirements. This resulted in a bounce in share prices allowing some, I don’t doubt, to offload. It also allowed a bounce in bond prices with the same outcome.

Who was feeding this advice? Did it constitute market manipulation? Were the ‘real’ haircut figures known? Does some of the trading in equity and bonds amount to insider trading?
AIB peaked (over the last two years) on 17 Sep 2009 at 3.37; it was 0.31 at last print.
BoI peaked (again over the last two years) on 30 Sep 2009 at 3.42; it was 0.35 at last print.