Claim banks misled Nama 'outrageous'

Claim banks misled Nama ‘outrageous’ - Simon Carswell → … 24447.html

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

McDonagh is telling the truth.

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?

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.

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.

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… hopefully we get some more supplicants , going rate is 1 million squids per year …

Please tell me Ned O’Keeffe is retiring

How 'bout Batt? :stuck_out_tongue:

Dail watchdog to recall NAMA chief over ‘backtracking’ on bank evidence → … 64680.html

Nama chief accused of ‘misleading’ Dáil committee → … 38529.html

hmmm :angry:

Nama ‘does not suspect’ it was misled by banks - MARTIN WALL → … 37232.html

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”?

^^ From the IT piece ^^

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:

“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.

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…”

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

Tensions between Nama and Central Bank over loans investigation call - Cliff Taylor → … 53610.html

Good man Mr. McDonagh. There is yet hope.

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.

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: … aircut-est

(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.