Developer John Kelly and his true wealth (Independent)

independent.ie/national-news … 55723.html

As I had always suspected these guys just bankrolled their lifestyles through massive business loans. They have never generated a cent worth of wealth for this country and are complete parasites.

Happy to bankroll the lifestyle… but was he happy to give it up once the basis on which it was founded crumbled?

wrong Kelly

the article is about John Kelly

This fellow has to be one of the most disgusting charachters that emerged over the last decade. A complete an utter parasite on the state as mentioned above. I cant believe he is walking free with the cheek to sue someone else.

Call in the baliffs to rummage around the corpse of his empire and then the gardai fraud squad. We are all paying for this dirty bastard at the moment

He was fairly quick to set the dogs on Thomas Byrne when he thought the Law Society might be good for the cash :smiley:

It was never an empire either.

I think we should be reading between the lines :smiley:

There is an interesting John Kelly and Thomas Byrne-related case before the courts at the moment that has not received the attention it merits, evem from the so-called paper of record.

It is a complex one involving lots of parties.

KBC advanced loans of around 25 million to John “Girls Aloud” Kelly and Thomas Byrne for various property shite and nonsense.

KBC’s lawyers were BCM Hanby Wallace, now Byrne Wallace, having shed a few partners because of their property-related losses and probably about to shed a few more or even shut down entirely.

BCM Hanby Wallace were insured by the luckless RSA Insurance.

KBC are now suing Byrne Wallace and therefore their insurers, for the money because the loans went bad - little left after paying for Girls Aloud, helicopters and the like. KBC obviously felt no need to perform any checks themselves before giving out tens of millions.

KBC say that Byrne Wallace failed to perform the legal duties in checking the loan documentation. For example Thomas Byrne claimed to have annual income of close to 10 million, including consulting services to various fashion houses, without being asked to provide any supporting documentation. John Kelly was allowed to self-certify his income and notional personal wealth. They just took these guys at their word.

This, and many, many other property-related legal clusterfucks will be coming soon to a court near you. And you will be paying for a lot of it.

All in the public domain for those with the time to attend the courts in person:

highcourtsearch.courts.ie/hcsliv … cessType=P

highcourtsearch.courts.ie/hcsliv … cessType=P

KBC BANK IRELAND PLC 2010 1430 P KBC BANK IRELAND PLC -V- BCM HANBY WALLACE
KBC BANK IRELAND PLC 2010 1429 P KBC BANK IRELAND PLC -V- BCM HANBY WALLACE

I think the strands of the story and the various names that pop up and how those people make their living make it much more interesting than a normal spat between a minor professional services firm and a minor player in the Irish lending boom.

:laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

Wrong

irishtimes.com/newspaper/fin … 56714.html

It appears in today’s Irish Times:

irishtimes.com/newspaper/fin … 56714.html

No mention of Kelly’s and Byrne’s wild claims of income but that will come out later. Also no mention of RSA who are underwriting the whole mess.

The bald truth of the thing still shocks me: up to 2006 or 2007 all of these fucking morons actually believed the property bubble would go on expanding forever. It wasn’t spin and it wasn’t hyperbole. It’s what they really thought.

Even allowing for the effects of mania and groupthink I still cannot understand how anyone who can tie their own shoelaces could not see the logical absurdity.

I’m told that banks loved solicitors undertakings back in the day.
Pat sells to John. John’s doesn’t want to pay stamp duty so John’s solicitor gives an undertaking to register the sale. John then flips the property to Mike. For stamp purposes there is only one stamped sale - Pat to Mike.

Is THIS legal??

It was not done on basis of undertaking - rather matters were left to rest on contract (no deed taken and so no stampable document) and then sold on - yes it was legal at the time. Anti-avoidance legislation caught up with it to an extent eventually.

I sat beside the Sister of a developer on a flight between London and Dublin just days before xmas in 2010 . I was a bit out of it as I had just spent 24 hours in Heathrow after flying from Oz due to the snow . I did not want to get into it as I was so tired so I just said that I knew nothing about the bust .
She was going to a xmas party hosted by her Brother in one of NAMA hotels for something like 50 people or more . It had to be out of public sight due to ’ perception ’
She told me and with great confidence that property would definitly make a come back and the whole bust was just a hiccup . True story and told to me with conviction .

For those who like to join dots and see where the tentacles reach I have to tell you about my shoe-shine boy moment when I opened the IT property supplement back in 2006 to see a Hello magazine style piece about the son of one of the aforementioned legal partners.

irishtimes.com/newspaper/pro … 36950.html

Unfortunately, the main body of the text is blocked but in it he talks about his valuations of sites in Sandyford in terms of hundreds of millions of euros. The thing is, this guy was in my class at school. He was thick as pigshit. He was like Tim Nice-but-dim only dumber. If only I had the ways and means to do a Joseph Kennedy at that very moment and short the entire country I would have.

funnily enough I was just thinking about another member of that family. A few anecdotes are like something straight out of Ross O’Carroll Kelly.

Incidentally I was told by a KK resident recently that MacDonagh Junction Shopping centre seemed OK tenant/footfall wise - they seem to have made an effort to get tenants in to avoid empty units if nothing else, and there is an anchor tenant which attracts people. Doesn’t mean it’s profitable obviously

He may have been thick but he was the good fortune (at least in the short-term) to be the lucky piece of spunk that made it all the way.

The simple arithmetic of stupidity:

BCM Hanby Wallace - Hanby Senior (and a few others) = Byrne Wallace

The residual Byrne Wallace will be featuring more and more in the coming years.

They were solicitors to many builders and got caught up in frenzy where everyone thought they could play the development game.

They were involved in a bizarre case involving property in Montenegro, again where RSA were doing the underwriting:

irishtimes.com/newspaper/ire … 59351.html

The investors paid their money, BCM allowed it to be moved from the main account to another account by the so-called developer and the money just disappeared into the pockets of the local Montenegron mafia. Nothing was ever built. I think the British Virgin Islands appeared somewhere in this case.

wasn’t Fingers up to his bollocks in some scheme in Montenegro? Different gig?

KBC ( furreigners) are suing BCM Hanby ( aka Byrne Wallace). They may or may not be insured by RSA

However NAMA is the equivalent of KBC ( not furreigners) and BCM are on their list of approved solicitors.

nama.ie/Publications/2010/Co … _Panel.pdf

  1. Have NAMA ever sued their OWN legal advisors, eg that shower down in Limerick whose website has disappeared, Dermot G O Donovan ?

  2. NAMA had around 65 legal advisor on their panel at one stage, how many have been removed from it ???