Drumm meets new Anglo chief to discuss personal loans

irishtimes.com/newspaper/fin … 67383.html

I’m sure they are all performing.

Dancing and singing!

independent.ie/business/iris … 97862.html

Can you believe these fuckers - shovelling countless billions into NAMA but terrified of taking a court case, because they mightn’t win it!!

Yes - but as Fintan O’Toole pointed out, they will happily fight the ordinary punter who have been properly wronged ( such as the Magdalene Sisters ) all the way to the high court if needs be.

What a bunch of scum we’ve voted in - utter shit bags, the lot of them.

Please note we never voted for the ones making these decisions. These are the Sir Humphreys of the DoF. A finance minister with cojones would face them down and demand that the case be taken but we’ve got Lenny.

FFS…we have had Constitutional referenda for lesser things than this…

It is very fucking easy to “get money back”. Simply let the banks go bust, set-up a new bank and don’t guarantee any previously granted pensions above a certain amount. Problem solved.

One of these guys owes €8m.

I owe €400 that’s on my credit card. I don’t have another debt in the world.

And yet, the guy who owes €8m is “richer” than me - I’ll bet he has a nicer car, better house and goes on more holidays.

At the risk of sounding like Kevin the Teenager, it’s sooo unfair!

Drumm case to go to full hearing

irishtimes.com/newspaper/bre … king65.htm

So people looking forward to enormous pensions themselves are reluctant to go testing the legal waters to see if they can reclaim some of the bankers dubiously deserved pensions. Same as they were worried about what Rody Molloy would do?


It’s becoming increasingly clear that the one untouchable in the economy is the pensions of the wealthy, in particular the pensions of the people who get to decide what’s touchable and not.

As I forecast previously when they issued the writ, they are afraid of this one and will back off. The photo shoot of Drumm going into the bank was to humiliate him and was purely political for the “gallery” and the mob who wanted a “head on the plate”. In the end though this was always going to backfire on them. He knows far too much.

If they won’t give Holohan his bank enquiry, there’s two chances that Drumm will ever be allowed to get on a courtroom stand. A nice quiet settlement… and are they ever pissed at the planks who suggested bringing in the paparazzi for the photo opportunity.


Hmmmmm…my understanding of contracts is that even if there is a technical error of this kind made, the thing that matters legally is the obvious intention by the parties when agreeing the contract. Here, since there is no reason why it would have been a non-recourse loan - and Anglo would never have granted it as such - then Drumm was actually conceeding very little in agreeing to have it changed. Open to correction on that though.

Besides, the cheek of the man.

Anyone know the legal implications of a bank giving one of its directors a non-recourse loan to buy shares in itself ?

If a loan is made to a Borrower in his/her personal name the loan its full recourse. The commercial reason for the loan is irrelevant. In any event I find it difficult to believe that the CEO of a Bank did not know the legal ramifications of signing a facility letter for a loan of millions.

Not if the facility letter limits the recourse to the borrowers.

Generally a company cannot provide financial assistance to buy it’s shares. As a bank you can lend to directors sure but have to be careful about the T&C so as to match generally the provisions when granting facilites to other borrowers.

Not if the facility letter limits the recourse to the borrowers.

This is moot, there was obviously no such clause or there would be no case for Mr. Drumm to take.

Is it likely then that we have someone else opening a can of worms for themselves in front of Mr. Justice Kelly? Could it be that the search for background documentation on this loan would reveal it to be non-recourse (i.e. not a type) and therefore an offence?

And where are the bleedin’ revenue?

Why does Revenue need to be involved?

Getting a non-recourse loan to buy shares from your employer is a benefit that surely must be taxable. Director’s loans in the UK are taxable if they are significant in scale and exist over more than a year. In the UK, the Inland Revenue and Customs and Excise (VAT) act as policemen to a fair degree. At the very least, the Revenue should see the loan documents to determine if they constitute a benefit in kind?