A High Court judge said yesterday that he was anxious to ensure that the report of the inspectors investigating National Irish Bank Ltd and National Irish Bank Financial Services Ltd would be with the court during the course of the present legal year - which ends on July 31st.
Mr Justice Peter Kelly was told, on behalf of the inspectors, that, as a result of correspondence with the bank and its legal advisers, it had become clear the bank would not be in a position to respond to a previous draft report within an earlier proposed timeframe.
The inspectors, former Supreme Court judge Mr Justice John Blayney and accountant Mr Tom Grace, were appointed to investigate and report on the affairs of the two bodies in 1998. The investigation relates to the improper charging of interest and fees to customer accounts, improper removal of funds from accounts and all steps taken by NIB, its directors and officers, in relation to charging of such fees and interest or the removal of any funds.
The National Irish Bank Financial Services investigation includes the sale of its life policies with Clerical Medical International Insurance Ltd.
Mr Donal O'Donnell SC, instructed by William Fry Solicitors, for the inspectors, said the case was before the court yesterday for a further report on the situation. He said there were reports from time to time and there was concern at the length of time the investigation had been taking.
In an affidavit, the inspectors said that, in their last interim report dated July 28th, they stated their intention to submit their draft report to the bank and the companies at the beginning of August last and to request that the bank revert to them by September 30th last to indicate how they planned to respond to the provisional findings and to specify the estimated time involved.
On that basis, the inspectors added, they expressed the hope that they would be able to complete their report by December 31st, 2003. Their draft report was duly provided to the bank and the company on August 1st.
As a result of subsequent correspondence with the bank and its legal advisers, it became clear the bank would not be able to respond to the draft report within a timeframe that would enable the objective set out in the interim report of July 28th to be achieved. They informed the court accordingly on November 4th.
The inspectors said that since the November hearing, they had further correspondence with the bank's legal advisers, culminating in a letter on January 21st last. They had informed the bank that all written submissions in response to the draft report must be delivered to them (inspectors) on or before March 31st, 2004, and any oral presentation made not later than April 16th, 2004.
Mr Shane Murphy SC, for the bank, said substantial efforts had been made by the bank to meet the inspectors' concerns and a timeframe had been suggested.
The judge said he was concerned at the length of time of the investigation. In correspondence, the inspectors had pointed to the slippage that had occurred in relation to the responses to the draft report. Mr Justice Kelly said he would list the case for the court on April 1st next when hopefully he would be told that the present timescale had been adhered to.
