Former Irish Nationwide Building Society (INBS) chief Michael Fingleton engaged in “cart-before-the-horse” lending, approving millions of euro in loans for a failed casino in the south of France before ever bringing these before the board for sanction, the High Court has been told.
The civil case against Mr Fingleton is in its third day. It has been alleged he negligently mismanaged the building society and engaged in property “gambles” with high net-worth individuals in an informal and speculative manner.
Mr Fingleton (87), who is in ill health after a stroke, ran the building lender from 1971 to 2009 as managing director and chief executive. At its height in 2007, INBS had reported assets of €16 billion, but it was a high-profile casualty of the financial crisis of 2008.
Liquidators for Irish Banking Resolution Corporation (IBRC) have taken the case against Mr Fingleton, who denies the allegation of negligent mismanagement.
‘Alan Hawe was a wolf in sheep’s clothing who fooled us all’: Clodagh Hawe’s sister on her fight for the truth
The ‘gentrification’ of Dublin: ‘Young people are coming in, buying houses and gutting them’
India-Pakistan ceasefire: explosions reported hours after truce agreed
Gerry Adams defamation trial: laughs from the jury, a judge’s intervention and a ‘very fine story’ about a hedgehog
The losses, relating to property loans, had been estimated by the IBRC at €6 billion. However, only €250 million in damages is now being pursued by IBRC relating to five loans made by INBS, allegedly approved by Mr Fingleton, who the court was told was also “nodding through” top-ups and extensions to certain clients.
At the High Court on Thursday, Lyndon MacCann SC, for IBRC, during his opening of the case, said that in 2007 a Luxembourg-registered company called Laurent Properties applied for a loan with INBS to develop two adjacent sites in the south of France to build a hotel and casino.
He said the borrower valued the property at €7 million for the first site, but then applied for a second loan to develop the other site.
Mr MacCann said loans were issued by INBS to Laurent Properties without the board having any sight of an application before the money was issued in September 2007 by authorisation of Mr Fingleton.
The court heard that a loan of €2.1 million for the second site was approved by Mr Fingleton again before the board or the bank’s credit committee ever seeing it.
The development never took place and by the time the bad loans were purchased by Nama for €4.5 million in 2010 it represented a loss, interest included, of €5.9 million – a discount of 57 per cent.
Mr MacCann said it was “cart-before-the-horse lending” made without security, guarantees, independent valuations or the board’s approval, which “beggars belief”.
In a separate loan to a UK company called Coast and Capital to buy up to 32 petrol stations, a loan of £1.75 million had been approved to pay for the deposits on the sites, which were to be bought from oil giant BP in April 2006.
On this occasion the borrower had been told by Mr Fingleton that INBS would back the entirety of the project and the society indicated it was prepared to loan Coast and Capital £34.5 million – again without board approval or credit analysis, Mr MacCann said.
He said that despite the deposit asked for being £1.75 million, a sum of £4 million was advanced but with the approval of the board, even though Mr Fingleton had previously told the borrower it would be approved.
Will DoorDash takeover of Deliveroo mean better pay and conditions for gig economy workers?
The borrower’s estimation was that the value of all 32 filling stations across England and Wales would increase to £38 million with planning permissions secured, Mr MacCann said. The following December, £27.4 million was advanced by INBS for the project without any authorisation from the board and was provided in addition to the £4 million for the deposit, he said.
When the second large loan was issued, the amount of sites to be purchased to be flipped had already reduced from 32 to 23 “as they fell by the wayside”, Mr MacCann said.
The debt built up on the deal was £30.5 million by the time Nama bought the loans in May 2011 for £11.4 million – a loss of 63 per cent.
This, Mr MacCann said, represented “a complete solo run” by Mr Fingleton.
The court heard of a third deal that incurred “massive losses”, according to Mr MacCann, when money was borrowed to purchase and develop a hospital outside Cardiff.
In May 2004, £20 million was lent to a company referred to as Galliard (Sully) Ltd, then topped up with a further £5 million in May 2006, counsel said.
“There was no profit generated. Instead there was a massive loss. Huge,” Mr MacCann said. He also said fatal planning issues included the safe destruction of the hospital’s incinerator, which would cost £2.2 million, “more” than 10 per cent of the first loan”.
The loans were eventually bought by Nama at a loss of £23.8 million, representing a 78 per cent loss, which counsel described as a “huge punt” made on “hope”.
The case continues.
