ACC Bank has secured a summary judgment order for over €6.2 million against developer Thomas McFeely over non-repayment of a commercial development loan issued four years ago.
Mr Justice Peter Kelly today ruled Mr McFeely, Ailesbury Road, Ballsbridge, Dublin, had no arguable defence to the bank’s claim and he granted the judgment order sought.
The judge had made a similar order against developer Larry O’Mahony, Shrewsbiury Road, Ballsnbridge, earlier this week over the same loan, issued in April 2005.
ACC granted the loan to repay a €4 million loan to Ulster Bank and to make some €1.89 million available for further development.
The loan was secured on an apartment development at Blakestown Road, Mulhuddart; 38 acres owned by Mr O’Mahony at Dunboyne, Co Meath; an assignment of rental income from the Mulhuddart apartments and €500,000 in a deposit account.
The bank moved in March last to call in the loan after repayment arrears of more than €600,000 accumulated on it.
In an affidavit resisting the application, both developers argued the loan was a 20 year facility and they had told ACC the arrears would be tackled through insurance monies due following a fire at the Mulhuddart premises.
Mr McFeely said he had paid substantial monies for remedial works as a result of the fire but those works were only partially completed because the company carrying out the works had gone out of business.
The developers also argued they had a defence to the bank’s claims in the form of proposals to address the arrears, including to find a new tenant for the Mulhuddart apartments. They also alleged their problems were exacerbated through the bank refusing to agree refinancing arrangements.
Martin Hayden SC, for Mr McFeely, said the fire at the apartments had caused many of his client’s problems and Mr McFeely needed more time to put matters in train to address the arrears. Mr McFeely had tried to reach an agreement with the bank in that regard but it was not prepared to assent to his proposals.
Counsel for the bank argued that both Mr McFeely and Mr O’Mahony had been given ample time to address the arrears and no repayment on the account had been made since December 2007.
Mr Justice Kelly ruled none of the arguments advanced represented any arguable defence to the bank’s claim for summary judgment against Mr McFeely, who had essentially repeated the arguments advanced to the court earlier this week with his only new argument alleging the bank had breached the Financial Regulator’s code of conduct in giving him inadequate time to address matters.
There was no arguable case of an alleged breach of the code of conduct as this was a loan repayable on demand and no repayments had been made since December 2007, the judge said. The bank had set out its position in September 2008 and given ample and adequate time to address matters. The argument the bank was obliged to advance more money was also unstatable.
In those circumstances, the same fate awaited Mr McFeely as had befallen Mr O’Mahony earlier this week, the judge said. He entered judgment for some €6.28 million, plus continuing interest at the Courts Act rate and costs, and refused an application for a stay on those orders pending a possible appeal to the Supreme Court.
