One of Ireland’s most senior judges today delivered a rebuke to NAMA for apparent delays in dealing with a matter before the courts. The remarks are reported by Mary Carolan in the Irish Times. It is not clear when the remarks were made as the case quoted was apparently not before the courts today according the Court Service legal diary. The redoubtable Mr Justice Peter Kelly is reported to have said that a “number” of cases that have come before the Commercial Court have been delayed as a result of delays of “an inordinate period” at NAMA.
The case reported by the Irish Times concerns a €40m claim lodged in February 2011 by Neil Durkan’s, Durkan New Homes Limited against Phil Hogan’s Department of the Environment . Durkan had apparently agreed to build 215 social housing homes for the Department in return for the Garda station on Harcourt Terrace in central Dublin. Durkan claim it completed its side of the bargain but the Minister welched on the deal because of delays with occupying a new Garda station at Kevin Street. It seems likely from the reporting that NAMA is involved in Durkan’s loans to build the social housing and was being consulted over a settlement offer by the Minister. This in itself is amusing : a NAMA-backed developer suing a government department since the government practically owns NAMA.
The upshot of it all is that Minister Hogan made a settlement offer. The offer had to be agreed by NAMA, presumably because the agency had acquired the loans used to build the social housing. It is not clear when the proposal was sent to NAMA but it is claimed that on 30th May 2011, it had been with NAMA for several weeks and on that date, 30th May, NAMA was asked to make a decision, presumably by Durkan. And a month later, the agency has still not made a decision or communicated that decision to either Durkan or the Minister. The Irish Times report says that last week NAMA responded to Durkan to say the matter was being considered “higher up” in NAMA.
Both the Minister and Durkan are reported to have written to NAMA asking for a decision. It is not reported if there has been any response by NAMA. As a result of NAMA’s apparent delays in responding, the case is to proceed with discovery of documents which will add to costs in the case, which it is suggested will ultimately be borne by the taxpayer.
The above is quite damaging to NAMA. The agency is by all accounts working very hard at a senior level to deal with developer business plans and everything that goes with managing a portfolio of €73bn of loans. The NAMA CEO is reportedly working 75 hours a week and reports reaching here suggest senior personnel at NAMA are working 12 hour days. Other reports suggest a degree of management dysfunction at a lower level in the organisation. But there is no suggestion that NAMA staff are sitting around all day playing solitaire on their computers. So it is understandable that there will be delays at NAMA in processing requests. But for NAMA not to provide a holding letter, perhaps providing a timescale in which a decision might be made or indicating the points at issue or resources needed or tasks to be undertaken to reach a decision, seems inexcusable and indeed disrespectful to the Court. That the taxpayer will ultimately pick up additional costs (because either the Minister will pay them or Durkan will, and Durkan may deduct them from loans outstanding) is also troubling.
NAMA presently has 140 staff and recently stated that it is recruiting an additional 60 to bring the overall complement to 200. NAMA is directly managing the top 180 developers owing €62bn of loans at nominal value. Capita and staff at banks are managing the remaining 670 developers who owe €10bn. It has long been an issue on here that NAMA is just not sufficiently resourced to handle this quantum of loans, particularly in the early years as procedures are established and business plans agreed. FG in Opposition said they would farm out NAMA’s operations to 3-4 asset management companies, and indeed then-Opposition leader Enda Kenny asked on 23rd March 2010 in the Oireachtas how NAMA could function with so few staff when other asset management companies with similar value assets employed 1,000s. Enda might be getting his answer if this delay criticised by Judge Kelly is representative. And Judge Kelly stated that there were a “number” of other cases where NAMA’s delays were “sterilising” the work of the Commercial Court. NAMA can’t afford many such critics or criticisms.
UPDATE: 12th July 2011. Ireland’s Evening Herald reports that NAMA has responded to last week’s criticism in the above case and has “responded “very quickly” to the proposals and a meeting was also held with the agency”. Apparently NAMA’s late engagement in the matter has not resulted in a settlement and the case has been set down for a hearing in 2012, but at least the agency is being seen to engage with a matter before the courts.