RTE is this evening reporting that Johnny Ronan and Richard Barrett’s Treasury Holdings has commenced legal action against NAMA seeking damages and challenging the constitutionality of the NAMA Act. It is not clear from the report but it is probably the application has been made inDublin’s High Court but there are no records of the application there as yet.
RTE reports that Treasury is unhappy with NAMA’s conduct with respect to the Battersea Power Station site on the south bank of the Thames in central London – pictured below – and it seems Treasury believe the company has lost out “on hundreds of millions of euro in potential future profits”
NAMA isn’t commenting save to say it will robustly defend the action.
I’m beginning to lose track of the many official actions taken by Treasury and NAMA against each other which include
(a) Treasury is seeking a judicial review of NAMA’s dealings with its loans and won approval from the High Court inDublin last month to proceed with this review
(b) Last week NAMA obtained charges over several million euro worth of assets including €600,000 of cash as security for costs and damages in the forthcoming judicial review.
(c) NAMA had administrators appointed to the companies which control the Battersea Power Station site last December 2011
(d) NAMA has had receivers appointed to 35 Treasury group companies this year, the latest just last week
(e) Last week NAMA launched an action against Johnny Ronan and Richard Barrett last week aiming to reverse the so-called TAIL transaction where in 2010 on the eve of NAMA taking control of Treasury loans, some €20m of shares were transferred to Richard Barrett and Johnny Ronan for a consideration which most comprised loans. NAMA wants the transaction reversed, Johnny and Richard say the transaction was at open market values is all above board.
From this perspective it seems as if the NAMA/Treasury relationship has completelyt broken down and become almost personal; the progress of the conflict between these big beasts will be watched closely.
UPDATE (1): 2nd May, 2012. The summary details of the case are now available from the Court Service. It seems that there are 19 – yes, 19! – Treasury companies suing both NAMA and National Asset Loan Management Limited – the presence of NAMA as a plaintiff or defendant usually indicates important matters as to the general operation of NAMA are at stake. Some of the Treasury companies have been subjected to receivership action, others like the TSARSKOYE SELO GOLF CLUB ST PETERSBURG appear not to have been affected by the appointment of receivers yet. All 19 companies are represented by international law firm DAC Beachcroft, the 19 are
(1) TREASURY HOLDINGS
(2) SPENCER DOCK DEVELOPMENT CO LTD
(3) SDDS [NO 1] LTD
(4) SDDC [NO 2] LTD
(5) SDDC [NO 3] LTD
(6) SDDC [NO 4] LTD
(7) FAXGORE LTD
(8) RUSHRID LTD
(9) CARRYLANE LTD
(10) CALLSIDE DEVELOPMENTS LTD ,
(11) TREASURY ASIAN INVESTMENTS LTD
(12) BATTERSEA POWERSTATION SHAREHOLDER VEHICLE LTD
(13) COPPER LAKE LTD
(14) VISTABROOK LTD
(15) CHERMONTVALE LTD
(16) DEMIRAS LTD
(17) MAINBROOK LTD
(18) ZAO TSARSKOYE SELO GOLF CLUB STPETERSBURG
(19) PUSHKIN DEVELOPMENT AB
UPDATE (2): 2nd May, 2012. The Financial Times has some detail on the application itself and say it relates to Treasury’s displeasure at NAMA’s handling of the Battersea Power Station project and the loss of an investor, the Malaysian company SP Setia and the consequent loss to Treasury of €400m – that’s 400 million euros – of management fees and an unspecified potential profit share from the eventual full development of the Battersea site, though it is reported that there were to be GBP 4.5bn (€5.5bn) in gross profits over the lifetime of the flagship development. Hmmmm.
NAMA Wine Lake 
My understanding is that it is very personal…. but I’m not sure about the “big beasts” analogy. When you come down to the personnel involved….. who do we have here?
On one side, a grouping of small minded civil servants who have been tasked with an enterprise that is daily proving to be way above their capabilities, consequently reducing an already mediocre bunch of brainwashed indecisive minions to irrelevancy, pitted against a couple of buccaneers (one of whom actually looks like a latter day Blackbeard).
I would hope that the Treasury team’s current mission statement flows from Napoleon’s thought that “Death is nothing, but to live defeated and inglorious is to die daily.”
No quarter will be given in this fight and – yes, it is personal. But, “big beasts”? ,,, Now that’s stretching it a bit. :-)
@WSTT, even if you don’t accept there are any big beasts in NAMA, the Agency has the wherewithal to put one together! With practically unlimited funding, access to the best solicitors and barristers in the country and what appears to be a fairly competent team – criticisms about their commercial nous might persist, but these people are not buffoons by any stretch – NAMA should be able to construct the composite of at least one big beast!
@NWL, Funny you should say that. Just yesterday, I had a conversation with a lawyer that represents NAMA. She cannot believe the amount of legal fees that NAMA is spending with outside consultants “just shuffling paper around, achieving nothing”.
She has no complaints – it’s putting bread and butter on the table in these dire economic times – well…. maybe cake and butter.
Yeah it’s personal,has to be some guarantees involved.Lloyd’s pulled the trigger on BPS too,they could have taken NAMA out at par or possibly a discount,if they had any confidence or faith in the promoters.
Total,complete waste of time,energy and resources.
Shame,NAMA never perfected that agreement that debtors who receive funding waived their rights to litigate,sloppy really.
Quick Question,Where is Treasury Getting the Cash to Launch these cases?If it is balance sheet Insolvent ect..If it a case that this Company is wasting money that had been advanced by the Agency and as such is now wasting taxpayers money
Ha – On 26th January 2012 as the first comment to the “NAMA versus Treasury – the legal battle is joined” post I said – “I wonder what enforcement costs NAMA has factored in for recovering money from Treasury.”
I would like to repeat that comment. It ain’t gonna be cheap.
@ Patrick – The cash to launch the cases comes from loans advanced to Treasury (and assets purchased – rent therefrom or sale proceeds) to the extent that there is cash available (which presumably covers the entirety) and thereafter from dividends, fees and profits earned by the Directors earned by them while operating a business funded by €1 billion of loans advanced by the Banks. Simple, really.
@ NWL – Richard Barrett of Treasury is renowned as having an excellent forensic brain – To give an analogy: the ordinary brains in NAMA HQ have been playing draughts until 1st January 2012 whereas Treasury are 10 moves into a chess game and have captured some pieces and gained positional advantage. NAMA can purchase more pieces though…
Alien vs. Predator
Are Accounts Available recently for the Treasury Holdings Group??
@Patrick,to the best of my knowledge no.
But REO and TCT are here.
http://www.labour.ie/press/listing/133587755044688.html
Some info on Ronan’s wine storage,horse and pony business here.
http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/ronans-equestrian-company-bucks-trend-with-25m-profit-2870545.html
@patrick wrong link for Treasury,was looking at something else,here it is.
http://www.treasuryholdings.com/
Treasury is on a winner with the Constitutional argument. I just wondered why nobody had brought it before. But maybe the bewigged ones are only beginning to get into gear. The trouble is that by the time such a challenge is heard NAMA will have folded its tent and be on the way out anyway – after relieving the taxpayer of another €10 billion or so in losses.
For those of you with an inquisitive mind,as owners here is the link to the BPS sales effort,happy to post a login but don’t want get NWL in any trouble.
Its ‘public’ info. no reason for any more cloak an dagger stuff,lets have some of that famous NAMA transparency !
http://search.knightfrank.com/gb0412
http://www.battersea-powerstation.com/
Ask NAMA to provide you a login or better yet,to link it from their website.
http://www.nama.ie/contact-us/
If no luck there, try any member of the PAC or your TD,you have a right to view this as owners.Sean Fleming must have a login,right?
http://www.oireachtas.ie/parliament/oireachtasbusiness/committees_list/public-accounts/members/
@John, if you’re interesting in making a bid for Battersea, you need to be quick
“We are extremely encouraged by the strong level of interest shown to date and are expecting a high number of credible bids to be submitted by the 12.00 noon deadline on Friday 4 May.”
http://costar.co.uk/en/assets/news/2012/May/CoStar-Profile-Batterseas-gold-rush-returns-in-earnest/
@NWL thanks for that,sure its almost ‘free’ if the ludicrous ‘loss’ of fees alleged by Treasury are to be believed.Doubt it but,if Treasury is playing spoiler here and interfering in the process,that could open them up to claims/allegations of tortious interference,with all sorts of nasty implications for Directors.
“An early, perhaps the earliest, instance of recognition of this tort occurred in Garret v. Taylor, 79 Eng. Rep. 485 (K.B. 1620). In that case, the defendant drove customers away from the plaintiff’s quarry by threatening them with mayhem and also threatening to “vex [them] with suits.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortious_interference
@JG, I love “tortious interference”. A damages claim much loved in the USA, but barely noticed this side of the Atlantic. Just waiting for NAMA inmate to personally interfere in some deal to see if it picked up by the dusty wigs down in the Four Courts.
@WSTT another much utilized legal strategy over here are ‘lis pendens’ suits.
If applicable,Treasury and the much vaunted legal whiz Barrett would file one on BPS,go all in assuming they have a pair left among them !
Surprising,that they made no objection when the receivers were appointed by Lloyd’s and NAMA last December.NAMA consented to the creation of a SPV carving BPS off from REO and agreed to a number of loan extensions,also appears they had significant ‘loan creep’ from the old B of I position.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lis_pendens
WSTT I thought there were NO sales,can you claim ‘tortious interference’ by NAMA for the entire industry!
@JG,
I have used the lis pendens route more than once, John. It was very effective for a quick and dirty “below the belt” blow. It effectively makes the property asset unsaleable because of the legal caution registered on the Tiltle.
However, as it was being misused by various nefarious wide boys a few years back to force banks and vendors into submission, the courts began to accept injunctive actions to have the lis pendens removed quickly (Sales were being held up for years).
It is only possible to use it as a weapon now if you have a genuine ownership claim or interest in the Title. The UK banks would be more vulnerable than NAMA – mainly because of the NAMA legislation, but a good “silk’ should find a way around that.
Like you, I’m surprised that it is a weapon in the armoury that has not been used thus far.
The assets are being reduced, like a cooking stock, and the aroma is still delicious. As long as there is a pot, the lawyers will be happy to stir it. Melting down the family silver of the Republic I suppose. Sad times.
@WSTT I would be no stranger to it myself …if we had a valid claim for say 400 million in fees and a potential profit share it would be route 1.
On the other hand,it also exposes you to downside damages…separates the men from the boys.Lets be having you Tresaury,are you in the BPS deal or in the way.
@JG, Neither side seems to have the true “killer” instinct. A lot if posturing and “upping the ante” – but no real killer strike. Makes me think it’s all negotiating tactics.
@wstt completely agree,but NAMA is a 500 pound taxpayer funded gorilla,they may also be utilizing this situation to garner some positive PR.
Is Mulyans balance sheet that much better or DQ’s hard to tell.Barrett has no appetite for this,I doubt he signed anything personally,Ronan may be facing ruin here,he’s personal on some docs.
Rangers are playing,Knicks done,apologies for typos etc, iPhone one hand pint in other,to be continued,hope you doing well.
@ NWL,
You seem to have a thing for Battersea Power station. Well good news, It’s being put to some use:
“LIVE EVENT: BATTERSEA POWER STATION
Foxes Live: Wild in the City will culminate in three live broadcasts (3 x 60 minutes) from Battersea Power Station in London and across the country. It will launch on Monday 30th April at 8pm and return the following week on Monday 7th May and Tuesday 8th May to reveal the results from the online public census.”
http://www.channel4.com/info/press/news/the-urban-fox-vermin-or-victim
I also note: “By live trapping and poo collection, experts can find out how much country foxes differ from their city slicker cousins. What are they eating, which are biggest, who lives the longest and are they genetically different species?”
So it seems they could teach NAMA a thing or two. :D
I wonder will Jonny Ronan be doing the Wicklow 200 this year? I passed him on last years route and he looked like he was dying!
UK radio news says BPS is a target for Chelsea FC – looking to build a 60k seater stadium on the 39 acre itet with the intention of preserving the important bits of the structure.
“In a statement released today, the club claim that, should their joint bid with property development partner Almacantar to acquire the 39 acres of land be successful, the new ground will “have the potential to become one of the most iconic football stadiums in the world”.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/chelsea/9245877/Chelsea-submit-bid-to-buy-Battersea-Power-Station.html
Abramovich and the fall-out from Irish property lending. Hmmm.
@SG, thanks. There are updates to the Battersea story today including the press statement from Chelsea at this blogpost
https://namawinelake.wordpress.com/2011/08/23/for-sale-nama’s-most-expensive-asset/
@JG, This one is for you John. Don’t choke on the bagels and coffee!
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2012/0518/1224316280024.html
@WSTT, thanks for that. There isn’t really anything new in it except perhaps the very last sentence which might shine some light on Treasury’s motivation
“Or the third way is we collectively find an investor who is prepared to do a deal with Nama that Nama is prepared to agree and hopefully work with us with a view to getting us off their balance sheet”
Or to possible re-state that
“Or the third way is we collectively find an investor who is prepared to do a deal with Nama that Nama is prepared to agree and hopefully work with us [that is, Treasury keeps equity or profit share or management fees in any new investment arrangement] with a view to getting us off their balance sheet”
@WSTT thanks would appear Treasury is the one doing a bit of choking,waiving the white flag,but in fairness they did build some decent buildings,pity the math did not work….
Bruder should text-the preferred method of communication days amongst teenages and the immature-“Ford Cortina” and they can go have a nice “whine” for lunch.Some,humble pie for desert too,second helpings for Bruder please.
The biggest baddest boldest convention in US starts this weekend,ICSC Las Vegas,few years back there would be quite a few Irish in attendance.But it’s actually a decent show,NAMA should be sending representatives to it or some of the agents,excellent place to source tenants and buyers.
If the reporting is accurate,a bit sketchy on details regarding BPS,well done NAMA,but they may be writing paper!
@WSTT/NWL I enjoyed this one,
“The sooner we can defuse the current collision course that we are on with Nama and find a solution that is to our mutual advantage, the better.”
Resistance is futile,we are NAMA,there will be no “mutually” acceptable solution,not going to happen.A sacrificial lamb is required and guess what it’s Tresaury,in my opinion could not have happened to a “nicer” bunch of people,try some toast too Bruder,because thats what you guys are.
http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/nama-sues-treasury-over-shares-transfer-from-firm-3136622.html
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2012/0612/1224317753165.html
Don’t Know what round this fight is in now.