I am sure there is new information in the Ronald Quinlan article in the Sunday Independent today about NAMA’s pursuit of Sean and Gayle Dunne through the US courts – it’s just unclear what it is.
As regards this week’s hearing where the feisty Gayle is described as looking “vulnerable”, there is little reference in Ronald’s report to the proceedings. But if any of you can decipher the sentence “While she [US judge] refused to remove a protective order preventing Mr McDonagh’s deposition a witness, she left it up to both sides to decide a date for McDonagh’s deposition” please let us know. Now I think that Ronald is trying to say something here. Despite RTE, the Indo and Irish Times who all had reporters in the Stamford court room this week, all reporting that the judge ordered that Brendan McDonagh be “deposed” – meaning present a statement to Sean and Gayle’s lawyers and allow himself be questioned by them – sources close to NAMA were disputing that such an order had been given. As of Friday this week, the judge’s written order is not on the US court system, PACER, so there might indeed be some obstacle remaining in Gayle’s path to have Brendan deposed, but we don’t know what it is, if indeed there is an obstacle at all.
However it is not the US court hearing this week, but the rejection of Sean Dunne’s business plan that the Sindo article contains most new information on, but even here it is distorted.
Sean is said to have been the 39th biggest NAMA developer by borrowings. But what were those borrowings? Ronald today claims that Sean owed €892m. Elsewhere he says Sean owed €538m to non-NAMA banks. Sean is said to owe €65-80m to Cork developer, Michael O’Flynn. We do know on here that NAMA obtained a €185m judgment from Sean. These numbers don’t seem to add up, though maybe Sean sold assets to pay off some of the debt. Who knows?
The Michael O’Flynn angle is odd. Ronald reports that Michael obtained a €65m loan from Irish Nationwide and gave it to Sean in 2006 to buy 65 acres of farmland in Kildare. Ronald claims that if Sean were to have succeeded in getting 70% of the 65 acres rezoned, then “the money would not be repayable [by Sean] to him [Michael]” Does this make any sense to anyone, or is Michael O’Flynn scouting the country trying to get lands rezoned on philanthropic grounds?
Ronald claims that when NAMA assessed Sean’s business plan, there were six reasons to reject the plan and only three to support it. So, what were the nine reasons, O Oracle?
I can’t find anything which would count as a reason for NAMA supporting Sean but this is my extraction and interpretation of the six reasons why NAMA rejected the plan (as with most crossword puzzles, I might be wrong, so don’t take this as Gospel)
(1) No need for additional office development in IFSC/docklands where Sean had property and sites. That was NAMA’s view in November 2010. After this week’s announcements, that assessment appears to have reversed.
(2) Sean wanted €196-275m to finish off his property, NAMA thought he only needed €28m
(3) NAMA would get €31m in rent over 10 years if it foreclosed against Sean
(4) Refusal of Gayle Dunne and three children from Sean’s first marriage to provide statement of assets. NAMA concerned about the €58m purchase of Walford, the crumbling Edwardian home on 2 acres on Shrewsbury Road. There were “reports” that Gayle was involved in the purchase.
(5) Sean owed €538m to non-NAMA banks (and what about Michael O’Flynn). Sean is said to have had €612m of net liabilities in his statement to NAMA.
(6) Ongoing litigation involving Sean Dunne
So, in the Sindo crossword today, we know that some clues are missing – reasons for NAMA to support Sean Dunne, for example. We may have misinterpreted other clues. And some clues – like whether the judge this week ordered that Brendan McDonagh be deposed, or what was to happen to the Michael O’Flynn loan if 70% of the 65 acres in Kildare were rezoned – have stumped us completely. Maybe Ronald might publish the answers in next week’s edition…
UPDATE: 24th February, 2013. We have gotten our hands on the transcript of last Tuesday’s hearing which supports Gayle’s comment as to the deposition of Brendan McDonagh. In other words, there is no order that Brendan be deposed at this stage, but having deposed John Coleman, Gayle and Sean can come back to the Connecticut court to seek to depose Brendan, and the court will give Gayle and Sean a date to depose Brendan.
NAMA Wine Lake 
I’m quite curious, but since when can a court in a foreign country ‘order’ anything of a Irish Citizen that isn’t resident. It may request. It may even make conditions. But what it cannot do is Order.
@VH, maybe you should share your expertise with the judiciary – they’re making orders on foreign citizens all the time. Recently in the Quinn saga, a Belfast judge ordered two Ukrainians, who had given evidence from the Ukraine via video-link, to hand over 17,000 apiece for contempt of court or face imprisonment
https://namawinelake.wordpress.com/2013/02/07/judge-fines-lawyer-and-economist-in-sean-quinn-case/
Yeah, well, I cannot help judicial delusion. Jurisdiction is actually a word that contains a limit. They might think/believe/wish with all their being that their writ runs across borders and perhaps even dimensions for all I know but those Ukrainians didn’t appear ‘before’ the court by video-link but attended the proceedings and so are in no way bound. It the whole darn point of Statehood.
What happened re McDonagh in court was this: Nama had a protective order in place stopping me deposing McDonagh prior to last week’s court hearing. Nama told the court that McDonagh knew nothing about the case, but that Portfolio Manager Kevin Nowlan was the ideal person for me to Depose as he knew everything about the Sean Dunne business plan and case. On the contrary when we deposed Nowlan he said he knew nothing about the case and had stopped working on the Sean Dunne file in July 2011.
In court last week the issue of who would be deposed and other discovery issues were argued. Nama again argued that McDonagh knew nothing. The judge did not accept that and referred specifically to the Mail interview McDonagh gave in July 2011 where he seemed intimately involved with cases against developers and us in particular. She was also informed by my attorney that we had found out that McDonagh was on the credit committee and that Nowlan reported to him on a weekly basis. The judge raised her voice at the Nama attorney and she said she had read the article and that if she was me, she would want McDonagh deposed.
However she listened to Nama’s view that McDonagh is a really important busy CEO who cannot spend several days in the USA unless it is totally necessary. It was then agreed between counsel and the Judge that I would depose Coleman first. After that the court would allow me to depose McDonagh. However, we all want to make sure that the deposition is not waste of anyone’s time and that I do not spend hours going over documents with McDonagh that Coleman could deal with. Furthermore Nama have refused to produce some documents and redacted others, so I need to be given all relevant discovery before I depose McDonagh. As it stands Nowlan will need to come back to finish his deposition, which could not be concluded with so many documents missing. While Nama were happy to waste our time and Nowlans by telling us he knew everything when he knew little, and by failing to produce proper discovery, discovery, they clearly do not want to waste McDonagh’s time in this manner. So the Protective order stopping me deposing McDonagh is still technically in place, but the Judge made it quite clear that McDonagh should and would be deposed in the near future, and that we are to go back to court to schedule same once Coleman has been exposed, sorry I mean deposed. I’d say we are looking at McDonagh getting on a plane in early April.
@VH, you cannot be compelled to give evidence in another jurisdiction, but when you are the plaintiff the courts will dismiss your case unless you are willing to try and prove it. Nama took this case in Connecticut, they need to tell us why and what the case is about, because to date we are all at a loss to know and Kevin Nowlan did not enlighten us.
@Gayle, thanks for clarification.
On the reference to a loan from Michael O’Flynn, it is understood that whilst Michael is a charitable man, known for his substantial contributions to Crumlin Childrens Hospital, that the report in the Sindo is incomplete, and possibly misleading. Michael is not stalking the land distributing millions to fellow developers for the purchase of agricultural land on terms which would see no repayment to Michael if rezoning is secured!
I’ve a feeling Gayle and her team are the only ones around who can wipe that perpetual smug smirk off his bloated face. Can’t wait to see the footage. Will there be an interpretor? The yanks may not understand what a ‘billen’ or a ‘millen’ is…
@gayle killilea
Any comment on the OFlynn Article?
Any Comment on Ulster Bank Proceedings in Ireland?
What is total debts owed both Personal and corporate to NAMA,other Irish banks and of course UB,INB,BOSI ACC?Even just a ball park figure
@ Patrick, I’m not Privy to O’Flynn stuff, all Dutch to me. I also don’t know details about loan breakdown, I was never a director of any of Sean’s companies. I believe the numbers cited in judgments to date would be correct. As for Ulster, that was a surprise and to date I have no more information than what was reported. My only concern regarding Sean being a bankrupt is that it will derail this Nama case before I get a chance to do so myself. You cannot sue a bankrupt so the case will be stayed which would be very frustrating.