Well, the surprise is, it took them so long!
This evening, communication has been received from Hayes Solicitors, acting on behalf of NAMA, threatening that unless a commitment is given not to publish the table referred to in this blogpost, then NAMA will seek “injunctive relief” to prevent such publication. The table referred to in the blogpost on John Fraher’s affidavit purports to show 103 loans with the name of the borrower which in some cases is an individual or group of individuals and in others is a company or business. Each of 103 loans shows “Full due diligence nominal value local currency” and “final acquisition value, euro” or in layman’s terms what appears to be the par value of the loan and the NAMA valuation. Remember NAMA has acquired €74bn of loans at par value and paid 43c in the euro on average, or €32bn in total.
The reason the table is troublesome is that, according to John Fraher, it shows co-borrowers of his, but also loans unconnected at all with John Fraher. NAMA has also said that it does not disclose the acquisition value of loans, disclosure of which might give a potential buyer an advantage because it would give them an indication of what NAMA might expect to achieve if it sold the loans.
In his affidavit John Fraher claims that this loan information was provided to John’s financial advisers by a NAMA employee named Padraig Reidy. NAMA was asked for comment on the affidavit and the tables more than two hours before publication of the blogpost, which withheld publishing the table pending consideration on here of privacy issues. NAMA’s solicitors this evening “request the immediate provision of an undertaking to desist (sic) from publishing such data to be confirmed to us by no later than 9.30am” tomorrow.
NAMA’s solicitors also claim this evening that the statement in the blogpost
NAMA “has provided reams of confidential information to third parties” according to an affidavit of John Fraher’(sic)”
is not correct
“for the record”.
Well, let’s see about that. John Fraher states the following in his affidavit
Paragraph 8 “I beg to refer to a listing of the members of Connection 872 together with the nominal value of Connection 872’s facilities and the acquisition price paid by NAMA/the Plaintiff to the Participating Institution, which was given to my financial advisers by Mr Reidy which is at Tab 2 of the Booklet. Since the proceedings herein were instituted, Mr Reidy has contacted my financial advisers asking that they destroy the document”
Mr Reidy is referred to in an email from John Fraher in the same file as the troublesome data as NAMA Portfolio Manager Mr Padraig Reidy.
Paragraph 9 “As is apparent from the listing, Connection 872 includes individuals and entities with which I have no connection whatsoever and with whom I have no joint or several liability to NAMA”
This is where the “third parties” arises. John Fraher is a third party to some of the borrowers, and so are John Fraher’s financial advisers.
The attached table purports to show borrowers, par values of loans and NAMA acquisition values of loans. Hands up anyone who thinks this is “confidential”? And if it’s not “confidential”, then what would NAMA’s grounds be for seeking an injunction.
“Ream” is defined as “a very large amount” and seems apt for 103 loans with names of borrowers and apparent par and NAMA acquisition value
So, taken together, it seems that “the record” shows John Fraher’s affidavit does justify the blogpost title
“NAMA provided reams of confidential financial information to third parties – affidavit”
For the record.
As for the attached tables of borrowers, par values of loans and NAMA value of loans which John Fraher claims were provided to his financial advisers by a NAMA employee, NAMA hasn’t denied the accuracy of the information nor has it denied the information was provided to John Fraher in the manner claimed. And in preparation of the blogpost yesterday, comment was sought in the usual way beforehand, and with more than three years of experience of NAMA’s PR company, communication, even if at 7.30pm on a Monday evening, is responded to promptly if there is comment. NAMA hadn’t commented two hours later, and in fact, NAMA has still not commented on the affidavit.
As for the content of the tables, the opinion on here is they do contain confidential information that should not have been disclosed by NAMA and which the borrowers would expect to be kept confidential Accordingly, this blog is happy to give to NAMA an “unequivocal undertaking to desist (sic) from publishing such data”
In fact, the NAMAwinelake blog will go further and hereby gives an unequivocal undertaking that it will not disseminate the data in any way whatsoever.
With one single exception.
The affidavit and tables will be provided to Mr Billy Hawkes, the Data Protection Commissioner together with a complaint that NAMA has, not for the first time, apparently failed in its duty to protect the privacy and confidentiality of data – namely details of borrowers and loans – and in so doing is in breach of the Data Protection Act 1988 (as amended).
Some nights, you’d wish the wine lake wasn’t just a concept!
NAMA Wine Lake 
Not to worry if it takes them as long to bring you to court as it dose its friends stroke clients you should be good for another few years.
Then there is the appeal to the Supreme Court which will take at least four to five years by which time you might get a politician who will keep his word and allow acces to the files off the biggest fire sale done in seceret of course for commercial reason of assets belonging to the people of Ireland
The Fact NAMA are threatening Injunction against you is proof if proof were needed they want to Continue operating secretly no doubt advised by well paid Lawyers . It smacks of the mafia using solicitors to protect an illegal organisation , keep the faith -:)
Phew!
Sounds like NAMA dodged a bullet here!
I mean, anyone who might have a vested interest in getting their hands on this table will now realise it is a futile effort (but also that the information must be ball-park true!) as the one and only place they may have got to see it has been injuncted.
I mean, this is the only place… right?
I’d hate to think that the only reason NAMA might be seeking to keep this quiet is to merely cover-up a leak, not plug it… they aren’t doing this, right?
I mean, any prospective vested interest is simply stymied now, right? No way for them to get this information now, right? Leak plugged, right?
I can think of three main reasons(With assocaited probabilities)
a) This table was the straw in the camels back, and Nama have finally decided to move on this thorn in their side. (Unlikely)
b) Someone at Nama got tired and emotional over this leak. (Fair to Moderate)
c) Someone Important’s name is on the list(Chances are very high).
Personally, I’m sick of this business aristocracy and these ridiculous games they play at our expense.
If it’s the case that someone “important” is on the list and it elicits a response like this – then the only responsible approach to take… is to run a daily “Are they worthy of an injunction?” post.
Do a short, quick post each day – I have some info on Developer X. Will publish tomorrow.
Then sit back and wait.
NAMA has set the precedent now – so either they do it for everything or by a process of elimination you can see who’s worthy of an injunction or not!
I bet all the Irish legal beagles are bemoaning the lack of a “super injunction” here – now there’s an idea…
“I love deadlines. I love the whooshing noise they make as they go by.” – Douglas Adams. Stick it up on the Pirate Bay. Sure why not?
Well done @nwl. When will the Data Protection Commissioner respond to the complaint?
It’s clear there is a need for micro management in NAMA, any ‘normal’ company could be taken to the cleaners for such a mistake, thankfully our quasi soviet of a state and our endless reserves will make sure NAMA continues to hide loses that would otherwise be part of our national debt (without the big salaries and drama!). It really is a f..king shame of a country
Excellent approach and a commendable, measured response, well done.
Congrats NWL!!!
Yet another measure of success to put along side your 3.78 million hits.
Threatened injunctions: 1
We need more of you on this island. Keep up the great public service!
Don’t worry nwl. I’ll send you a smart phone in a cake to keep the blog going from inside.
Dedicated to the people behind this blog.
Fight The Power.
The Law: Last refuge of the guilty.
@NWL, It’s OK for NAMA to play fast and loose with confidential information ….but not for you to do it. Just shows the two standards that prevail, but it probably has more to do with embarrassing the Agency. I have said it before, not since Joseph Goebbels was Minister for Propaganda has anyone been more sensitive to criticism than NAMA.
If an entity feels the need to suppress information relating to its activities, or seeks to cover up its errors, it always begs the question “Why?”
Put someone in a position of power, and arrogance and hubris will ensure that they truly believe that the rules don’t apply to them.
NAMA and it’s parole officers remind me more and more of the Stanford Prison Experiment — arguably history’s most notorious and controversial psychology experiment, which gleaned powerful and unsettling insights into human nature.
Twenty four random recruits were assigned to the roles of prisoners and prison guards in a hyper-realistic simulated prison environment. Though the guards were instructed to under no circumstances harm the prisoners physically, they were encouraged to think of themselves as actual prison guards and instill in the inmates a sense of powerlessness, frustration and “arbitrariness,” to make them fully believe that their lives were controlled entirely by “the system” and that they had no freedom of action whatsoever. What followed was a devastating manifestation of the human capacity for cruelty and evil, so powerful and dehumanising that the researchers had to end the two-week experiment after the sixth day.
The study made a very profound point about control – that human behavior changes for the worst when you put a “beggar on horseback”, or give power to someone who can abuse it. Character and personality are destroyed and base instincts such as contempt, distrust and the demeaning of those who are subject to that power predominates.
I’m not surprised that confidences were broken. There will be no repercussions for those responsible and the frequency of these incidents will increase.
So, be careful NWL, as Nietzsche said,
Beware of those in whom the urge to punish is strong.
A little off-point, but what gets my goat is the inability of the legal profession to understand basic grammer (and punctuation in some cases).
If they can make simple mistakes in their writing, maybe they also make silly mistakes in their expensive, sorry, extensive, deliberations…
They are taking the piss NWL. Obviously the lawyers in there are spreading the work around the ‘members’ in Dublin.
I would get some very pointe dquestions asked of Noonan as to the legal bills that NAMA has run up in the past 3 years and their legal aid budget for the next three.
If you need ole 2Pack to pump and dump onto Scribd Docstoc and Slideshare so that you can link back and comment (on the information that is accidentally in the public domain) thereafter then you know where to find me and need but ask. :)
For now we must surmise that the lawyers are salivating at all the juicy commissions that their brethern in NAMA are sending their way.
:
Namawinelake—Thanks from all the powerless people..Well done on a responsible approach.
… I wonder if Judge Kelly, or Judge Mac Eochaidh, would have granted them their injunction… Technically, once something is referred to in an affidavit it is ‘in the public domain’ and ipso facto not confidential unless the judge hearing the application/proceedings imposes reporting restrictions… Bully-boy tactics. Unfortunately likely to cause the NAMA-police more trouble than they appreciate. You’ve been quite kind to them lately, maybe they prefer you criticising them.
I would like to reiterate Camella’s “thank you”, NWL. The posts to this Blog and many of the replies indeed are very informative and give us, the plebs, some insight in to what is happening in this loss making property behemoth.
We all suspect the reasons why NAMA has to suppress the facts. For all the wrong reasons NAMA claims that it cannot be transparent. Yet it is for the right reason that Blogs such as this one operate and which exposes what it can about the truth concerning NAMA. On a personal note, it’s not nice being on the receiving end of a solicitors letter regardless of how serious or trivial the matter might be. If you intend to fight this bullying tactic by Daly and his ilk, you will need fortitude and resolve. I hope you have both in abundance!
never ever give up the truth is the truth and Namas shareholders (us) deserve to know what is going on. independent.ie/business/irish/bill-gates-was-bondholder-in-bailedout-irish-zombie-banks-29226533.html … wonder if Bill will be coming back for a well deserved rest here. The taxpayer is regarded as stupid but not anymore thanks NWL.
Keep up the good work NWL!
Nothing to worry about, they are worried about their own incompetence. I don’t think that is something that will receive a great deal of sympathy for in any court. All, they will do is open a can of worms they will never be able to put back in the tin. Then again, they have done that already.
Thanks to you lord NAMA and your disciples of bureaucracy. It feels like the Irish ascendancy all over again. The crowd in power trying to metaphorically speaking sh*t on everyone and use solicitors to throw a carpet over it.