Quinn Insurance in Administration

[Hereiam]

Mrs.  Seán Óg Quinn adds a fashion angle to the whole soap opera.

Indeed she does. I would rattle the ass of her.

[T Fearon]

At least Sean was spared the ignominy of having to watch his beloved Tempo get hammered by Warrenpoint in the Ulster Intermediate Championship yesterday! 

[trileacman]

At least Sean was spared the ignominy of having to watch his beloved Tempo get hammered by Warrenpoint in the Ulster Intermediate Championship yesterday! 

What the f**k are you on about?

[T Fearon]

Teemore! Lol! Too many similar sounding shit teams from Fermanagh beginning with the letters Te

[T Fearon]

Should they not use some of the money from the sale of Quinn's (former) assets to build a special jail on the Fermanagh/ Cavan border specially to house the entire Quinn family? He would be bringing even more employment to the border region!

[orangeman]

SEAN Quinn Jnr cannot afford to pay $500,000 sought by the former Anglo Irish Bank as he tries to purge his contempt over asset-stripping of the Quinn family's international property group., the High Court was told today.

Mr Quinn was keen to try to comply with coercive orders made by the court last June, his brother-in-law Niall McPartland told the court.


Irish Bank Resolution Corporation (IBRC), the former Anglo Irish Bank, had indicated Mr Quinn could purge his contempt by repaying to it a $500,000 sum paid to Larissa Puga, general director of Quinn Properties Ukraine, in autumn 2011.


But Mr McPartland said Mr Quinn was not in a position to pay that and did not feel that was an appropriate way to purge the contempt,.


Shane Murphy SC, for IBRC, said there had been correspondence with Mr Quinn and the bank wanted proceedings against him adjourned for two weeks while that correspondence continued.


Mr McPartland said the bank had raised issues in the correspondence about deficiencies in Mr Quinn's disclosure of assets. While his side felt those deficiencies were not substantial and two matters had been overlooked as an oversight, Mr Quinn was engaging with the bank and would continue to do so.


Ms Justice Elizabeth Dunne said she would adjourn the proceedings for two weeks to facilitate the engagement between the bank and the Quinn side.


Last Friday, Ms Justice Dunne jailed Sean Quinn Snr for nine weeks arising from her finding last June he was in contempt of court orders of June and July 2011 restraining asset stripping.


IBRC had argued Mr Quinn had failed to purge his contempt and said it believed Quinn family members continue to direct steps to prevent it recovering assets for the Irish taxpayer.


Sean Quinn Snr, in an affidavit, said he had no control over the IPG assets but he and his family were willing to do all they could to assist the bank in recovering assets and to purge the contempt found against him and his son.


Sean Quinn Jnr was in court today with Mr Mc Partland. Mr Quinn was released from prison in late October after completing a three-month prison sentence for contempt.


The bank indicated last week it was not at this stage making any application concerning him but wanted time to consider its position.


Also today, Mr Justice Peter Kelly is hearing an application by a receiver appointed over the personal assets of various Quinn family members for access to a wide range of financial information held by them. They are objecting to his being given their passwords for their personal email accounts and certain other records.-

[rrhf]

Sounds like they will scapegoat this family for the entire financial crisis.  The dope that is the average Irishman will see this as their pound of flesh, their justice for losing that holiday home in marbella.  Its a target for venting their spleen... How many complicit in running the banks and the nation to poverty, are watching and sneering from afar,  safe, probably untouchable, protected by the institutions they helped destroy.   

[Lone Shark]

Sounds like they will scapegoat this family for the entire financial crisis.  The dope that is the average Irishman will see this as their pound of flesh, their justice for losing that holiday home in marbella.  Its a target for venting their spleen... How many complicit in running the banks and the nation to poverty, are watching and sneering from afar,  safe, probably untouchable, protected by the institutions they helped destroy.

It's not scapegoating. My grandmother used to have this little decorative plaque up on the wall of the kitchen, saying that the best way to get anything done was to begin. The investigation and reparation all had to start somewhere and while nobody is arguing that the Quinn family are any more or less responsible for the state of the nation than Seanie Fitz, David Drumm, Bertie or anyone less, for now they are the ones that are in front of the courts and so they should be pursued to pay their debts to the full limit of the law. If the Quinn family can prove that they did nothing wrong, that they did not sign documents agreeing to guarantee SQ snr's borrowings and that they made no attempt to hide information or assets from the investigation, then so be it - they should keep what's theirs.

The despicable lack of action against many of the other culprits is not an excuse to go easy on the Quinns, on the same basis that if you have two different people suspected of murder in different cases, the lack of submissible evidence against suspect 1 is not a case for letting suspect 2 off the hook.


That there are others who should be hanging from a gallows for the treasonous things they've done to this state and her citizens is not in question. However letting the Quinns off to keep what may or may not be taxpayer assets in the eyes of the law is not going to right that wrong, it will merely compound it.

[Nally Stand]

Sounds like they will scapegoat this family for the entire financial crisis.  The dope that is the average Irishman will see this as their pound of flesh, their justice for losing that holiday home in marbella.  Its a target for venting their spleen... How many complicit in running the banks and the nation to poverty, are watching and sneering from afar,  safe, probably untouchable, protected by the institutions they helped destroy.

+1. Sean Quinn didn't put this debt upon the taxpayers but the state has chosen it's scapegoat and the sheep are sucking it all in, being gleeful mouthpieces for Anglo in their Quinn witchhunt and with a fifth of them (and counting) prepared to once again put FF back into power.

[seafoid]

I think the state is right to go after the Quinns but that the point of all the ones who got away is also valid. Ireland is corrupt, has a very weak legal system for white collar crime and the swine who f***ed the country more or less got away with it. Except for Quinn.

[rrhf]

The despicable lack of action against many of the other culprits is not an excuse to go easy on the Quinns, on the same basis that if you have two different people suspected of murder in different cases, the lack of submissible evidence against suspect 1 is not a case for letting suspect 2 off the hook.

Is there really a lack of submissable evidence, that is some statement in itself,  they are prepared to give substantial assets away to win this case at all costs. I Believe that  if Quinn meekly give it all back in the morning and the focus moved on to someone else there wouldnt be the same collated effort, the newspapers would change tact very quickly.   Did you ever stop to think of who is whistleblowing on this family? and what facesaving deals are being done behind the scene to unearth the Quinn portfolio.  I dont see how any one with more than a half a brain cant see this loaded effort / smokescreen for what it it.  Parallell cases should be going on against legislation breaking bankers because the law at that time appears to have been broken. The laws / rules were retrospectively changed leaving the taxpayers as creditors and the Quinns as debtors to the taxpayers.  If I go out for a meal and the restaurant tell me the neighbouring table have made off and  didnt pay their bill - I aint washing their dishes, the Irish taxpayer has been offered up to pay Quinns bill, he didnt want this to happen.  Finally  In this case the taxpayer was made responsible for business misdemeanours.  One party was a capitalistic businessman one party had finanical regulations guiding their operations regulations to protect the bank and the country.  Why were regulations not adhered to - thats the  chronological start point.       

[Lone Shark]

Is there really a lack of submissable evidence, that is some statement in itself,  they are prepared to give substantial assets away to win this case at all costs.   

I have no idea what the evidence is like against the other white collar criminals who have done this to the country. I know there are no cases so far, so that suggests to me that the legislation/will/evidence is not sufficient. That's all a sad indictment of our country, but it's still no excuse for the Quinns.

I Believe that  if Quinn meekly give it all back in the morning and the focus moved on to someone else there wouldnt be the same collated effort, the newspapers would change tact very quickly.   

Of course they would. Because the Quinns would be seen to be doing their best to discharge the debts, that rightly or wrongly, are perceived to be family debts. Of course the courts may rule otherwise in time, but in law, the family assets are considered to be charged, and so the issue that people have is that the money is owed, the wherewithal is there to discharge at least part of this debt, and the Quinns don't want to do so. Of course it would change if they were actually doing their best to pay their debt.

Did you ever stop to think of who is whistleblowing on this family? and what facesaving deals are being done behind the scene to unearth the Quinn portfolio.  I dont see how any one with more than a half a brain cant see this loaded effort / smokescreen for what it it.     

I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say here. The reference to whistleblowing makes me very uneasy because of course the truth should come out, regardless of where it comes from. This culture of not "whistleblowing" in this country is what has us where we are. People perceive a little bit of playing fast and loose with the rules as our culture and not something that "busybodies" should stick their nose into. Maybe if we were quicker to out fraudsters at every level, big and small, we'd be better off. As for facesaving deals, well again that's for the courts to determine, but any deals that maximise return that can be done should be done.

Parallell cases should be going on against legislation breaking bankers because the law at that time appears to have been broken.     

Of course they should. No-one on any side of this debate would disagree with this. However again, that's nothing to do with the Quinn family saga.

The laws / rules were retrospectively changed leaving the taxpayers as creditors and the Quinns as debtors to the taxpayers.  If I go out for a meal and the restaurant tell me the neighbouring table have made off and  didnt pay their bill - I aint washing their dishes, the Irish taxpayer has been offered up to pay Quinns bill, he didnt want this to happen.     

Whether SQ/the Quinn family owe money to IBRC or the taxpayer is moot - the money is owed and there is both a legal and moral responsibility to do everything in their power to repay it. It may turn out that the Quinn family are liable, it may turn out that SQ alone is liable. The problem that most people have is that the Quinn family aren't happy to leave this up to the courts, they want to squirrel everything away so that the creditors get nothing, regardless. No right minded person would have a problem with the Quinn family keeping their assets if it can be proven that they never guaranteed loans, had no part in the transaction, never signed anything agreeing to guarantee loans and didn't receive any assets or excessive remuneration after the debt was incurred.

However while the taxpayer may not have agreed to it directly, we did when we voted for Fianna Fáil collectively. We agreed to be bound by their decisions and one of their decisions was that Anglo's debts would become Ireland's debts. Until we have governance by plebiscite, that's an unfortunate side effect of democracy. So yes, the taxpayer did agree to it. The tragedy that is FF polling anything above 5% since that decision is a separate issue but one that requires everyone in Ireland to look at themselves and ask why we have this masochistic nature.

Finally  In this case the taxpayer was made responsible for business misdemeanours.  One party was a capitalistic businessman one party had finanical regulations guiding their operations regulations to protect the bank and the country.  Why were regulations not adhered to - thats the  chronological start point.     

The issue here is that it is not proven that those regulations were not adhered to, and either way, that does not absolve the debt. SQ incurred the debt and the fact that other side broke the rules is not necessarily a valid excuse. All the more so when we consider that SQ himself knew that there was a shadiness to the whole operation. He wasn't buying the shares/options on the basis of information that was released into the public domain, he was buying because he thought he had extra information.

[Lone Shark]

That's the issue Mid. You would think that they would confirm if the guarantees are legal before going about to enforce them. Unfortunately the courts have been very selective about what they want to investigate. Yet there has been no delays in any of the cases against the Quinns.
What your forgetting LS is that the majority of assets that were moved, were done legally due to the lack of security over the assets. So considering there was no legal issue with the transferring of most of the assets, I can't see how the Quinns would have any moral obligation to help Anglo considering the their actions.

IBRC could hardly wait to confirm guarantees were legal if they knew that the Quinns were busy moving stuff out of the jurisdiction in order to ensure that the debt would be worthless by the time it was proven. The difference here is that if in the long run it's proven that the assets should not have been forfeit to IBRC, IBRC will be liable for losses, which the state will have to make good. So if the Quinns are right and their assets should not be be forfeit, then once the courts prove that they will be recompensed appropriately. What the Quinns are doing is making sure that they win either way, regardless of what the courts declare.

I would have thought that the fact that the debt was legitimately incurred would have been moral obligation enough by the way. If I borrow money, I would feel honour bound to repay, whether from friend, family or financial institution.

[supersarsfields]

The Quinns have no problem with the 455 m debt that they accept was legitimally loaned. They dispute the loans of 2.3B, which they believe Anglo acted unlawfully. Therefore would see no moral obligation to help Anglo cash in on it.

[Lone Shark]

The Quinns have no problem with the 455 m debt that they accept was legitimally loaned. They dispute the loans of 2.3B, which they believe Anglo acted unlawfully. Therefore would see no moral obligation to help Anglo cash in on it.

I agree, that's exactly how they see it. The problem I, and a lot of other people in the country have, is that they're not prepared to let the court have a view. They want to make sure that the court's verdict is meaningless, so that IBRC and the taxpayer lose out either way, and they get the assets either way.


It's not for the Quinns to decide what justice is. Just because they perceive themselves to be in the right doesn't make it so - we have courts for that, and their actions so far suggest that they also believe themselves to be above the courts.