Quinn Insurance in Administration

[OverThePostsAWide]

All 5 judges ruled against the actions she placed against Sean Quinn Jr's contempt. I could allow a certain leeway if it was 3-2 or even 4-1. A complete idiot would have seen the injustice in what see did. You don't have a major issue with that. I do. She was bending over backwards for Anglo. But in actual fact went so far that she made a mess of it for them.
Your happy to accept this as just a mistake by the Judge, and that Irish politicians getting involved in court cases in other jurisdictions is just "appeasing the voters". I don't. Call it a smokescreen all you like, but there's enough there to cast doubt.

Very selective there SS. Now you're at the smokescreening yourself. If you are holding up the judgement of the 5 Supreme Court judges in overruling Justice Dunne in her ruling that Quinn had breached 30 coercive orders and should be jailed indefinitely until this was purged, are you also holding up the 4-1 judgement that upheld findings of contempt against Quinn and upheld the 3 month jail sentence? You can't have it both ways. Or are the only judgements that are correct and impartial are the ones that suit your point of view?

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2012/1108/1224326307780.html

"...Last month, by a four-to-one majority, the Supreme Court had upheld findings of contempt against Mr Quinn and also upheld the imposition of a three-month jail sentence on him over that contempt.

However, all five judges found the High Court was not entitled to find he had breached 30 coercive orders aimed at reversing a wide ranging of asset-stripping measures when there were no actual findings he was involved in most of those measures.

They also found the High Court could not jail him indefinitely for breach of those orders..."

[supersarsfields]

All 5 judges ruled against the actions she placed against Sean Quinn Jr's contempt. I could allow a certain leeway if it was 3-2 or even 4-1. A complete idiot would have seen the injustice in what see did. You don't have a major issue with that. I do. She was bending over backwards for Anglo. But in actual fact went so far that she made a mess of it for them.
Your happy to accept this as just a mistake by the Judge, and that Irish politicians getting involved in court cases in other jurisdictions is just "appeasing the voters". I don't. Call it a smokescreen all you like, but there's enough there to cast doubt.

Very selective there SS. Now you're at the smokescreening yourself. If you are holding up the judgement of the 5 Supreme Court judges in overruling Justice Dunne in her ruling that Quinn had breached 30 coercive orders and should be jailed indefinitely until this was purged, are you also holding up the 4-1 judgement that upheld findings of contempt against Quinn and upheld the 3 month jail sentence? You can't have it both ways. Or are the only judgements that are correct and impartial are the ones that suit your point of view?

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2012/1108/1224326307780.html

"...Last month, by a four-to-one majority, the Supreme Court had upheld findings of contempt against Mr Quinn and also upheld the imposition of a three-month jail sentence on him over that contempt.

However, all five judges found the High Court was not entitled to find he had breached 30 coercive orders aimed at reversing a wide ranging of asset-stripping measures when there were no actual findings he was involved in most of those measures.

They also found the High Court could not jail him indefinitely for breach of those orders..."

Not smokescreening at all. For what it's worth I agree that the Quinns were in contempt and should have been punished accordly. So Why would I raise an issue with that when I agree with her original finding and indeed the 4/5th of the Supreme. I'm not in the habit of taking issue with  points that I agree with.
But as mentioned I don't agree about how she went around putting sanctions on the punishment that A) had no relevance to the issues that were ruled on, and B) linking it to the actions of someone else. To me, going down that route, which was a clear objective of IRBR, she opened herself wide open to questions on her impartiality.

The Quinns have no problem with the 455 m debt that they accept was legitimately loaned. .

Why don't the slimy scuts pay it back then and stop piling more costs on the taxpayers of the 26 Cos.

The 455 has already been taken you stupid c&@t.

Supersh1t is obviously a Quinn family member.
The same views - Everyone is out of step except the Quinns, a distorted view of reality and of course totally arrogant.
He now joins the threatening ranks of the "concerned citizens" with the above abusive post.
Disgraceful post by a deluded thug.

Yeah I'm a Quinn family member. Despite from being from the wrong county, let alone townland!! (That and the fact that various posters on here know who I am, in fact I've never hidden my identity) I treat people as I find them. I've debated with others on here with no problems, despite being from polar opposites of opinions. But you, come in make a snide comment, then usually run away. If someone trys to debate your comment you disappear for long enough and then come running back on to make the same comment. I've no time for you and my opinion of you hasn't changed. And the hypocrisy of you complaining about an abusive post isn't lost on me either.

[Rossfan]

Some of us have to work for a living away from desks and computers so I can't be answering every post all day long.
I have no time for you either so there !!

[highorlow]

The 2nd biggest mistake the Quinn family made (after taking the gamble in the 1st instance) was admitting to the 1/2 billion owed.

I reckon their own lawyers who were likely coaxed and threatened by the IBRC lawyers forced the Quinns to admit to this amount due.

This decision to admit to any money owed has effectively turned out to be miss advised and miss judged.

Had they shut up shop completely there would be no contempt or any of the rest of the carry-on and the Quinns case on the illegal loan would likely have been heard first before any of this other stuff.

This mistake opened the door to the IRBC to almost take over everything belonging to the Quinn family which is completely unjustified. The IRBC got first run on the Quinns rather than the other way around. Now they are making the Quinn family out to be some sort of criminals and scapegoats for the entire collapse of the economy when it was in fact the greed of the Bankers themselves that caused the whole things to collapse.

[Gaaboardmod3]

Hi Lads, I've not had much time for a couple of days, so just looking at some reported posts now. I'm aware this is an emotive subject, but two things I want to make sure of

1 - No insulting each other. If you can't debate opposing points without resorting to childish insults, then we'll have to lock the debate because it's neither informative or entertaining.
2 - No insulting or libelling people not on this board. Obviously this is subject of a complex and lengthy set of legal battles. Feel free to debate what is in the public domain, but please try to do so without resorting to baseless accusations or cowardly insults on somebody who cannot respond here. Your opinion is welcomed, no matter how harsh, but please do not phrase it in libellous or insulting terms.

Thanks

[Hardy]

Now they are making the Quinn family out to be some sort of criminals and scapegoats for the entire collapse of the economy

This comes up over and over again. The Quinns have not been jailed for anything to do with the collapse of the economy or as scapegoats for somebody else. The Quinns have been jailed for contempt of court. That's all. And contempt is a very good word for how they've treated the courts and, by extension, the people who are the real scapegoats in this debacle.

Also, the suggestion that nobody else has been taken to task for the banking collapse just ignores the fact that Fitzpatrck, McAteer and Whelan of Anglo are on bail, charged with 16 separate crimes each. It's taken too long and there should be a lot more of them in the slammer, but it does mean it's nonsense to suggest the Quinns are carrying the can by themselves for the banking collapse.

[supersarsfields]

Noboby is saying they were jailed because they brought down the economy. They are saying that the media attention given to Quinn over the Anglo dispute greatly outways the attention given to the likes of Fitz. I've barely read an article regarding Seanie fitz, McAteer et al since they were bailed. And yet there has been daily articles focusing on everything to do with the Quinns, from the price of cake to what they're wearing. Not really in proportion is it. That's the issue.

[Hardy]

Really? That's all you and others are complaining about - the media attention and its proportionality? I could have sworn I've been reading about the Quinns being jailed as scapegoats for Anglo and others, unfair procedures, wrongfully allocated debts and even corrupt courts.

That's all withdrawn now, is it and the only problem is disproportionate publicity? It seems to me that marching about the countryside and speechifying off the back of a lorry on a Sunday evening is not exactly trying to fight shy of publicity and media attention.

[supersarsfields]

Again Hardy you're making the mistake of thinking that the contempt is the only issue on the table, like so many others. Funnily enough there a few more issues than that, but I understand how you'd be confused about that. Some people get all their information from the papers....

[Hardy]

Em ... you were the one, just two posts ago, suggesting that there was only one issue about the treatment of the Quinns - publicity. "That's the issue" you said.

[supersarsfields]

That's the issue I had with your post. You were saying that people who believe SQ was being scapegoated was in relation to the Contempt charges and him being jailed. What people lose sight of is that the contempt is only one part of the story. There are plenty of others.

[supersarsfields]

AINE McMAHON

Liberty Insurance,  formerly Quinn Insurance, is to shed 285 jobs at  its offices on both sides of the Border.

The development comes on top of 900 redundancies two years ago at the company.

At staff meetings this afternoon, workers were told that 140 redundancies would be sought in Blanchardstown in Dublin, 75 in Cavan town and 70 in Enniskillen, Co Fermanagh. About 500 people currently work in each location.

A spokesman for Liberty Mutual told The Irish Times that Cavan will remain the headquarters for Liberty Mutual insurance in Ireland.

The company has told staff the redundancies are voluntary but the company has not ruled out compulsory job losses.

Chief executive Patrick O'Brien said the redundancies were necessary to protect the remaining 1,100 jobs.

"We are fully committed to the Irish business, will continue to invest in our business, and believe that our arrival has been positive for the Irish insurance market and consumers," he said.

He added that management, employees and the employee representative body would work together during a 30 day consultation period.

The company also announced plans to target general insurance customers in Northern Ireland and Britain. It said the decision to enter the market secured 415 jobs within the Irish operations.

Supporters of the Quinn family, who have staged several rallies in their hometown of Ballyconnell, Co Cavan, claimed the job losses came as little surprise after the family's plan to save the business was rejected.

Adrian McCaffrey, of Concerned Irish Businesses (CIB), said: "It is devastating for the employees concerned and their families, especially coming up to Christmas; however, it has been expected for some time now.

"The company formally known as Quinn Insurance has been in decline since the appointment of the administrators some two and half years ago, an appointment which has to date not been fully explained by the Financial Regulator.

"These job losses come at a time of severe social and economic turbulence in Ireland, a time when families in rural Ireland and particularly those in the border region are struggling to survive and maintain any form of community."

[sammymaguire]

Nice to see the government's way of handling the Quinn/Anglo mess is shaping up well for them... Or maybe they don't care if the vast majority of jobs being lost are north of the border

[Maguire01]

Nice to see the government's way of handling the Quinn/Anglo mess is shaping up well for them... Or maybe they don't care if the vast majority of jobs being lost are north of the border

70 out of 285 is the vast majority?

[sammymaguire]

Nice to see the government's way of handling the Quinn/Anglo mess is shaping up well for them... Or maybe they don't care if the vast majority of jobs being lost are north of the border

70 out of 285 is the vast majority?

Nah suppose it isn't. Me bad. Irish government ok.