Michael Fingleton engaged in 'solo run' trading when lending millions, court told

High Court Reporters

Former Irish Nationwide boss Michael Fingleton engaged in "cart-before-the-horse" and "solo run" lending and approved millions in loans for a failed casino in the south of France and the development of a hospital site in Wales that saw "massive" losses before ever bringing them before the board for sanction, the High Court has been told.

The civil case against former INBS chief Michael Fingleton is in its third day before the High Court, where it has been alleged that he negligently mismanaged the building society (INBS) and engaged in property "gambles" with high net-worth individuals in an informal and speculative manner.

Mr Fingleton (87), who is in ill health after a stroke, ran the building lender from 1971 to 2009, as managing director and chief executive. At its height in 2007, INBS had reported assets of €16 billion but was a high-profile casualty of the financial crisis of 2008.

Liquidators for Irish Banking Resolution Corporation (IBRC) have taken the case against Mr Fingleton, who denies the allegation of negligent mismanagement.

The losses, relating to property loans, had been estimated by the IBRC at €6 billion. However, only €250 million in damages is now being pursued by IBRC relating to five loans made by INBS, allegedly approved by Mr Fingleton, who the court was told was also “nodding through” top ups and extensions to certain clients.

At the High Court on Thursday, Lyndon MacCann SC, for IBRC, during his opening of the case, said that in 2007 a Luxembourg-registered company called Laurent Properties applied for a loan with INBS to develop two adjacent sites in the south of France to build a hotel and casino.

Mr MacCann said the borrower valued the property at €7M for the first site but then applied for a second loan to develop the second site.

Mr MacCann said loans were issued by INBS to Laurent Properties without the board having any sight of an application before the money was issued in September 2007 by authorisation of Mr Fingleton.

The court heard that a second loan of €2.1M for the second site was approved by Mr Fingleton again ahead of the board or the bank's credit committee ever seeing it.

The development never took place and by the time the bad loans were purchased by Nama for €4.5 million in 2010 it represented a loss, interest included, of €5.9 million - a discount of 57 per cent.

Mr MacCann said it was "cart-before-the-horse lending" made without security, guarantees, independent valuations or the board's approval, which "beggars belief".

In a separate loan to a UK company called Coast and Capital to buy up to 32 petrol stations a loan of £1.75 million had been approved for deposits on site to be bought from oil giant BP. in April 2006.

On this occasion the borrower had been told by Mr Fingleton that INBS would back the entirety of the project and the society indicated it was prepared to loan Coast and Capital £34.5 million again without board approval or credit analysis, said counsel.

Mr MacCann said that despite the deposit being asked for being £1.75 million, a sum of £4 million was advanced but with the approval of the board, even though Mr Fingleton had told the borrower it would be approved.

The borrower's estimation was that the value of all 32 filling stations across England and Wales would increase to £38 million with planning permissions secured, said counsel. The following December, £27.4 million is advanced by INBS for the project without any authorisation from the board and is provided in addition to the £4 million for the deposit, said counsel,

When the second, large loan was issued, the amount of sites to be purchased to be flipped had already reduced from 32 down to 23, "as they fell by the wayside", said counsel.

The debt built up on the deal was £30.5 million by the time Nama bought them in May 2011 for £11.4 million - a loss of 63 per cent.

This, counsel said, represented "a complete solo run" by Mr Fingleton.

The court heard of a third deal that incurred "massive losses", according to counsel, when money was borrowed to purchase and develop a hospital outside of Cardiff.

In May 2004, £20 million was loaned to a company referred to as Galliard (Sully) Ltd, and then topped up with a further £5 million in May 2006, counsel said.

"There was no profit generated. Instead there was a massive loss. Huge," said Mr MacCann. Counsel said fatal planning issues included the safe destruction of the hospital's incinerator which would cost £2.2 million,"more than 10 per cent of the first loan".

The loans were eventually bought by Nama at a loss of £23.8 million, representing a 78 per cent loss, which counsel described as a "huge punt" made on "hope".

The case continues at the High Court.