The National Asset Management Agency is expected to face questions from the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) in the coming weeks about a case in which it sold loans at a 97.5% discount to a debtor's relative.
Details of the case came to light last month in a report by the Comptroller and Auditor General which examined NAMA’s progress on achieving its objectives by the end of 2021.
The report found that NAMA was warned by independent valuers that the assets that it controlled and which had a market value of €1.3m, were unlikely to ever be sold for that amount or at all while threats and intimidation connected to the properties continued.
The valuers told NAMA that they would not recommend that a receiver acting for the agency should attempt to sell these assets, as they were not considered marketable.
The valuers also noted that a cash investor would be unlikely to purchase the assets and to take on potential litigation and intimidation and threats, for such a low return.
NAMA ultimately sold loans related to the assets that had a par value of €10.5m for €265,000, a 97.5% discount.
The loans were sold to a relative of the debtors and were not openly marketed prior to the sale, as normally required under NAMA's loan sale policy.
The sale resulted in NAMA incurring a loss of just under €6m.
Sinn Féin’s Brian Stanley, who is Chair of the PAC, has indicated that NAMA will face questions about the case when it comes before the committee for a scheduled hearing in September.
"As Chair of the PAC, I feel it’s important that we have full transparency around this transaction," he said.
"What was the status of the relative, was it a sibling, an aunt/uncle, or a cousin? We need NAMA to be more specific."
"The C&AG’s report also states that a contributing factor behind the disposal of the loans for such a significant discount was due to potential litigation and intimidation/threats."
Mr Stanley added that questions need to be answered about the nature of the threats, about whether gardai were contacted and did the threats have any credibility.
"If NAMA is going to use this as reasoning for a 97.5% discount, we’re demanding a specific and detailed explanation of the incident and how much of factor they played," he said.
