(Limerick East): I propose to take Questions Nos. 3, 12, 13, 16, 59, 60, 61, 62 and 63 together.
I am informed by the Garda authorities that the Garda pursue actively all alleged breaches of the law in relation to moneylenders. In keeping with this policy all divisional officers had investigations carried out following the allegations of irregularities by moneylenders which were made in the media in November and December last year. All of the matters concerned are still under investigation but, so far, in the majority of cases these investigations have not uncovered evidence to substantiate the allegations made. Some evidence of irregularities was found to exist in the areas of Cork, Galway, Waterford and Wexford.
This, however, must be assessed in the following context. First, a difficulty nearly always encountered by the Garda in investigating the recent allegations against moneylenders, and indeed on previous occasions, is that in many cases the persons making the allegations or the borrowers in question are either unable or unwilling to give information.
Secondly — and this is of central importance — most of what may be described as irregularities in the matter of moneylending are not criminal offences. In many important instances the Acts do not create offences at all and, therefore, do not provide for a criminal sanction but only for a restriction on the civil right of the moneylender to recover a debt in the courts. Accordingly, the remedy provided by law does not rest with the Garda — even when they get full co-operation from the borrower — but with the borrower himself if the moneylenders seeks to bring civil proceedings against him.
A case in point is the matter of interest and related charges. There is no power vested in the Garda to prosecute for excessive charges. Charging more than 39 per cent is not a criminal offence. The figure is mentioned in the 1933 Act in the context of a provision which allows a court, in proceedings brought by a moneylender for the recovery of money lent, to re-open the transaction and give equitable relief if the transaction is harsh and unconscionable. The court must conclusively assume that it is such a transaction if the interest exceeds 39 per cent simple interest but can give relief even where the interest is less. Charging more than that rate of interest could also be significant in the context of applications for renewal of certificates of fitness.
The scope for Garda procedures, even where the facts alleged are provable, is therefore very limited and the Garda statistics which follow should be read against that background. They show that there were no prosecutions for offences in the moneylending area in the years 1980 to 1983, inclusive. In 1984 one person was convicted of unlicensed moneylending and assault. In 1985 one licensed moneylender was convicted of opening for business on Good Friday and another person was prosecuted for 11 offences related to moneylending, that is, four counts of unlicensed moneylending and seven counts of assault. He was convicted for eight of these offences and the other three still have to be dealt with.
I have been asked if I would be willing to discuss and consult with interested groups in relation to the problems. I would welcome the views of these groups but I believe that those who have considered the matter in some detail are alive to the fact that it is part of a complex problem that is not necessarily eased but that could, on the contrary, be worsened by legal provisions that might superficially sound right. In those circumstances, I do not consider that the matter would best be approached by my meeting some interested group but, rather, by their setting out their own considered views in writing and I suggest that they submit their views to me in writing.
Some of the questions refer to amending the law. I will, of course, consider introducing any amending legislation that may be necessary. I wish to assure Deputies that I will keep the subject of moneylending under review. Decisions on any further action, either by way of enforcement or by amending legislation, will be taken in the light of developments in the present Garda investigations and points made in any submissions by interested groups. However, in saying this, I am not to be taken as saying that this area is necessarily one that I should continue to deal with. It may appear, as consideration of the matter develops, that it would be regarded as something to be dealt with in the wider context of social legislation, credit control and/or consumer protection.
When I answered questions on various aspects of moneylending in 1984 and 1985 I suggested that Deputies should bring any particular cases they have in mind to the notice of local gardaí. I would like now to reiterate that suggestion.