Skip to main content
Normal View

Joint Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform, and Taoiseach debate -
Thursday, 24 Nov 2016

Banking Sector in Ireland: Allied Irish Banks

I welcome Mr. Bernard Byrne, CEO of Allied Irish Banks, and his colleagues. In advance of the meeting we collated questions from members and submitted them to the bank. They will form the backdrop to our discussion.

By virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to the joint committee. However, if they are directed by it to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and continue to so do, they are entitled thereafter only to qualified privilege in respect of their evidence. They are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against any person or an entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable. I invite Mr. Byrne to make his opening statement.

Mr. Bernard Byrne

We are very pleased to have the opportunity to give the Oireachtas and the public as comprehensive a picture as possible of AIB's progress - from recovery to its current position of sustainable profitability - to what I believe can be a period of continuing growth for it and the country. The crucial task for all of us is to ensure Ireland is clearly seen as an attractive location for business in which to invest capital and resources. This challenge has grown considerably in recent times. This is my first opportunity since I became the bank's chief executive in May 2015 to meet the joint committee and I look forward to hearing members' views on how we can move forward together in the economy in facing up to these challenges and availing of many opportunities.

The committee will have received our written responses to the questions in its questionnaire, to which we will return. I would also like to give it an overview of how I see AIB contributing positively to the growth of the economy and to assure members that the bank now has a sustainable business model and is in a position to continue to facilitate the return of capital to the State when the Government decides.

First, I will introduce the members of my management team who are with me. They are Mr. Mark Bourke, chief financial officer; Mr. Jim O’Keeffe, head of financial solutions group; and Mr. Robert Mulhall, managing director of retail, corporate and business banking.

AIB is a critical part of Ireland's economic infrastructure. The banking system and the supporting infrastructure were rescued from collapse at great expense to the taxpayer because of the crucial economic role of the banks. The financial crisis and the role the banks played in its creation led, understandably, to a reputational battering of the banking sector which will take a lot of time to heal and will never be forgotten. Fortunately, the reality is that the banking sector in Ireland is now in far better shape and delivering on a daily basis the economic support it has been designed to deliver.

Overall, while the GDP growth rate is expected to lessen slightly next year, the economy is forecast to continue to perform well in the next three years, prompting demand for new loans and banking products and reducing pressure on problem loans. AIB's role is to be a strong net contributor to Ireland's prosperity to demonstrate why it was an organisation that was well worth saving. We can do this by providing reliable financial support for every aspect of the economy, including business, farming, families, individuals and communities. As evidence of its progress, the bank is recording a strong underlying profit, has made substantial repayments to the State and is ready for sale at a time of the Government's choosing.

In summary, after a period of enormous transformation, AIB's financial performance has improved, with a sustainable underlying profit of approximately €1 billion, excluding write-backs and one-off benefits which are incremental to it; a reduction in our cost base of €450 million over three years to 2015; an €18 billion reduction in impaired loan balances to €11 billion in June 2016 from €29 billion in 2013; new lending approvals of €14 billion in 2015 and €6.1 billion in the first half of 2016, an increase on the figure for the previous year; a total of 37,000 forbearance solutions provided for mortgage customers in difficulty; owner-occupier arrears greater than 90 days past due at a figure of 5.8%, significantly below the industry average of 8%; significant capital generation and strong capital ratios; and repayments of capital in the past 12 months of €3.5 billion to the State, bringing total payments to €6.5 billion, including fees, coupons, dividends and levies.

AIB received a €20.8 billion investment from the State and our objective is to facilitate the repayment of this amount in full. The timing, nature and structure of a return to the public markets are matters for the Minister. From my perspective, the aspect within my control is the management and performance of the bank and ensuring international investors have a clear understanding of our strategy, progress and future trajectory. Members will have recently seen that the Department of Finance has begun the process of appointing investment banks as "global co-ordinators" as part of a banking syndicate to assist in a potential future initial public offering, IPO, of AIB. The selected investment banks will assist the State in the initial stages of preparation for an IPO and the Department has confirmed that the global co-ordinators selected will be appointed for an 18-month period with an option to extend.

If proof were needed of the importance of a strong banking sector, it has rarely been more starkly illustrated than in very recent times. Economic uncertainty has been introduced in unprecedented measure by the Brexit vote and possible policy changes under a new US Presidency. I strongly preface my remarks by stressing how premature it is at this stage to accurately foretell what lies ahead in either the EU, US or UK scenarios. However, as a small open economy which is particularly influenced by developments such as those we have just seen in two of our most significant trading partners, we must give serious thought to the risks and benefits that might yet result for the country. In the short term a weakening sterling is affecting some of our indigenous exporters and we are working hard with our customers who are impacted on to address these effects and plan with them for alternative and diversified markets. I believe that in the longer term Ireland can present itself as a bridge between two major economic regions on either side of the Atlantic. This must be the most attractive location in which to invest capital and resources. This must be true for local entrepreneurs, domestically headquartered businesses and the multinational sector. This goes well beyond headline tax rates. If we have a truly supportive and agile approach to attracting all investment, we can maintain the healthy job creation that has been a feature of the past few years. There is no reason we cannot benefit from additional foreign direct investment inflows and possibly the relocation of financial firms from the United Kingdom, but in order to attract business we must have the required supporting infrastructure such as commercial office space, housing, transport and efficient access to finance. As a well capitalised bank with excess liquidity, AIB is strongly placed to help to drive and support that strategy.

During the summer the publication of the ECB stress test results attracted negative media attention. The market reaction was more muted. The methodology used is particularly penal to banks such as the Irish banks, with their relatively high levels of non-performing loans, NPLs, and a recent history of losses on distressed loans. The tests were a snapshot in time and do not fully reflect the current state of the bank and the pace of our recovery.

Crucially there are no required capital actions. Earlier this month, Moody’s outlook on Ireland’s banking sector was positive in spite of the Brexit vote, saying the uncertainty introduced by the result was manageable and that Irish banks had materially strengthened their solvency ratios owing to a mix of factors including strong internal capital generation and simplification of their capital structures.

After the initial phases of the financial crisis, the level of non-performing loans, NPLs, still on AIB's balance sheet was almost €30 billion at the end of 2013. AIB has in the intervening years engaged with customers in difficulty to implement a range of forbearance and restructuring solutions. This work meant that by the end of June 2016 these NPLs were 61% lower at €11 billion. Despite this progress and the fact that we hold almost half of this in bad debt provisions, we recognise it is still a high number when compared to other peer European banks. Elevated NPLs attract both regulatory and market attention and the ECB in particular is very keen to oversee the lowering of NPLs across the entire European financial system. Their stress tests will continue to focus very heavily on this aspect, as will other regulatory actions. Therefore, we must continue to address the challenge of non-performing loans as a matter of the utmost strategic importance. We will continue to seek and implement sustainable solutions for those customers who engage with us while also recognising that after years of consistently working to restructure the number of loans in long-term arrears, we must keep all options open that reduce the overall level of NPLs.

We are essentially a core Irish bank. With 2.2 million AIB customers and 360,000 EBS customers, the AIB Group is rooted in the country’s economic life and communities. A total of 60,000 customers use our 205 AIB branches every day, with a further 7,000 customers visiting our 71 EBS locations daily.

Our partnership with An Post, with its 1,100 offices, provides banking services to 15,000 customers every day, with approximately 4 million transactions expected to be recorded by the end of this year alone. These combined banking services amount to a deeply embedded and widespread network across the country. Our network bank staff are drawn from within the community, bringing with them local knowledge and an understanding of our customers and their needs.

Close engagement between AIB and our customer base is important to the success of our business and underpins our performance. We have recently reorganised our banking model in order to work more closely and connect better with our customers across our retail business and corporate activities. We created 19 new local markets which are now in place and headed by an individual senior manager responsible for AIB’s overall engagement with customers in that region.

The bank is organising around customers at a local level, eliminating duplication and unnecessary complexities in the system. The new structure aims to provide customers with a convenient one-stop-shop flexible form of service, allowing more local management autonomy when it comes to decision-making, including lending. It is designed to be more tailored to individual customer needs, allowing far greater agility of service and enabling us to move working capital faster and more efficiently.

When I joined AIB in 2010, I could not have predicted the amount of change in customer behaviour that would occur in a relatively short period of time. The systematic move by customers to digital and technological banking means that AIB is more than half way through an €870 million investment programme focused on improving the customer experience, digital innovation and information technology resilience.

AIB is leading the expansion of digitalisation of services. For example, 76% of all AIB’s personal loan applications are now done through digital channels and 95% of all customer transactions are automated. This activity is by no means conducted just by a younger generation of customers. The use of digital channels by older age groups is growing consistently, regardless of geographical location. In line with European norms, banking online and through remote channels has been embraced across the country. Almost 50% of customers in rural counties now use digital banking of one kind or another. More than 40% of our 500,000 daily transactions are conducted outside of normal banking hours, and are transacted online or on mobile.

There is a balance to be maintained between providing our customers with personal, one-to-one services and an accessible and robust digital or mobile service. AIB opened three new branches last year, in Little Island, Cork, Carrickmines and Grand Canal Dock in Dublin. Earlier in 2016, we opened the only in-store banking outlet in the Republic of Ireland through SuperValu in Lucan. It is an illustration of the increasing number of flexible banking options available to our customers, to be used when and where they choose.

AIB is also increasing its mobile salesforce where trained staff travel to meet customers where and when it suits their needs. In addition to the core retail opening hours, by the end of this year the bank will be operating 20 bank lobbies across the country providing a wide range of services, seven days a week from 8 a.m. to 9 p.m. In addition, students now have access to exclusive on-campus banking services at 13 universities and colleges from Waterford to Sligo, and from Dublin to Galway. Where there is a lack of physical branch infrastructure, AIB operates community banks in rural areas of Cork, Kerry, Clare, Limerick, Tipperary, Mayo, Galway and Donegal via mobile branches. We have recorded over 40,000 transactions at these branches this year.

Supporting our customers with speedy and efficient credit decisions remains central to our aims. Overall, the bank is approving approximately €14 billion a year in new lending to SME, corporate, mortgage and personal customers. The bank is now clearly performing its fundamental role of facilitating our retail and business customers in protecting as well as creating jobs. On the SME and corporate side, the bank sanctioned €4.8 billion in lending last year to existing and new businesses and the current momentum is positive.

The bank has 250,000 SME customers and can now provide a decision within 48 hours on a credit application of up to €30,000. Since this initiative’s launch in September 2014, some 28,000 applications have been approved through this process. The performance of loans in what was a very challenged SME sector has improved significantly, a welcome metric as it directly involves saving jobs and creating employment. Meanwhile, we have been building out bank sectoral teams, developing specialists to work specifically with key areas of the economy. These teams have gained an insight into the needs of farmers, retailers, the hospitality sector, transport, technology, exporting, energy and health sectors. This approach of building sectoral capability has been very effective. It has given the bank a high level of understanding of the specific requirements of businesses and allowed us to shape products and funds suitable to their needs. For example, our agri-team now includes eleven specialist advisers with front-line experience of farmers’ needs and opportunities and who can respond rapidly and pragmatically to issues such as flooding, price volatility and poor crop yields. Farming is a major aspect of our business and, following the full drawdown of the first €500 million agri-loan fund, at the end of last year we launched a second €500-million agri-loan fund to support the sector.

Recently, AIB has been engaging with the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine and with the Strategic Banking Corporation of Ireland or SBCI in regard to the Low-Cost AgriCash Flow Support Loan Fund announced in the budget. AIB’s successful partnership with the SBCI in helping the expansion of small businesses and farming is reflected in the aforementioned figures. Since the launch of AIB’s €400 million SBCI fund in 2015, which is available at a 4.5% rate, AIB has approved more than €5 million of credit each week to businesses and farmers under the fund. Last year, the average loan drawdown under this fund was €28,500 but loans ranged in size from €1,000 to €1 million.

AIB is the largest provider of mortgages in the Irish market. We have a 34% share of market by drawdowns and we approved €2 billion of loans to customers last year alone. Conscious of the need to treat customers fairly, as soon as the bank’s underlying performance allowed, and in particular as our cost of funding improved, AIB moved to cut its standard variable rate. The joint committee is aware that we have implemented four mortgage rate cuts totalling 1% to new and existing customers in the past 24 months. Our SVR rate is now a market-leading 3.4% and LTV variable rates start as low as 3.1%. It means savings of approximately €1,300 a year on the average mortgage. We also introduced a €2,000 contribution to switching costs to facilitate that process.

Case by case restructuring of problem mortgages continues to absorb a high degree of bank resources but, as the figures show, we are making good headway. We have produced a comprehensive range of sustainable solutions including split mortgages, low fixed-rate options, term extensions, arrears capitalisation, reduced repayment and voluntary sale for loss. All of these measures are underpinned by the bank’s determination to keep people in their homes where possible, when customers engage with us and prioritise mortgage debt. Repossession is always a last resort and, in spite of popular misapprehensions, less than 200 repossessions of owner-occupier homes took place last year as a result of enforced security. Our engagement with third-party channels such as the Irish Mortgage Holders' Organisation and Stepchange has also led to the resolution of thousands of what appeared to be intractable cases.

As everyone is acutely aware, we are operating at present in a very constrained housing market. The societal and economic impact of the lack of housing supply makes an early solution to this crisis imperative. AIB recognises the critical role it plays in the housing supply chain and is actively engaged with the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government, as well as other relevant agencies, to ensure we play our role in establishing a normalised housing market. The bank is also providing a pipeline of hundreds of empty houses to the Housing Agency to provide homes for families.

In summary, on behalf of AIB, I want to again express thanks to the committee for inviting us here today. From our perspective, these engagements with the Oireachtas are a valuable means of explaining our position to the committee and to the broader public. They allow space for debate and also provide us with a clear view of the opinions and expectations of the committee.

Once again, with the bank now profitable, our priorities are to maintain the focus on delivering a strong and sustainable financial performance, to be ready for an IPO when our shareholder decides, to continue to reduce impaired loans, to strongly support Ireland’s economic growth and jobs and to keep our customers' needs at the heart of all our policies.

The Irish banking sector is an integral part of the Irish economic infrastructure. In addition to supporting our indigenous industries, we play our role in establishing Ireland as the European location of choice for international investment. I assure the committee my team and I will continue to build on the advances already secured by AIB and support our customers in the challenges ahead. It is through the delivery of professional, efficient, reliable and experienced service that we intend to match our strong financial performance with a full redemption of customer trust in the bank. We welcome the committee's questions.

I welcome Mr. Byrne. I also welcome the information he has provided to the committee to help us in our endeavours this morning. Will Mr. Byrne explain to us the information on page 6 of the document we have received? We asked for data in tabular form on the total remuneration package for employees. Mr. Byrne provided us with a table suggesting nobody had a total remuneration package in excess of €500,000. Mr. Byrne is well aware this is not totally true, given his package is €587,000, as reported in the annual accounts, and Mr. Burke's is €570,000. Could it be suggested that the bank has tried to mislead the committee in the presentation of the facts, in answer to a very clear question on total remuneration?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

The figures disclosed here are total remuneration excluding any contributions for pensions. The only pension contributions we have are defined contribution benefits. In my case, my salary and package on an annualised basis, because last year contained a half-year number, is €500,000, and I have a defined benefit contribution of 20% on top of this. On a normalised basis this is €500,000 plus €100,000 which equals €600,000. For all other members of the bank their defined contribution rates vary from 12% to 20%, depending on individual circumstances. The remuneration here is all cash, and all forms of annual pay have been included.

I think the bank is being a bit too clever for itself on this issue, with respect. We ask very clearly for the total remuneration package. The annual accounts have the total remuneration package. We are aware of it, and we just wanted it for ease of access and reference. The bank decided to exclude the pension part and did not state it is excluding it. I will not dwell on it.

Mr. Bernard Byrne

It is made clear we included all remuneration bar pensions. We did not do that and I am sorry. My answer was very direct I hope.

With regard to the announcement yesterday on first-time buyers and the macro prudential rules, the bank supported the Banking and Payments Federation Ireland submission on increasing the 90% loan to value rate from €220,000 to €300,000. Is Mr. Byrne surprised or can he comment on the fact that the Governor of the Central Bank went way beyond what the federation was looking for and got rid of the cap altogether? Will he speak to us about the impact this will have on lending to first-time buyers in his financial institution and the movement on house prices?

A vote has been called in the Dáil. I presume because it is on the Social Welfare Bill we must suspend. I apologise to Mr. Byrne. We will suspend until after the vote and come straight back to deal with Deputy Doherty's question.

Sitting suspended at 10.25 a.m. and resumed at 10.40 a.m.

Regarding the arrangements for the rest of the meeting, I will continue to chair the meeting. During the vote the Senators tell me they are quite capable of carrying on the business of the meeting without a problem.

I invite Mr. Byrne to respond to Deputy Pearse Doherty.

Mr. Bernard Byrne

To ensure I am on the right topic, the Deputy asked a question about the submission from the BPFI. Part of that referred to a limit or number. We are part of that group but in overall terms I believe that number came from looking at the average first-time buyer property in terms of the pricing that was set and to move the limit from €220,000, which seemed low relative to the experience in the market, to a level which reflected the experience in the market. The guiding thought on that number was based on market practice more than anything else. Based on quick observation of what the Central Bank has done, it has simplified the system even more than that. Effectively, it has stuck with a 90% position and moved away from a property boundary on the loan-to-value, LTV, side, so it is creating an environment where a 90% mortgage for a first-time buyer on a LTV basis is okay. It is important to remember that the loan-to-income, LTI, restriction will still be in place, so that will place a boundary on part of the criteria. Affordability is central to everything and what has happened on the LTV side will certainly help in freeing up what was probably the major stalling point, as we would have seen it, in terms of the ability of people to gather deposits. It has helped that piece. However, the affordability piece in terms of incomes will still be in place. It will take time to see how that plays out. As a quick perspective on it, we believe it is helpful. We believe it will help bridge the apparent real problem which was people's inability to gather deposits. However, affordability is still central to this. People will get closer access to a deposit but affordability will be key.

I understand, but my specific question was what impact, if any, Mr. Byrne thinks this will have on house prices when one looks at both schemes combined. I will give him an example. Let us say I am a first-time buyer who is borrowing from a body in the AIB group, such as EBS, and I wish to purchase a house for €300,000. The deposit I must put together now is €9,000, which is 3%. Obviously the loan-to-value ratio is 90%, the Government will give me 5%, which takes me up to 95%, and EBS will give me 2% back. In effect, from a borrower's point of view, it is like a loan-to-value ratio of 97%. We know that is not the reality but the reality for the borrower is that he or she is only required to have 3%. Does Mr. Byrne think that is prudent? That is close to a return to the 100% rates, which could allow for much more credit to flow and could have the impact of pushing house prices up again. We have seen the house price increases in the last number of months. Does Mr. Byrne believe we are likely to see a steady rise in house prices as a result of these moves?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

Other things being equal - and other things are not equal because a set of other initiatives are taking place on the construction cost side that may have some impacts - one of the comments that would have come from the construction and property sectors was that pricing was too low to justify the development of new builds. There is an element of the pricing for first-time buyers, other things being equal, having to rise to attract supply into the market. There will be two factors playing out and it will be difficult in the first six to 12 months to figure out which of them is happening. One will be a move to a clearing price in terms of first-time properties and the second might well be price inflation as a result of a supply-demand imbalance still in the system. In the short term one is likely to see prices rising. Some of that is necessary to encourage supply to come forward and some of it will be simply a consequence of that shortage of supply for demand. As a measure, it will encourage the development of first-time properties in a significant way. That is something we will see playing out. Property developers, and banks, will now be able to look at the market and see how properties can be moved into a consumer marketplace as consumers can get the deposit together, so they can construct. The measure is likely to have a positive impact from that point of view.

The other positive measure in the Central Bank announcement yesterday is that it is clear from the Governor, Mr. Lane's speech and the actions of the Central Bank that the Central Bank will keep this under very close review. There will be short-term and medium-term effects and then long-term effects.

I do not underestimate the challenges Mr. Byrne inherited in terms of the amount of the bank's losses and some of the practices that took place in the bank during the height of the boom. We are approaching the end of this year and at the mid-point of the year there were 13,325 principal dwelling homes in mortgage arrears of 90 days or more. Can Mr. Byrne give a best estimate of the breakdown of those figures? How many of them are the hard core cases? How many are there where there might be no option but to repossess the home or seek voluntary surrender? How does he believe these will be resolved? As I said to Mr. Byrne and his predecessors previously, it is deeply frustrating to see that there are still thousands of cases so long in arrears. It is not just me pointing this out; other external agencies are doing so. It is causing a drag on the bank and on the wider economy. We must clear it up. Can Mr. Byrne give an indication of what the position will be over the next 12 months with the huge level of arrears in his institution?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

We share the concern about the level of arrears. I will ask Jim O'Keeffe to give the Deputy a more detailed breakdown, but as we have progressed over the last number of years we have engaged in a significant process of trying to deal with issues as we have seen them. On the mortgage side, as we have engaged with customers we have put 38,000 solutions in place. We have written off €1.3 billion of debt in an attempt to right size particular positions for home owners and property owners on mortgages who have engaged with us. Our stance has always been that if somebody engages with us, gives us the disclosure and allows us to understand their affordability, we will right size the debt and come up with an answer. That answer in many circumstances involves the right sizing of debt, and €1.3 billion is the total write-off. We think that will continue but we think there are a couple of categories that are starting to become very obvious. Some of them are about people's inability to engage because they just have no affordability and, on the other hand, people's desire to stay out of the process because they see that as a better outcome than getting involved in the process. Jim O'Keeffe will give some statistics.

Mr. Jim O'Keeffe

Good morning, Chairman and members. As Bernard Byrne said, we have 38,000 mortgage restructures in place. We have 13,000 customers who are post 90 days past due in our private dwelling or owner-occupier mortgages which, as the Deputy pointed out, is still a significant number of customers in difficulty. The challenge for us is that it is about engagement. We have been working very hard on engagement because we recognise that borrowers, for various reasons, find it difficult to engage with the bank. We have worked with the Irish Mortgage Holders Organisation, IMHO, StepChange and various organisations. That engagement is critical to us working through this portfolio. In the engagement we have had with the IMHO, where people feel that they can have independent engagement with ourselves, funded by ourselves, we have had almost 3,000 customers come through that and we have put solutions in place for over 2,500. They would have been customers that we would have seen within the cadre of customers who were not willing to engage and work with us.

As the committee will see from the documentation, we have almost 7,000 customers out of the broad group of 13,000 that are at various stages of the legal process. The legal process and repossession are a tiny part of the solution. When we look at the scale of repossessions that have taken place, from our perspective, and on an industry level, compared to the amount of restructures that have happened, it is about 1%. When one looks at the volume of restructures that have happened in the bank through 2015, for example, nearly 48,000 restructures occurred and close to 700 repossessions took place and some of those would have been voluntary.

Engagement is critical. One can see from the list that we have a wide range of solutions. Even in the legal process when we look back to 2015 we see that between 20% and 25% of that grouping re-engaged with us and in the vast majority of cases we were able to find solutions for them. As we move forward what will be critical for everybody is that either directly with ourselves or through engagement with third parties, people are encouraged to come forward to the banks to find solutions.

I will move on to another issue, but with respect, it is the same spiel – engagement, engagement, engagement - but there must be a point where the situation is resolved and the bank does something different.

The bank holds 569 vacant properties following repossessions. Permanent TSB is also owned by the State and when one takes the properties owned by the two institutions, more than 1,000 houses are lying vacant at this point. That is criminal in the extreme when we see figures released yesterday by the Dublin Region Homeless Executive and when we hear about rough sleepers. There are multiple families in the hotel I stayed in last night. A hotel room is now their home and has been for some months, and in some cases for years. We must move in an aggressive way to ensure those houses are used to deal with people who are homeless.

This morning the Minister spoke about 200 houses in total being bought by the Housing Agency before the end of the year. Can the bank do anything with the 569 houses to make sure they are used to deal with the housing crisis?

Mr. Jim O'Keeffe

I will take that question. Absolutely. We have had very significant engagement with the Housing Agency as a result of the broader initiatives. The Deputy referred to this morning's announcement about 200 houses. We are clearly a significant part of that. We have made available the full listing of the 500 properties to the Housing Agency and we are working actively to make sure we see the process come through with the agency. We share the Deputy’s concerns in that regard. We have had much engagement with the Department. In the short and medium term we will make up a considerable percentage of the flow of houses into social housing.

I will go to the final issue, namely, tracker mortgages but I do not believe we share the same concern. Given that we pumped €21 billion into the bank, I believe AIB should announce today to the committee that the 569 houses will be made available immediately to deal with the pressures experienced by people who are in emergency accommodation. The houses are lying vacant. It is not enough to make them available for the Housing Agency to buy, but that the bank would do the right thing, even if we did not pump €21 billion into the bank.

In terms of the 3,000 customers who are expected to receive redress from being moved off tracker mortgages, is that number still accurate and is the provision which has been spoken about of €105 million still relevant? Could the witnesses inform the committee from their trawl of tracker mortgages how many have been moved off them or have not been allowed to go back on them? Has AIB assessed how many people have lost their home as a result of them not having a tracker mortgage?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

I will take the question. We have never come out with a number so any numbers that are in the system are media numbers. The number mentioned by Deputy Doherty is not one we have ever used.

Last August we started a programme to look at whether there was an issue in the bank associated with tracker mortgages. As we developed through the programme we determined that there was an issue and there are two parts to it. One is that in certain situations customers had, or should have reasonably been entitled to think, that they had a contractual right to a tracker. The second part is that there is probably a larger group of those we confused, or where the documentation was confusing or our communication with them was misleading. There are those two cohorts. As the work progressed, the Central Bank came out with a framework in December and we brought the two programmes together. In July we announced that we were starting to communicate with the first group of customers that we had brought through the whole programme at that stage and we put them on to the correct rate. The number of customers we are talking about in that circumstance is approximately 2,600.

As we have progressed, this month we are engaging with customers in terms of actually fixing those balances. We changed the rate and now we are fixing the balances and before the year end, in respect of those customers we expect to have resolved all items and issues, subject to the fact that they have appeals rights and that there may be other issues that need to be investigated. In respect of that group, which is the majority of the customers, we expect to be through that, so it is a slightly different number but I am just giving the context of where we are at. We have not completed all of the work in respect of that at this stage and it will run into the early part of next year in terms of conclusion of that programme.

The provision that we have is the one we announced last year and we still remain confident it is the correct provision so we have no change in respect to it. Based on the work we have done at this point in time our assessment, knowing what we know - we have not fully engaged with all of the customers so we do not know everything - in respect of people's homes, where the rate was an issue, we might have 14 customers where the home was lost as a result of the rate.

If I could add the context to that, because I think it is relevant, one of the reasons that we have written off €1.3 billion of debt and mortgage loans is that as we have engaged with customers and we have tried to right size their loan based on affordability. In situations where they could not afford the whole debt we therefore did a write off. So the historic rate that existed on the product was not hugely relevant all the time in terms of the position that they were in. If they were in a modest amount of arrears or they could not afford the repayment we looked at a different solution; a split mortgage, for example, would not have looked at the existing product offering, it looked at affordability and we tried to see whether we could do something.

In order to make sure that we were clear on the boundaries of what we were trying to do and not to make another mistake, problem and loss to the customer, we effectively expanded our definition of the criteria to apply for those products. Our solution for the 14 customers, which is the position as we know it at the moment, is based on an assessment that asks whether they would have been entitled to a forbearance solution. All of them would have a problem under any solution, and if we were applying a more expanded definition, a bigger boundary to that forbearance solution, would we have been able to come up with an answer which may have allowed us to progress? That is the full context to the number we have at the moment but until we conclude I will not be able to say definitively where we are at, but for the sake of the committee, that is where we are at today.

I welcome Mr. Byrne and his colleagues and like Deputy Doherty I thank him for the information he provided in advance by way of the questionnaire.

I will start on the issue of the bank's interest rates, the standard variable rates, SVRs, and acknowledge the progress AIB has made on that front and the fact that the bank does not differentiate between new and existing customers, unlike some other banks. AIB has a very competitive SVR, and that must be acknowledged.

I do wish to ask about EBS and the reason the previous time AIB announced a rate cut, which took effect on 1 July, a corresponding cut was not applied to existing EBS customers. If one looks at the table AIB has provided on page 4 of the questionnaire there is a difference of between 0.2% and 0.3% in the rate. Existing EBS customers feel very aggrieved. Could Mr. Byrne please address that issue?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

I do not want to get into a long answer because it would take up too much time but one of the issues of which we are very cognisant because it is common to the lot is where Irish rates are relative to European rates, and how that plays out. If one looks at the overall book of Irish rates versus European rates, in all banks not just AIB, we are right on the average in terms of the European zone in total book when one takes the pricing. Some markets are higher, for example, France, Germany and the UK, and some markets are lower.

On a front book pricing basis, Irish pricing is higher than the European average, but the features of the market are very different. For example, in many European countries, the imposition of fees upfront has a significant impact. The European average is about 43 basis points. In France, it is 87 basis points if the effect of upfront fees is annualised across. Different markets operate in different ways. In the Irish market, this manifested itself in banks offering a significant upfront benefit in the form of a cashback offer. For our core AIB franchise, we felt it right to continue to offer the front and back book benefit in terms of the customers' positions. Any time we make a change to the SVR, we spread it across the customer base. This costs us about €140 million in benefit to the customers. However, the feature of the market attracting particular interest was the cashback offer, which does not come without a cost. The 2% cashback offer comes at a cost to one's position. Effectively, we differentiated the two offerings we had on the market and positioned EBS as a cashback offer for customers for whom cashback is very important and who wanted a cashback position. Interestingly, the changes about which we talked earlier may have an impact on the relative attractiveness of this product in the future. Pretty much all the competitors were offering cashback at the time. We then tried to facilitate switching, if this was important to the customer and was what he or she wished to do, from an EBS brand to AIB. It was not a perfect measure but it was our attempt to match customer choice in the two relevant offerings in the market and to facilitate switching via a benefit of €2,000. If one wanted to move from one to the other, one could.

However, the issues affecting the existing EBS customer cohort, that is, the cashback, the discount and so on, are not relevant to them, so they are paying a higher variable rate than the existing AIB customers.

Mr. Bernard Byrne

Yes.

I still have not got the justification for this. Does AIB intend to review this?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

The point is that there are different offers in the marketplace at this point in time and we have facilitated to the extent that we can a frictionless switching cost between products so that if people want to switch, they can. We cannot implement a back book price change and not implement a front book price change in EBS. Neither can we do the reverse. We have an EBS brand offer which is based on a cashback and a better SVR. We have implemented three price cuts in respect of this in the marketplace which is appealing to certain customers.

However, the bottom line is that the cashback sweetener comes at a price for the existing customer cohort. They do not get the extra reduction in their ongoing rate-----

Mr. Bernard Byrne

There is a price difference between customers.

That must be acknowledged. If that is the case, it is unfair, but that is AIB's policy for now at least.

Regarding the blended cost of funds, Mr. Byrne has provided us with a table in question 18. Will he translate it for me? Last year, he gave us a very clear answer that in the second half of 2014 the blended cost of funds was 1.57%. What is the corresponding figure as of June 2016?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

I ask Mr. Bourke to respond to that.

Mr. Mark Bourke

As of June 2016, our blended cost of funds is 1.28% when compared against the 1.58% of two years previously.

It is what is described as average interest-earning liabilities-----

Mr. Mark Bourke

Yes.

-----in the table. The rate of 1.28% is a good bit higher than those of Permanent TSB and Bank of Ireland, which both come in at around 0.75%.

Mr. Bernard Byrne

I have not examined the detail of their numbers, but my guess is that that is the full disclosure of all the liability positions they have and they have priced them all individually. Our understanding is that other institutions do not disclose the information in this way. I could be wrong, but we have examined and tracked this. The one other issue which could have had an impact on this in the period is the subordinated liabilities, that is, the contingent convertible bond, CoCo, which is included in that for the period and which is the higher cost. I would have to examine the detail of the reconciliation. That may have had an impact.

Mr. Mark Bourke

One issue is the CoCo, which was costing us €13.85 million but is now gone. There would therefore be a consequent reduction in average cost. As Mr. Byrne said, the other thing some banks include and some do not include is a reduction in the average by including zero-cost current accounts.

I note that AIB's fixed rates are higher than its variable rates. This is the bank's pricing strategy, presumably, which is quite different to Bank of Ireland's, which has kept its variable rate high and opted for lower fixed rates. AIB has reduced its variable rates. Its fixed rates are slightly higher than its variable rates. This is a very deliberate policy.

Mr. Bernard Byrne

Yes. The initiatives we have taken so far have been focused on standard variable rates. We have reduced fixed rate pricing and we will keep all those rates under review, but our focus at this stage is definitely on variable rates. I do not know if Mr. Mulhall wants to say anything about that.

Mr. Robert Mulhall

Mr. Byrne is absolutely correct. As he said earlier, our commitment here is to pass on the benefit of the reduced cost of funding to our customers. We have credentials in this regard, given the four basis cuts we have implemented over the past two years. I think this is also reflected in the buying behaviour of the customers. Over 60% of our new mortgage business comes in on our variable rate. It is attractive to the customer.

I make the general point that it is instructive that, though AIB has a higher cost of funds and blended cost of funds, it has managed to reduce its variable rate to effectively the lowest in the market, whereas other banks that have a much lower cost of funds stand over much higher variable rates. This proves the point that there is scope in the case of a number of other banks to reduce their rates.

I want to raise the issue of the tracker redress programme. I have a copy before me of the clause in the mortgage contract in which it is clearly stated that at the end of the fixed interest rate period, the customer may choose from a further fixed interest rate period, conversion to a variable interest rate or conversion to a tracker interest rate mortgage loan. It is the customer's choice. However, those who choose the tracker option are being offered a rate of 3.67% plus ECB. Many customers feel that this is an arbitrary rate which is broadly in line with AIB's variable rate offering, even slightly more expensive. Can the witnesses explain the rationale behind this and why AIB is not offering such customers what would be regarded as a prevailing tracker rate in the market today of roughly 1%?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

A prevailing tracker rate today in the market for somebody who has never been on a tracker is not 1.4%. A prevailing tracker is for somebody who has never had a tracker. The clarification I would make is in respect of-----

There is no prevailing tracker for somebody who has not had a tracker.

Mr. Bernard Byrne

Exactly.

They do not exist.

Mr. Bernard Byrne

However, to be clear, all customers under the redress programme about whom we have spoken and whom I mentioned earlier to Deputy Doherty have been offered a reversion to their original tracker rate. The rates for this are between 0.49% and 1.5% - they vary depending on their original position - plus ECB. All customers about whom we have spoken to date have been in that position.

How many customers are in this category? Does it consist of the 2,600 or so in this programme who had that clause in their mortgage contracts whereby at the end of the fixed rate they had a choice?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

I do not know. We have many different cohorts. This is not meant as a confusing statement. The material relating to the contracts varied over time, so I do not know the answer to the Deputy's question. I do not know if Mr. Mulhall has any more information.

Mr. Robert Mulhall

I do not know the exact detail, but it is probably worth pointing out that of those 2,600 people to whom Mr. Byrne alluded, 50% pertain to EBS contracts and 50% to AIB. They are spread across both brands. Furthermore, as Mr. Byrne alluded to, we are considering many different cohorts in the redress programme for these 2,600 customers. In many cases we have examined marketing materials, anything that could have been misinterpreted by the customers or communications in which we were not totally transparent about customers' rights should they ever come off a fixed rate and want to go back onto a tracker rate, etc. It is not that everybody is in that category that he describes-----

I accept that. The case to which I refer is quite specific. The customer could choose a tracker rate at the end of the fixed rate period. There are no new tracker products to choose from, so this is down to interpretation, but one can certainly argue that the customer is entitled to the current tracker rate.

Mr. Robert Mulhall

If I might be allowed the time, it is worth elaborating on this so people can absolutely understand this issue. Its root cause dates back to 2008 when trackers were withdrawn. At that time, the bank did not do a good enough job of understanding the confusion, whether customers' rights were being infringed or we were not communicating with customers in this regard. As Deputy McGrath quite correctly pointed out, among our contract holders were customers who could go onto a variable rate, fixed rate or prevailing tracker rate. When we withdrew the tracker product, there was no prevailing tracker rate. That was an error. We should have reinstigated what a prevailing tracker rate at that time should have been. This is what has created this moment of confusion.

There are no new tracker products but there is a prevailing tracker rate for a very large customer base. However, AIB is not offering that to the customers who now choose a tracker. It is down to interpretation.

Mr. Robert Mulhall

I understand.

AIB has arrived at a figure of 3.67%, and it seems to customers that it is determining the new tracker margin by reference to its general SVR.

Mr. Robert Mulhall

The tracker product was withdrawn in the first place because the cost of funding was no longer aligned to the ECB rate. The dysfunction that happened in the financial markets meant it was not viable to run this product.

We asked about the possible sale of loan portfolios on page 15 of the questionnaire. The bank's reply was that it is reviewing all options. Is the sale of loan books, particularly residential mortgages, under active consideration by the bank?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

A couple of things need to be borne in mind in this respect. We mentioned in our opening statement the position we adopted as we tried to address the very high level of non-performing loans we had. Over the past five or six years, we have engaged significantly with customers. As I have indicated, there has been €1.3 billion of write-offs on the mortgage side. A similar volume of write-offs has taken place across SME and other portfolios as we have tried to address this issue. We have successfully reduced the balance to €11 billion and we have indicated that this figure will be closer to €10 billion by the end of the year, which is great. However, non-performing loans will still comprise 17% of the bank's balance sheet. The European norm is approximately 5.5%. The primary issue of focus for the ECB and the regulatory authorities is the level of non-performing loans on a bank's balance sheet. The stress tests we mentioned earlier make that very obvious when they focus on the capital position of the banks. For that reason, we emphasised in our opening statement that it is of the utmost strategic importance that we continue to address this topic. I suppose that is consistent with Deputy Pearse Doherty's comments. The level of arrears remains very high. It must be addressed and dealt with. It was in that context that I said we are keeping all options under active review at this time. I include the options that have been mentioned, such as portfolio sales and disposals, if appropriate, in that context. Any attempt in that direction will focus on commercial portfolios in the first instance. We are continuing to work as hard as we can on the private dwelling house portfolio and other portfolios. This issue will have to be addressed. A famous investor, Warren Buffett, once said that if something cannot last forever, it will end. The ECB's view is that the number of non-performing loans in Irish banks must be reduced. If this issue is not resolved, the consequences in terms of capital, etc., will be very significant and that will feed through to pricing.

Under the relationship framework agreement with the Minister, is the bank required to consult or get the permission of the Minister if it is seeking to dispose of a loan portfolio above a certain threshold?

Mr. Robert Mulhall

That is an issue for the board.

Okay. I believe the threshold is €100 million in the case of AIB. Is that right?

Mr. Robert Mulhall

I think the issue of portfolio sales is one for the board.

I believe the bank is required to consult the Minister. Is that correct?

Mr. Robert Mulhall

Yes, as part of the normal shareholder relationship.

I believe the relationship framework agreement deals with that issue.

Mr. Robert Mulhall

Okay.

Question 5, on page 3 of the questionnaire under the heading of "Voluntary & Legal & Surrender", relates to the issue of family homes. By my calculation, some 5,729 mortgages fall under the categories covered in the first four lines of the box at the top of page 3. The four categories are issuing of a civil bill at the court; civil bill served on the borrower; court hearing in progress; and order granted for repossession. It seems to me that the number of mortgages at such advanced legal stages on the path to repossession is quite high. I assume that the 1,788 mortgages referred to in the following box are separate and are not included in the 5,729 mortgages referred to in the box at the top of the page.

Mr. Bernard Byrne

Correct.

The categories in the second box are voluntary sale; voluntary surrender; trade-down; and other solution. If these 7,500 mortgages are added to the 569 mortgages and the 722 mortgages in the previous box, it is clear almost 9,000 properties have been repossessed or, in the majority of cases, are well down the road to being repossessed. Is AIB pursuing this approach as a means of triggering engagement? The number of properties that are well on the road to being repossessed seems very high. I suggest it is much higher than would have been expected.

Mr. Bernard Byrne

I might ask my colleague, Mr. O'Keeffe, to go through the detail in a moment. The overall number is a consequence of where we are in the process at this time and the volume of cases we have been dealing with through the process. The number mentioned by the Deputy must be seen in the context of the number of solutions that have been put in place and have been successful. Many of the issues that are seen on the voluntary side refer to specific cases that have been worked through with the customer, and in respect of which deals have been done and agreements have been reached about debt write-offs and relieving people of future obligations. That has been helpful in this context. There is a legal element to this because as part of the process, we must make constant progress through the process. We end up in that circumstance when people do not engage. As Mr. O'Keeffe mentioned earlier, the legal approach sometimes has a positive effect in terms of re-engagement. It is also a necessary phase in terms of how we make progress. The time periods, in terms of bringing these cases to a conclusion, tend to be very significant.

Mr. Jim O'Keeffe

We are seeing cases that are coming into the legal process after a long number of years. At the start of this, we had almost 40,000 private dwelling house customers in arrears. This has taken a considerable amount of time. It has not been a one-year event. The legal cohort has probably built up over six, seven or eight years. That is an important point. The most significant category mentioned by the Deputy is "court hearing in progress". It is important to point out that it takes a considerable amount of time to work through that progress. I advise the Deputy not to take these figures as an indication that a large number of repossessions is coming through the pipeline. Based on the way the system is operating currently, that is not how it will work out. Approximately 1,600 customers within the grouping mentioned by the Deputy are re-engaging with us. We are working with them at the moment. If they continue to engage with us, we will work through their cases and find solutions for them so that they can exit the legal process. As I said earlier, we have positive outcomes in that regard.

When will AIB be ready for a Government policy decision regarding an initial public offering? When will all of the necessary steps have been completed at AIB's end?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

We have indicated publicly on a number of occasions that we are ready at our end. The job was to restore the bank to a sustainable level of profitability and to establish our strategy for communicating effectively to the market the results we have been delivering and demonstrating recently. The crucial restructuring of the capital last December was the biggest step. The repayment of the convertible instrument in the summer of this year was the other fundamental step that was taken to position the bank. I do not know whether Mr. Bourke would like to add anything to that.

Mr. Mark Bourke

No, I think that is it. By the end of last year, we had completed our capital reorganisation. We have done all the preliminary steps that would normally be done in preparation for an initial public offering or a sell-down. It is simply a matter of the timing, which is in the hands of the Minister.

I would like to follow up on Deputy Michael McGrath's questions by asking about vulture funds and the bank putting together a package of properties to go to the market. When the bank reaches the point at which it is looking at court proceedings in respect of homes owned by families, obviously all other options have been worked through by the bank with those customers. Has it seen any schemes in any other jurisdiction or country that the Government could adopt here? Could the Government intervene through a voluntary housing agency to take up these homes and prevent families from becoming homeless if court proceedings are successful? When the banks have exhausted their efforts, some sort of Government scheme could assist families that are otherwise going to become homeless. The mortgage-to-rent scheme is not working. How many mortgage-to-rent houses or applications have been processed by the bank?

Mr. Jim O'Keeffe

We have 190 mortgage-to-rent cases at various stages of progression. We are adding three or four cases to that every month.

What does Mr. O'Keeffe see as the obstacles in that scheme?

Mr. Jim O'Keeffe

From an AIB perspective, we would have expected to have a lower number of customers going into the scheme because we make a wide range of offerings available at the outset as we try to agree solutions with customers.

Once the process commences, the criteria relating to customers' incomes, location and type of property can be restrictive. As a result, there is an acceptance from our perspective that a broadening of the criteria could assist in opening up that avenue.

I might take the opportunity now to move on to the Chairman's earlier query in respect of a wider scheme.

Mr. Jim O'Keeffe

One of the items considered in the context of the Keane report and the various solutions that were identified was mortgage to rent with, as we see playing out now, limitations. I confirm that from our perspective we see the mortgage-to-rent scheme as a very good solution and work-through and we are very much engaged in trying to make it work. There was an additional item at that point which was referred to as the mortgage-to-lease scheme. That is more in keeping with a wider scheme of being able to attract a portfolio of customers rather than just taking it individually, case by case. We remain positive that this is an option. As we mentioned earlier, there are various discussions on initiatives around housing with Government and we are actively working on the basis that if we can contribute to something like that, we would be very willing to do so.

How does the bank make itself heard in the context of informing the Government about mortgage to rent or mortgage to lease or in terms of attempting to deal with the numbers involved, particularly as everything else has been worked through? Is it through the federation, directly with the Minister for Finance or by some other method?

Mr. Jim O'Keeffe

In the first instance, all of our interactions - in terms of an industry view - go through the Banking and Payments Federation Ireland. On a particular set of initiatives around housing, that is falling into an engagement with the Department, at its behest, in terms of seeking arranged solutions, one of which we spoke about earlier, namely, vacant properties and movement in that regard. It is very much a request coming to engage with the Department and we are very comfortable about doing so and about talking through what might be the practical implications of implementing such a scheme.

On the EBS side, how many of the cases go to court? How many are in court? Is it a larger or a smaller number?

Mr. Jim O'Keeffe

In general, we had a higher volume of cases on the EBS side that went into difficulty and that ultimately floated through to the legal system. In terms of treatment of customers in that regard, once a customer gets into difficulty, we have a standard treatment policy across the bank regardless of the brand or the way one was originated into one's mortgage. There is no bias in respect of why we would be moving customers from EBS or AIB into a legal process. We deal with them consistently across the two. If there was a bias in terms of the numbers, it would only be on the basis of how many customers got into difficulty.

My point on that process is that I have come across cases of customers - not just in my constituency but also in the context of approaches at national level - who are certainly unable to repay their debts. They then find themselves in court. It seems that not every avenue has been examined in respect of some of those cases. I can give Mr. O'Keeffe examples but I do not want to go into the details. I am surprised that the cases in question are before the courts. Despite intervention to try to explain the situation through intermediaries, they remain before the courts. In other words, when the bank passes them to its legal representatives, they just take a course and end up either with a registrar or in the Circuit Court and it is impossible for some of them to be represented properly in those courts. They have to apply for free legal aid, which further adds to their distress and upset because they are dragged through all of this process without the appropriate supports in terms of solicitors and everything else. There must be something wrong with the process if cases like that end up with the registrar or the Circuit Court.

There is something wrong with the fact that when the bank passes its cases to its legal representatives, it becomes an inflexible process that just closes down in the interest of pushing the proceedings through the courts. Has the bank examined that matter? A number of Deputies and Senators attend these courts and what goes on is shocking. I have also said it to the Bank of Ireland that it is difficult to believe that such cases would be taking place in light of all the discussion we have had about saving family homes and working through all the options. One particular case comes to mind and I must set it out. The case in question involves two brothers living together, one of whom is now attending the department of psychiatry and has been for years. He is still getting letters from the bank's legal representatives despite the fact that it has torn his life asunder. His brother is now on the verge of the same thing. I am just asking the bank to review the process.

Mr. Bernard Byrne

Having regard to any particular issues that anyone has, we do not promise any treatment but we are always available to ensure that we check that we are applying the right treatment in respect of those. If there are any issues that anyone has at any point in time, we always have review and appeals processes to do that. Please feel free to do that. It is important to point out the number of mechanisms that are in place to help people, whether it is a MABS solution, the IHMO or some other solution. They are available and we engage as actively as we possibly can with them. We do not benefit and it is not helpful to us to have a legal process given how long it takes where repossessions go through.

The Chairman made an opening comment, which I understand, around whether there is something else that can happen when people have gone through everything they can. The reality is that in the majority of cases that end up in legal, people have gone through nothing because they have not engaged with us. As Mr. O'Keeffe mentioned, the 2,800 cases sitting in court are there because there has been zero engagement. Yet, when we finally get up into a legal process, 1,600, or the majority of those cases, actually begin to engage. We are dealing with a complex situation. There are always going to be cases where situations are misunderstood by us. We have made mistakes and if there are any of those, please tell us. We will see whether we are doing the right thing or the wrong thing. However, if people do not engage with us and are not fully involved or participating or using one of the agencies that exist to engage with us if they find engagement with the bank too difficult, it is going to be tricky for us to progress.

Where can people who are in circumstances like those I describe engage with the bank? In fact, all one gets is "It is now with our legal representatives". In his opening statement, Mr. Byrne said he was conscious of the need to treat customers fairly. It may be that the bank has treated them fairly but now they are dumped onto the legal system and their cases are not being understood.

Mr. Jim O'Keeffe

Clearly, I do not know the specific examples to which the Chairman is referring. As I mentioned at the beginning, 20% to 24% of customers re-engaged with us last year out of the legal process. We have an absolute ability to work with people who are in the legal process and who want to re-engage. They can do that directly with ourselves.

We will see about that then.

It has been an interesting morning in terms of the presentation regarding the stability of the bank and all of that. It is only in the past 20 minutes or so that we have got to the crux of some of the problems coming down the line in terms of the number of people who can expect to lose their homes in the next year, albeit I recognise the efforts the bank says it is making to engage. The pressure to bring non-performing loans from 17% to the European average of 5% paints a stark reality for those who are struggling to pay their mortgages. There is a conflict there in terms of saying that the bank is engaging with customers and is going to help everybody when the further it gets down the line, the more difficult it is going to get. I appreciate that the bank has worked with people to restructure loans. It is not only AIB. The situation is presented by the banks across the board, which makes me very fearful in terms of what is going to happen in 2017 and 2018.

Should we be in a position in which quantitative easing finishes and interest rates begin to rise, there will be further pressure on families.

Deputy Doherty referred to the 596 houses in AIB's possession. The delegates are saying the bank is making them available. In the past 12 months, how many properties have been made available by AIB to the Government or local authorities?

Mr. Jim O'Keeffe

I will take that. The initiative is new. The work with the Housing Authority is a new initiative. In the past, we made some properties available but we have not had the opportunity to make such a quantity of houses available.

When Mr. O'Keeffe says "some", how many does he mean? Is it dozens?

Mr. Jim O'Keeffe

Yes. Previously we worked with a grouping of 24 to 30 houses. I would have to confirm that and revert to the Senator. The number was not of the current scale. It is partly attributable to the fact that we did not have vacant property available at the current scale bearing in mind what we were doing at the time in question. I reinforce the point that we very much welcome the opportunity to work this through now because we see the opportunity to address the social housing need.

Would the bank always give the option to a local authority rather than a vulture fund if making a decision on off-loading vacant properties?

Mr. Jim O'Keeffe

With regard to the sale of vacant property, when we talk about the potential regarding portfolio sales at a point in time and the involvement of private equity in that regard, we are having a separate discussion. The sale of properties would be done on a market basis or through the housing authority. It would obviously be done on a valuation basis. That will continue to be a process. We are not seeing any move into private equity.

Does the bank foresee itself selling off the non-performing loans to vulture funds?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

I will take that in the context of the earlier part of the Senator's question. We often end up talking a lot about one particular type of asset class at these meetings, namely, personal homes. It is very important to note that these comprise just one type of asset we have worked through. We have lowered the figure from €30 billion to €11 billion, which is a €19 billion reduction. We are talking about a reduction of probably €5 billion or €6 billion more. It is approximately one third of what we have done already. It is a much smaller number. In many scenarios, we end up having conversations on the impending doom associated with repossessions. In reality, that does not transpire because there are developments, people engage and they move to a different position. It is always important to bear in mind where we are. We do need to solve the problem; that is the important point. We accept that there is a set of solutions.

Mr. Burke will contextualise the mix of assets we are talking about. Those are the assets we think about in broad terms. As I have mentioned, if we were to engage in any portfolio sale - no decision has been made - it would be across commercial portfolios in the first instance.

So it would not be residential properties. Mr. O'Keeffe spoke about his reality. Mine is that I attend the court sittings around the country and see the human casualties and the children being put out of their homes. We are already in the middle of a massive housing crisis. What is occurring with the banks and repossessions could further the crisis next year. AIB's having 569 houses in its possession creates difficulties, therefore. I have several other questions and do not want to dwell too much on that.

Mr. Mark Bourke

On the 560 properties, it is important to state we started our engagement with the Minister as far back as August of last year. We made the full list available. We have concluded the sale or transfer of 114 of those properties. Probably another 80 will be transferred before the year end. If our expectations are correct, there may be 600 or 700 in the following year. That is a big part of our plan in trying to address the various aspects as far as we can as a bank.

On Mr. Byrne's point on dealing with our entire impaired loan portfolio, we have reduced the figure from approximately €29 billion to approximately €10 billion at year end. At year end, €3.7 billion of that €10 billion would pertain to private dwellings while the remainder would be split between commercial property and personal SME non-property business. We have to get down to the €3 billion level. We can get a huge amount of that distance simply by dealing with the non-private dwelling home asset portfolios that are non-performing.

Reference was made to the continual communication with the Government. Has there been formal communication between the bank and the Government on changing the criteria for the mortgage-to-rent arrears so as to deal with this? The delegates say the criteria are too restrictive. Has there been formal communication with the Government that this needs to be changed?

Mr. Jim O'Keeffe

The Department is just reviewing the mortgage-to-rent scheme and has asked for feedback on it, particularly on the gaps and the issues in that regard. On the wider scheme I referred to, that is a separate piece. It examines how there could be a broadening out to cater for a wider group of customers. It involves separate engagement at the behest of the Department. We are working through that at present. We are too early in the process to give any details on it but it is certainly something we want.

When does Mr. O'Keeffe expect the review of the mortgage-to-rent scheme to be concluded?

Mr. Jim O'Keeffe

I do not have a date. We are just feeding into the process at the moment and have been asked for our feedback. I assume it will be concluded in a timely manner.

In the programme for Government, there are several commitments, one being on the establishment of a dedicated new court to expeditiously and sensitively handle mortgage arrears and other personal insolvency cases through imposing solutions, including those recommended by the new service. The hearings of this court will be held in private if requested by the debtor. What is the bank's view on the court being empowered to impose solutions in such a way?

Mr. Jim O'Keeffe

At one level, any adjustment to the court process to help move this along, both for the customer and ourselves, would be welcomed. The current process is not working for either, in reality, although there are many customers in the process. As I said, when one looks back at 2015, one notes that 1.5% of restructurings were repossessions. Any of us would welcome a system that would operate differently in terms of how we go about this. We do not have any details on that but, as it emerges, we will certainly be very willing to engage.

On the court system deciding what the solution would be, I do not have the specifics on how it would operate. Mortgages are secured lending so the point we would need to understand is how that could have an impact. Clearly, mortgage pricing is done on the basis that it is secured lending. The unintended consequence of giving a court a power, if it were to weaken the construct of secured lending, is that there could be a feed-through in regard to pricing. I do not have the details on it. It is just an observation we have made based on what we have seen to date. Certainly, anything that would help to move the system on for all parties would be beneficial. The Chairman mentioned the distress people rightly feel as they are going through the legal process owing to the toughness of the system. We would be very willing to engage with it.

Has Mr. Byrne ever seen the people standing in the wind, rain, snow and all kinds of inclement weather queuing up at the mobile units the bank has supplied throughout the country where there are closed branches? Does he know what this does to people? The units themselves can hardly be kept in situ with the wind and rain. Elderly and vulnerable people are queuing up to do their banking. These are the elderly people who have put €28 billion into AIB.

Mr. Bernard Byrne

I have seen the community banks, but not on quite as dramatic a day as the Senator is describing.

Has he seen people queuing?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

I have seen the units around the country and have seen where they operate. We put them in as assistance points to address the fact that there were areas of the country we were not serving.

I will ask Mr. Robert Mulhall to give detail of our overall perspective on that solution. It is a solution we put in place to try to help that situation. Clearly, from the Senator's description, there are days or scenarios where it is difficult for people because of the weather. In overall terms, as part of an overall solution, it is an effective way for us to get to parts of the country that in no other circumstance we would be able to maintain banking in.

AIB closed down small branches and branches in rural Ireland. I cannot imagine that those branches, with two or three staff, were producing huge overheads to service communities. AIB closed them down. It was not offering a solution to people. AIB closed them down without consultation with the very people who propped up the banks. There are people in rural areas who are elderly and do not have broadband. Mr. Byrne referred earlier to 50% of people engaging digitally because they are forced to but it also means there is 50% who are not engaging digitally and who have to queue up at these mobile units without any protection from the weather. How much has AIB saved by closing these branches and putting these units in place?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

The overall programme that took place in 2011-12 was part of our EU restructuring programme. We had an obligation under the EU programme to take €450 million of operating costs out of the business. As part of that programme, we closed approximately 30% of the branch network in terms of number of units. The solution we implemented was around those closures. I will ask Mr. Mulhall to talk about the impact in terms of the local market and what we are trying to do around that. The €450 million programme was part of our EU restructuring plan.

If the bank was in a position again where it did not need to do that financially, would it look at the viability of the branches it closed down and reinstate them to serve the community that supported not only AIB but the other banks in a time of great need? In many cases, the private banking debt being nationalised led to these and other people losing their jobs.

Mr. Robert Mulhall

I will make a number of points. It was regrettable that we had to embark on that branch closure programme after the financial crisis but a very important dimension to this story is that we entered into an agreement with An Post at the time to offer full banking services in 1,100 post offices across the country. We are the only bank doing that. It was a key part of our continued commitment to rural Ireland and ensuring we were continuing to provide services in that regard. It should be recognised that as we look at the migration of transactions to digital, there is an unstoppable force there in terms of the level of transactions that are now being executed over online, mobile, etc. It is not just a young person's fascination; it is across the full demographic of the population of customers we serve. We do regular customer experience surveys with our customers to determine the level of service we are offering. Our customer service continues to improve in that regard.

Has AIB done any of that research outside these mobile units when people are queuing up to access them?

Mr. Robert Mulhall

The feedback we have gotten on the mobile units has been positive when we asked customers who are utilising them what they are getting from a service perspective. We do not see that as the main solution. We see the solution as the investment in the digital offering and the An Post franchise so we continue to offer services in many communities all across the country. Mr. Bernard Byrne referenced in his opening statement that we have recently done a reorganisation within our distribution franchise around local markets. This is all part of our commitment to ensuring we are absolutely part of the community and that we continue to provide that service to the community. We have reorganised our distribution around the county construct. We have created accountability around senior people within each county to ensure they carry the flag of AIB across all the services we offer in that county. It is not just about branch banking. It is as much about putting in place mobile sales forces and mobile relationship managers that can go to the place of business of customers who want us to visit them such as the agri-sector population. That has been hugely successful for us as we look at how we shape our distribution going forward.

I cannot connect with what Mr. Mulhall is saying when I see the reality of moving a branch so that one's nearest branch of AIB is then 40 miles or 50 miles away. AIB used to be a community bank. I have experience of AIB in Britain and it was a community bank that engaged with its customers. It is removing itself further and further from that customer base. It is ignoring people in rural areas. I ask the witnesses to look at that again. We are trying to get the Government to use the CSO survey to ask people their opinions on banking and the banking services they need. I welcome that AIB is looking at giving more autonomy to branch managers. I can see AIB is doing something but I ask that it looks again at some of the branches that have been closed down.

In terms of the bank overall, is it ready for selling off now?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

The work that has taken place in the bank up to now in terms of restructuring and repositioning has got us to a position where we are comfortable that we have a sustainable business model and a sustainable level of performance, which is ready from an investment point of view. One of the key features that matter from an IPO point of view is the investor appetite for the marketplace. Ireland is an attractive market relative to other jurisdictions. It still has a higher growth rate, a younger demographic and is seen as an attractive location from a European point of view. That is positive. Another feature is the strength of our banking franchise. Approximately 40% of the marketplace is seen as attractive as a growth opportunity and that is given we have a disproportionate share of younger customers. The fact we have restructured the bank and are delivering profitability is seen as attractive and is still giving an opportunity for growth going forward. The next phase of any development is to make sure people are comfortable with the capital. At this stage people are comfortable with the capital and can see how the bank is generating a return on that capital. The final element, which is a very important one, is the market dynamic, which is influenced by a whole series of things. It is influenced by an interest rate environment which is low at the moment. It is influenced by a view on Europe, Brexit, the US elections and the sort of things which introduce volatility. It is also influenced by a view on the regulatory regime and its likely impacts. They are all decisions that investors make independent of us. We have nothing to do with that. Our job is to position the franchise so it is attractive and growing. Across pretty much all of those segments we are growing our market share and delivering a higher level of performance than peers, which means the answer to the Senator's question is "Yes".

If it was at the point of sell-off, does Mr. Byrne think it would be better to sell it off as a whole entity or in parts?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

They are choices that people ultimately make. I could give the Senator arguments either way. It will be a Government decision but given the position of the bank and the fact that markets are volatile and will remain volatile for a period of time, the sense, as we understand it, of selling a piece of the bank at this stage and then maintaining a sell-out over time gives optionality. That means the bank can avail of market opportunity when it arises. I can certainly see the merits and wisdom of the strategy as described. Does Mr. Bourke want to add anything?

Mr. Mark Bourke

It comes back to getting the State the €20.8 billion that went into the banks. It either comes through a dividend stream or a complete sale or partial sales. We are agnostic on that. It is just a matter of finding a way to recoup the full €20.8 billion over time.

Deputy Pearse Doherty took the Chair.

I will touch on a few areas. The big issue at the moment is in the area of mortgages and first-time buyers. I want to go through the practicalities. Am I correct in saying that in answer to questions Nos. 9 and 10 in the questionnaire the witnesses provided us with, they say that the loan-to-value ratio for first-time buyers is 80% and the average mortgage for a first-time buyer is about €175,000? If that represents 80%, then the value is about €219,000, which is below the €220,000 limit. Is that circumstantial?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

This is a very interesting point because the evidence in front of us is the evidence based on the market that exists. In other words, the number of people who make it through will be based on the rules that exist at this point in time. It should not be circumstantial, it should be evidential of the rules being applied.

Therefore, it is not a sign of pent-up demand or issues that did not make it through. It should not be seen as pointing to there being no bigger market because the statistics do not support that. We think there is more demand but the rules led to this conclusion.

Does Mr. Byrne believe the new rules announced by the Central Bank, requiring a 10% deposit for properties above €220,000, rather than a deposit of 20%, will predominantly be an issue in Dublin or will be a nationwide issue?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

I do not have any evidence about that and it is too early to say how it will play out. The disparity between pricing in Dublin and-----

Is there a breakdown of the average size of a first-time buyers' mortgage in Dublin as compared to one outside Dublin?

Mr. Robert Mulhall

These averages are national and there is a skew factor in Dublin. I do not know how much higher it is in Dublin but it gets us past the €220,000 threshold, which has probably been a constraint for first-time buyers in Dublin. There are a number of factors in regard to the macroprudential rules. We welcome the new rules as a welcome relief for first-time buyers who are trying to accumulate deposits while also paying rent and we think this will accelerate the journey for them, making it a welcome initiative for everyone. However, our first decision criterion is affordability. After we assess that, we apply the criteria of loan-to-income and loan-to-value.

The average was three times earnings. For a typical couple wanting to buy a house for €250,000, the bank will offer three and a half times the combined household earnings.

Mr. Robert Mulhall

Correct. In looking at the macroprudential measures it is important to look at both factors because, even on the average industrial wage in Ireland, even when applying the limit of three times earnings, people will not be borrowing to the full LTV.

If a house costs €250,000 a couple, assuming they satisfy the loan-to-income ratio, would have to come up with a deposit of €28,000, that is €220,000 at 10% and the balance at 20%. Is that correct?

Mr. Robert Mulhall

Under the existing rules, yes.

Under the new rules, combined with the Government's first-time buyer's scheme, they would get a rebate of €5,000, equal to €250,000 at 5%. Is that right? Maybe it is a 2% rebate.

Mr. Robert Mulhall

Under the help-to-buy scheme?

I am referring to the bank's own scheme.

Mr. Robert Mulhall

No, we do not offer cash back under the AIB brand but under the EBS brand. That would be 2%

Under the EBS brand, 2% would be €5,000 so they would have to come up with a deposit of €23,000.

Mr. Robert Mulhall

Yes. The cashback only occurs after taking down the mortgage. The actual loan is a 90% mortgage so they are putting equity into the home, which will act as a cushion.

I have no doubt that the bank has added up its figures. I am asking about the practical effect. A first-time buyer would have to come up with a deposit of €28,000 and would get €5,000 back from the bank making the net deposit €23,000. Under what is now proposed, they would have to come up with a 10% deposit, €5,000 in cash, and would get a rebate of €12,500 in the Government scheme, that is 5% of €250,000 and a cash return of €5,000 from EBS. This would mean they would have to come up with €7,500 rather than €23,000. Is that a fair comment?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

Yes, based on the maths the Senator has applied. It is a new scenario but the 2% cash is new news. Schemes such as these have limited timescales on the market and clearly they will be looked at again in light of the new announcements.

In AIB the deposit is €12,500 and in EBS it is €7,500. How does AIB feel about that? It gives the bank the 10% equity which the punter is providing.

Mr. Bernard Byrne

It is for first-time buyers for whom there are certain criteria.

Mr. Bernard Byrne

The Deputy is asking whether it has gone too far.

No. I am asking what practical difference it will make to the first-time buyer.

Mr. Bernard Byrne

It will have two impacts. One will be on the confidence of the entire chain. The developer side, the builder side and those who finance the builder can now see how consumers can afford to get the deposit together to buy. That is a very significant issue and should mean the supply side has the confidence to start. The second impact is that the very long period for which people had to save, as well as renting when rents were rising very rapidly, will reduce very significantly and this will broaden the range of people who have access to deposits. People will not have to rely on others to gift them a deposit but will have the income to get one and that will have a societal benefit. It will also have a benefit from our point of view because it opens the field up to a wider group of people, namely, those who have good sustainable income but were struggling to find the deposit. That is my interpretation of how events will play out but they will unfold in the way they unfold.

The likelihood is that the level of the deposit required by a first-time buyer will probably be halved. Is that fair?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

Based on the maths, yes.

Am I correct in saying that AIB's loan book is approximately €69 billion? Are they all organic loans? Were AIB and EBS the originators of these loans?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

I think the answer is "yes" in that we have not bought loan books over the five or six years since I have been involved.

Does the bank intend buying loan books?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

We do not have any current intention to do so and our strategy is predominantly focused on growing our franchise and building it up.

Mr. Byrne will be aware that some of the bank's competitors, such as Bank of Ireland, are buying loan books. Is there a reason AIB is not pursuing a similar line?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

We would look at doing this if it was consistent with our existing business and if it was in a marketplace where we had a strong presence, such as Ireland, or in a particular sector. If it was in a marketplace where we did not have a strong position, such as the UK, we would not be particularly interested at this point in time. Our key focus points are in delivering better propositions in the Irish market and reducing the cost to serve in the Irish market. The key issue for investment and, ultimately, the attraction of capital - not just equity capital but debt capital, which is going to be increasingly important - depends on getting the cost-income ratio below 50%. It was said earlier that to pass benefits on to the customer one must operate efficiently. There is no point in having a higher or lower interest margin if one has a very significant cost base and one has to take the cost base down to pass on benefits to customers and to be competitive. The board has just had a strategy meeting and we are focusing on our core markets and trying to get more efficient.

When was the last time AIB paid a dividend?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

In the past 12 months our big focus with the regulator has been on the restructuring of the capital position and the last return of capital to the State was €3.5 billion, from December last year to July this year.

The largest cheque we could give back to the State was around restructuring the capital. The only returns on capital we paid to the State were on that convertible debt instrument, which was about €280 million.

Mr. Mark Burke

It was €280 million on the preference shares.

Mr. Bernard Byrne

Yes. That was the last dividend in the form of recurring income. Obviously, that capital is now restructured. At this point in time, we are engaged in a discussion with the regulator and our shareholder, namely, the Department of Finance, on how, having restructured the capital of the bank and established sustainable profitability, do we get to a position where we can re-establish returns on equity capital, namely, dividends. We are in that process but there are a number of pieces to that which play out and need to be progressed.

Does AIB believe its return and balance sheet position is strong enough to be in a position to start paying a dividend in the normal commercial sense?

Mr. Mark Burke

Going back to that, even in the years before we restructured, on a combined basis, we paid €280 million on the preference dividend and €160 million on the CoCos, contingent capital notes. We were paying €440 million to the Government on non-equity instruments. Given we are currently generating €1 billion on a recurring basis, we would view ourselves as being absolutely in a position to pay a conservative level of dividend on an ongoing basis.

Obviously, that would be critical in the flotation of AIB again.

Mr. Bernard Byrne

Yes, the re-establishment of a dividend and seeing that equity capital has been remunerated is a crucial feature for all holders of capital, not just equity capital but also debt capital. It makes senses, regardless of who holds the debt.

When does AIB anticipate it will pay a normal commercial dividend?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

We cannot give an answer at this stage because we do not have an agreement in respect of it. We are actively engaged in a process around that. There is a set of regulatory matters which need to occur to establish it.

Is it intended to pay a dividend on the bank’s 2016 results?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

That would still equate to answering the question I cannot answer, unfortunately.

I will put it this way. Is this part of the discussions with the Department?

Mr. Mark Burke

Once we had done the fist step of capital re-organisation, which was to get the €3.5 billion converted and repay the CoCo, the next conversation immediately moved to when do we start to pay a dividend. As Mr. Bernard Byrne said, that is a three-cornered discussion with the regulator, the shareholder - the Department - and ourselves. We moved straight from re-organisation to dividend in terms of discussion.

When does AIB anticipate these conclude?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

We do not.

Would it be reasonable to suggest that it would be an objective of the bank’s board that it could be in a position to pay a dividend on the 2016 results?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

The best we can say is that it is the objective of the bank board to pay its dividend as early as it can, accepting the fact there are several parties and considerations which need to be borne in mind.

AIB has €69 billion of loans and a provision of €7 billion for losses. That is higher than some of the other institutions’ provision. Why is it so high? It is a phenomenal figure that is the equivalent of the entire budget for the Department of Education and Skills. A breakdown was given with the figure of €3.7 billion relating to home loans. Is that home loans or the entire property loan book?

Mr. Mark Burke

It is the entire mortgage portfolio, both commercial and private dwelling house.

Is there a breakdown between home loans and buy-to-lets in that?

Mr. Mark Burke

We have an impaired book of €5.2 billion. Roughly, €2 billion of that is buy-to-let and the remaining amount is private dwelling houses.

How much of a loss provision has the bank for private dwellings?

Mr. Mark Burke

It is slightly skewed. The average is about 30% or 35% in terms of total coverage. It is slightly more for the buy-to-let and slightly less for the PDH, principal dwelling houses, sector. I can give the Deputy exact numbers later.

Deputy John McGuinness resumed the Chair.

What is the bank’s target to reduce this and its timeframe to achieve that?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

In 2013, we had €17 billion of loss provision.

Was it €17 billion or €19 billion?

Mr. Mark Burke

It was €29 billion of impaired loans and €17.9 billion in loss provision.

Mr. Bernard Byrne

The number now must be seen in the context of the reductions which have taken place.

I like to deal in real time.

Mr. Bernard Byrne

We are continuing to work through this. It will have progressed from the last disclosed numbers we have. While provision for principal dwelling houses is slightly lower and for others is slightly higher, one can assume that on average, it is about a 50% provision level. Gross loans provided a provision level of 50% on impaired loans. We would expect that to maintain itself as we continue down the gross side of this equation. Those provisions are required at this point in time and are necessary for us to implement solutions to right-size debt and get people back into a sustainable debt position. There is a significant amount of scrutiny that takes place in those. A key area of concern of the European Central Bank is the level of provision we hold in respect of those.

We understand it is a large number. Unfortunately, with a big balance sheet one ends up with every number being big. Our objective is to get that number down appreciably. It will be coming down because the gross number comes down and then the net number.

I can see the loan book is going down. However, the bank has provision of about 10% of its gross loan book. What target is it aiming to get this down to?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

One has to consider them in two buckets. If one takes the impaired loans out, which is a 50% provision level, on the other loans one would expect a provision level of a tenth of that. It is a small provision.

Mr. Mark Burke

The expected annual provisioning level would be about 32 basis points of the total book.

As for getting our impaired loan book to a certain level, if 17% of our total book is still non-performing and the European average is 5.7%, then our ultimate target over three to five years is to get to that level. It must be remembered that is a level for the entire portfolio of €11 billion of impaired loans. This is €6 billion of SME, land and development, construction and PDHs. It is the total number that we need to take down to that €3 billion or €4 billion level.

So, the bank is looking to get it from €7 billion down to €3 billion.

Has AIB any intention of purchasing any loan books? Has the board made a decision on selling any of them off?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

We know this is an issue that we need to have under consideration. The only directional comment I can give is that the focus we have is on commercial portfolios. I cannot say any more than that.

AIB will not be selling home loans.

Mr. Bernard Byrne

Again, I cannot eliminate that as a longer-term piece. Our focus at this point in time is on commercial investments. In the same way, I am not saying we will never look at a loan portfolio acquisition. That is not in our strategy at the moment, however. Our first point of call, when we look at portfolios, will be on commercial portfolios. I cannot make any other statement because we have not made any other statement in the marketplace.

Was anything sold over the past year?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

No.

When was the last time AIB sold on loans?

Mr. Mark Burke

We had one in 2012 and one since, Project Forge, involving a portfolio of UK loans which we sold at the end of 2014.

I revert to the new scheme that is being introduced. On foot of yesterday’s Central Bank announcement, is there a need to alter the loan-to-income ratio of 3.5 times gross income?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

I will give a response rather than a thought-out consideration of it. Given the change that has taken place on the loan-to-value piece, I can see the logic of leaving the 3.5 times rule in place to see what emerges, given that it has a natural dampening effect on affordability, which is probably a good thing. I can see exactly why the Government and the Central Bank have made that call. As I said earlier, it is clear that they will keep it under active review. If it turns out to be an issue, we should all assume all these mechanisms will be capable of being amended if there is too much exuberance in the market or if the Government thinks it is acting as too much of a dampener.

The bank is allowed up to 20% exceptions to the 3.5 times loan-to-income rule. What proportion of the bank's lending so far is an exception and what does the bank expect? Is Mr. Byrne saying there have been no exceptions?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

These are not targets, but limits. If we breach a limit, we are in regulatory sanction.

The bank is entitled to have 20% exceptions. I am asking how many exceptions the bank went with, why it went with those exceptions, what it has learned from going above the exceptions in terms of how it lends and whether there is a need for alteration.

Mr. Robert Mulhall

As I referenced earlier, our first port of call in any assessment is affordability. If somebody does not qualify from an affordability perspective, based on our credit criteria, there is no discussion around exceptions or anything else regarding what is here. We will consider exceptions only in the eventuality where somebody qualifies from an affordability perspective. Then, we consider an exception. One enhancement down the road could be having exceptions on a rolling 12-month basis rather than on a calendar year basis. This could be easier to manage. As Mr. Byrne said, if one finds oneself at a point on a cycle in which exceptions are high in a particular calendar year, it may curtail one's ability to lend in the second half of the year, which is unhealthy. We have to manage it quite rigorously in terms of ensuring we do not breach the-----

How many exceptions were there in 2016?

Mr. Robert Mulhall

I do not know the figure of the top of my head. First and foremost, we consider affordability. Only when we are satisfied with that will we ask-----

I do not believe an organisation the size of AIB does not know this figure.

It is 13% of the bank's loan to value and 17% of its loan take-up was done on an exception basis.

Mr. Bernard Byrne

I was going to say that, on average, it will be approximately 80% of the limits.

When does Mr. Byrne anticipate AIB will be floated again?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

The Senator has all the good questions on timing. I do not know the answer. As I mentioned earlier, the bank is in a position in which it is capable of being sold to third parties, if the Minister and Government decide to do it. The marketplace in Ireland remains attractive and the bank, in terms of its growth story, is attractive. Those things do not last forever. We cannot take them for granted. If there is a set of circumstances in which most of the stars are in the right place, it is something one should definitely consider. Markets are volatile, and this means people must get themselves to the point of being ready so that when the opportunity for IPOs opens up, the Minister is in a position to make the choice. I think this is what the appointment of the-----

Does Mr. Byrne the sun is shining on AIB at the moment?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

I do not think the sun is shining on us. We have gone through a very difficult period, we are in a much better place and it is clear to us how we can continue to progress. We have a lot more to do and we can continue to progress, and this story is attractive to people who are looking to make investments and looking for yields.

I mentioned the 13% and 17% given that the witnesses provided it to us in the information. The bank was entitled to 15% loan to value exemptions and 20% on the loan to income. However, the bank finished with 17% in the scope period. Are we to read from this that nobody who applied to the bank was deemed affordable but could not get the lending because of the rules? Was this was the maximum number of people who applied to the bank, passed the affordability criteria and on whom the rules did not impact? Sorry, maybe I am not articulating it well.

Mr. Robert Mulhall

No, I understand. As I said, we first examine our own affordability rules and then determine whether exceptions are required. The statistics the Deputy quoted are overall industry statistics. We are in line with them and the answer to the question is, "yes". We will look to exceptions if a customer requires it and has the affordability.

I appreciate the clarification that the figures are for the overall industry. One in five of the value of all loans the bank will issue can be above the loan-to-value ratio of 80%. How does the bank inform customers that they may be entitled to it? Say, a person who wants to trade up is examining these calculations and wants to buy a house which costs €300,000. The person calculates that he or she needs a deposit of €60,000 and, therefore, decides to forget about it, not knowing that for every five loans the bank issues, one of them can be above the ratio and this person could be that one person. How does the bank communicate, advertise and select the individual who will be able to go above the loan-to-value thresholds set by the Central Bank?

Mr. Robert Mulhall

When we examine our October data of market share across Ireland, AIB and the EBS have done 40% of the mortgages. This is done through a very intensive engagement with our customers in terms of ensuring they understand the process. As part of it, we will discuss exceptions if they are appropriate at this point. I would not offer it as the perfect solution, given that the awareness of exceptions probably has dampened people's desire to even come and ask the question. As the debate has emerged more and more in the public domain, there has been increase in the number of people who will come and engage, whereas otherwise they would probably never have thought to come in the first place. The Deputy's point is well made and is a very fair question. The awareness is probably growing as opposed to being perfect.

May I offer that the bank needs to be more proactive in terms of advertising the fact that the ratio is not cast iron and that people who do not have a 20% deposit are not locked out? People who are more connected or tuned in are able to go to the bank and ask to be considered for one of the exceptions.

Mr. Bernard Byrne

The new rules will make it simpler and much clearer to first-time buyers as to how the limit will work. I suspect there will be a benefit due to the simplicity of the 10% rule as opposed to a rule with limits. It will help part of the process. I am guessing it is one of the reasons behind some of the changes.

The sanctions are way over the level of drawdowns, and they have been consistently. The number of sanctions has been increasing regularly since 2014. Can the witnesses explain why the level of drawdowns is so weak in comparison to the level of sanctions? In the context of the idea that we need to create more demand, one third of the loans the bank has authorised have not been drawn down in the first quarter. I know there is a timing issue, but across a three-year period, approximately one third of loans are not being drawn down.

Mr. Robert Mulhall

There are probably two factors in it. First and foremost is healthy competition. If two parties to a loan bank with competitors, they will try both banks. The second factor is the supply side. While there is a ready market of buyers, there is a gap on the supply side.

The Dáil finished late last night. Our final division was at 2.45 a.m. For my sins, I read the Central Bank's document afterwards. It is very sad. I was waiting for my "Morning Ireland" interview and I thought if I fell asleep I might pull a Conor Lenihan, so I decided I was better to try to stay awake.

There was an issue with the risks of the bank. It is stated in the Central Bank document that the concentration of lending to residential and commercial real estate represents a vulnerability. It states:

Approximately 65% of Irish Banks loan portfolios are accounted for by residential mortgages while a further 11% are for commercial real estate. Coupled with the outstanding vulnerabilities in the household sector and still high proportion of households in negative equity it is clear that Irish banks remain vulnerable to any reversal in trends in real estate prices.

I always knew about that vulnerability in terms of prices, and I am particularly concerned about a reversal of prices in commercial property. In regard to the concentration of lending for AIB, where does the bank sit? The Central Bank is stating that across the banking sector, 65% of the loan portfolios are for residential mortgages while 11% are commercial. I have been thinking about this. I sat on the banking inquiry, and I now wonder how this was seen in the context of Anglo Irish Bank, which was a monoline bank? If we have banks that are so heavily concentrated on property loans, we have numerous banks, which have similar practices to the former Anglo Irish Bank.

Mr. Bernard Byrne

In macro terms, in the banking market that is Ireland, a bank will always end up with people with a heavy concentration associated with residential. That will be a feature of the market place. If one has very large investment banks that take different positions in different exposures, one might end up as an industry with a different type of position but when one gets down to simplified banking structures a large part of the portfolio will be property related because that is where people make investment decisions.

Our model, however, has a certain benefit. There is one other player in the market who would have a similar characteristic, that we have a range of different offerings from a business-corporate perspective as well as different types of personal lending. While we will have a more balanced position than the one Deputy Doherty described, we will still have a heavy concentration associated with residential and property related loans taken out during the boom and thus the bust. We ended up with too much exposure to other types of property related exposure even outside residential mortgages. Our own risk limits prevent us from getting back into those sorts of positions. One of our objectives is to ensure we grow a more diversified portfolio in terms of that position. However, residential mortgages will be a large feature of the Irish markets as they will be a large feature of any market that has a simplified non-investment bank type structure. One does not get the other portfolios of investments through that model.

Mr. Mark Bourke

Our Irish portfolio of mortgages is €33 billion compared to an overall €67 billion. We are at the sub 50% level on Irish mortgages, but mortgages as a total when we take in everything is well over the 50% mark. It is simply a feature of working in a small economy that we will absolutely have concentration of risk, that is unavoidable unless one takes geography out of the equation for a retail bank.

A comment from the SME sector generally is that they cannot get support from the bank, whether it is an overdraft or whatever. I am talking in general about small businesses all over the country. Will Mr. Byrne comment on the Strategic Banking Corporation of Ireland fund and how the bank operates in the context of the fund?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

I will give a general comment and my colleague, Mr. Robert Mulhall will pick up anything that I miss or leave behind.

Certainly the issue of credit availability for SMEs was a very significant topic a few years back in terms of the general level of discontent around whether banks had made credit available. At this point in time that is much lower down the list and the surveys that exist will support this. From our point of view, what we have done and what we continue to try to do is deal with the speed at which credit decisions get made. One of the key issues that has affected people is decisions taking a very long time, which they interpreted as a slow "No", but not giving a person a decision at all. Hence our commitment, and we mentioned it in the opening address, to the turnaround times for small loans, that is a loan for under €30,000, which is 90% of all SMEs loans, is 48 hours. Our approval rate for SME loans is 94%.

Basically, we are saying that SMEs should apply, it is a very short process, the document that an AIB customer has to fill out is very small, about three or four pages. We are encouraging AIB customers to fill out the application and we can track what happens. If the SME customer does not like the bank's decision, there are many mechanisms available, both internal to the bank and also the Credit Review Office. There is professional machinery that works and will deal with the customer when a loan decision or an investment is declined. We will always work, and have always worked with the decision of the Credit Review Office and implemented the solution that has come out of that process.

The numbers that take those routes are very low, but it is very difficult to deal with the anecdote. It is very difficult to deal with people who say they did not apply because they knew the bank would say "No". In terms of encouragement to people, the first priority should be for them to apply for a loan. I would not be too concerned if our approval rates dropped because more people applied. At least that would be evidence and information with which we could do something. The first issue is to try to ensure that everyone applies. If we the bank end up saying "No", there is an appeals process and a Credit Review Office. That is important.

In the second point about the Strategic Banking Corporation of Ireland, SBCI, we engage very actively with it and in terms of its loans, we put in place a €200 million facility. We utilised it very quickly and then we actually drew down another €200 million, that is €400 million in total. The last time I saw a statistic on it, some 90% of all the loans that were being sanctioned through SBCI were through AIB. We have the highest level of penetration by far of any bank. We have embraced it. As I also mentioned in my statement, we are working on the agri-fund at this stage which will have subsidised funding and we hope to be the first to market with that fund.

Am I correct that 90% of the loan applications from the SME sector is for amounts under €30,000?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

Yes.

How long does it take to make a decision around that?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

We guarantee that a decision will be made in 48 hours.

Where is that decision made?

Mr. Robert Mulhall

It is a key plank of our local market strategy, where we have pushed the decision makers out into the local markets, to ensure that even if a central credit underwriting decision is required, outside the discretion of the branch manager, that local credit person is in the local market and hence delivering again Mr. Bernard Byrne's commitment of the 48 hour turnaround.

How long does it take to reach a decision on amounts for more that €30,000?

Mr. Robert Mulhall

The same process applies, we have committed to make a decision in 48 hours. However, we are always trying to turn around decisions as quickly as possible. We would claim that the larger SME sector is part of our brand in the marketplace. People know that our speed of response is an indicator on which we try to differentiate ourselves from others in the market.

When one speaks to business groups around the country, they often say the opposite is the case, that they cannot get a decision from the local branch. They might be talking about small amounts of money or the continuation of funding for a business.

Mr. Robert Mulhall

I can speak only for AIB. We have it as an absolute plank of our strategy to maintain discretion at the branch manager level. When it is outside the discretion of the branch manager, we put it to a credit union, which is a also domiciled in the geography.

In the case of an application under the SBCI fund, how many applications were made and what is the refusal rate?

Mr. Robert Mulhall

As Mr. Bernard Byrne mentioned, our sanction rate is very high, it is at the 90% mark. As he also alluded to, AIB is the only bank that has gone back for the second tranche and now we are now up to €400 million of the overall €800 million fund that was available to Ireland through the SBCI. We are the primary lender using SBCI finance.

I understand Mr. Mulhall to have said the approval rate was in the 90% mark A company or a person who has been refused a loan, goes to the Credit Review Office, and the Credit Review Office will say go back to the bank and the bank continues to say "No".

Mr. Robert Mulhall

The Credit Review Office will actually do a full case review of the case themselves and if they believe the bank has not acted correctly it will liaise with the bank and try to change the bank's decision. Although it does not happen that often in the case of AIB, where it has happened, we have always worked with the Credit Review Office in that regard.

Mr. Bernard Byrne

The number of cases in terms of the Credit Review Office is literally in the handfuls. On a quarterly basis, I think there are approximately 8,000 SME credit applications. On an annual basis, the number that will end up as a changed decision through a Credit Review Office will be a handful.

I came across some cases where the applicant went to the Credit Review Office. They were reviewed and were sent back to the bank, but they did not get it.

Mr. Bernard Byrne

In the case of AIB?

Yes. I will not go into the detail because there is a small number of those cases throughout the country.

Mr. Bernard Byrne

I am happy to look at any of those situations, but our general stance has been to work with the Credit Review Office, CRO.

It is a good credit facility.

We are all trying to learn from what happened in the past. Beyond the loans, how AIB agrees them and so on, what else did the bank learn about relationships and how it was advised by professionals who applied and supported loan applications only to find out years later that those applications did not do what they said on the tin?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

It is important to consider everything that has changed across the system. Ireland was not the only country to have a banking crisis. It was global. Most of the rules and regulations that started to change from an Irish point of view have effectively become European regulations at this point. As an institution, we are regulated out of Frankfurt and all the rules and regulations concerning how we conduct our business prudentially are set by Frankfurt. The rule book has changed completely. Every practice that we engage in now is likely to be different from it was ten years ago when the loans originated. This is 2016, so the last of those loans originated in 2006.

The level of verification and validation in terms of customers and SMEs is an issue that we need to address. The level of support given to provide assurance around larger credit and loans is significant. The level of property valuation that is required to support those positions is different. From a credit point of view, the marketplace bears little resemblance to that which existed in the early 2000s, which was quick and easy. It is not quick and easy now. In particular, a significant process is associated with collateralised lending.

Something that has not changed and is still a work in progress is the establishment of security. Where collateral is used, the process remains dated. How security for properties is registered is a national issue rather than a banking sector one. It probably has not changed much, but nearly all the other processes and procedures are different.

Did AIB ever get the urge to take on solicitors or accountants who, in those years, may have given it a bump steer? Many business people feel sad for themselves in terms of advices that were given. Banks would have shared in those advices and taken them on board as being okay, but it turned out that they were wide off the mark. Has the bank ever examined that aspect?

Mr. Bernard Byrne

It is not an issue on which we have spent excessive amounts of time. Our main focus has been on fixing what we have. If we run into any instance of genuine negligence or deliberate neglect, we examine it, but we have not carried out an industry-wide decision.

Does Mr. Byrne believe it would be worthwhile? The banks are regularly blamed for what happened and for their lending criteria, practices and relationships, but when one drills down, advices were given informing banks, relationships were formed that allowed money to flow freely and there were practices that perhaps were less than ethical.

Mr. Bernard Byrne

Now that we have come up for air, that is something that we might be able to consider, but we have not carried out a large piece of work on it.

If members have no further questions, I thank Mr. Byrne and his colleagues for their attendance. I apologise for this disjointed meeting, but with the Dáil sitting and voting until 3 a.m. on the Finance Bill, it had to be that way.

Sitting suspended at 12.35 p.m. and resumed at 2.30 p.m.
Top
Share