There are some cases where additional monies are requested of NAMA by debtors in order to complete developments. NAMA makes the decision to advance funds to an individual development project based on its commercial viability. In these cases NAMA is typically a secured creditor as it has a mortgage charge, usually over the property that was security for a loan. That property may be land, an unfinished development of houses or offices, or some similar form.
The question appears to relate to an instance where unsecured creditors have supplied goods or services to a developer or the company of a developer. As a consequence of the economic downturn there have been instances of individuals and companies having difficulty collecting money owed to them as suppliers. Where a debtor and an unsecured creditor have an issue in dispute it is for the two parties to attempt to resolve the matter between themselves. Where that is not possible, and agreement cannot be reached, then the courts would appear to be best equipped to judge the merits of each case and determine the outcome.
NAMA was not established to settle commercial disputes or to adjudicate on the rights and wrongs in these cases. Such a role is beyond the functions of NAMA set out in statute in the National Asset Management Agency Act 2009. The prime function of NAMA is to manage acquired loans efficiently, effectively and expeditiously and in the best interests of the State. In doing so, it aims to attain the best achievable financial return subject to acceptable financial risk.
