I wish to remind the deputy that NAMA was established as an independent commercial body and as Minister for Finance, I do not have a role in its operations or decisions.
As the deputy will be aware, NAMA does not own property, rather NAMA owns loans relating to property and the properties themselves act as security for the loans. Properties commonly referred to as “NAMA properties” are in fact owned by private entities who are “NAMA debtors”. The management and maintenance of any NAMA-secured property remains the responsibility of the NAMA debtors. Where a receiver is appointed, they take over these duties and act as agent of the NAMA debtors. In relation to Carrickmines Green, John McStay and Jim Luby of McStay Luby, stand appointed as receiver and agent of the original developer.
While I recognise the considerable anxiety that building defects can cause homeowners and the substantial costs that can be associated with rectifying them, neither I, nor NAMA, can force a receiver to take a particular course of action.
Additionally, by virtue of section 10 of the NAMA Act, NAMA is required to obtain the best achievable financial return from its acquired assets. Any strategies employed in relation to the assets were therefore guided by these legal and statutory obligations.
It should be noted that there is current litigation between the receiver and the Owners Management Company (“OMC”) in relation to the development at Carrickmines Green which NAMA understands is due back in court on 24 October.
Given the on-going litigation, NAMA is not in a position to substantively engage in certain issues, which it is understood are the subject of disputed claims in the ongoing pending litigation.
