# Solicitor Anthony Joyce recommends against using independent appeals panels



## jess82 (4 Apr 2017)

Solicitor Anthony Joyce was on RTÉ radio this evening to comment on the meeting of the oireachtas today and the tracker debacle in general. His advice was for anyone effected was to skip the appeal processes put in place (ptsb) and go straight to court where it is a fully independent hearing! He stated that he would not be taking any of the compensation received as his fees would be covered separately. 
He also stated he has many clients effected. I find this advise curious as I can't find any info on cases he has taken so far to court? Considering its 2years since ptsb first contacted effected customers I would have thought there would have been something either on this forum or in media regarding cases he has taken?! I know p.kissane has in past mentioned court proceedings in relation to the rate issue but Anthony Joyce was not discussing this, more in relation to compensation. Has anyone heard info on mr Joyce's case progress thus far?


----------



## Stitcher (4 Apr 2017)

I heard him on the radio too and wondered who he was?


----------



## jess82 (4 Apr 2017)

I had heard of him in 2015 but nothing since, so found his comments re courts rather odd. Surely if he has many clients engaged he would be aware that the majority of people effected wouldn't have the funds for individual court fights. I suppose will have to watch this space to see if anyone can give info on his progress!!


----------



## gahfan (6 Apr 2017)

Hi Jess82 and Stitcher, I am with Anthony Joyce as are many others I believe. I have found his office to be helpful. We are appealing the level of compensation received, had to fill in forms etc, awaiting outcome. There are no fees upfront. They do charge the e400 fee for financial advise but not at this point. They are confident of winning on the basis of P Tsb's admission of guilt though you never can tell.
Let me know if you have any other queries.


----------



## gahfan (6 Apr 2017)

They are based in Dublin 8.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (6 Apr 2017)

jess82 said:


> His advice was for anyone effected was to skip the appeal processes put in place (ptsb) and go straight to court where it is a fully independent hearing!



He clearly does not understand the process if that is his advice.

The Appeals Process costs you nothing, but time.
It is independent, but that does not matter.
If you don't like the result, you can then go to the courts.
And you will be better prepared for court as you will get an insight into the bank's defence.
I would think that the first question a judge will ask is "Why did you not try the Independent Appeals Panel first?"

Of course, solicitors get no fees from people who go down the Independent Appeals Panel approach and are satisfied with the outcome, but that would not be Anthony Joyce's motivation. He obviously thinks that there is some advantage to the client in not taking a free shot.

In general, you should be very wary of solicitors who operate on a no foal, no fee basis.  I have seen many of them. You have a really strong case until you reach the steps of the court. Then it turns out that actually your case is not that strong.  You are at risk of having a significant costs  award made against you. The bank's offer to pay your professional fees begins to appear very generous and you come under pressure to accept it.  So there was no foal, but the legal profession gets a fee anyway.

Brendan


----------



## Freshstart (6 Apr 2017)

Each to their own course of action of course but the thing about this entire debacle is that is has left many people drained completely. Not just financially but of all the fight in them. It's OK to say the appeals process costs nothing but time. But to many embroiled in this the prospect of further being put on trial by a panel set up by the bank that defrauded them to begin with is just a step too far. To defend themselves and be asked for evidence that cannot be provided such as family loans or lost opportunities is too much. I think it's understandable people handing the reigns over to Anthony Joyce or any other solicitor.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (6 Apr 2017)

Freshstart said:


> To defend themselves and be asked for evidence that cannot be provided such as family loans or lost opportunities is too much.



So you are prepared to make a claim without substantiating it? You will have no chance in court.  

Make your claim to the Independent Appeals Panel.
Provide the information which you think is appropriate to support your claim. 
If they reject it,  then by all means go to court. 



Freshstart said:


> this entire debacle is that is has left many people drained completely. Not just financially but of all the fight in them.



Do you have any idea how draining a two or three year court battle is going to be? 

It's crazy advice not to avail of the Independent Appeals Panel set up under the direction and guidelines of the Central Bank. 

By the way, Padraic Kissane has been highly critical of one of the ptsb appeals panels and highly supportive of the other one.  Fortunately, the one he supports is the one for the big claims. 

Brendan


----------



## Brendan Burgess (6 Apr 2017)

It might well be worth asking Anthony Joyce or any other solicitor who is bypassing the independent appeals panels how many of their cases have been resolved through the courts process.

I know that Padraic Kissane has resolved many cases through the independent appeals process to everyone's satisfaction. And I know that he is not happy with some of their decisions which he will be taking to the courts or to the FSO.

Brendan


----------



## Freshstart (6 Apr 2017)

Pardon my ignorance but if a case has been through appeals and ends up in court anyway what's the difference!?


----------



## Brendan Burgess (6 Apr 2017)

Freshstart said:


> Pardon my ignorance



I think that people, in their annoyance, seem to be vulnerable to people giving them very bad advice. They can't follow the logic of what is happening here. 

You got say 10% compensation or €3,000 and you don't think it's enough.
You add up the distress caused and you think it should be €20,000.
So you go to a solicitor and you sue for €20,000.
Two years later, after ....

On such an afternoon, if ever, the Lord High Chancellor ought to be sitting here—as here he is—with a foggy glory round his head, softly fenced in with crimson cloth and curtains, addressed by a large advocate with great whiskers, a little voice, and an interminable brief, and outwardly directing his contemplation to the lantern in the roof, where he can see nothing but fog. On such an afternoon some score of members of the High Court of Chancery bar ought to be—as here they are—mistily engaged in one of the ten thousand stages of an endless cause, tripping one another up on slippery precedents, groping knee-deep in technicalities, running their goat-hair and horsehair warded heads against walls of words and *making a pretence of equity with serious faces*, as players might. On such an afternoon the various solicitors in the cause, some two or three of whom have inherited it from their fathers, who made a fortune by it, ought to be—as are they not?—ranged in a line, in a long matted well (but you might look in vain for truth at the bottom of it) between the registrar's red table and the silk gowns, *with bills, cross-bills, answers, rejoinders, injunctions, affidavits, issues, references to masters, masters' reports, mountains of costly nonsense, piled before them.
*
you win your case and you get €20,000 plus the solicitors fees. So you feel happy and your solicitor is happy and richer.

But you could go to the appeals panel and within a month, they agree that you deserve €20,000 and you get it.

There are a few possible outcomes.

1) Go to the appeals panel and get awarded €20,000 a month later - everyone happy except the legal profession.
2) Go to the appeals panel and get refused - so you go to the courts anyway.You have lost nothing. 
3) Go directly to the court and two years later get an award of €20,000
4) Go directly to the court and two years later your case is thrown out and there is a judgement against you for the bank's costs.

It's bonkers stuff not going through the appeals panels.

Brendan


----------



## moneymakeover (6 Apr 2017)

Bleak house Charles Dickens

https://dailylit.com/read/87-bleak-house


Thanks for the literature Brendan


----------



## Freshstart (7 Apr 2017)

Not really what I asked though. Even Mr Kissane has expressed his disapproval at this panel. There has been any satisfaction for very few. Have you actually seen what a daunting prospect that appeals booklet is? A lot of customers in vulnerable positions just would not be able for it.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (7 Apr 2017)

Freshstart said:


> A lot of customers in vulnerable positions just would not be able for it.



Let's be quite clear. If they would not be able for this, then they would not be able for a court case.  Anyone thinking of engaging in a court case in Ireland should be required to read Bleak House first. 

Brendan


----------



## gahfan (7 Apr 2017)

Freshstart I sense you are disillusioned and obviously I'm not aware of your personal circumstances but I'd have a different approach altogether, be like a terrier with a bone, don't give up, hang in there, keep fighting. Many people have had decent results from all this over the last few years.

Brendan I take your point about going to the appeals panel first. There seemed to be a lot of negativity around it and I think that put people off.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (7 Apr 2017)

A few other points 

1) I don't  think that the lender can appeal the decision of the Appeals Panel.  So if the lender does not like the decision, they are stuck with it. If they don't like the court's decision, they can appeal it. If it were a decision that might have implications for other cases, they probably would appeal it. 

2) The Appeals Panel is held in private.  The court is a public forum.  Most people would not like their financial affairs being discussed in public. 

Brendan


----------



## Onceagain (7 Apr 2017)

Who makes up the people on the Appeal Panel, are they bankers or what?


----------



## Brendan Burgess (7 Apr 2017)

For ptsb 

B          Customer Appeals Panel ("CAP"):-

1.         Patricia Rickard Clarke (Chairperson); - a solicitor 
2.         Anthony (Tony) Ensor; - a solicitor and rugby player 
3.         A ptsb employee, but acting independently 

4.         Michael O'Mahony (alternate independent member).



The members of the Independent Review Panel are 

James McCourt - solicitor 
Caroline Gill - barrister and former deputy FSO 
Cyril Maybury - chartered accountant 

The AIB panels are 
*Tracker Mortgage Appeals Panel Membership*


*Who will hear my appeal?*



All appeals will be heard by a fully independent appeals panel who will operate under the Terms of Reference that have been agreed with the Central Bank of Ireland. The operation of the panel will be managed independently by an appeals panel secretariat and all communication with the customer during an appeal will be through the secretariat.


The appeals panel comprises three individuals:


One member with legal qualifications
Either Lisa Broderick, Gary Rice, or Niamh McKeever 

One member with accountancy qualifications
Either *Eugene McMahon*, Aedin Morkan, or * Brendan Waters*

One member with appropriate experience of dealing with consumer affairs
Either *Ann Fitzgerald*, Ita Mangan, or Kevin Rafter 
I know the three people whose names I have highlighted. I would have full confidence in their independence.  I don't know if they have much knowledge of mortgages though. 

Brendan


----------



## Onceagain (7 Apr 2017)

Thanks Brendan, total conflict of interest having any employee working on an appeals panel.


----------



## TLO (7 Apr 2017)

Anthony Joyce has a fairly strong record in legal initiatives.  One of the highlights from a few years ago would be the pioneering Section 94 application to the High Court.  It had the effect of forcing changes in the way in which banks negotiated with negative equity borrowers who wished to sell their property.  If Anthony Joyce's advice is to ignore the Appeals Panel then TLO's instinct would be to follow it, notwithstanding everything that Brendan said above.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (7 Apr 2017)

Onceagain said:


> total conflict of interest having any employee working on an appeals panel.



Hard to know.  I understand that he acts completely independently. He might not even be based in the office. 

Neither of the other two know anything  about mortgages.  So they would need some technical input. Anyway, he is outnumbered two to one. 

That is the theory. In practice, their decisions have been very poor.   


Brendan


----------



## gahfan (7 Apr 2017)

"4) Go directly to the court and two years later your case is thrown out and there is a judgement against you for the bank's costs."

How likely do you think the above is Brendan? Perhaps not a question you can answer


----------



## Sarenco (7 Apr 2017)

While I don't disagree with Brendan's view, a couple of points strike me as potentially relevant:-

At this stage, some impacted borrowers may feel that they can only summon up the mental energy to go through one, and only one, more process; and 
Some borrowers may be concerned that any subsequent appeal will become time-barred under the applicable legislation.


----------



## SaySomething (7 Apr 2017)

Sarenco said:


> While I don't disagree with Brendan's view, a couple of points strike me as potentially relevant:-
> 
> At this stage, some impacted borrowers may feel that they can only summon up the mental energy to go through one, and only one, more process; and
> Some borrowers may be concerned that any subsequent appeal will become time-barred under the applicable legislation.


@PadKiss said this at the Oireachtas committee that he was aware of at least 1 client who had reached the point where she'd had enough and wanted to settle. To be honest it's all dragging on so long the banks may be counting on it. Wear you down.


----------



## odyssey06 (7 Apr 2017)

Brendan Burgess said:


> Hard to know.  I understand that he acts completely independently. He might not even be based in the office.



I don't see how anyone can act completely independently when the company pays the wages, controls future employment opportunities etc. The staff member, even if they are a 'saint', should not be placed in a position of conflict of interest.

It's not an independent panel if a staff member is on it. Anyone asked by the judge why they didn't use that particular appeals panel has an immediate answer right there.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (7 Apr 2017)

odyssey06 said:


> It's not an independent panel if a staff member is on it. Anyone asked by the judge why they didn't use that particular appeals panel has an immediate answer right there.



No, they don't. 

If you go to the FSO, you will be asked if you used the bank's internal complaints process first. You might not be happy with the internal complaints process or their decisions, but you have to use them first. 

If ptsb had three employees on this appeals panel, I would still recommend using it.  You have nothing to lose.  The worst that can happen is that they make a biased stupid unfair decision against you. Then you go to the court or the FSO. 

The best that can happen is that you ask for €10,000 and they award you €10,000. 

It's a free shot. 

Brendan


----------



## odyssey06 (7 Apr 2017)

Brendan Burgess said:


> No, they don't.
> If you go to the FSO, you will be asked if you used the bank's internal complaints process first. You might not be happy with the internal complaints process or their decisions, but you have to use them first.



It's not clear to me that "internal complaints process" and "independent appeals process" are the same thing?


----------



## Brendan Burgess (7 Apr 2017)

They are not the same thing. 

The point I was trying to make is that in the ordinary course of events if you have a complaint against a financial services provider, you must use their internal complaints procedure first which is not in any way independent.   If you are not happy with the way that they resolve the complaint, you go to court or the FSO. 

Bad as the ptsb CAP is, at least two of the members are independent. 

Brendan


----------



## joe351980 (8 Apr 2017)

How do you calculate what compensation you're entitled too. Even if you went in looking for 10,000 you could actually be entitled to more. Would the appeals panel abrove an amount greater than requested.Would employing a lawyer like AJ not ensure that a full and final outcome would materialise


----------



## gahfan (10 Apr 2017)

Regarding the court being held in public or people having to attend what Anthony Joyce's office have said is that they hope that a sample of cases will be heard and all others will then be determined on that basis rather than each and every case coming before the courts.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (10 Apr 2017)

gahfan said:


> what Anthony Joyce's office have said is that they hope that a sample of cases will be heard and all others will then be determined on that basis rather than each and every case coming before the courts.




Whatever about a sample case on an issue such as the interpretation of the meaning of "prevailing rate", it is not possible to have any form of "class action" on an individual's claim for compensation. 

Brendan


----------



## gahfan (10 Apr 2017)

Well perhaps some form of mediation with p tsb on the basis of the court ruling that the levels of compensation were inadequate.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (10 Apr 2017)

Which raises the question - why not complain to ptsb in the first place and ask for more compo?


----------



## gahfan (8 May 2017)

Has anybody any update on any of this?


----------



## lolopops (23 May 2017)

I am with Anthony Joyce Solicitors, proceeedings have been issued on the bank but they have not responded and no cases have been heard in court yet, the intention is to push forward the most emotive ones to form a precendent and then settle on the rest. I sought advice from several solicitors before deciding what to do. I decided against going to the appeals panel as my life was made hell by that bank for years and I did not trust an 'independent' panel chosen by them, looking at the figures on the amount of unsuccessful appeals I am glad I didn't. The bank has already admitted liabilty so it is not a question of proving thier liability it is a question of showing that the compensation they offered was insufficient, I don't think this will be difficult. The solictors will recover thier fees from the bank, yes the process is long but I am happy to wait to get what is deserved.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (23 May 2017)

Hi lolo

You clearly do not understand the process. 

They did not offer compensation. They paid it. You were free to accept it and then to ask for more. 

The record of the appeals panel has been poor but so what? It didn't cost anything to appeal and if they found against you, you could still go to the court. 

I imagine that the judge will not be happy that you did not exhaust the company's appeals process first.

By the way, why did you not go to the FSO? 

What have you agreed with Anthony Joyce regarding fees? 

Brendan


----------



## gahfan (12 Jul 2017)

Yes Brendan you made the same point to me as lolopops and maybe I should have appealed through the panel also.

I am also with A Joyce and I suppose we are assuming we are likely to win the case but perhaps that is not the case and we are/were a bit naive


----------



## Andy836 (12 Jul 2017)

gahfan said:


> Yes Brendan you made the same point to me as lolopops and maybe I should have appealed through the panel also.
> 
> I am also with A Joyce and I suppose we are assuming we are likely to win the case but perhaps that is not the case and we are/were a bit naive



What is the fee he's charging you?


----------



## gahfan (18 Jul 2017)

Hi Andy836, i't's a no win/no fee basis, only the e400 independent legal advice fee. What about you?


----------



## SirMille (18 Jul 2017)

gahfan said:


> Hi Andy836, i't's a no win/no fee basis, *only* the e400 independent legal advice fee. What about you?



Is EUR400 the final, out the door, everything included price?


----------



## gahfan (18 Jul 2017)

Hi Andy836, yes I understand so unless we lose the case. AJ's office are confident that we won't lose on the basis that the bank have admitted liability


----------



## gahfan (18 Jul 2017)

SirMille sorry not Andy836


----------



## SirMille (18 Jul 2017)

Four hundred is not reassuringly expensive. And he has no cases to point to.

What does the 400 get apart from processing a paperload?


----------



## Andy836 (18 Jul 2017)

SirMille said:


> Four hundred is not reassuringly expensive. And he has no cases to point to.
> 
> What does the 400 get apart from processing a paperload?



€400 is all it might cost gahfan unless they loose then gahfan would be liable for the €400 plus the Bank's costs (although what's the liklihood of the judge awarding costs against gahfan in this day and age?)

Would it be possible that if Gahfan wins, then the Bank will be held liable for cost and then gahfan's lawyers can bill the full amount to the Bank, which could be higher than €400?


----------



## Brendan Burgess (18 Jul 2017)

gahfan said:


> AJ's office are confident that we won't lose on the basis that the bank have admitted liability



You are not arguing about the liability.

You are arguing about whether the 10% paid was enough or not. 

You have not gone to the Independent Appeals Panel, which the Judge will take a poor view of. 

Brendan


----------



## Sarenco (18 Jul 2017)

Brendan Burgess said:


> You have not gone to the Independent Appeals Panel, which the Judge will take a poor view of.



I very much doubt that the Judge (if the case ever gets that far) will pay a blind bit of notice to that particular fact.


----------



## SirMille (18 Jul 2017)

Brendan Burgess, why are you certain the judge will take a dim view of bypassing the "independent" panel?

You have repeated yourself ad nauseum, but you never provided a reason, other than "it's a free go", which is not a strong reason.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (18 Jul 2017)

Sir Millie 

Having a free go at something is a very good reason. There is no downside whatsoever to the person affected in appealing this. There is a huge downside to the legal profession in that the person may have their appeal upheld and have no need to pay them legal fees. 

Brendan


----------



## Brendan Burgess (18 Jul 2017)

Hi Sarenco 

That is interesting.  I would have thought that a judge would ask someone how they progressed their complaint. If they did not make a complaint to the defendant but went straight to law, the judge should certainly take it into account. But then I am assuming common sense on behalf of the judges. Maybe that is not a reasonable assumption? 

I would have thought that it would strengthen your legal case to have your appeal rejected by ptsb without ptsb giving any valid reason. 

Brendan


----------



## Sarenco (18 Jul 2017)

Hi Brendan

This isn't actually an appeal from anything - these are brand new proceedings.  

We all have a constitutional right to access the Courts.  "Common sense" doesn't come into it.

None of which is to suggest that it was necessarily sensible to avoid the process set up by PTSB.


----------



## RedOnion (19 Jul 2017)

If it were me, I'd be worried about the potential liability to pay bank costs if I lost the case, and hadn't followed an appeals process the bank had put in place free of charge. 
In my view, that's when a judge might have a dim view of it.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (19 Jul 2017)

The first thing is that it is clear that one should always use the Independent Appeals Process.(Sorry for having to repeat this _ad nauseam _but a very small number of people still don't get this and have lost out as a result.) 

There is nothing to lose.  If you have received a refund of €40,000, you have automatically received compensation of €4,000. 

If you have a good case for getting €50,000 compensation, then there is a real chance that the Independent Appeals Panel will give you €50,000 or something close to it.

If you have no case at all, you are very unlikely to get an increased award, but you might, so there is nothing to lose.

You can still go to the FSO or the Courts.

If you have no case, there is no cost or risk in going to the FSO.

If you have no case, you can certainly try the Courts.  ptsb may cave in beforehand. But if you have no case at all, then they probably won't and you might get stuck with costs.

I simply can't conceive of any situation where going to the Courts directly is the right thing to do.  Possibly if the solicitor agrees to pay any costs awarded against you, but I doubt if they would do that.

I am surprised that the judge wouldn't pay any attention to it. But I presume that a Judge wouldn't hold exhausting the Independent Appeals Panel against the complainant.

Brendan


----------



## Wardy7 (19 Jul 2017)

I just wish the whole damn thing would hurry up and reach a conclusion.

Still no idea of a possible date for court.

It's appalling that so many of us are in limbo with life on hold waiting for an outcome.

Frustration at its best!


----------



## Brendan Burgess (19 Jul 2017)

Wardy7 said:


> Still no idea of a possible date for court.



Which is the big disadvantage off the court. 

Those who made successful appeals, are done and dusted and have the money in their pockets. 

Those who went to the FSO are probably going through the mediation process now. 

Brendan


----------



## gahfan (19 Jul 2017)

I take your point Brendan but I can't do anything about it now. I was about to go through the appeals and then came across Anthony Joyce's existing cases. 
Hopefully it's not something I'll regret but I can't change the past.


----------



## joe351980 (19 Jul 2017)

I'm similar to gahfan but when you see all the cases taken to the FSO that found in favour of the bank it doesn't leave confidence in appealing, (free shot or not) to same


----------



## Brendan Burgess (19 Jul 2017)

Hi Joe

You have no free shot at the FSO. 

If the FSO finds against you, that is effectively it. Technically you can appeal to the High Court, but the costs are prohibitive and the hurdle to cross to overturn an FSO decision is huge. 

You had a free shot at the Independent Appeals Panel.  

If they found against you, you could then go to court or the FSO. 

Brendan


----------



## Brendan Burgess (19 Jul 2017)

gahfan said:


> I was about to go through the appeals and then came across Anthony Joyce's existing cases.



Very interesting. Where did you come across them?  

Were there many? 

Brendan


----------



## gahfan (19 Jul 2017)

Sorry I meant


Brendan Burgess said:


> Very interesting. Where did you come across them?
> 
> Were there many?
> 
> Brendan


Sorry I just meant I came across them in the media


----------



## gahfan (31 Aug 2017)

Anyone any update lads please?


----------



## Wardy7 (31 Aug 2017)

I think we're all chomping at the bit at this stage!!

Frustration is killing me


----------



## gahfan (7 Sep 2017)

AJ's office said they have been in contact with the Solicitors for the Bank to discuss a number of clients affected by the Redress programme and will be in touch.


----------



## gahfan (15 Sep 2017)

Has anybody any update on the above please?


----------



## gahfan (18 Oct 2017)

All the negative publicity about the banks and trackers might help our cases. Leo on about it too.


----------



## gahfan (18 Nov 2017)

Has anybody any update on the above please?


----------

