# Eddie Hobbs and Tony Taylor



## Bank Manager (10 Aug 2005)

I really look forward to Eddie presenting the Rip Off programme on Taylor Investments ripping off the likes of St V de P.  Should be a good one given that he was Tony Taylors partner, we might even get the inside story!


----------



## RainyDay (10 Aug 2005)

*Re: Rip Off Ireland - Reviews*



			
				Bank Manager said:
			
		

> I really look forward to Eddie presenting the Rip Off programme on Taylor Investments ripping off the likes of St V de P.  Should be a good one given that he was Tony Taylors partner, we might even get the inside story!


You forgot to mention the bit about how Eddie funded the private detective that found Tony in the UK and ensured he was brought back here to face the music.


----------



## Bank Manager (10 Aug 2005)

*Re: Rip Off Ireland - Reviews*



			
				RainyDay said:
			
		

> You forgot to mention the bit about how Eddie funded the private detective that found Tony in the UK and ensured he was brought back here to face the music.


 
Guilty conscience???


----------



## RainyDay (10 Aug 2005)

*Re: Rip Off Ireland - Reviews*



			
				Bank Manager said:
			
		

> Guilty conscience???


Cheap shot from an anonymous poster against a named individual.


----------



## Bank Manager (10 Aug 2005)

*Re: Rip Off Ireland - Reviews*



			
				RainyDay said:
			
		

> Cheap shot from an anonymous poster against a named individual.


 
Well that's rich.  Here's a guy claiming to be the great white knight for the 'consumer', I for one (and many others I know) have our doubts.......  If he wasn't involved with TT why not include it in the programme, as an example of what a real 'rip off' can look like, rather than he having cheap shots at Govt and Businesses in Ireland, while attempting to appeal to popular opinion.  Didn;t see the programme, but I'm intrigued to know what sending nappies to a minister is supposed to achieve (at least that's what appears to be happening from reading this thread).


----------



## dam099 (10 Aug 2005)

*Re: Rip Off Ireland - Reviews*



			
				Bank Manager said:
			
		

> If he wasn't involved with TT why not include it in the programme, as an example of what a real 'rip off' can look like, rather than he having cheap shots at Govt and Businesses in Ireland, while attempting to appeal to popular opinion.


 
I'd imagine there could be all sorts of potential legal issues if he was a partner of this guy regardless of his conduct good or bad. Also how could he be said to be an objective journalist given his own connection to the whole affair. If he did do a show on this I'm sure he would get a slating for having a conflict of interest.


----------



## RainyDay (10 Aug 2005)

*Re: Rip Off Ireland - Reviews*



			
				Bank Manager said:
			
		

> Well that's rich.  Here's a guy claiming to be the great white knight for the 'consumer', I for one (and many others I know) have our doubts.......  If he wasn't involved with TT why not include it in the programme, as an example of what a real 'rip off' can look like, rather than he having cheap shots at Govt and Businesses in Ireland, while attempting to appeal to popular opinion.  Didn;t see the programme, but I'm intrigued to know what sending nappies to a minister is supposed to achieve (at least that's what appears to be happening from reading this thread).


Sad to see the great Irish tradition of knocking down anyone who has the guts to stick their head above the parapet alive and well. If you think that the TT issue is worthy of a TV program, get up off your backside, make the TV show and get it shown. If you really, really think that this is something that Eddie should do, give him a call at his office tomorrow and discuss it with him - don't hide behind anonymous postings while taking cheap shots at a named individual.

So let's turn the 'guilt by association' game around for a moment. You're a bank manager right. Look at the 9 bank managers from NIB where the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement has requested their disqualification as directors. Look at all those bank managers from all banks who pushed the bogus non-resident accounts in the 80's & 90's. What a shower of crooks. And you're one of them so you must be a crook - right? You must be a pretty dodgy character - right? Have you stopped beating your wife yet?

So how does it feel to get castigated by association? The key difference of course is that you are still an anonymous poster, whereas Eddie is a professional in the public domain. In case my sarcasm in the last paragraph isn't clear, I'm not serious in these comments. I'm making about about tabloid-journalist style guilt by association comments which have absolutely no foundation. If you have information of any wrongdoing by Eddie, then take it through the proper channels. If you don't have any hard information, then hold your fire.


----------



## Debasser (11 Aug 2005)

*Re: Rip Off Ireland - Reviews*

In order to clarify Eddies position is anyone aware of the facts surrounding Eddies history with TT investments. A couple of cynics here in work have made off the cuff remarks about Eddies integrity due to his association with Tony Taylor. Maybe it could be posted on another thread. Personally I don't know enough about it to make judgement & prefer to take Eddie at face value. 
BTW this is a request for facts not opinions or rants.! 

Thx all,


----------



## Brendan Burgess (12 Aug 2005)

*Re: Rip Off Ireland - Reviews*

In my opinion, Eddie made one big mistake in this whole issue. As an employee of Taylor Investments, he accepted a directorship without having access to the accounts. He was a director for 18 months up to the date of the fraud. He did sign off accounts during this period, which he should not have done. That was the late 1980's when this was commonplace. He was totally ignorant of what his boss was doing. Like many others, he trusted Tony Taylor. This was not unreasonable. Tony Taylor was a very public figure who had set up the Irish Brokers Association and was very well known and highly regarded. We are less trusting these days. 

Taylor fully supported Eddie in his campaign on endowment mortgages so it did look like Taylor was a good guy. When I was campaigning against the demutualisation of the Irish Permanent, I got very little public support. I got a phone call out of the blue from Taylor, whom I had never met, encouraging me. I got great encouragement as this was the only support I got from an industry insider whom I would have had respect for at the time. I can see how Eddie would have trusted and liked the guy. 


I gather that most of the fraud involved keeping some customers' accounts at home. The money never ever went through Taylor Investments books, so Eddie would have had great difficulty in knowing that there was a fraud taking place.

According to David Murphy in and Irish Independent report in August 1999:



> An affidavit lodged by the liquidator of the Taylor group with the High Court, and which has not yet been publicly opened, is believed to say that *none of the officers, management and staff of the company could have had knowledge of **Taylor**'s activities.* Mr Hobbs said that he was ``outraged'' when he heard that one of the investors which had lost money was the St Vincent de Paul, and he became determined to track down Taylor.



When he became aware of the problem, he was totally open and honest in his reaction to it. He assisted the authorities proactively in resolving the issues.

Some months later, he was one of the first people, if not the first person, to be appointed as an Authorised Advisor. I think it was the Central Bank who made those appointments, so they were happy with him. That is good enough for me. If the Central Bank had any doubts about Eddie, they would not have allowed him to continue working in the industry. 

 He used his own funds to locate Tony Taylor.

Just to restate for the record:
The Central Bank granted Eddie Authorized Advisor status. 
IFSRA has renewed this each year.
The High Court did not restrict Eddie as a director.
No creditor has taken any action against him 
No criminal or civil charges were taken against him
He was appointed by the Minister for Finance to the IFSRA Consumer Panel
He was appointed by the Minister for Entrprise to the Consumer Strategy Group. 

His only "guilt" is by association and his detractors have really milked this.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (12 Aug 2005)

Just to clarify a few issues raised earlier on in this thread...

Taylor Investments was a limited company owned by Tony Taylor and his wife Shirley(?). I think there may have been a few companies in the group. Eddie was a director of one or more of these companies. I don't know if he was a shareholder. 

He was not a partner of Tony Taylor and this is a critical distinction. In a partnership, all partners are jointly and severally liable for the debts of the partnership. So in the Morrogh's case, the senior partner who did nothing wrong, has lost all his personal wealth due to the fraud by his junior partner. Had Eddie been a partner, he would have been liable for the debts of the company.

Directors are liable for the debts of a company if fraud or reckless trading can be proved against them. To the best of my knowledge, neither the liquidator nor the creditors attempted to prove fraud against Eddie. 

Eddie has had a dramatic impact on improving the lot of financial consumers in Ireland. He has highlighted the huge money being made by people in the endowment mortgage business. He was almost singlehandedly responsible for the reduction in endowment mortgages from 40% of the market to virtually zero. Lots of people have saved a lot of money who have never heard of Eddie Hobbs. 

There are many insurance companies, banks, and intermediaries who have lost a lot through Eddie's activities. So every so often, they raise the Taylor story to discredit him. It simply doesn't work. They can only use innuendo and cheap shots as the facts simply don't support anything else.

Brendan


----------



## Debasser (12 Aug 2005)

Thx Brendan. Non-issue as far as I'm concerned now & I'll have no hesitation in outlining your points to the "cynics" in here. 

As a sideline I wonder if some reputable journalist out there would spot a story here & interview Eddie. Would be a great way to put an end to the whispers & sniggers about his past with TT investments not to mention a scoop with the new rising star of Irish TV


----------



## Imperator (12 Aug 2005)

I have read articles in papers over the last couple of weeks (I think it was the Sunday Independent or Tribune) which gave a fairly detailed profile of Eddie Hobbs and discussed his association with Tony Taylor.  The general tone was that his behaviour was honourable in his business dealings, and that he upheld as well as obeyed the law. Other than the remarks made on *this* site, I haven't heard of any negative comments as to his previous relationships.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (12 Aug 2005)

Hi Imperator

Eddie's association with Taylor is raised in a negative manner in the media from time to time. Most notably by the deputy business editor of the Irish Times, John McManus who has written two opinion pieces saying, as far as I remember, that Eddie should not be the financial spokesperson for the Consumers Association. 

Here is what a search of the site shows:



*1* *[broken link removed]* 
John McManus   
Business Opinion: There is an interesting little software company based up in the Guinness Enterprise Centre in Dublin's Liberties called 3Q Solutions. ...
*matched words: *hobbs taylor mcmanus   *published: * 13/06/2005   

*[broken link removed]* 
By JOHN MCMANUS   
Eddie Hobbs, the Consumer Association of Ireland spokesman on financial services, is rarely out of the public eye. The launch of his latest brainchild, the association's savermark for the new special ...
*matched words: *hobbs taylor mcmanus   *published: * 21/05/2001     

I wrote a letter to the Irish Times along the above lines, and it was never published. 

Brendan


----------



## LDFerguson (12 Aug 2005)

Eddie himself wrote a piece in The Examiner a year or two ago openly discussing the various "conflict of interest" allegations against him, and how they really had been done to death and were becoming boring at this stage. 

The more time passes, the more boring it becomes when someone tries to resurrect ancient history.


----------



## cerberos (12 Aug 2005)

This thread should be closed.

C


----------



## Brendan Burgess (12 Aug 2005)

Hi cerebros

I think we will wait for Bank Manager to respond to the posts in the thread as he raised it initially.


----------



## dam099 (12 Aug 2005)

*Re: Rip Off Ireland - Reviews*



			
				Brendan said:
			
		

> When I was campaigning against the demutualisation of the Irish Permanent,


 
Sorry to go off-topic again, but you campaigned *against* the demutualisation of the Irish Permanent?

I discovered this site through searches for info on the Irish Nationwide demutualisation which you are campaigning for.

Did your views on demutualisation change over time or do you see the circumstances as different in each case?


----------



## Bank Manager (13 Aug 2005)

Interesting responses.  The one thing we probably all agree on is that the story is unlikely ever to be included in the Rip-Off programme.


----------



## RainyDay (13 Aug 2005)

I'm really dissapointed that Bank Mananger hasn't the decency to withdraw his comments, particularly the 'guilty conscience?' weasel words. As I've pointed out to him privately this particular suggestion, it is actually quite illogical. Surely if EH had done something wrong, it would in his interest for TT not to be found. The last thing he'd want would be to reopen the Garda investigation and put TT on the stand. If EH had done anything wrong, he'd be praying for TT never to appear in Ireland again.  

To me, this is like the worst of Irish small-town oul biddy gossiping. Take the one visible weakness from an individual's history and keep knocking the person down, down and down again. Is 'Interesting responses' really the best you can do?


----------



## Bank Manager (13 Aug 2005)

_Edited by RainyDay_


----------



## RainyDay (13 Aug 2005)

I've edited my previous post to remove references to content of a private message from Bank Manager to me. 

Bank Manager - I've removed your subsequent post as it also referred to this information. Feel free to repost your response.


----------



## GreatDane (13 Aug 2005)

Hi

Not entirely sure I agree with you here, people should be aware Eddie is a Poacher turned Gamekeeper, given he is so much in the public eye, imho 


Cheers

G>
http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=13123 - min €145 free !


----------



## daltonr (13 Aug 2005)

I think the point is he never was a poacher. Perhaps the best gamekeepers are the ones who saw poachers up close.
I don't see anything in Eddie's past that i would call a weakness or a problem.
-Rd


----------



## GreatDane (14 Aug 2005)

Hi

I mean it in terms of people being aware he formerly worked in the industry. 

Various whispers do the rounds, both positive & negative about Eddie Hobbs. Personally, I dont know the fella and never had any dealings with him, so I won't repeat any of them, either way. 

Cheers

G>
http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=13123 - €145 min for free !


----------



## shnaek (15 Aug 2005)

Dirt will always come out on people who stand up to be counted. But if we agree with what the man says, and we believe he means it, then that is the important thing. In this case he is standing up for the Irish consumer and trying to get us all to stand together to change some aspects of the way the country is run for the better.


----------



## Humpback (15 Aug 2005)

shnaek said:
			
		

> Dirt will always come out on people who stand up to be counted.


 
My question is, did this "dirt" come out when he was fronting the "Show me the Money" programme and showing up consumers for getting into unreasonable amounts of debt and for having unrealistic spending behaviours?

Or is it only coming out now when he's showing up the Government and big business and vested interests as being the alleged reasons behind Ripoff Ireland?

A conspiracy me thinks!!!!


----------



## Brendan Burgess (15 Aug 2005)

Bank Manager

Perhaps you would like to make a comment on the initial matters you raised in the light of the additional information provided in this thread, of which I assume you were not aware? 

Brendan


----------



## RS2K (15 Aug 2005)

The endowment mortgage part of this thread regarding Eddie Hobbs is interesting.  

Eddie was Sales Director/National Sales manager at one point with Eagle Star.

During his tenure in that lofty position his employer launched their version of the endowment mortgage product.

He actively marketed it.

It carried collosal costs. 

My final remark on this. Go figure the rest of it yourselves.


----------



## Bank Manager (15 Aug 2005)

Brendan,

My initial view holds - would make an interesting topic on his programme, but like I've already said I think we all agree he's unlikely to cover it.  BM


----------



## Brendan Burgess (16 Aug 2005)

Bank Manager

Your "initial view" was some sort of implication that Eddie was a participant in wrongdoing. When this has been shown to be demonstrably not the case, you still hold your "initial view".  This is disappointing. The great thing about Askaboutmoney is that people can make statements or express "initial views" which are completely mistaken and they can have them corrected by other contributors. If you have any grounds for your "initial view", you should specify them.

It is unfair for an anonymous contributor to cast aspersions on a public figure without one whit of evidence for those aspersions. 

Brendan


----------



## Brendan Burgess (16 Aug 2005)

Hi RS2K

I have tried to "go figure". There are a few possible explanations. I don't know which is correct, but perhaps you could shed some light on which is correct?

1) Eddie is a hypocrite. He has no interest in the consumer. He consciously screwed the consumer when he was in Eagle Star and his unpaid work for the Consumers Association and his campaign which killed off endowment mortgages were all some sorts of con or stunt. 

2) Eddie behaved just like the rest of the financial services industry at the time. He promoted high charging products to maximise the profitability of his employer. He had some sort of conversion and realised that these products were not in the interests of consumers and changed from being a poacher to a gamekeeper. He blew the whistle. 

3) Maybe endowment policies were actually a good idea at one time? I certainly had one and later campaigned against endowment mortgages. The main change for me was not because of some religious conversion, but because the tax relief on life assurance premiums was withdrawn and also because I came to understand the products a bit better. 

I suspect it's 2) or 3) but I don't actually know.

Brendan


----------



## legend99 (16 Aug 2005)

Lads, all i can say is that the program comes accross as a program for kids who are being talked down to by a lofty school teacher.
Bottom line, the guy isn't a great TV presenter. I felt compelled to switch off the TV last night it got so annoying.

Dumbest moment of the program. The Nun who runs the treatment centre saying that Dublin was the biggest catchment area for people who had drink issues. the greater Dublin area probably has half the population of the country at this stage....its not exactly a shocker to see the biggest population centre by far ,providing the biggest number of people to a treatment program!

Opps, should have


----------



## ClubMan (16 Aug 2005)

legend99 said:
			
		

> Lads, all i can say is that the program comes accross as a program for kids who are being talked down to by a lofty school teacher.
> Bottom line, the guy isn't a great TV presenter. I felt compelled to switch off the TV last night it got so annoying.


I guess that this should go in the review thread(s) but I have to agree - I personally find it very hard to listen to _EH _for more than a few minutes on _TV _as I find that his presentation style really grates with me.


----------



## daltonr (16 Aug 2005)

> I find that his presentation style really grates with me.


 
I find is presentation style a welcome relief from the kind of presenters that RTE have thrown up (pun intended) over the years.   

Out of curiousity do you think your dislike of his presentation is affected by whether you agree or disagree with what he's saying?  Or do you find he grates even when you agree with him.  Of course if you never agree with him we won't be able to get to the bottom of this.

-Rd


----------



## ClubMan (16 Aug 2005)

daltonr said:
			
		

> Out of curiousity do you think your dislike of his presentation is affected by whether you agree or disagree with what he's saying?


No - as I've already said it's his style and not his content that irritates me. I have mentioned this before on _AAM_, the first time many years ago. It's just a personal opinion and observation and I certainly don't expect everybody to agree with me or anything like that.


> Or do you find he grates even when you agree with him. Of course if you never agree with him we won't be able to get to the bottom of this.


Sorry - I don't know what you're getting at here.


----------



## daltonr (16 Aug 2005)

> Or do you find he grates even when you agree with him. Of course if you never agree with him we won't be able to get to the bottom of this.


 
Nothing sinister.  I was just waying that if you never agreed with him we'd have no control sample to see if it was his content or his style that got you.   If you know it's his style not content then that answers my question.

I have similar feelings towards John O Donoghue, but since I never agree with him I don't know if it's his style or content.   Similar problem with Jackie Healey Ray.   With Joan Burton I sometimes do agree so it's defintiely her style I have a problem with, although I wouldn't hold it against her too much.

I like Eddie though, both style and content.

-Rd


----------



## ClubMan (16 Aug 2005)

daltonr said:
			
		

> Nothing sinister. I was just waying that if you never agreed with him we'd have no control sample to see if it was his content or his style that got you.


I didn't realise that by expressing an preference I would be the subject of a scientific vivisection style laboratory study. I must bear that in mind next time I express an opinion in one of these threads.


----------



## daltonr (16 Aug 2005)

Oh for Pete's sake it was just a question,  I was just curious.   Remember when curiousity and discussion was allowed?  Those were they day's weren't they?   

I didn't accuse you of anything.   I was interested in whether your feelings towards him were in anyway influenced by his message.   I'm sorry if a simple question caused offence.

-Rd


----------



## ClubMan (16 Aug 2005)

daltonr said:
			
		

> I didn't accuse you of anything.


Me neither.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (16 Aug 2005)

ClubMan said:



> I didn't realise that by expressing an preference I would be the subject of a scientific vivisection style laboratory study. I must bear that in mind next time I express an opinion in one of these threads.



Now you know how all those poor posters who are subject to your forensic analysis feel!

Brendan


----------



## harvey (17 Aug 2005)

RS2K said:
			
		

> The endowment mortgage part of this thread regarding Eddie Hobbs is interesting.
> 
> Eddie was Sales Director/National Sales manager at one point with Eagle Star.
> 
> ...


 
I thought he became a broker ?


----------



## Lemurz (17 Aug 2005)

*Taylor Investments*

We all have our individual bias.  Bertie, Cowen, O' Donogue, or the rest of the Government don't do it for me.  In fact, I cringe when I see them on foregin TV as Ireland's elected representatives.

I agree, Eddie isn't a natural, but he's far better than many ridiculously overpaid RTE presenters! We seem to export most decent home grown talent.

I don't know too much about Eddie's past, but he did jump ship well before the Taylor empire sank which was a well reported red flag to me!  As far as I'm aware we still employ the innocent until proven guilty theory in the courts!  Give the guy a break until he's proven guilty.  He has more neck that all of our Government put together, when their not on holiday!


----------



## ClubMan (17 Aug 2005)

daltonr said:
			
		

> I find is presentation style a welcome relief from the kind of presenters that RTE have thrown up (pun intended) over the years.
> 
> -Rd





			
				daltonr said:
			
		

> I have similar feelings towards John O Donoghue, but since I never agree with him I don't know if it's his style or content. Similar problem with Jackie Healey Ray. With Joan Burton I sometimes do agree so it's defintiely her style I have a problem with, although I wouldn't hold it against her too much.
> 
> I like Eddie though, both style and content.
> 
> -Rd





			
				Lemurz said:
			
		

> We all have our bias.
> 
> Bertie, Cowen, O' Donogue or any of the Government don't do it for me either.
> 
> Eddie isn't a natural, but he's far better than many overpaid RTE presenters!



Great minds think alike or ...


----------



## Lemurz (18 Aug 2005)

Great minds think alike. (full stop)

(no "or ..." required)


----------

