# Tanager vs. Ralf Kane in the High Court



## Brendan Burgess (1 Nov 2017)

I sat in on the first day of this yesterday. It continues today, but I have had enough.

I didn't follow many of the legal arguments and it was difficult to hear at times, so this can only be a partial report

Tanager went first and Ralf Kane responded. But it makes more sense to report Ralf Kane's arguments first

*Background *
Kane drew down the mortgage in 2006
31 October 2010 - BoSI transferred the mortgage to Bank of Scotland plc a UK company
In 4/2014 BoS plc sold the mortgage to Tanager Ltd
Tanager Ltd became Tanager DAC

BoSI registered a charge with the PRA
BoS plc did not register a charge
Tanager registered a charge with the PRA

5/2012 - BoS issued an arrears demand
3/2013 - date of last mortgage payment
14/4/2014 -t/f to Tanager
25/4/2014 Tanager registered the charge with the PRA
30/8/2014 - Balance was €290k with arrears of €56,941
21/1/2015 - Circuit Court proceedings initiated
24/4/2017 - Judge in Circuit Court dismissed Tanager's case
31/10/207 - This is an appeal by Tanager against the Circuit Court's decision

This doesn't seem to be a review as such. The case appears to be being heard from scratch.

*Kane's case *
Kane represented himself. He did much better than I had expected, but it was not always easy to follow. He had a  McKinsey Friend the last time, but was completely on his own this time. There were others in the court room who were probably from the Hub or Irish Land League, but they did not assist him in the court in any way.

1) (This was a new point made in an affidavit filed on Friday last.) The way in which Tanager has calculated the arrears means that they have effectively capitalised the arrears, so there are actually no arrears. The Master of the High Court criticised this practice by Tanager. The Attorney General in Northern Ireland described this as "double billing", "unconscionable behaviour" and "criminal behaviour".

So there are no arrears due and the demand letters are wrong.

2) The interest rate is not shown on the arrears statement, so I don't know what interest rate I am on.

3)They are in breach of contract. The mortgage offer says that I will be on a margin over the ECB's "Main refinancing operations minimum bid rate"

This was discontinued on 8/10/2008. (See list of ECB rates here.)

4) Bank of Scotland plc did not register a charge with the PRA. So therefore Tanager should not have been able to register a charge. It was done in error by the PRA.

5) The sale of assets from Bank of Scotland Ireland to BoS plc did not comply with European legislation so the transfer was null and void.

(They adjourned matters at 4 pm, so he may make other points this morning.)


----------



## Brendan Burgess (1 Nov 2017)

Tanager's case

1) This is really simple.
The nub of the issue is  Kane's argument is that Tanager has no right to take a case as they had no right to register a charge with the PRA.

Case law is very clear. Once a charge is registered with the PRA, it is conclusive evidence of title. There is no scope for going behind it except in cases of fraud, or error.  There was no fraud here. And there was no error. Judge: Kane disputes that there was no error?

Kane argues that as BoS plc did not register the charge, they can't discharge it. This is a non sequitur.  Discharging it means something else. There is no obligation on a charge holder to register a charge.  They miss out on some rights by not doing so, but they are not under any obligation to do so. 

There was no necessity for BoS plc to register the charge. Their choice of not registering it did not in any way stop Tanager registering it.

It's clear that BoSI sold the mortgage to BoS plc and that BoS plc sold it to Tanager. They are the correct owners of the mortgage and so have the right to register the charge. (The Supreme Court has held that BoSI did sell the mortgages to BoS plc)

There were cases where BoS plc could not proceed because they were not the registered owner. But this is not the case here. The registered owner is Tanager.

2)(I did not understand the arguments about the failure to comply with European law.)

3) Kane argues that he did not get "good bye" letter from Bank of Scotland, but he did get an "hello" letter from Tanager.  There is no legal requirement for such letters, although they are good practice.

4) The Main Refinancing Rate was not discontinued. The method of calculating it was changed.
In any event, in 2007, Kane fixed his mortgage for 5 years at 4.89% and it reverted to the SVR after that.


----------



## Browner (1 Nov 2017)

Well done and great report Brendan. 
Nervous times for the man but I really hope it goes his way. 
It will give Tanager such a kick if they lose that may be just may be they will start to treat people with a bit of respect rather than bullying them the way they are. 
Fingers cross.


----------



## cremeegg (1 Nov 2017)

Browner said:


> Well done and great report Brendan.



+1


Browner said:


> Nervous times for the man but I really hope it goes his way.
> It will give Tanager such a kick if they lose that may be just may be they will start to treat people with a bit of respect rather than bullying them the way they are.
> Fingers cross.



The man borrowed the money, bought the house and hasn't made a repayment since 2013. Who is bullying whom here ? Get a sense of reality.

If there were errors in the transfer of the security from the original lender to the current owner of the debt, well that may change the debt from secured to unsecured, but it hardly erases the debt.


----------



## Browner (1 Nov 2017)

Cremeegg:
I don’t know the mans circustances but I believe the man has gone through a lot of hardship- some from Tanagers approach to dealing with people. 
Reality is a company called Tanager who treat people like dirt and are getting away with it. They do not care about the law or their moral conduct with dealing with people who want to come to a solution with them. People who ran into differculty and are now coming through hard times. 
These people want blood and don’t care what the end result is and that includes people taking their lives. 
I know the reality!


----------



## newirishman (1 Nov 2017)

From Brendan's report it doesn't look like the chap has engaged in a meaningful way with the lender when he was in difficulty. Maybe someone could clarify that?
Even so, *over 5 years* not paying a single penny back? I have no respect for that man. 
Regardless of how atrocious Tanager might have acted or not.


----------



## Tanagable (1 Nov 2017)

I think that Brendan is over simplifying the arguments put forward by Ralf, Only the Judgement and the subsequent appeal to the Supreme court will tease these out, In relation to whatever took place in about payments. I am of the opinion that if I borrowed money from a Gentleman and he decided to sell the loan to a tramp, who showed up on my doorstep seeking payments. I would slam the door in their face. I fail to see the difference just because it is a bank selling to a large  company. Or are people still so stupid that they trust the banks.


----------



## newirishman (1 Nov 2017)

Tanagable said:


> I think that Brendan is over simplifying the arguments put forward by Ralf, Only the Judgement and the subsequent appeal to the Supreme court will tease these out, In relation to whatever took place in about payments. I am of the opinion that if I borrowed money from a Gentleman and he decided to sell the loan to a tramp, who showed up on my doorstep seeking payments. I would slam the door in their face. I fail to see the difference just because it is a bank selling to a large  company. Or are people still so stupid that they trust the banks.


No payments for over 5 years and you are talking about Gentleman like behaviour? Whatever. 
The mortgage is still regulated by the same laws and codes of conduct as when it was with BOSI. 
The man took the money. He signed the contract. He failed to upheld his obligations. 
If Tanager has broken their obligations, then this case will hopefully put an end to this, and maybe a fine in top.
But that man better starts paying his debts.


----------



## Open air (1 Nov 2017)

Sarenco said:


> That may well be your opinion but the tramp, in your example, could certainly take steps to enforce the loan if he can demonstrate that he acquired the loan from the gentleman.


And the borrower deserves to lose all protection that is afforded to a borrower from a pillar bank is it?


----------



## Open air (1 Nov 2017)

newirishman said:


> From Brendan's report it doesn't look like the chap has engaged in a meaningful way with the lender when he was in difficulty. Maybe someone could clarify that?
> Even so, *over 5 years* not paying a single penny back? I have no respect for that man.
> Regardless of how atrocious Tanager might have acted or not.


You cannot engage with a entity that has zero willingness to engage with you.How you can have no "respect" for someone without knowing their personal circumstances is extremely harsh to say the least.


----------



## Sarenco (1 Nov 2017)

Open air said:


> And the borrower deserves to lose all protection that is afforded to a borrower from a pillar bank is it?


No, borrowers still have the same regulatory protections after a loan sale - the application of the various Central Bank Codes are not limited to BoI and AIB (the two, so-called, pillar banks).

In any event, non-cooperating borrowers lose the benefit of MARP.  A failure to pay a penny over 5 years would indicate that Mr Kane is such a borrower.

But, hey, rant on...


----------



## Brendan Burgess (1 Nov 2017)

I must say that I was watching the case yesterday and was not sure who I was up for. 

I am familiar with cases such as  Open air's . They have  made payments all the time, despite serious financial problems, and Tanager have no interest in dealing with them. I would like to see a system, whereby a judge or whoever, makes a decision that the mortgage is sustainable and that Tanager can't keep hassling them. 

At the same time, I have no sympathy for guys who don't pay anything and try to avoid their debts using legal means. I would like if the same judge could just say "You haven't paid anything at all in two years - order for possession granted". 

My concern is that the hard nosed chancers will get away with it, while the decent guys will cave in. 

Brendan


----------



## Sarenco (1 Nov 2017)

Brendan Burgess said:


> I must say that I was watching the case yesterday and was not sure who I was up for.


It really doesn't matter who you are rooting for Brendan. 

This is a classic example of a borrower that is trying to delay the inevitable by advancing "clever" technical arguments.

Bear in mind that Mr Kane has not repaid a bean in 5 years.


Brendan Burgess said:


> I am familiar with cases such as  Open air's.


I've no knowledge at all about OpenAir's circumstances but I thought this thread was about the High Court hearing that you attended.



Brendan Burgess said:


> I would like to see a system, whereby a judge or whoever, makes a decision that the mortgage is sustainable and that Tanager can't keep hassling them.


We already have "no veto" PIAs - what else would you propose?

Tanager may well be impossible to deal with but borrowers have ample legal mechanisms available to them to definitively deal with their debts.

In any event, that has nothing to do with the merits (or otherwise) of Mr Kane's arguments.


Brendan Burgess said:


> At the same time, I have no sympathy for guys who don't pay anything and try to avoid their debts using legal means. I would like if the same judge could just say "You haven't paid anything at all in two years - order for possession granted".


And yet you are in two minds about Mr Kane's case?  Sorry Brendan but that makes no sense to me.


----------



## Rambo1 (1 Nov 2017)

So , has there been a judgement on this case yet ?


----------



## Open air (1 Nov 2017)

Judgement reserved for month or so.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (1 Nov 2017)

Sarenco said:


> And yet you are in two minds about Mr Kane's case? Sorry Brendan but that makes no sense to me.



I would like to see them both lose. 

Tanager are going after a lot of good guys. I would be delighted to see them stopped from doing so if it turned out that they had a problem with their charges. 

But, at the same time, I don't want to see guys getting away without paying. 

That is why I am in two minds.

Brendan


----------



## Rambo1 (1 Nov 2017)

Clearly, there are some legal hurdles for Tanager to overcome ?


----------



## Sarenco (1 Nov 2017)

Brendan Burgess said:


> I would like to see them both lose.


Well I hope the Court will continue to deal with individual cases on their individual merits and will not take extraneous, irrelevant matters into account.

If Tanager are being unreasonable in dealing with arrears, distressed borrowers would be well advised to avail of the legal mechanisms available to them to take the matter out of Tanager's hands.


----------



## Rambo1 (1 Nov 2017)

Sarenco , I concur with your hope  "that the court will continue to deal with individual cases on their individual merits and will not take extraneous, irrelevant matters into account"

Perhaps if the court was to say firstly look at relevant paperwork and procedures at the time and before the commencement of the original alleged agreement between a BOSI Mortgage holder and BOSI the problem or problems may appear /commence right there?  (Or maybe the original mortgage holder may have to point them out to the court ?) even before the mortgage holder fell into arrears ? And Perhaps BOS may actually have a problem now ? And Perhaps Tanager may now have to go back to BOS PLC or Llyods or whoever they bought the original loan book of for the discount of up to 80% and get €€€€€€€€€

Clearly its not just down to the legalities of the transfer to Tanager etc and perhaps this is now known by all parties ? or not?

Just my thoughts , I continue to pay my full monthly amount 32 consecutive months and no deal from Tanager !

This is going to go on and on...............until the next scandal !


----------



## Brendan Burgess (2 Nov 2017)

Sarenco said:


> If Tanager are being unreasonable in dealing with arrears, distressed borrowers would be well advised to avail of the legal mechanisms available to them to take the matter out of Tanager's hands.



Hi Sarenco 

I have advised the Tanager borrowers I am dealing with to first and foremost try to make their repayments and rely on the Registrar of the Circuit Court adjourning the case.  I have advised them not to start challenging the legal validity of Tanager's attempts to repossess their house. They are way too uncertain.  If a borrower makes a legal challenge, the case is sent to the Circuit Court judge where the chances of an order for possession being granted are much higher. 

This does not apply to cases where they consider that Tanager did not comply with the MARP. That is a reasonable objection to bring it at this stage, if it's correct. 

If, at the end of the normal process, the Registrar or the Judge is about to grant an order, by all means, use the legal challenge, but only as a last resort. For most people who got the legal paperwork recently,  the legal challenges will have been clarified by the time they get to them. 

Brendan


----------



## Rambo1 (2 Nov 2017)

Brendan, some sound advice there from you to your clients! However in most if not all cases TANAGER are not going into to have tea and cake with the mortgage holder and the registrar! They will ask the Registrar for the possession order there and then irrespective of what proposal you put to them ! It's not exageration to suggest that if the mortgage holder, or wife, husband, son , daughter , cat , dog etc has just collapsed in front of the registrar? Tanager would step over the injured party and still demand the possession order!

They don't play by the rules, only there own, and perhaps when the rule of law suits them ? so you have to remind them of The Rules! By all means have your clients state their case and demonstrate their  efforts been made and their good bona fides. However IMHO they are going to need more than that ?


No offence mean't by myself to anybody here , I base this on my own experience with Tanager.  Good Luck to you and your clients!


----------



## Brendan Burgess (2 Nov 2017)

Hi Rambo 

I have not yet seen any Registrar granting an order for possession against a borrower who was paying anything significant and who showed up in court.  Until that changes, that is the best strategy for hanging on to your home. 

Tanager and any other lender can be as brutal as they like, but they won't get orders against people who are paying their mortgage. 

I have seen people challenging the legal basis of the case, and the Registrars and Judges have no time for them at all. The best one can hope for is to get the case sent by the Registrar to the Judge's List. The judge seems much more likely to grant an order than the Registrar.  These legal arguments are a stupid strategy unless you are a deliberate defaulter and want to  live in your house and pay nothing. 

Brendan


----------



## IdesofMarch (2 Nov 2017)

Hopefully the recent Shoreline case in the High Court will coax Tanager to start engaging with people and enter into ARA's. This way Tanager does not have to pay those Hefty Legal Fees unnecessarily. Let common sense prevail. I also note that the automatic capitalization of arrears has been deemed by the Courts in the UK to be a bar to possession for the charge holder.

On a separate note why did Kane not challenge the Property Registration Authority (PRA) through the Land Registry Court, for allowing BOS Plc to transfer the charge to Tanager, when BOS Plc were not the registered charge holder. Obviously didn't have or take proper legal advice. Maybe that is why Tanager decided to use Kane as a test case. Kane would most likely have been successful if he took this route.


----------



## Open air (2 Nov 2017)

IdesofMarch said:


> Hopefully the recent Shoreline case in the High Court will coax Tanager to start engaging with people and enter into ARA's. This way Tanager does not have to pay those Hefty Legal Fees unnecessarily. Let common sense prevail. I also note that the automatic capitalization of arrears has been deemed by the Courts in the UK to be a bar to possession for the charge holder.
> 
> On a separate note why did Kane not challenge the Property Registration Authority (PRA) through the Land Registry Court, for allowing BOS Plc to transfer the charge to Tanager, when BOS Plc were not the registered charge holder. Obviously didn't have or take proper legal advice. Maybe that is why Tanager decided to use Kane as a test case. Kane would most likely have been successful if he took this route.


Their is currently another case involving Bosi and another vulture fund in the land registry court


----------



## IdesofMarch (3 Nov 2017)

If I was being pursued by Tanager, whilst still making repayments, this is the avenue of defence I would choose.


----------



## Open air (22 Nov 2017)

Well great news today for all tanager customers.Justice noonan stated that he could not make a decision on the case, and that the case would have to be forwarded to the supreme court for decision.This basically puts a stop to all tanager cases going forward, huge respect for ralf kane and the courage he is shown in dealing with this vulture fund/tanager!!!!!!!


----------



## Brendan Burgess (22 Nov 2017)

Wow!

Has it been published online? 

Did he say why he could not make the decision? 

Brendan


----------



## Tanagable (22 Nov 2017)

What will you say to all these people now who have been paying Tanager. Now that Rolf the chancer has put a spanner in the works.
If and only if he altimitly wins. Will all the people who have payed while calling people like Rolf names be looking for refunds. They probibly paid Irish water as well.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (22 Nov 2017)

Hi Tanagable

Ralf borrowed the money so he owes the money.  

The vast majority of borrowers, whether customers of Tanager or not, try to repay their loans. 

Brendan


----------



## Tanagable (22 Nov 2017)

You sound like you should be a judge or a banker. So no matter what they have done wrong they are the good guys.
You are in the wrong job. 


"The vast majority of borrowers, whether customers of Tanager or not, try to repay their loans."

I agree with that statement, tell me. Where exactly has that got them. I know quite a few and every one of them are in court having there homes taken. 
It's only people like Rolf that will change that.
I can bet not one person will show up in court at the next hearing and say no thanks I don't want my case adjourned becouse of the keane case. You can have it. 
Not likely I think.
and if he wins every one of them will stop paying.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (22 Nov 2017)

Tanagable said:


> if he wins every one of them will stop paying.



You are wrong.

But you and I move in different circles. Most people I know  actually do want to pay their debts. A small percentage want to get free housing. But that is a very small percentage.

If people want to keep their homes, they should continue to pay their mortgage as much as they can. Even if Tanager loses in the High Court, it does not mean that the loan is wiped out. It makes it more difficult for them to enforce their security, but they will be able to do it eventually.

Brendan


----------



## Tanagable (22 Nov 2017)

You have no idea what circles I move in. Just another assumption.
I agree that people should pay.
But here is  the problem. You want them to pay every penny until the likes of Tanager take the house regardless of how much the person is paying.
Tell me when they loose the house and have nothing left. Will you give them a spare room?
I won't put a bet on that one.
I know people paying more than the monthly payments to Tanager and are still in court, yet not feeding there children to feed Tanager instead.
All I can say is I am glad my conscience does not let me move in your circles


----------



## Tanagable (22 Nov 2017)

"It makes it more difficult for them to enforce their security, but they will be able to do it eventually."

Only time will prove you or me wrong on that


----------



## Open air (22 Nov 2017)

Unfortunately rolf has had to go through this today, not because he chose to, but because he was forced to. We tanager customers got landed with a vulture fund who operated with complete abandonment in this country.They showed no duty of care to their customers, and proceeded to repossession on properties without any negotiation with their borrowers.Now through their own reckless actions, they have been left in limbo!! 3 cheers for rolf


----------



## Brendan Burgess (22 Nov 2017)

Well it would be up to the solicitor for the purchaser to check the title.  If they have any doubt, they would advise their client appropriately.

Brendan


----------



## IdesofMarch (19 Dec 2017)

Update, on the next  court date, 22/12/2017 the Property Registration Authority (PRA) will attempt to become joined as party to the said proceedings.


----------



## IdesofMarch (20 Dec 2017)

Update, Kane was in court today and not the 22/12/2017. Justice Noonan acceded to allowing the Property Registration Authority and Bank of Scotland Plc to join the proceedings with Tanager. Kane put up no legal objections to this.  Bank of Scotland possibly being represented by Arthur Cox, PRA by Chief State Solicitors Office, and Tanager by A L Goodbody. Case remanded to mid January 2018. I say at a guess, there will be 3 senior counsels and two juniors against Mr Kane on the next date (don't you just love our Justice system). They are circling the wagons Mr Kane. Don't believe your own hype, if you can, get some legal person to represent you.


----------



## Open air (20 Dec 2017)

I hear he spoke very well for himself again today!


----------



## IdesofMarch (22 Dec 2017)

There are good solicitors and barristers out there, just like there are bad ones; the same for all professions I suppose. Rolf needs to choose the right people that are neither compromised or have a conflict of interest, but he does need to get some professional advice and soon.


----------



## Open air (22 Dec 2017)

There must be someone in the country who will help this brave soul with no strings attached!! If a ordinary joe soap had made the balls up that was made in transferring these loans this case would of been sorted years ago, because the P.R.A tanager and bos are involved all the stops are being pulled out!!! It's amazing that money supercedes justice in this little country of ours!!


----------



## IdesofMarch (23 Dec 2017)

Rolf Kane, I hope you get the current automatic capitalization of arrears letter to. Best of luck!


----------



## IdesofMarch (23 Dec 2017)

No, it was highlighted to the European Commission by myself in 2013 in relation to some types of Anglo loans and again in 2015 to the Central Bank of Ireland in relation to Start mortgages. Getting the CBI to investigate takes time, evidence must be gleaned and provided in proper format. Then the CBI enters supervisory engagement with the firm. Finally, if that does not work they issue administrative sanction procedures and enforcement procedures in relation to the fitness and probity regime within the said firm. No Rolf was not the cause of the CBI action nor did he invent the wheel. 
However, he has done very well as a lay litigant and has given a good account of himself during the two day hearing, especially given the recent tragic family circumstances that befell him. He now has an opportunity (with the permission of the High Court) to ask the Court of Appeal appropriate questions in relation to *any points *he raised as a defence on affidavit or in oral evidence during the hearing.


----------



## IdesofMarch (23 Dec 2017)

?


----------



## IdesofMarch (23 Dec 2017)

Here is a link to the letter format


https://www.askaboutmoney.com/attachments/lapithus-let-171220-pdf.2399/


----------



## Bronte (24 Dec 2017)

Is this thread the only one about Rolf Kane?

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/cri...-on-key-issue-in-repossession-order-1.3300972

Burgess made reference to why was European law involved in the case, but here it is mentioned

[broken link removed]

Here's a much better description of the legal issues

[broken link removed]

Seems to me Kane has a very good chance of winning the argument that the mortgage charges can not be registered with the PRA. I would have thought that the PRA has sought legal advice on this behind the scenes.

But even if that is the case, where would that be of benefit to Kane, does it mean Tanager cannot enforce the repayment of the mortgage.

Here's the actual court judgment

http://courts.ie/Judgments.nsf/0985...ec16b1f24ec176c3802581e100567fec?OpenDocument


----------



## Bronte (24 Dec 2017)

https://www.askaboutmoney.com/threads/tanager-mortgage-holders.204569/

More on Tanager here. Poster Openair in particular.


----------



## Bronte (24 Dec 2017)

Extraordinary legal incompetence by the lawyers for BOS not to have registered the charge, and what of Tanagers purchasing lawyers on their legal team not to have spotted this.

Can the banks sue their lawyers for this. Probably inhouse. So I guess not.

PRA

Amazing incompetence by them too. It seems to me.

Next

Either Kane or Tanager has to ask the judge to send the questions off to the Court of Appeal for legal direction.  One presumes this is being done?

Simple summary of the legal issues around title

[broken link removed]


----------



## IdesofMarch (24 Dec 2017)

Bronte said:


> Extraordinary legal incompetence by the lawyers for BOS not to have registered the charge, and what of Tanagers purchasing lawyers on their legal team not to have spotted this.
> 
> Can the banks sue their lawyers for this. Probably inhouse. So I guess not.
> 
> ...



The lawyers were not in house, as already stated on the AAM forum, in relation to the transfers of charge Arthur Cox represented the seller BOS Plc and A L Goodbody represented the buyer Tanager Limited. A L Goodbody are also on record for Tanager in the Kane case with Cian Ferriter Senior counsel and Gary Hayes Junior Counsel respectively. 

With regard to the PRA, they receive vast volumes of transfer documentation in relation to properties within the State. They are obliged to take each application at face value (in other words not to question it's bona fide, this is how solicitors Michael Lynn, Thomas Byrne etc. and others defrauded many property owners of their properties, and maybe this situation needs to change.)

As far as I am aware Rolf Kane has made no submissions to date, to the High Court in relation to questions to be answered by the Court of Appeal. (schoolboy error)


----------



## Brendan Burgess (24 Dec 2017)

IdesofMarch said:


> Here is a link to the letter format
> 
> 
> https://www.askaboutmoney.com/attachments/lapithus-let-171220-pdf.2399/


Hi Ides

That link does not work.

Can you post again? 

Thanks

Brendan


----------



## IdesofMarch (24 Dec 2017)

Brendan,

It is posted on the Tanager Mortgage Holders thread. Poster Kitten put it up.


----------



## IdesofMarch (24 Dec 2017)

Brendan Burgess said:


> Hi Ides
> 
> That link does not work.
> 
> ...



It's on the "Tanager Mortgage Holders" thread, posted by Kitten. So far all letters the same


----------



## Lone Star (10 Feb 2018)

Re getting Solicitor/Counsel: Julie Sadlier with Kieran Mulcahy Solicitors in Limerick might be worthwhile talking to...She has an interesting article in November 2017 Law Gazette.


----------



## IdesofMarch (12 Feb 2018)

Seamus Downes solicitor with Ronan Murphy as senior counsel would be my premiere choice.(no connection with either by the way)


----------



## Open air (16 Feb 2018)

Seems mr kane has served plenary summonses on Tanager the P.R.A and BoS. Just as the latter two were trying to sneak in the back door, mr.kane met them at the front door!!!!. Well played Rolf kane


----------



## Rambo1 (17 Feb 2018)

Seems mr kane has served plenary summonses on Tanager the P.R.A and BoS. Just as the latter two were trying to sneak in the back door, mr.kane met them at the front door!!!!. Well played Rolf kane

Hi Open air Can you tell me how this will work for Mr Kane ? and what is the positive with this tactic?  Thanks


----------



## Poldara (18 Feb 2018)

BOS plc where never registered as owners of the charges on most mortgages sold to Tanager as they where registered to BOSI or The governor and company of BOS. So had they the right to sell these on to Tanager?
The PRA new this but still registered Tanager as the owners of the charges.
By law you have to be registered as owner before selling on a charge.. It will be very interesting to see how it all pan's out


----------



## IdesofMarch (27 Apr 2018)

Kane case put back to June 26th 2018


----------



## Amber's (29 Aug 2018)

Hi all any update on this case?


----------



## Pink123 (1 Sep 2018)

I was wondering the same thing Amber's.  Where is this case at the moment?  Thank you!


----------



## Brendan Burgess (5 Oct 2018)

I just checked it out here and there doesn't appear to be any order yet 

Tanager DAC v Kane 2017/12 






This is the High Court list.

Is there a separate list for the Court of Appeal? 

Brendan


----------

