# Banks using Private Investigators...Data Comissioner Investigating



## Raging Bull (28 Oct 2015)

http://www.independent.ie/business/...ivate-detectives-hired-by-banks-34137881.html

This is disgusting if they can go to the HSE and illegally get your data. The invasion of privacy should not be allowed.


----------



## Gerry Canning (28 Oct 2015)

From experience I would be a bit more sanguine about this.(I don,t support any illegal methods)
1. Most time any checking being done is to confirm that the person being checked is telling the truth.
2. Since we bailed out Banks , I do not want liars getting off under the cover of (invasion of privacy)
This overarching on Privacy issues can be nitpicking
Eg.
Under the (new) Private Investigator Rules , a summons server must only serve summons on person in the place summons is addressed to, they cannot enquire or get info on where the person on whom the summons is served works etc.
To be allowed to do summons , you must register , get insurance etc etc .
Upshot is that only larger organisations can serve summons.
Summons , as an example, are something that should be easily served.

I fear that this (privacy) thing , more protects the sinners , not society.


----------



## Raging Bull (28 Oct 2015)

Gerry I'm not entirely sure what you are saying but privacy aside are you saying its ok for a bank to break the law to enforce a loan agreement


----------



## 44brendan (28 Oct 2015)

Hiring PI's is a standard Recovery process used by all banks. However, in the case of the bank that employs me we only use credible licenced PI's on an approved listing is there would be significant consequences where inappropriate or illegal practices were being used by  agents acting on a bank's behalf. Similar controls are in place with all of the major banks. This is a generic article with no specific banks or other organisations being identified as countenancing such practices.
OP you are quite correct. These practices should not be and are not allowed. No doubt the findings of any investigation on the issue will establish whether they are still taking place!


----------



## Raging Bull (28 Oct 2015)

What would be the ramifications for the Bank if proven? I saw a PI outside my house


----------



## mf1 (28 Oct 2015)

Raging Bull said:


> What would be the ramifications for the Bank if proven? I saw a PI outside my house



Well, he wasn't very private if you saw him!

And as for ramifications, has this more to do with a bigger issue being blinded by an aside? 

mf


----------



## Raging Bull (28 Oct 2015)

Well he was a bit thick alright. ..I saw him taking pictures of me in my own house


----------



## odyssey06 (28 Oct 2015)

If the PIs can get the data when they shouldn't whether for 'valid' reasons or not, so can scammers ... clearly the institutions need to tighten up their data protection implementations.


----------



## Ian D Withers (28 Oct 2015)

_If the Banks and Credit Unions were to build in to their Contracts with Borrowers, a consent to access personal data in the event of a Default, this may go some way in reducing the losses suffered by the Lending Industry, as a result of the limits on accessing data for the sole purpose of locating Debtors and Fraudsters!!
It is a sad fact that the may in which this 20th century "social law" has the affect of protecting the criminals, and criminalises the Investigators who break the rules for the quite legitimate purpose of hunting down the offenders. Something seems out of balance in Society?? - Ian (D. Withers) Retired PI - 55 years in Practice_


----------



## Gerry Canning (29 Oct 2015)

I think Ian D Withers , sums up my views.
Raging Bull, I clearly said I do not support illegal methods.
It is probable your (PI) was nothing more than an agent confirming state of some house to show lender what shape it was in.

For clarity.

I am of the opinion that too much time is spent protecting the perceived slights over privacy over the real rights of society.
Shout (privacy) and it becomes a bigger issue than the investigation?

I do NOT support illegal trawling for information , but I fail to see normal enquiries eg asking where someone works etc can be subsumed into a bureaucratic system that dis empowers sensible investigation.
From experience ,once privacy is mentioned the enquirer becomes the enquired.


----------



## Kerrigan (5 Nov 2015)

I'm not surprised by this article.  Similar to Raging Bulls story a relative also had a PI photograph them in their property. Oddly enough they were not in arrears.  It was never quite understood why this action was taken but lets say it never happened again.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (30 Nov 2015)

This was referred to in a report in yesterday's Sunday Times. 

"The alleged data breach was discovered last February after an AIB customer received a letter at his new address from the solicitor. The man, who had a judgment against him over an AIB credit card debt and who is facing repossession proceedings from the bank over a Dublin property, believed only social welfare officers had his new address."

Of course it's wrong for a lender to get information illegally from the Department of Social Welfare. But if someone owed me money, I would try to find them. 

Brendan


----------



## 44brendan (30 Nov 2015)

We use properly licenced PI's as a normal part of the collection process! Generally used to confirm details supplied by the client such as employment status and standard of living etc. There is never any question of access to SW or any illegal method of information collection as our Compliance Dept would be extremely vigilant in closing down such activities and disciplining anyone involved.


----------



## Gerry Canning (30 Nov 2015)

The PRIVACY thing has now got to even serving a Court Summons.

To now serve a court summons , I need to register etc etc , cost circa k2.
I can only assume the reasoning was to keep (undesirables) eg convicted criminals serving them?
All that most of this PRIVACY fobia will do, is slow things down and put costs up.
I strongly think the balance is now skewed into protecting possible sinners versus the overall good of getting info.

And I repeat I do not condone illegal activity , but its now illegal to even enquire from anyone !


----------



## Raging Bull (30 Nov 2015)

Im familiar with this case..it goes further than a breach of social welfare

I had a PI on my case too. They took pictures of me in my own house and many other unsavoury things to boot.


----------



## Gordon Gekko (30 Nov 2015)

This is a very interesting thread.

We as a nation seem overly sympathetic towards debtors.

In the US, the "victims" of PIs would be branded "deadbeats" and receive zero sympathy.


----------



## HelpingHand (30 Nov 2015)

Gordon Gekko said:


> This is a very interesting thread.
> 
> We as a nation seem overly sympathetic towards debtors.
> 
> In the US, the "victims" of PIs would be branded "deadbeats" and receive zero sympathy.




You only tell half the tale, also in the US when you hand back the keys of the property, that's it. The debt is settled. There is no judgment debt outstanding against you for the next 12 years. In fact I would go as far as to say, that being declared bankrupt is a right of passage, for any serious businessman. Most successful ones have been declared such, two or three times at least. They can also open bank accounts again and move on with their lives, contribute to the economy etc.


----------



## Sarenco (30 Nov 2015)

HelpingHand said:


> You only tell half the tale, also in the US when you hand back the keys of the property, that's it. The debt is settled.



That's not the case in the vast majority of US States.  There are actually only 12 "non-recourse" States, which, unsurprisingly, traditionally have the highest foreclosure rates.

In the remaining 38 States, lenders can register a deficiency judgment against a borrower if the sales proceeds of a foreclosed property are insufficient to discharge the outstanding balance of the loan.  Such judgments are obviously unsecured and can, of course, be discharged in bankruptcy (as is the case in Ireland).

I personally think the legislation that is currently expected to be adopted before year-end to bring the bankruptcy term in Ireland in line with that in the US (and the UK) is long overdue.  Hats off to Willie Penrose for driving this through.


----------



## HelpingHand (1 Dec 2015)

Sarenco said:


> That's not the case in the vast majority of US States.  There are actually only 12 "non-recourse" States, which, unsurprisingly, traditionally have the highest foreclosure rates.
> 
> In the remaining 38 States, lenders can register a deficiency judgment against a borrower if the sales proceeds of a foreclosed property are insufficient to discharge the outstanding balance of the loan.  Such judgments are obviously unsecured and can, of course, be discharged in bankruptcy (as is the case in Ireland).
> 
> I personally think the legislation that is currently expected to be adopted before year-end to bring the bankruptcy term in Ireland in line with that in the US (and the UK) is long overdue.  Hats off to Willie Penrose for driving this through.



You are conveniently forgetting about "stay judgement-proof" in the remainder of the federal states that do not impose non recourse. Lived there, done that.


----------



## Sarenco (1 Dec 2015)

Sorry but I'm not conveniently forgetting anything.  

You are simply wrong.  Again.

A debtor is "judgment proof" if they lack the resources to satisfy a court judgment. It is not an affirmative defence to enforcement proceedings and does not settle or discharge a debt.  

The position is is no different to Ireland in this regard.


----------



## HelpingHand (1 Dec 2015)

No I am not. I have gone through chapter 13 bankruptcy. Depending on your financials, this usually entails the creditors taking a hit of between 30% and 60% on the outstanding debt. You then enter a pay plan with the creditors of between 3 to 5 years. You are then clear. You can continue to trade during this period, if you own a company, you can have company bank accounts etc.


----------



## HelpingHand (1 Dec 2015)

Gordon Gekko said:


> This is a very interesting thread.
> 
> We as a nation seem overly sympathetic towards debtors.
> 
> In the US, the "victims" of PIs would be branded "deadbeats" and receive zero sympathy.



Are you kidding me, in the US, debtors have many more options that are not available in their Country. The US system is very forgiving of debtors.


----------



## Sarenco (1 Dec 2015)

I am fully aware of what a Chapter 13 bankruptcy entails - it is broadly comparable to a personal insolvency arrangement here

You suggested that all mortgages are non-recourse in the US.  Untrue.

You then implied that in non-recourse States being "judgment proof" achieves the same thing.  Again, untrue.


----------



## HelpingHand (1 Dec 2015)

n


Sarenco said:


> I am fully aware of what a Chapter 13 bankruptcy entails - it is broadly comparable to a personal insolvency arrangement here
> 
> 
> Very broadly comparable, a bit like comparing edam and stilton cheese ( both are cheeses, but one certainly leaves you with a sharp taste in your mouth ). At least the bankruptcy term has been reduced to 1 year, that is a move in the right direction. However, we have a long way to go, to be akin to the American model and how it deals with it's debtors. In America, most large companies take out insurance against bad debts, why not here.


----------



## Sarenco (1 Dec 2015)

Yes, broadly comparable in that a PIA, like a Chapter 13 bankruptcy, provides a mechanism for the reduction of debt outside of bankruptcy (or a Chapter 7 bankruptcy in the US).

A PIA provides for the agreed settlement and/or restructuring of debts in the case of people who have secured debts up to a total of €3 million (as well as any unsecured debts) and have no prospect of being able to pay off their debts in the next 5 years.

Compared to the US, Ireland has an extremely lenient attitude to home loan defaulters.  Have you ever studied the foreclosure statistics in non-recourse States such as California and Nevada?  They really don't hang around.

And what gives you the impression that Irish companies don't carry credit insurance?


----------



## HelpingHand (1 Dec 2015)

Sarenco said:


> Yes, broadly comparable in that a PIA, like a Chapter 13 bankruptcy, provides a mechanism for the reduction of debt outside of bankruptcy (or a Chapter 7 bankruptcy in the US).
> 
> A PIA provides for the agreed settlement and/or restructuring of debts in the case of people who have secured debts up to a total of €3 million (as well as any unsecured debts) and have no prospect of being able to pay off their debts in the next 5 years.
> 
> ...



Can you provide me with any stats on how many Irish companies carry adequate credit insurance with respect to their credit risk exposure.


----------



## Sarenco (1 Dec 2015)

HelpingHand said:


> Can you provide me with any stats on how many Irish companies carry adequate credit insurance with respect to their credit risk exposure.



Table 19 of the Central Bank's Insurance Statistical Review (known as the "Blue Book") will show you how much credit insurance was written in Ireland in any given year.

Anyway, what does that have to do with the respective legal mechanisms available to resolve debts in Ireland and the US?


----------



## HelpingHand (1 Dec 2015)

Sarenco said:


> Table 19 of the Central Bank's Insurance Statistical Review (known as the "Blue Book") will show you how much credit insurance was written in Ireland in any given year.
> 
> Anyway, what does that have to do with the respective legal mechanisms available to resolve debts in Ireland and the US?



You are the person who asked the question about credit insurance, I know the Irish Banks certainly did not have adequate cover and the State, through the taxpayer, bailed them out.

Do not attempt to argue that the Irish system of debt management and enforcement is in any way as sophisticated as that of the USA. The troika had to bend the arm of Government to update the laws on debt enforcement. It was not all that long ago, where you could be imprisoned in this Country for not paying a relatively small debt. The Irish State was dragged kicking and screaming from its dickension model of debt enforcement into the modern age.


----------



## HelpingHand (1 Dec 2015)

Debtors Act 1840, 1872 were still being applied by the courts until relatively recently.


----------



## Sarenco (1 Dec 2015)

No, you raised the issue of credit insurance although I have no idea what it has to do with any debt resolution mechanism.

I made no attempt to suggest that our debt resolution mechanisms are appropriate or sufficient and I have been fully supportive of the campaign to reduce the bankruptcy period.

I was simply correcting your misrepresentations of the legal position in the US and I note that you have not had the good grace to acknowledge your errors.

To suggest that the US takes a more lenient approach to debt defaulters is, frankly, risible.


----------



## HelpingHand (1 Dec 2015)

Sarenco said:


> No, you raised the issue of credit insurance although I have no idea what it has to do with any debt resolution mechanism.
> 
> I made no attempt to suggest that our debt resolution mechanisms are appropriate or sufficient and I have been fully supportive of the campaign to reduce the bankruptcy period.
> 
> ...



I suppose that's the reason why David Drumm, CEO of Anglo Irish Bank, went to the States. Frankly, your talking out of an orifice that is not your mouth. Go and take some proper legal advice. Your postulations are WRONG and serve to misinform !


----------



## Sarenco (1 Dec 2015)

HelpingHand said:


> I suppose that's the reason why David Drumm, CEO of Anglo Irish Bank, went to the States. Frankly, your talking out of an orifice that is not your mouth. Go and take some proper legal advice. Your postulations are WRONG and serve to misinform !




David Drumm!!  

Are you seriously holding David Drumm up as an example of US leniency towards debt defaulters?  You do know he failed in his attempt to file for bankruptcy in the US having been described by the Judge as being "not remotely credible" and is currently incarcerated pending extradiction to Ireland?

I see that it didn't take long for you to revert to your usual abusive ways...


----------



## HelpingHand (1 Dec 2015)

Sarenco said:


> David Drumm!!
> 
> Are you seriously holding David Drumm up as an example of US leniency towards debt defaulters?  You do know he failed in his attempt to file for bankruptcy in the US having been described by the Judge as being "not remotely credible" and is currently incarcerated pending extradiction to Ireland?
> 
> I see that it didn't take long for you to revert to your usual abusive ways...



Yes, I am. He was found not to be credible and was trying to pull a fast one. But he was in the USA for the purpose of declaring himself bankrupt, *as US bankruptcy is more lenient than bankruptcy in Ireland.* Face it Sarenco, your post in this regard are laughable, incorrect and untrue. In the USA, bankruptcy is more lenient than in Ireland,* fact.*

He is incarcerated in the USA due to criminal fraud charges in this Country lodge with the US attorney's office, in which the Irish State is seeking extradition. This imprisonment has nothing to do with his failed bankruptcy petition.


----------



## HelpingHand (1 Dec 2015)

I say black you say white. I say tomato say tomAto. I say potato you say potAto. You are not the Pope, you are fallable like the rest of us mere mortals. You just need to admit it to yourself.


----------



## Sarenco (1 Dec 2015)

More personal abuse.  You really can't help yourself, can you?

I have never claimed to be infallible.  When I get something wrong, I'm more than happy to admit it.

I never suggested that David Drumm's current incarceration had anything to with his failed petition for bankruptcy - I specifically stated that it was pending his extradition.

The bankruptcy term in the US was obviously shorter than the term in Ireland when David Drumm petitioned for bankruptcy in the US. That difference is now, thankfully, being removed.


----------



## HelpingHand (1 Dec 2015)

Without boring other viewers of this thread, there are a myriad of other reasons why bankruptcy in the US is still more amenable to debtors than bankruptcy in Ireland. It is not risible as you assert in a previous post, you need to take proper legal advice in this regard, as your posts only serve to misinform readers, which is something I hope is not your intention. You are still wrong and there is no point in continuing this discussion with you as it will turn into an argument with no winners.


----------



## Sarenco (1 Dec 2015)

HelpingHand said:


> Without boring other viewers of this thread, there are a myriad of other reasons why bankruptcy in the US is still more amenable to debtors than bankruptcy in Ireland. It is not risible as you assert in a previous post, you need to take proper legal advice in this regard, as your posts only serve to misinform readers, which is something I hope is not your intention. You are still wrong and there is no point in continuing this discussion with you as it will turn into an argument with no winners.



I actually said that any suggestion that the US takes a more lenient attitude towards debt defaulters was, frankly, risible.  This is self-evidently the case when you compare foreclosure rates in the US with repossession rates in Ireland.


----------



## Leo (1 Dec 2015)

If you want a private chat, PM is your friend...let's get back on topic here.


----------

