Hello,
Pepper are the ones who have most likely convinced Danske to run with this strategy and will ultimately be the ones pushing the paperwork back and forth between Danske and the Receiver (even post appointment of the Receiver).... unfortunitely, they will now be starting to sound like a scratched record, saying it's nothing to do with them and all communications need to be via the Receiver, despite the fact that someone in Pepper will now be doing everything imaginable to defend the strategy they proposed and got Danske to sign up to.
Thank you for your advice.....We are waiting for FSO to come back to us before we make any decisions on our next move and we are been advised by our solicitor...
Does you solicitor have significant experience in dealing with commercial property, insolvency and Banks ?
Is the solicitor proven in commercial negotiaton, alongside litigation ?
.... if not, then this may not be the right person to be guiding you.
Personally, I think it's a brave move to just wait for the Ombudsman to make a decision (not least, because I don't believe that the Ombudsman's office has notable experience in working with commercial banking transactions, despite smaller cases (with T/o below €3m) being within their remit).
If the decision goes against you, you can expect to see the property feature in the Allsop auction after the Ombudsman's decision is made, because while the Ombudsman's decision is pending, preperations are most likely being made behind the sceenes to sell the property.
....On another note our tennants buisness is booming and in May they will be 3 years rent free...
That is just crazy - at the very least, the rent shoud be paid on an ongoing basis into an escrow account. If no one has dealt with this already, then they need to deal with it immediately (and ensure historic rent is also lodged, not just rents going forward). Odds are, the tenant will now be feeling a little opportunistic, so don't be surprised if you've another small battle to face here !
What I am suggesting is that the legal approach is the wrong approach. ...
I agree with you Mr. Burgess and beleive the non-legal strategy is ultimately how this gets resolved.
However, pesonally I would be running legal and non-legal strategies parrallel to each other (but clearly ensuring that one team is not undermining the other etc.).
I have seen this type of strategy implemented by another unconnected Bank in times past. Suffice to say it was a mess from everyones point of view.... the true winners were the legal teams and the receiver, who all ran up plenty of fees as a result !
If I were involved in this case, I would be asking for a meeting "without prejudice" between all parties - you will need to put this request in writting through the Receiver, but if the Bank has any sense they will agree to it - if only to see if you can get them out of this mess, with all sides saving face.
Keep an eye out for updated interest accruals on the sum the Bank is demanding payment for, as they should be undermined on the basis that the rent has not been collected and offset against the daily interest on the debt. The costs asssociated with the receivership should be undermined on the same basis.
