Why have no individuals been made responsible for the tracker scandal?

[Brendan Burgess]

From Charlie Weston in today's Indo

Tracker mortgages scandal is a shameful episode in banking history that is finally over after 13 years, but the stench will linger

It has taken 13 years, but regulators now claim the monster tracker mortgage probe is finally over. However, questions remain about why the banks made it so difficult to resolve the cases, and the role of the Central Bank, which has taken so long to get to the bottom of the scandal.

www.independent.ie

More annoying is the fact no individuals have so far been named and prosecuted for what is essentially a massive fraud perpetuated by lenders against their customers.

...

Various reasons for not going after individuals were trotted out, such as the current regulatory framework being too weak, difficulties identifying individuals and finding sufficient evidence to convince the DPP to take a case.

 

[Brendan Burgess]

It is very difficult for the Central Bank to go after individuals.

If they begin a sanctions process and the individuals play hardball as the directors of Irish Nationwide did, the Central Bank has to begin a formal process which is very time consuming and expensive and unlikely to end in a good result.

It takes years and hundreds of witnesses.

In the background, the Central Bank probably uses its Fitness and Probity powers to keep these people out of financial services. So if one of the guys involved in the tracker strategy seeks approval for a position in another bank, the Central Bank lets the new employer know that this application could take a long, long time. In other words, it might be better for them to withdraw the application. For some reason, the Central Bank does not like to outright refuse approval - they just sit on it forever.

Brendan

 

[SaySomething]

I think this is what's so difficult for people to get their heads around.
A massive wrong has been done (and technically fixed) but holding a bank accountable doesn't feel the same as holding the individuals who made the decisions accountable. It's much more satisfying psychologically to point a finger at somebody, rather than a business entity who continues trading.

 

[ryaner]

The main difference is the people involved who made the money via things like bonuses feel none of the pain from the fines. You see similar in tech where some of the large companies just count the fines as the cost of doing business.