Today Ben Gilroy joins Open Your Mind Internet Radio. They discuss the upcoming demonstration outside Savills in Dublin, across from the largest Masonic Hall in Ireland. They discuss the ongoing troubles of Seamus Sherlock, who is time of this publication, barricaded into his farm to prevent its being taken from he and his family by receivers. They discuss Ben Gilroy’s recent encounter with Fergus Lowe the receiver.
Ben Gilroy’s Interview With OYM
One of the major things to take away from this interview is the actions of Justice Lefoy during the case of Fergus Lowe attempting to act as receiver at Stitch ‘n’ Fix in Navan, the business owned by Gerry Burns. When Gerry quite rightly did not accept the signed court order Mr. Lowe presented him with, under the advise of Ben Gilroy, Mr. Lowe returned to the high court saying that Mr. Burns was in contempt of court. Gerry was of course not in contempt of court as the court order was not signed by the high court judge who issued it. Justice Lefoy decided that Gerry was in contempt of court despite this.
Source: Open Your Mind Internet Radio. Listen to move interviews here.
Today’s interview is something of a cross between an audio and a video article. Vin at TNS Radio and Ben Gilroy talk their way through a recent interview with Ben on TV3. Vin plays and pauses the video as he and Ben discuss what is going on throughout.
The interview in question is in regards to the taking back of a bar outside of Cork from the receivers who had entered the bar, gave the owner a few hundred euro, and for all intents and purposes simply told her to “get out”. As per usual, no tri-party agreement was furnished to or by the receiver, and the court order under which the receivers were operating was not signed by a high court judge. The incident with Mr. Gerry Burns goes into these issues in more detail.
Vin and Ben Gilroy discuss the TV3 Interview:
Ben points out that between the two parties involved in the transaction (the bank and the customer), the only party who has broken any laws would be the banks. They broke serious liquidity laws which carry punishments of five years. How many bankers have you heard of being removed from their businesses or dwellings as a result of these crimes? Under the constitution, “The Dwelling Of Every Citizen Is Inviolable And Shall Not Be Forcibly Entered Save In Accordance With Law”. As the bankers are the only ones who have broken the law, they are the only ones for whom their dwelling may be entered.
Today we join Ben Gilroy outside the business Stitch ‘n’ Fix owned by Mr. Gerry Burns in Navan. After several requests for meetings and documents from Mr. Burns to the banks were apparently ignored, receivers turned up on the premises, changed the locks, and denied Mr. Burns access to his business. Luckily he decided to contact People For Economic Justice, and Ben Gilroy informed Gerry that the receiver worked as an agent, not only for the bank, but for he, Gerry, as well.
Under Irish law, a person cannot have an agent forced upon them. This is due to the fact that when someone is acting as an agent on half of a person, that person, not the agent, is responsible for everything that agent does. The receiver also has what is called an “equitable duty of care” for both parties. We’ll discuss the specific event after the video.
Ben Gilroy, Gerry Burns, Fergus Lowe and Ms Justice Mary Laffoy
So in this case the receiver refused to detail whether he had or had not seen the tri-party agreement between the bank and Mr. Burns. If the receiver has not seen such a thing, then he has absolutely no basis to act against the debtor, and perhaps more importantly, if the bank does not have this agreement, then Mr. Burns would owe the bank absolutely nothing.
Notice also how the Garda in the video states plainly “this matter appears civil”. This is a basis for many of Ben Gilroy’s meetings with An Garda Siochana. As Gerry (or indeed any debtor) has broken no laws, the Gardai have absolutely no reason to even be present. In this specific case however, Ben Gilroy had shown that the receiver was in fact trespassing. As is almost a theme across the various People For Economic Justice videos, the only laws being broken are done on the part of the bank.
Perhaps the most important point raised in this video is the issue of signed orders. The receiver turned up with a court order, which granted him the power to receive the business. This order was not signed by the judge who issued it, but was in fact signed by the registrar, in black ink. If a court order is not signed in blue ink, but the judge that issued it, it is totally invalid, and grants no power what so ever. On top of this, if the receiver does not have a copy of the mortgage deed, and a copy of the tri-party agreement, then he has not acted on his duty of care, and is illegally trespassing in your business. Do not let them take your business without these three things.
As for the actions of the judge, Ms Justice Mary Laffoy, while in the commercial court itself, we will leave any conclusions on that matter to you the reader.