[ad_1]
The High Court has handed down judgments for a total of 675,000 euros against the widow of lawyer Marcus F. Daly senior SC derived from a loan that was granted to him and the guarantee of another loan.
Bank of Ireland Mortgage Bank (BOIMB) filed a proceeding against Ethel Daly, as the personal representative of her late husband’s estate, for failure to repay the loan and the guarantees granted to her.
Mr. Daly, of Dalkey Avenue, Dalkey, Dublin, was 78 when he died.
The guarantee, signed in 2010 and limited to 300,000 euros, was related to a loan of 1.65 million euros to his son Marcus junior and his daughter-in-law Patricia.
Mr Daly snr also obtained a loan from BOIMB in 2009 for € 350,000 which was secured by a mortgage on a property in Kirwan’s Lane, Galway. Interest-only repayments were held on this loan until his death and were extended after the five-year interest-only period expired.
BOIMB demanded a refund of the guarantee in 2014, but no payment was made and procedures were issued. When he died in July 2016, his widow was replaced as a defendant for being the executor of his estate.
After his death, the bank also demanded the repayment of the loan of 350,000 euros, but it was not possible. Proceedings were also issued in that case in 2018 against the estate with Ms. Daly as the defendant and personal legal representative of the estate.
In December 2018, the bank requested a ruling in both cases.
Ms. Daly objected to the request.
He argued that in connection with the € 350,000 loan, it was made to be loaned to his son to reduce the son’s debt.
The 350,000-euro loan offer to Marcus Jr. had a number of preconditions, one of which was debt reduction, he argued. The bank subsequently required Marcus senior to sign the € 300,000 guarantee as a condition of the € 300,000 loan to Marcus jnr, he said.
That meant the bank was “improving its own financial position to the tune of 650,000 euros” at the expense of its loyal customer, her late husband, she said.
It was a requirement of these facilities that certain preconditions be met in relation to his son’s indebtedness, he said.
In reality, her husband would not have helped their son by paying the bank 650,000 euros without a significant change in his son’s financial situation, she said. This was because her husband was not going to be able to repay the loan that was advanced to refinance the lines of credit that Marcus snr obtained in 2006.
She believed the bank was fully aware of that and “took advantage of Marcus senior’s relationship with his son,” she said.
The bank denied his claims.
In his sentencing Thursday, Judge Mark Heslin said Ms. Daly’s defense of both claims “was not credible” and that she had made no defense.
His opposition to the bank’s claims can “be described as mere, or naked, claims that are not supported at all by evidence and fatally undermined by facts that are not in dispute.”
It was not controversial to say that Marcus Sr. agreed to provide the guarantee out of a desire to support his son and daughter-in-law and in doing so was aware that he was taking a risk, the judge said.
The bank was entitled to a judgment of 302,552 euros in relation to the loan and 373,213 euros in relation to the guarantee, he said.
[ad_2]