In the attempt to extricate himself from the National Asset Management Agency (Nama), a state institution established in the aftermath of the 2008 worldwide banking crisis to rescue local banks by assuming distressed property loans, Derek Quinlan had a potential offer to present to the agency in June 2017. The trajectory for the month wasn’t off to a promising start with regards to his association with Nama.
Quinlan, a renowned property investor during the expansion period and Nama’s largest debtor, had evidently not revealed his complete involvement in counselling a group on a potential bid to acquire Finance Tower in Brussels for approximately €1.3 billion. The disclosure of his participation in the negotiations in Brussels became public on June 2nd, 2017 via an article in the EuroProperty trade periodical.
It would be an appealing opportunity for Quinlan, the financially ravaged erstwhile magnate, to make a significant resurgence. Following the media revelation, Frank Lynch, the Nama officer overseeing the Quinlan case, immediately asked for clarifications from the property investor. Quinlan issued an electronic response to this query on June 12th.
“Please understand that my wife, Siobhan, and I have a young family to sustain and require a stable source of revenue after years of turbulence,” Quinlan, 69 at the time, penned. He stated that his wife had launched Quinlan Real Estate (QRE) in London. She financed this venture, yet to turn a profit or bring in significant fees, utilizing her personal assets. Quinlan disclosed that he was offering unpaid consultancy to QRE, owning no share in the enterprise.
In the event of a successful Brussels transaction, he explained, QRE anticipated receiving a reward. If this transpired, it would facilitate covering QRE’s initial expenditures, assist him in repaying a loan intended for a prospective transaction to free himself from Nama, and enable his wife to adequately provide for the family’s impending living expenditures. Quinlan emphasised that any income generated would be exclusively at her judgment and not his. It was evident that Nama had a vested interest in Quinlan’s income prospects.
The narrative shifted to the subject nearest to his soul – persuading Nama to grant him liberation. He would later express, from 2009 onwards, that Nama had “consumed his existence”. Its sway was prominently stamped on the majority of his ensuing activities, such as his involvement in the Coroin case alongside the Barclay siblings and Paddy McKillen regarding authority over the Maybourne hotel group.
Quinlan was desperate to escape from the grips of Nama. He had managed to return €3.1 billion of the €3.5 billion debt he had accumulated, but Nama depleted his collateral assets to sell off. This left him with an outstanding balance of €403 million, on his Nama loans. He had the task of persuading it to negotiate a settlement that would liberate him from his debt obligations.
Riaz Valani, an American magnate who gained his fortune via Juul vapes, had suggested bestowing Quinlan €1.25 million to obtain his buyout. This offer was also extended to his relatives, his daughter and son-in-law, Caroline and Matt Brooks. Valani’s aspiration was that Quinlan’s liberation from Nama’s grasp could potentially stabilise Glenn Maud’s condition, a previous collaborator of Quinlan’s, with whom Valani was aligned. Quinlan and Maud’s stakes were tangled in intricate historical transactions, notably the Santander establishment in Madrid.
In his letter to Lynch at Nama, Quinlan wrote, “I have shown my cooperation with Nama and chosen, on principle, to anticipate future prospects instead of dwelling on the past. I humbly request Nama to do the same with an official exit agreement, given my proposed payment of €1.25 million funded through a loan from [Valani].”
Quinlan had previously hinted to Nama about Valani’s potential offer, hence the media exposure of the Brussels’ potential deal, which attracted Nama’s attention, proved to be ill-timed.
“While I recognise that media coverage [and its timing] can be detrimental, it shouldn’t detract from this being a favourable business proposition, considering the harsh reality of alternative options,” Quinlan articulates.
He recognised that his €1.25 million payment barely dented his outstanding balance, but insisted it was a “sound business return for Nama” given the absence of any remaining assets that could safeguard any further debt. He argued, “This settlement reflects funds that Nama otherwise wouldn’t have been able to secure. The alternative is to keep me in a stagnant state, which doesn’t generate any business return.”
Quinlan fervently made his case to his Nama contact, asserting that he wasn’t in denial about his situation, but rather, was attempting to confront it. He said, “I didn’t disregard Nama by restructuring my situation when the last of my assets were liquidated, leaving only unsecured debt. On the contrary, I appreciate my departure and committed to matching Nama’s requirements for such exit.”
He pleaded one last time before ending, stating that closing his case with Nama as he neared his 70th birthday in November was a matter of urgency for him.
This was, however, not to be the case. By the subsequent February, no resolution had been arrived at. Lynch, on behalf of Nama, addressed Quinlan’s then-lawyers at Eversheds, citing “numerous irregularities and inconsistencies” in the details supplied by Quinlan as reasons for deferring any agreement. Nama had also requested a formal statement of accounts from Quinlan’s wife, Siobhan, due to the apparent financial ties with her husband.
Following an asset investigation, Nama discovered that Siobhan Quinlan held the key beneficial ownership of Isle of Man companies with €5 million at their disposal. The Quinlans were residing in Monaco at the time and Nama highlighted that similar apartments in their complex were being leased at €30,000 a month, despite Quinlan’s substantial insolvency.
Nama expressed the need for a “clearer perspective on her financial standing.” Unless they were satisfied with the responses concerning the state of Siobhan Quinlan’s finances, there would be no exit deal for Derek Quinlan.
By the end of the year, there had been no progress. Quinlan was now employing famous media lawyer Paul Tweed to negotiate with Nama, recounting later that Nama wouldn’t even entertain a meeting with Tweed.
In a letter dated 21st December 2018, Nama expressed to Tweed its dissatisfaction for not receiving answers to inquiries posed in February to Eversheds regarding Siobhan Quinlan’s economic situation. Notably, Quinlan’s creditors planned to serve him a payment demand notice, a prelude to insolvency, on that very same day. It was evident that Quinlan’s financial woes were escalating.
Quinlan, by November 2022, spent four gruelling years fending off the insolvency application spearheaded by one of his creditors – Robert Tchenguiz’s Edgeworth Capital. Unexpectedly, following a judge’s disclosure ruling, Quinlan decided to quit his resistance and requested the judge declare him bankrupt. Interestingly, rather than blaming the creditor he’d been at odds with, Quinlan pinned his decision on Nama.
Lamenting to the insolvency court, Quinlan claimed Nama sold off his assets at an unfavourable market time. Per his estimations, postponing the sale could have brought in hundreds of millions more, potentially settling his debts and leaving a notable surplus.
Quinlan disclosed that he had repaid a staggering €3.8 billion to 20 institutions; €3.1 billion of this was repayment of the €3.5 billion debt he had owed to Nama. Despite these repayments, Quinlan hit a dead-end criticising Nama for its refusal to negotiate an exit deal.
Derek Quinlan expressed his sentiments, “The very fact that Nama has shown me no mercy has constrained me from restarting my professional pursuits in the fields of finance and property. My capacity to make a living has been crushed. Considering the remaining debt (€403 million) owed to Nama, my 75 years of age, and my unsatisfactory health status, I have little hope of completely repaying Nama.”
Quinlan recognises the uncompromising attitude of Nama, which in his view will keep him under its shadow for the remainder of his life unless he comes to terms with his insolvency. According to Quinlan, the only way he could ever return to his former profession in finance and property is by casting off Nama’s chains, and this could only be achieved, albeit ironically, through bankruptcy.
Clearly, Quinlan’s declaration was quite a distressing one for him to utter at that time in his life. His grievances towards Nama grew more evident the next year as he interacted with his bankruptcy trustees at Begbies Traynor firm. By October 2023, in his conversation with Jacob Beake, one of the trustees, it came to light that back in 2015 when Quinlan was under the scrutiny of the Oireachtas banking inquiry, he was directed by Nama not to express any negativity.
Quinlan hinted at his belief that Nama denied any deal to him, seemingly due to his previous involvement as a tax inspector. The previous chair of Nama was ex-Revenue chairman, Frank Daly. Quinlan’s view was that Daly was disgruntled that a former tax inspector like himself ended up as a bankrupted property investor saddled with a debt of €403 million to the taxpayers. Quinlan declared that while others under Nama were granted significant deductions on their debts, he unfortunately was not. There was visible discontent between him and Nama following his bankruptcy.
Later, when trustee Beake challenged Quinlan’s bankruptcy release alleging non-cooperation and refusal to offer information, Beake referred to Quinlan’s interactions with Nama in the court. Beake had analysed Quinlan’s Nama files and concluded that Nama was discontent as full transparency had not been provided by Quinlan. That was cited as the reason for the lack of a deal. Quinlan was associated with a list of properties that Nama had asked for information on in 2015 but had never received a satisfying response. Among these were apartments above the Pearse Street fire station in Dublin which Quinlan claimed had been sold around the late 1990s. Properties on Molesworth Street in the city centre, which Quinlan asserted were “sold long back”, were also mentioned. Nama also didn’t receive definitive responses regarding Quinlan’s interest in Hainault House near Tallaght on Belgard Road, sold off in 2014. Quinlan pleaded ignorance about this. They further discussed several other properties.
Beake disclosed to the judiciary that the businessman’s feedback to his inquiries about his Nama properties was mere tokenistic. Quinlan found himself unable to extricate from Nama for several years, and similarly, even after 14 years of involvement with the agency, he remained entangled in UK bankruptcy.