High-profile restaurateur Ronan Ryan is seeking to have €634,000 of his €1.6m debt written off under proposals which would see him keep the family home he shares with his wife, former Miss Ireland Pamela Flood.

The move is the latest in a series of cases where the courts have been asked to sign off on massive debt write-downs under personal insolvency legislation.

Please log in or register with Independent.ie for free access to this article.

Log In

New to Independent.ie? Create an account

If the proposed write-down is given court approval, the businessman has pledged to repay the remaining debt of close to €1m over the next 22 years. Under a proposed personal insolvency arrangement, Mr Ryan (49) would provide creditors with a lump sum payment of €80,000 and repay just €900,000 of his outstanding mortgage debt of €1.2m on the celebrity couple’s home in Clontarf, Dublin.

A number of other debts would also be significantly written down.

Mr Ryan’s representatives argue his creditors will fare much better under the proposed arrangement than if he is forced into bankruptcy. However, he faces an uphill battle to get the proposed debt deal across the line as it has been opposed by two of his main creditors, vulture fund Tanager and Bank of Ireland.

He will need a judge to approve the arrangement, but may not get the opportunity to make his case unless the High Court rules in his favour next month in an appeal against a court order allowing Tanager to repossess the family home.

If the arrangement is eventually approved, Mr Ryan would be 70 by the time his remaining debts are paid.

In an affidavit, he said he was seeking to pay his debts and that Tanager would get more under the arrangement than if the house was sold.

A copy of the proposed arrangement, put together by personal insolvency practitioner (PIP) James Green, of McCambridge Duffy, was filed in court last week.

Details of the arrangement were also outlined in court by Mr Ryan’s barrister Keith Farry.

Mr Ryan was a high-flying restaurateur and previously operated the popular Town Bar and Grill on Kildare Street in Dublin, while his wife presented television shows.

But a restaurant Mr Ryan opened in Sandyford was not successful and he got into financial difficulty around the time of the economic crash.

In court filings, he detailed how he entered an “assisted sale” agreement with lender Bank of Scotland (Ireland) in 2012 under which he agreed to the sale of their home and did not have to make any further mortgage repayments.

However, a number of proposed sales fell through for a variety of reasons. In 2014, Mr Ryan’s mortgage debt was purchased by Tanager.

Earlier this year, Mr Ryan agreed to a settlement in which he consented to the vulture fund getting possession of the house at Mount Prospect Avenue, which is valued at €860,000.

The couple, who have four children, had been due to vacate the property by July 9. But Mr Ryan, who now has a catering business called Counter Culture with his wife, later had a change of heart and instituted last-minute personal insolvency proceedings.

In an affidavit, he also said his financial position had materially improved in 2019.

“I am now in a position to pay and I have a good and steady income. I do not want to, and did not want to, at the time of the settlement, surrender my home,” he said.

Mr Ryan secured a protective certificate in June, which was to give him 70 days breathing space to make proposals to creditors.

However, Judge Jacqueline Linnane, in the Circuit Court, later granted Tanager leave to execute the possession order after hearing Mr Ryan did not inform his PIP that the possession order was already in place.

An appeal against that decision was heard in the High Court earlier this week and a ruling is expected on October 7.

The order had been stayed until then.

The court heard Mr Ryan apologised unreservedly for failing to mention the possession order when applying for the protective certificate.

Tanager opposed the appeal, arguing it would be prejudiced by any further delay in taking possession of the property.

The fund’s counsel, Rudi Neuman, also said the personal insolvency system would fall apart if people did not face consequences for non-disclosure.

However, Mr Ryan’s counsel Keith Farry told the court the existence of the possession order would not have affected his client’s eligibility for insolvency protection.

He also said Tanager’s policy was that it did not write down debt and allow debtors to stay in their principal private residence.

He said the vulture fund’s strategy was to buy loans cheaply and to quickly sell the underlying asset.

“Personal insolvency is exactly the opposite of what they want,” Mr Farry said.

The courts have approved a number of large debt write-offs in personal insolvency cases in recent times.

Continued from Page 1

Source: Read Full Article