I also welcome this. It is very important. Like others, I have spoken to people who have been treated absolutely abysmally by some of these credit servicing firms. These include people who have been harassed or who have tried to get out of the situation and tried to sell. On contacting the firms to say they want to sell, they have been told that if they want to talk about that, then they will be charged a fee. They have not had recourse. These people, who have been trapped in these situations - that is their language - have over the past 15 years effectively paid off the vast bulk of the value of their mortgages in real terms, but because of the punitive interest rates they have been subjected to, they are still trapped with very heavy mortgage payments that they cannot get out of. They cannot see a route out of this for themselves at any point. I have been contacted by people in situations where they have been looking to sell but have had grave difficulties getting back possession of deeds from the credit servicing firm. These are all people whose mortgages were sold on for values of maybe 30% or 40%, yet they are shown no co-operation or leniency and, in fact, are treated in a very punitive way. This has a huge impact on their mental health and wellbeing. This legislation allows people some recourse and it is welcome that the loophole is being shut, but much more needs to be done on the entire area to help people in situations who have been really aggressively pursued. There are media reports today that another ECB rate cut is due. One of these credit servicing firms has made no cuts to its rates at all over five ECB rate cuts. They are charging people punitive rates that are grossly unfair and they never signed up for. That also has to be addressed.

Sentiment score: -0.11

I ask the Minister of State to reconsider this. The case for this amendment has been made strongly. Yesterday in the audiovisual room, Members of the House from Opposition and Government parties heard directly from women who are survivors of domestic abuse and have gone through horrendous situations. They spoke passionately about the lack of support for them and the lack of refuge places that have trapped survivors of domestic violence in horrendous situations. Their clear message to all of us as legislators is that we need to do everything we can to support them in every possible way and that they are not consistently getting the support they need and deserve. All this amendment seeks to do is allow some level of flexibility and discretion so that people, usually women in those situations, would have recourse. I cannot possibly see how it is defensible not to allow some level of flexibility and discretion here so that when people are in those terrible situations and need recourse, at least that can be considered. Every Member of this House, across parties, in opposition and government, would surely support what is being attempted to be achieved in this amendment. I ask the Minister of State to reconsider.

Sentiment score: 0.07

I endorse Deputy Nash's request for that commitment from the Minister of State that he will look at this and work on getting a solution to it. It would be very welcome if he would do that. I will make a point to him. I accept his bona fides in what he is saying about the Supreme Court ruling on the Zalewski case. What is pertinent in that ruling is that, because of the quasi-judicial role involved here, there must be cognisance of the need to follow fair procedures. Deputies Nash and Doherty, the Minister of State and I all recognise that accommodating those who have been put in horrendous situations and their access to recourse must be at the heart of fair procedure. There is nothing fair in a procedure that excludes them from recourse. I bring that point strongly to the Minister of State's attention. With regard to the Zalewski case, the access to fair procedure he has talked about has to apply to people who have been in abusive relationships, who have been subject to coercive control or who have suffered horrendous abuse in their relationships. There must be fair procedure for them. Any reading of the Zalewski case ruling and the reference to fair procedure would surely acknowledge that access to fair procedure must apply to people in those situations.

Sentiment score: 0.19