The High Court yesterday dismissed an appeal he and his wife Nina brought against a Nama company’s legal proceedings which led to the possession of the house on Aug 11 last.
The National Asset Loan Management Ltd (NALM) company obtained the repossession order arising from Mr McFeely defaulting on a €9.5m mortgage taken out in 2005. Mr McFeely’s company Coalport developed the Priory Hall complex in Donaghmede, which was closed last year by order of the High Court due to fire safety concerns.
Mr Justice John Hedigan said there was no basis for the McFeelys’ appeal against a circuit court ruling in which NALM obtained orders which ultimately led to the repossession.
The case appeared to be “open and shut”, the judge said. He was satisfied the judgment obtained over a €9.5m mortgage had been well-charged and there was nothing wrong with the circuit court order which the McFeelys had challenged.
“I appreciate the circumstances here are tragic and terrible but there isn’t anything I can do,” the judge said, dismissing the appeal.
Mr McFeely, who was in court, had previously complained his family were “living on the side of the street” as a result of lies having been told at a repossession hearing.
The McFeelys’ counsel James Salafia said his clients were unhappy they had been put out of their house after a court had been told by NALM there was alternative accommodation available to them. A conscientious investigation would have shown there was a lack of an alternative to putting people out on the street, he said.
Mr McFeely had also “complained bitterly” about the publicity given to the repossession.
However, Mr Salafia accepted that was all now “water under the bridge”.
It was also their case that because the original mortgage was taken out to pay off existing loans, the house was not liable as security.
Michael McDowell, counsel for NALM, said there was no basis for reversing the circuit court order. The orders obtained would not have been affected by Mr McFeely’s bankruptcy because the security he provided for the mortgage was not affected by that.
Mrs McFeely had also brought proceedings in her own right against the repossession and these matter had been fully heard and ruled on, he said.