• McHale Muldoon Solicitors are delighted to report that the High Court today handed down Judgment in the matter of Mr Larry Untoy and GE Money [Record No. 2014/1871 SS] in favour of a consumer against a large financial institution. Michael Muldoon and Kieran Friel instructed Counsel Stephen Moran BL.

• Mr Untoy’s case was dismissed by the District Court on 01st May 2014. Mr Untoy showed huge courage and determination to launch an appeal of the poor Judgment. This was in spite of GE’s tactics is using its financial muscle in the hope that Mr Untoy would simply go away. In similar cases, GE have been threatening to land Plaintiffs (with valid complaints) with huge legal costs bills if a case was lost. Thankfully, Mr Untoy overcame this threat and pushed on with his case and won.

• In this particular case, it was held by Ms Justice Iseult O’Malley that GE money were answerable as an inter-company structure within GE (discovered by McHale Muldoon) which was not disclosed. This failing along with the failure to disclose the level of commission earned by GE in the sale of the PPI was held to be misleading.

• Judge O’Malley found as follows: “I therefore consider that the learned trial judge fell into error in holding that the conduct of the defendant was “beyond reproach” having regard to the admitted failure to comply with a mandatory requirement to disclose the relationship between the companies. I further consider that he erred in holding the commission was not relevant to the case.”

• Michael Muldoon, who is the Principal in McHale Muldoon commented as follows; “we are delighted with the Judgment and I am delighted for Larry. He has shown great courage and determination to push this case. The Judgment is excellent as it will open the door to other costumers to get redress for missold PPI in a similar way to what has happen in the UK”. To date, in Ireland victims of PPI misselling have been treated appallingly by the banks and lenders. This Judgment also calls into question the Central Bank review into the misselling which in my view has simply failed. Finally,this is the first occasion that the Superior Courts in this jurisdiction have delivered a written decision on the misselling of complex insurance products to consumers which is significant and will be helpful to the lower courts and the industry.