A LINE IN an internal bank document suggests senior management was keeping information “off the official record”, former solicitor Michael Lynn’s defence counsel has told his multi-million-euro theft trial.

Lynn (55), of Millbrook Court, Red Cross, Co Wicklow is on trial accused of the theft of around €27 million from seven financial institutions. He has pleaded not  guilty to 21 counts of theft in Dublin between October 23, 2006 and April 20, 2007.

It is the prosecution’s case that Lynn obtained multiple mortgages on the same properties, in a situation where banks were unaware that other institutions were also providing finance.

The financial institutions involved are Bank of Ireland, National Irish Bank (later known as Danske Bank), Irish Life and Permanent, Ulster Bank, ACC Bank, Bank of Scotland Ireland and Irish Nationwide Building Society.

Noel McCole, a retired business banking manager for National Irish Bank, continued his cross-examination before the jury this afternoon.

Paul Comiskey O’Keeffe BL, defending, showed the court internal National Irish Bank documents that the jury heard were obtained through the Data Protection Compliance Office earlier this year.

One document contained the phrase ‘solicitors undertaking / 4 properties’, the court heard.

“This is consistent with what Lynn says was the position – that these were undertaking-only mortgages,” Comiskey-O’Keeffe said.

“I never heard of an undertaking-only mortgage in 43 years in the bank,” McCole replied.

Comiskey O’Keeffe said McCole had not been entirely “frank” with the court. He put it to McCole that he had been “selective” with the documents he provided in relation to the case.

McCole denied this, telling the court: “I can honestly say I gave whatever information in the file which was deemed to be relevant to this case and put them together.”

The jury was shown a National Irish Bank document entitled ‘General Systems Enquiry Printouts’ which Comiskey O’Keeffe said he got shortly before the jury was sworn in last week.

Going through parts of the document, the jury was shown a note which said ‘at the request of steering committee to keep information off portal’. The court heard the steering committee was made up of “very senior individuals” in the bank.

Comiskey O’Keefe put it to McCole that this suggested that senior management was keeping information “off the official record”.

“I was not aware of any information kept off the portal,” McCole said.

Under re-examination from Karl Finnegan SC, prosecuting, McCole said it was “never the case” that the loans from NIB to Michael Lynn were for the purchase of properties abroad.

Earlier today, John Kinsella, partner of Kinsella Mitchell & Associates gave evidence. He told John Berry BL, prosecuting, that he is a partner at Kinsella Mitchell & Associates, an accountant, tax consultant and auditing firm.

Kinsella said his partner at the firm was a friend of Lynn and the firm became independent auditors for Michael Lynn and Co Solicitors from 2003.

The jury was shown a statement of affairs of Michael Lynn dated November 2006. Kinsella told the court that the company stamp on the document was similar, but it was not the Kinsella Mitchell & Associates company stamp.

He said the signature did not come from his company and that the last statement of affairs his company carried out for Michael Lynn was in July 2006.

“Is it fair to characterise this document as a forgery?” Berry said.

“Yes,” Mitchell replied.

The court was also shown two versions of Michael Lynn and Solicitor draft accounts for the financial year end of September 2006. Kinsella said one version was not prepared by his company. He agreed the other version was carried out by his office.

Berry told the court that in the draft accounts prepared by Kinsella Mitchell, Lynn’s income for 2006 was placed at approximately €646,000. The other document, which the court heard was provided to National Irish Bank, stated sales of €1.2 million for the same year.

Berry put it to the witness that the figure of €1.2 million was “186 per cent greater than the income you reported as being attributed to Lynn”. Kinsella agreed with Berry that it was “nearly twice as much”.

Berry said the “genuine document” showed a profit for the same year as being €183,065. In the other version, he said the income was listed as being €449,618, or 246 per cent greater than the profit Mitchell Kinsella reported for the same year.

“It completely overstates the profit associated with Michael Lynn & Co Solicitors,” Berry said.

Further documents were shown to the court, which the prosecution said did not come from Kinsella Mitchell’s office and were “forgeries”. Kinsella agreed.

The court heard Kinsella will be giving evidence at a later stage and the defence will cross-examine him when is examination is complete.

Solicitor Stephen Mahon also gave evidence today. He told Berry of an instance in 2007 when his client sued Michael Lynn for interest accrued due to his failure to complete a property sale within the agreed timeframe.

Mahon said he was an apprentice solicitor in 2006 when his clients agreed to sell a Dublin 2 property to Lynn. The court heard the sale was not completed within the agreed timeframe and Lynn was issued a 28-day warning to complete the sale in April 2007.

The sale was not completed within that time period either, the court heard. In July 2007, Mahon said he received a letter from Lynn requesting that the sale name be changed from Michael Lynn to Property Capel.

Mahon agreed with Berry that the name change was “not appropriate where the contract said Michael Lynn”.

Berry told the court that at that time, Lynn had drawn down finance from two financial institutions – Bank of Ireland mortgages and National Irish Bank.

“Would that surprise you?” he asked Mahon.

“Yes,” Mahon replied.

Mahon said he received the outstanding balance for the property in August 2007 and the sale was completed in September 2007.

Mahon said that because of the delay, his clients had a right to interest owed of €18,000 and they started legal proceedings against Lynn. They got a court order in relation to that but ultimately decided not to pursue it, the court heard.

The trial continues before Judge Martin Nolan and a jury.