TD says scheme was `perfectly legitimate'

An offshore investment scheme at the centre of a libel action by ail TD, Ms Beverley CooperFlynn against RTE was a "perfectly…

An offshore investment scheme at the centre of a libel action by ail TD, Ms Beverley CooperFlynn against RTE was a "perfectly legitimate product", the Co Mayo TD has told the High Court. She said it was a good investment option.

The CMI Personal Portfolio Scheme, one of several products including 47 personal portfolios which she sold while working with National Irish Bank for six years, was a legitimate and tax-efficient way of investing money, she added. The average investment was £100,000 to £150,000 and the scheme was for "cautious" investors.

Ms Cooper-Flynn was giving evidence on the second day of the action in which she is also suing RTE journalist Mr Charlie Bird and a retired farmer, Mr James Howard, Drogheda, Co Louth. She claims she was libel led in broadcasts shown on RTE in June and July 1998 and that words used in the programmes meant she had instigated an investment scheme the object of which was tax evasion. The defence denies libel.

Ms Cooper-Flynn said she was born in Castlebar and was a daughter of the former EC Commissioner, Mr Padraig Flynn. She had a commerce degree from UCD. She joined NIB in 1989. Her area included 15 branches. Only when invited by branch managers would she meet specified customers. Occasionally she would meet customers in their homes if there was a specific request.

READ MORE

She would explain the various options to the customer. "I was not a tax adviser and I had no expertise in the area of tax," she added. "It was always explained to individuals that I was not a tax adviser and neither was I a legal adviser."

Sometimes the issue of tax did come up, she said, because a lot of investment products would have tax features. Ms Cooper-Flynn told her counsel, Mr Hugh Mohan SC, that Clerical and Medical International (CMI) offered a range of investment products and life insurance.

She became aware of the CMI Personal Portfolio at the end of 1991. In the early stages she did not sell that product because there were other options. She sold the first CMI Personal Portfolio in 1992 and sold 47 over the next five years. Each year she sold on average 300 to 350 policies across all insurance companies, and sold only eight or nine CMI portfolios a year.

The personal portfolio continued throughout a person's life. It ceased at death unless it was cashed in earlier. It was a life investment geared towards the wealthier investor.

The minimum lump sum one could invest in the personal portfolio was £50,000. The client, along with NIB, would decide how to invest the monies. Because it was an offshore life company, one of the benefits of the fund was that investments grew tax-free through the person's life. On death, there was a mechanism whereby one could place the money in trust. This was done by signing over control of the investment to trustees who looked after it throughout its life. There would be changes in line with instructions from the investor.

Throughout the duration of these policies she would meet customers and regularly recommend changes. A person could also take an income from the investment. Ideally, however, it was geared towards investors aged 40 and over, who were focusing on security.

Ms Cooper-Flynn said the tax features of the portfolio were always explained to a customer. The tax position depended on the tax jurisdiction, and CMI documentation advised investors to consult their tax advisers. Of the 47 individuals she had dealt with in relation to CMI portfolios, 10 had lived outside the jurisdiction. The focus of her job was to give investment advice, she said. It never occurred to her to ask clients where their money had been invested or whether they had paid tax. That was not her job or her role.

Asked by Mr Mohan if she had been aware of Mr Howard before the broadcasts, she said she had not. He was a typical CMI investor. She understood the procedure had been completed with him. There was no trace of her handwriting anywhere on his file. There was no reference to her on Mr Howard's file and she did not meet Mr Howard in relation to CMI Personal Portfolios or at all.