10th Parliament· 154 sittings on record · 30,475 speeches · latest 10 June 2026

The Hon. Ravi Karunanayake

New Democratic Front· National List· 6 August 2025 ·Oral question: Oral Question (Standing Order 27(2)): Review of Policies in the Leasing Sector

Public FinanceLaw & OrderJustice & Human Rights
AI summary generated by gpt-5.5

Hon. Ravi Karunanayake, raising a matter under Standing Order 27(2), called for urgent reform of the leasing industry, arguing that current recovery practices by licensed finance companies are overly institution-focused and insufficiently accountable to borrowers facing genuine hardship. He questioned the basis for permitting asset seizure after 90–150 days of arrears without assessing intent or circumstances, and sought data on repossessions, borrower protections, legal remedies, and Central Bank interventions. He proposed a more humane tiered framework, including mandatory restructuring, grace periods, mediation before seizure, and measures to address market dominance or regulatory asymmetry in the leasing sector.

Verbatim record (translated)

Machine-translated from Sinhala / Tamil / English

¶ 01 Mr. Speaker, under Standing Order 27(2), I rise to draw the attention of this august House to the urgent need for reform in the leasing industry, which has become highly protected and lopsided, with minimal accountability and favoritism towards institutions over citizens.

¶ 02 Leasing companies, particularly Central Bank-licensed finance companies, resort to forceful recovery of leased assets, even where 60–70% of dues have been paid, often without transparency or fairness. Current regulations permit seizure after 90–150 days of delay without considering whether default is willful or due to hardship such as job loss, illness or macroeconomic shocks. When the country went bankrupt and interest rose from about 10% to 30%, this also worsened matters.

¶ 03 This erodes trust, increases poverty and undermines the Central Bank’s role. We need a humane, tiered framework distinguishing bad-faith defaulters from those in genuine difficulty.

¶ 04 Sometimes vehicles are seized on the road or people are thrown out of their homes. I raise this on humanitarian grounds.

¶ 05 Accordingly, I seek urgent responses and policy clarity on: 1. What protections exist under Central Bank directions for borrowers in involuntary default? 2. Data on annual repossessions, and how many involve hardship rather than willful non-payment? 3. Why is seizure permitted after 90–120 days without assessing hardship, intent or willingness to negotiate? 4. Will guidelines be introduced to differentiate willful defaulters and mandate restructuring/settlement efforts before seizure? 5. Has a mandatory grace-period mechanism or mediation been considered prior to seizure, especially for MSMEs? 6. What legal remedies exist for unfair repossessions? Has the Central Bank intervened where institutions acted with undue haste or without restructuring options? 7. Market breakdown of leasing contracts by institution; do large finance companies dominate due to regulatory asymmetry or monopolistic practices? If so, what steps will ensure a level playing field for consumers?

¶ 06 Thank you.

Provenance

Source
Hansard, Wednesday, 6 August 2025 ·No. 1755159820030645 ·English daily/uncorrected Hansard
Page · column
not yet extracted — page/column anchors are not in the current dataset; the source PDF is the citable location.
Permalink
/lk/speeches/17105

Cite as: The Hon. Ravi Karunanayake. 10th Parliament, Parliament of Sri Lanka. Hansard, 6 August 2025. No. 1755159820030645. Politick, https://staging.politick.io/lk/speeches/17105