First Active's annual general meeting was a stormy affair although the sight of Anglo Irish Bank edging closer offered some hope that the life-boats were finally being lowered. Chairman and acting chief executive, Mr John Callaghan, spent two and a half hours trying to calm up to 800 shareholders. Ahead of the meeting, Mr Callaghan and his colleagues were aware they could be facing a rough ride, and as time elapsed it became increasingly obvious that most shareholders were firmly behind the disaffected.

Mr Callaghan told shareholders things are never as bad as they seem. The bank was doing well. It had taken decisive and swift action to reduce its costs in the face of intense competition and was now poised to head in a new direction with a rival financial institution.

His statement proved far from reassuring with shareholders quickly rising to their feet to have their say.

Today FM presenter Mr Eamon Dunphy together with Sunday Independent business editor Senator Shane Ross had orchestrated a campaign to encourage shareholders to use their votes to dislodge members of the board which helped to swell the numbers in attendance.

Senator Ross led the charge against the board, castigating Mr Callaghan and his fellow directors for presiding over an abysmal stock market performance since flotation.

First Active's directors were grossly overpaid for what they had delivered and should not be allowed anywhere near the board of a new institution formed with Anglo Irish Bank, he stated. Indeed their performance had been so poor, they should at least refuse to accept their salaries, he told the meeting.

"Everyone here has lost money. People would be much better off being looked after by the directors of Anglo. "Investors won't touch First Active shares because the bank had inadequate people on its board and management teams, and now we are going with our hands up to another bank saying `please take us over'. It is not acceptable that First Active directors should become directors of a new entity."

Mr Callaghan fundamentally disagreed with these comments and once more sought to keep everyone calm. "It really is difficult to listen to this when so much is inaccurate. The image being created is far from the reality. We accept we have got to get our image more in line with reality and we will."

Still shareholders waved frantically from their seats. Everyone wanted a microphone.

"It's like listening to the crew on the Titanic complaining about the iceberg when they hit it" one shareholder suggested. "You are doing a wonderful job of putting everyone into the lifeboats." Another burning issue was the circumstances surrounding the departure of chief executive, Mr John Smyth, earlier this year with a £788,000 (€1 million) handshake.

"Did he jump or was he pushed?" one shareholder finally asked.

Mr Callaghan said it became apparent "it was not right for Mr Smyth to continue as chief executive." At that point he said the board sat down with him and "sorted the matter out".

The severance payment was in line with the bank's contractual obligations to Mr Smyth, who had been with the company for more than 30 years, he explained.

But it was the vote for the re-election of three directors, Mr Callaghan, Mr Richard Milliken and Prof Noel Whelan, which fuelled tensions. While Mr Callaghan had millions of proxies from investors to win this vote, it was his refusal to count the votes at the meeting that incensed shareholders.

Mr Callaghan's re-election appeared to have been won based on a show of hands but the votes for his two colleagues, which were deemed to have been carried, were hotly disputed. Mr Callaghan refused to count the votes and quickly moved to finalise the business of the meeting in the face of uproar.

Several shareholders walked out at this point. "Why did we waste our time coming here?" one man shouted while another described the episode as a "farce", telling investors to sell their shares. "Who will buy them?" someone replied.