Mr Charles Haughey told the tribunal that in 1979 AIB was piling on "very, very penal rates of interest" which he described as "crucifying", while at that time they were also criticising him for having excessive drawings.
Mr John Coughlan SC, for the tribunal, referred to a memo dated February 19th, 1979, which was an account by bank manager Mr Michael Phelan of a meeting with Mr Haughey.
The memo stated that Mr Haughey had referred to the high interest charges, which were £196,000 at that stage and included a surcharge of £40,000.
Mr Phelan had noted he was confident there would be agreement to scrubbing the surcharge.
Mr Coughlan asked if Mr Haughey remembered the meeting. Mr Haughey replied he did not remember it in any detail.
Mr Haughey said: "For the first time in this memorandum, Mr Phelan seems to be putting forward a view about the interest and he admits that there was a surcharge of £40,000 which is a staggering figure, and somewhere else here in this documentation it emerges that the rate of interest being charged at that time was 21 per cent."
Mr Coughlan said the interest charges of £196,000 seemed to be a rolled-up interest, and related to the fact that half-yearly interest payments which he had undertaken to pay over the previous two years had not been paid. Perhaps the surcharge related to that.
"The rates of interest were high enough at 16 or 18.5 per cent but then to add a surcharge on top of that seems extraordinary to me . . . particularly as I was never told anything about it," Mr Haughey stated.
Mr Coughlan asked if that in any way affected his view of the accuracy of the record of the meeting.
Mr Haughey replied: "No, not really, it's the level of interest, the crucifying aspects of it.
"I was being criticised by the bank for having excessive drawings but at the same time they were piling on very, very penal rates of interest." Mr Coughlan said they were probably the rates of interest that applied to most customers of the bank at the time.