10000 early payment

  • jeffwilkins
  • 21/10/08 14/11/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
Posted: Wed, 04/03/2009 - 13:26

I have just received a letter from IOM G. This is advising me that part of my application form for early repayment has been lost.

My wife and I have two accounts and are joint applicants on both so were expecting £40000. £10,000 * 4. As we have nearly £600,000 invested this was a small but welcome amount that would have helped in our pretty dire circumstances. We were shocked to learn that due to some very clever wording we are now not getting £10000 on each account but as seperate account holders no matter how many accounts we hold we still only receive £10000 per account holder.

The news just gets worse

3.22222
Your rating: None Average: 3.2 (9 votes)

Comment viewing options
Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

EPS2 Beware

  • srcoates
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 10/03/2009 - 20:18

Everyone should read the 'Legal Situation Update' http://www.ksfiomdepositors.org/public-page/legal-situation-update prior to making an application for this payment. In particular this section of it;

"The Early Payment Scheme

By the Early Payment Scheme the IoMT acquires the rights and in particular the votes of depositors to the value of what is paid. This means that unless agreement is reached to the contrary the IoMT will have significant influence over the voting on its proposed Scheme. We would hope that IoMT will agree not to exercise any right to vote, which will give rise to a conflict. We believe this to be an absolute pre-requisite for the Scheme to go forward."

This means that the IoM Government could be aquiring a bigger say/vote (depositor numbers and value) in whether the SoA is implemented. That is not to say the SoA is not the best course open to us, the DAG Strategy Team say we and our legal people do not yet have enough information and clarification to make a definitive judgement.

Their strategy could be a pre-emptive Trojan Horse---unless you absolutely need the cash perhaps it would be better not to make an application just yet---we need ALL the depositor numbers and values possible to give our legal team the most support on April 9th.


EPS 2 e-mailed application form

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Fri, 06/03/2009 - 18:35

As our postal system where we live is very slow, and as I saw that the EPS2 application forms had been mailed out this week, I e-mailed the IOMG asking for an on-line version and was sent by return a "personalised" pdf version. This may be of help to depositors with a similar problem.


fraude - good tip ref forms, thanks

  • icdbrazil
  • 10/10/08 30/11/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 06/03/2009 - 21:04

I´m in similar position ref post, grateful advise email address you contacted them at.


EPS2 e-mail address

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Fri, 06/03/2009 - 22:21

icdbrazil: Here is the address and the person who sent it to me. Maybe you are in Brasil - I am in Venezuela.

KSFDepositors(?)gov [dot] im

David Watterson
Officer IOM Treasury


Am I having a "senior moment"

  • go mann
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 06/03/2009 - 20:32

Am I having a "senior moment" here? It appears I have to fill in my details on Page 1 and Page 11 of the "Application Form" - do I then have to send back the whole bloody thing, including all the legalese in the Memorandum of Assignment? On top of the Account Holder Information Form?

How complicated can they make this?
And how can it all fit in the envelope provided?

Good job I have a copier.


Big papers

  • bobwin
  • 23/12/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 10/03/2009 - 15:14

use a steam iron to flatten them and force it in the envelope-they pay the postage

Bob


EPS 2 Clarification Required Guidance Notes Page 7

  • hopeful
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 05/03/2009 - 14:41

I am a depositor in the over 50k group and note that there is a clause on page 7 of the guidance notes accompying the early payment 2 application forms (received today) that states "The Treasury has the right to vote in relation to any restructuring or scheme of arrangement proposed by the Liquidator Provisional/Liquidator in proportion to the payments made to KSFIOM depositors".

I imagine that most of us would wish to apply for these early 10k payments which are expected to be made around the 19th March. However the above clause seems to suggest that the IOMG will automatically gain voting rights for the SOA for every depositor who applies for the 10k (max) loan under EPS 2.

If this is the case, the IOMG will benefit in their aim to get the SOA approved and its a crafty way of doing so. This is just another example of how badly the IOMG have treated us. Firstly they manipulate the winding up process and cause a significant delay with the various court adjournments and then they create a situation where they induce depositors to accept an early payment so that they can hopefully get their way and proceed with the SOA.

I think that this latest stroke by IOMG will certainly disadvantage those depositors who would prefer Liquidation over SOA when it comes to the vote.

I would welcome any feedback on this matter but in any event I guess that most depositors will apply for the 10k at this stage.


EPS 2

  • Dolobran
  • 14/01/09 14/07/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 05/03/2009 - 13:40

We have recieved our forms today for for EPS 2. Need some advice or thoughts from the rest of DAG. We are concerned that if we sign and send off the forms before the court case, will we be signing away our rights to further litigation. We are in in the £50K + group and would look to recover our savings 100% with the rest of DAG thro litigation.Makes our blood boil to think that we deposited our money in the Derbyshire BS and still paying taxes to Darling and his thieves in the Treasury.


EPS 2

  • Mrs E. Balding
  • 23/02/09 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 09/03/2009 - 17:11

Having read the Guidance Notes to the EPS2, I am unsure whether I should sign the form which has come in from the IOM G. Guidance notes says "By signing the Memorandum of Assignment, the account holder agrees to assign all his/her right title and interest but only in respect of the total amount received thru the two Early Payment Schemes". "As a result Treasury will 'stand in the shoes' of an account holder but only in respect of the rights relating to the amount of the payment from the original and EPS2. It follows that the assignment of rights can never exceed £10,000.: rights in relation to any remaining account balance will be entirely unaffected".

When I rang the IOM G offices, the information that I was given was that this was looked upon as a loan and the IOM G has athe right to recover the total amount of any payment directly from the Liquidator
Scheme Manager of the DCS or any other party (in the event of a restructuring, scheme of arrangement or purchase of KSIOM). It appears that these payments also allow the IOM G to vote in relation to any restructuring or scheme of arrangement proposed by the Liquidator Provisional/Liquidator in proportion to the payments made to KSFIOM depositors.

As a consequence of taking up the EPS2, that gives the IOM G voting rights to the value of the £10K in the decision making. What I do not know is whether this is a good idea since I do not know whether this would benefit the depositor or not.

Can any other depositor help me with this dilemma? Decisions or where to find further information on this subject.


Mrs. Balding, re applying for EPS2

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Mon, 09/03/2009 - 17:47

Every individual will have to decide for themselves whether to apply for the early payment. For many it will pay them off in total and for others it will account for a significant portion of their account balance, especially in the case of two or more joint depositors on the account as each are entitled to the £10,000. providing the sum total doesn't exceed the balance on their account(s).

As to giving the IOM government voting rights equal to the value they lay out for the EPS, I believe that will be the case. Whether it will be sufficient to sway the outcome of a vote towards the SOA is anyone's guess but I suspect the SOA in its finalized form will probably contain several changes which may make it acceptable to most depositors. However, if you are not in dire need of the £10,000. right away, you may want to hold off filing the forms until April 9th when you will see what the amended SOA will mean for you.


EPS 1 & 2

  • bobwin
  • 23/12/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 10/03/2009 - 15:25

In my case it took 7 weeks from posting to receiving my 1000 GBP.
I have not received my EPS2 forms yet.
Chances are,I will not get EPS2 before the next hearing.
So no vote for IOMG--I think

Bob in Davao

Less than 30 days to next hearing I believe


Mrs E Balding

  • Tricky Dicky
  • 24/10/08 30/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 09/03/2009 - 17:39

Hi Mrs Balding,
The first consideration you need to make is do you need this money right now or not. If you need it then you should probably apply for it, if you dont then yes you will assigning your rights of £10,000 value to IOMG when it comes to voting on a SoA. In the scenario that IOMG buy enough votes then they could push through whatever they like, irrespective of depositors wishes or needs.

The decision to accept or reject is yours depending on the circumstances you find yourself in


EPS - To Apply or NOT To Apply

  • Julienne
  • 16/10/08 31/08/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 10/03/2009 - 09:40

Tricky Dicky
Your advice is the clearest I have seen yet - outside the e-mail from DAG received this morning.

My first thoughts were - £10,000 - thanks I'll take it - I don't (thankfully ) especially NEED it, but it's MINE so GIVE IT TO ME.

However reading the notes re voting rights - THERE IS NO WAY I will sign any of my RIGHTS to the IOM Govn't. They could have solved this mess months ago if they were moral and upstanding people - BUT they obviously aren't - so we will NOT be applying for the EPS; we will keep our right to vote on the SoA and I hope all others in the same position will do the same.

If you can get by without it - then don't apply- - It is a shame they have some of us "over a barrel" - they know that which is why they want to take rights from us,


And the longer they drag the

  • SgKZ
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 10/03/2009 - 10:44

And the longer they drag the whole thing on, the more people fall into the category of 'being over a barrel'. I wonder why they have taken so long to draft the damn thing considering they have been working 'tirelessly' behind the scenes for many months now. (That was a rhetorical question!)

I can undertsand the IOMG wanting access to the money when it becomes available. You would think though that due to their fumbling in the dark with the bra clasp of the SOA for the past 4 months they are in a moral position to do this. Liquidation would have produced an advance a long time ago that would have kept people on their feet.

I don't see why they should get the voting rights though. They can stand in the shoes under liquidation or an SOA. It is the least they can do.


EPS2 - Now or Later ?

  • merlina
  • 26/01/09 01/06/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 06/03/2009 - 09:32

I too am worried about para 7 on EPS2 - May I suggest those who want to claim, wait until after 9th April, in that way you won't be giving IOMG any leverege on votes. We are not claiming at this stage because I don't trust them at all.


merlina, re EPS2 - now or later

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Fri, 06/03/2009 - 13:29

Merlina, April 9th is when the Court will make its decision (hopefully) to either liquidate or allow the SOA to be put to a vote. However, the actual vote may not take place until mid or late May. Many people are in dire need of some cash so I don't think it is fair to ask them to wait any longer. Personally, after this £10,000, I don't think we will see another payout before late August or September regardless of which scheme (DCS or SOA) is triggered


My lawyer told me to write

  • tsunamivictim
  • 11/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 05/03/2009 - 14:42

My lawyer told me to write the following very clearly on every page" Without Predjudice to my rights to bring a claim against KSF London in whatever capacity"
My money is an in flight held en route in London...


Dolabran, Re EPS2

  • mikeexpat
  • 31/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 05/03/2009 - 14:29

I am > 50K Depositor. I am not a lawyer or a financial adviser. After taking into account to date activities of IOMG and other blogs on this site regarding past activities of IOMG I decided the following in order to keep 100% my rights to further litigation. And I recommend for all > 50K Depositors to do the same.
1. I have not applied and will not apply for 1,000 Early Compensation.
2. I will not apply for 10,000 Early Compensation.
3. I will not apply for DCS (Deposit Insurance DCS 50,000), as I will get more than this from liquidation.
4. I will vote for liquidation.


EPS 2

  • Dolobran
  • 14/01/09 14/07/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 05/03/2009 - 16:01

Thanks for your thoughts mikeexpat, they are similar to mine, its just that with everything flying about re SOA and Liquidation, the thought process gets a bit foggy at times!


Advice Needed

  • bellyup
  • 10/10/08 09/01/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 05/03/2009 - 14:18

I have posted this before maybe I have missed the answer.

What is Edwins Coes take on this?

Shoulds we take the 10000k or will this affect the voting rights?

ie Give lots more clout to the IOMG and so they may vote the way they want to go which we still do not know if is in our best interests?

Can someone from the London / Strategy Team deal with this or direct people to the answer?


correct

  • bellyup
  • 10/10/08 09/01/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 04/03/2009 - 15:01

Sadly Jeff you are correct.


10000 Early Payment

  • ice
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 04/03/2009 - 14:21

I had understood the early payment provision was £1,000 (which I have received) not £10,000 as referred to by jeff. Have I missed something?


EPS1

  • bobwin
  • 23/12/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 05/03/2009 - 06:57

EPS 1 in my bank 4th March-sent app mid January ----EPS2 forms not yet received.


ice you will get

  • bellyup
  • 10/10/08 09/01/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 04/03/2009 - 15:02

Ice you will get another 9000 coming to you - I understand they are sending out the relevant paperwork


10000 early payment

  • ice
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 04/03/2009 - 17:25

Thanks bellyup - a nice surprise when I expected nothing until much later this year


EPS

  • Brabander
  • 15/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Wed, 04/03/2009 - 13:48

Jeff,
If the bank had been put into liquidation in December when it was clear that there were no possible buyers you would by now probably already have received over £70k.
As a higher value depositor be sure that the proposed SoA does not make you subsidise <£50k depositors.
If the IOM wants to guarantee 100% to these the IOM should pay for this!!
Vote against any SoA that does not guarantee a percentage return to you at least equal to the % of assets eventually realised. Based on current information I believe this will be at least 70%, possibly a lot higher.
OK not the 100% we want but that is life!


Brabander <50k

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Thu, 05/03/2009 - 08:35

Where have you got the figure of 70k from?

If you don't like the DCS, why did you bank with a member of the scheme?
The IoM will not pay out anything to <50k depositors. Where do you get this "fact" from?
A subsidy for <50k people? GREAT! Tell me more, Brabander. How do I climb on this gravy train?


steenjp <£50k

  • skintagainnow
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 05/03/2009 - 09:34

Steenjp, - brabander is assuming the liquidator would have paid out over 11% of the 16.5% funds he holds hence (deposit 600K - 11.6% of this = 70K), however if it had been wound up in December - I would hazard a guess we may have been due a payment this month at best - 11% ?? who knows. Better working on a 10% return, any more then it's a bonus.

A subsidy for the <50K, again - this is NOT a fact - we simply do not have the information as yet, it is possible with either scheme (DCS & SOA) that the >50K depositors will lose out IF the enhanced payment is a loan.
on DCS £20K is the "normal" guaranteed level - £50K is enhanced IoMG have earmarked the additional 150m to the DCS for any and all bank failures to Oct 2009, IF this is a loan to be paid back from the assets, the >£50K group effectively pay the enhanced levy. Their % returned will be reduced to fund the loan, IF it is a gift then there is no additional cost to the >£50K group and others not covered by the DCS.

on SOA - we know this is a loan to speed up payments -- this depends on whose calculations are correct the engineers (from reading various posts, appearances are predominantly engineers calculations) or finance.

engineers calc's - the >£50K group fund this loan
finance calc's - the IoMG fund the loan.

I know a number of questions have been posed to the IoMG requesting clarification of both the SOA and DCS payment plans, until we receive answers back and full clarification in layman's terms with worked examples - we are all shooting in the dark.

Anyone at this present time claiming they know any different and that what they say is a hard & fast FACT is living in cloud cuckoo land and / or deluding themselves, the documents and legislation so far released are not clear, they are contradictory and a downright scandal after 5 months. By accident or design the IoMG is turning a financial disaster into a farcical mockery to depositors of all denominations and classes.


<£50k SoA

  • Ally
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Thu, 05/03/2009 - 17:12

Skintagain

I would say that >£50k do not subsidise <£50k. Top up funding to make sub £50k up to 100% and also to ensure all over £50k depositors get a minimum of £50k (for example someone on £60k under a 60% payout would only get £36k but is entitled to £50k) comes from a non refundable contribution from the IoMG.

I have a list of questions and answers I submitted to the IoMG on this and I believe this is clear in their answers. They just need to make it clear in the SoA final details, which need to be a lot different from the basic outline on 19th February.

The difference between the SoA and liquidation is not very much and under both the IoMG will contriobute non-refundable funds to ensure those who would gain 100% under the DCS do so.

I am not posting for or against the SoA but just to clarify its workings.


< 50k SoA

  • banna
  • 15/10/08 01/03/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 05/03/2009 - 18:00

Ally,
I am worried by your comments on the IOM 'contribution' to the SoA or DCS.

It seems clear to me that, in both cases, once the assets realised pass a certain limit the IOM will expect to recover whatever monies they have paid out to meet their committment to all >50k depositors. At the moment they have said they will expect to be repaid in the SoA when depositors have recovered 60% - or 65% - of deposits. In the DCS my understanding is they will recover their outlay once realisations are sufficient to pay out at least 50k to all depositors.And yet you talk of non-refundable monies.

I am worried by your comment because you seem to be saying that IOM will leave their money in permanently, and I do not believe that is true. If I am wrong show me the evidence please, because I think it is important that all of us understand exactly what the difference is between the 2 proposals and what IOM is offering to do.

Personally, I shall opt for the DCS unless IOM comes up with a much improved SoA. In either scenario if they leave in their 150k plus the bank levies then we have very good chance of seeing all our money back. But I do not believe it.


<£50 SoA

  • Ally
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Thu, 05/03/2009 - 20:24

banaa

I am not supporting or against the SoA but just trying to clarify understanding of the SoA based on my understanding of the SoA and discussions and emails with various people involved with it.

Funds used to to ensure sub £50k's get 100% and that any other who are ntitled to a minimum of £50k receive £50k are not refundable, these are a contribution to the SoA as they would be in a liquidation/DCS scenario.

Funds used to ensure the 3 assured payments are made on the times stated to over £50k's depositors are in the form of a loan that is repayable when depositors receive 60%. (monies used to ensure 100% for sub £50k's are not a loan but are non-refundable, indeed a permanent contribution if asset recoveries are less than 100%)

Under the DCS the IoMG would put money in to ensure those who claimed under the DCS would receive their entitlement under this scheme. They would then recover these funds, I believe at the discretion of the Scheme manager. Under the SoA the IoMG will again put money in to enure everyone receives 100% of £50k whichever is the greater. These funds are irrecoverable.


Thx Ally

  • skintagainnow
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 05/03/2009 - 18:01

Thx Ally,

:-) as soon as you can, if not quicker get them posted - it'll save a lot conflab

Do you know yet when the example web page will be going live? also are they, (JS. I assume) going to reproduce the QA's on an official IoMG webpage, not saying they might go back on their word - just a good reference point if any future disagreements over any questions they have answered.

LS

Added,,

Is there any chance of this being a regular dialogue with JS, would he or any other IoMG source be up for a regular QA list via a DAG contact similar to PWC. No suggestions or other comments, just a QA on anything they propose?


skintagainnow, re IOM top up payment

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Thu, 05/03/2009 - 20:27

Hi skintagainnow, I notice Ally is no longer on the site but if you click on the following link it will take you to a previous posting by Ally in which he has posted John Spellman's response to queries Ally posedregarding the IOM top up payments-

http://chat.ksfiomdepositors.org/forum-topic/soa-clarifications


Thx undone, that's the old

  • skintagainnow
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 05/03/2009 - 21:09

Thx undone, that's the old one from a couple of weeks ago, as Ally indicates in his post earlier this evening there's new updated version, this is the one I indicate in the post a couple above - with luck he may get time to post shortly.
This was one of the reason I asked if this was to be regular exchange and if so could we make more formal - with the QA's being presented on an official IoMG website, then there would be "no question" of it's authenticity - and of course it would easy to refer any questioners to that page/s and use as reference if and when required.

BTW - I have every confidence in Ally and any comments posted - does that confidence extend beyond......

I'm also aware the DAG lawyers are trying to obtain answers from IoMG.


Hear Hear, skintagainnow

  • klauseriksen
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 05/03/2009 - 10:50

I couldn't agree with you more. However we do know that IOM has already tried to shaft the foreign currency holders in their early drafts which give you some indication where this might be going. My personal expectation to the SOA scheme is that the IOM will seek to protect the local depositors/voters accounts and say to hell with anyone else. At best I therefore expect the rest of us will be no worse off. At worst I think the rest of us may end up being completely shafted and have to go through lengthy litigation just to get what we are legally entitled to in a conventional liquidation, but as you rightly point out we have very few facts on the table which is just as scandalous after 5 Months as the bankruptcy itself


Thx Klause, part added for clarity

  • skintagainnow
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 05/03/2009 - 12:41

Thx Klause,

I'm leaning toward heavily loan (DCS) & my (engineers) calc's, (SOA) but I hope to be proved wrong on both. I do trust and understand the "workings" of the finance folk, looks good on paper - in reality????

Added, Under DCS even if the difference between the "normal" and the "enhanced" payment is treated the same as the UK Treasury funding of the Edge depositors where the UK Treasury has made available (remember those words) and "stood as guarantor" for the 1.2b (or thereabouts) and now stands as a pari passu unsecured creditor, the >50K group still provide a % of the guaranteed amount. Albeit a smaller %, it's still a %.
Also note the UK Treasury spin on things -- UKG paid £1.2b to assist depositors and this cost every resident of UK £xxxx - sound familiar, in fact not quite right, but good spin.

FX - issue - they knew from the outset that FX was an issue and would create additional problems - they should have within the first week transferred all accounts to stg (all literature, liquidation / DCS etc,. states payments in stg), hence they knew any other possible route barring a take over would mean all payments would be made in stg. The fact they didn't exchange all deposits to stg should not be at the expense of the FX holders, nor should any future exchange date be different in whatever scheme is eventually adopted. They could keep all FX deposits in the deposited currencies and set an exchange rate on the "day" of any "due payment", which maybe slightly fairer to all --- you never know stg might gain against the majors in the next 6 >20 years - pigs might fly - BUT!

For clarity I'm >50K and stg depositor - so yes the FX issue may cost me, by not using the Oct date first forwarded.

but I'm already screwed - the stg deposit I have / had in there was there to transfer to Euro's

Everything geared toward the resident and voter - you can bet your life on it.


cheque or direct deposit

  • mrken30
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Tue, 10/03/2009 - 03:18

I am now living abroad and was wondering if I would be sent a cheque or whether the money will be paid direct into my account. If they send a cheque am I able to request it gets sent to a relative in England?


mrken, re cheque or deposit

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Wed, 11/03/2009 - 11:59

I suggest that you call the IOM government help line at 44-1624-685 858 They should be able to answer your question with certainty.

Good luck.


Cheque or direct deposit

  • losymysavings
  • 14/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 11/03/2009 - 04:43

mrKen30 - the way I read the forms, they have asked for an account where they can make a direct sterling deposit.

I don;t think you will be able to get a cheque sent anywhere as this opens the risk of fraudulent diversion of funds.