ACTION STATIONS! YOUR VOTE NEEDED NOW !

  • Lucky Jim
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
Posted: Mon, 26/01/2009 - 18:36

We now know enough about what's going on to tell us that a SoA put forward by the IOM Government will only offer a return of depositors' money that falls short of 100%. DAG's Mission is 100% .

The time has come for DAG members to support a motion that makes this clear. HMG got us in this mess so HMG must help the IOM Government to get us out of it. Justice dictates nothing short of 100% return.

So will you support this Motion?

"DAG will not accept any proposal that does not secure a 100% return of its members' deposits. No SoA that falls short of this is acceptable. DAG will support the IOM Government if it will negotiate a loan from HMG in order to bridge the gap that presently exists in the accounts of KSFIOM in order that depositors may be paid fully and speedily. DAG believes that to fail to do so will precipitate the collapse of the IOM financial services industry"

Unfortunately the Poll format does not enable all this Motion to be posted, so it appears as:

"DAG calls on the IOM Gov to negotiate a loan with HMG to enable full restoration of depositors' money"

With Diver's support/approval it will b addressed to the IOM Government as the Motion as set out in full above.

THE POLL IS NOW RUNNING IN THE LEFT HAND COLUMN

5
Your rating: None Average: 5 (22 votes)

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

DAG calls on the IOM

  • nivit
  • 19/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 27/01/2009 - 10:56

DAG calls on the IOM Government to negotiate a loan with HMG to enable 100% restoration of depositors' money

I don't agree with the above for the following reason. It is not our place to tell the IoM government how to resolve this problem but merely to insist that they do. In calling on the IoM government to follow a specific course it is just too easy for them to say oh we would love to help you but I'm afraid we can't because of x,y and z end of argument. The IoM government are well aware of the options available to them and one of them is to dispose of us as inexpensively as possible we must make it plain to them that this is not in their best interests.

IMPORTANT please vote here as well;
http://www.chat.ksfiomdepositors.org/poll/has-dag-changed-its-objective-...


You have my vote

  • Anne Patrick
  • 27/10/08 15/07/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 27/01/2009 - 06:58

Well said LJ . Thought this was DAGS OBJECTIVE has it changed......?


Voting - easier said than done!

  • grapow
  • 20/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Tue, 27/01/2009 - 09:34

Trying to vote myself but the cursor doesnt strike any voting tab that I can see? That said this is surely the equivalent of turkeys and NOT voting for Xmas, I dont think it is going to surprise IOMG or HMG to see a 100% or close to, result on this one?

Nonetheless, as ever I will support the masses but could someone tell me where I am going wrong please?


Come on everybody this is

  • banditman
  • 21/01/09 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 26/01/2009 - 19:15

Come on everybody this is something we can all do vote now and lets get a full house of votes in favour of this motion to show we are united in wanting 100% back after we trusted IOM Gov duresdiction with our money although not all of us new where our money was being put by the takeovers and buy ups. Make your vote count if you want your money BACK.


Fine but now we have two

  • nivit
  • 19/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 26/01/2009 - 19:14

Fine but now we have two poles running addressing almost the same issue. I suggest it would have been better to have added your fine motion as a comment to the existing pole rather than complicate things and possibly dilute the responce to the existing pole


Well everybody reply to both

  • banditman
  • 21/01/09 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 26/01/2009 - 19:16

Well everybody reply to both poles that should prove something.


Both Polls are complimentary - VOTE FOR THEM BOTH !

  • Lucky Jim
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 26/01/2009 - 21:30

Exactly !

nivit's Poll is good in that it is an up-to-date sounding of present feelings of Members about DAG's original Mission Statement

The other Poll is a pro-active Motion. With overwhelming support it will be considered by Diver for formal submission to the IOM Government.

The draft SoA will, of course, still be submitted to the Court on 29/1. Subsequently this Motion for the IOM Government if accepted by the Government will bring about a change in the IOM's position.
If it is unwilling to accept what DAG asks of it, then we shall ask it to give an account as to why it is not prepared to negotiate a loan

Let's be clear about this, if there is a run on any of the banks in the IOM the IOM Government will have to ask for loans from someone, & as a Crown Dependency the UK Government will be the first port of call.

Our proposal really is an extraordinarily simple way for the IOM to resolve this whole sordid affair.


IOMG should pay

  • markH
  • 12/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 27/01/2009 - 01:45

I've voted yes in the poll - I mean, who's going to vote no?

BUT, we should be pressuring IOMG to provide the loan, not HMG. My impression is that the UK will continually ignore us, saying that IOM is not their concern. They'll have British popular opinion with them on this one too.

The ones with most to lose, alongside us depositors, is the IOMG. As such, our focus should be on them. They should loan the balance in lieu of any decision on the crucial £550M. They can afford it. It will be a vote of confidence in their financial system. And it's the right thing to do.


markH IOM action

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Tue, 27/01/2009 - 04:50

Agreed. IoM should be our agent. They can shake a bigger stick at HMG than we can.
The problem is though, mark, that they might not want to - so we are back up against the HMG wall again.


The solution IS simple...

  • Lucky Jim
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 27/01/2009 - 02:38

The IOM Treasury must have considered this option as the easiest, quickest & less controversial solution, so one can only assume the IOM Government does not have the capital reserve to do it. Because it is the easiest solution they have to get the means to carry it out,
If relations between the IOM & the UK are as rosey as they claim, then it should not be difficult to negotiate a loan from HM Treasury. After all most of the loan would be simply an advance payment in lieu of the release of KSFIOM's assets currently frozen in Kaupthing UK.


Lucky Jim ... IoM Reserve fund

  • steveejeb
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 27/01/2009 - 05:31

LJ - The IoM at the end of March 2007 had a reserve fund of £371,689,337. Looking at the trend since 1998 it would be safe to assume that by March 2008 reserves should have been in excess of £400M.

See section 16.9 from Souce:
http://www.gov.im/lib/docs/treasury/economic/digestreport2008.pdf


lucky jim...

  • hippychickrobbed
  • 03/11/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 27/01/2009 - 06:34

well then over the 5ys they can add to our soA, they have more money than the uk treasury, probably more than any other country at the moment but they want to remain immune from problems , as always.something can be worked out, could this not be put to the core?


Hippychickrobbed, I really

  • expatfrance1
  • 15/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 27/01/2009 - 07:23

Hippychickrobbed,

I really dont think that the 400m IOM reserve is more than any other country has got at the moment!

The answer is with HMG, if they can pump billions and billions into the banks withiut any understanding of what they are investing in they can surely loan IOM 500m against the money on deposit in KFSUK.


HMG loan

  • DonaldC
  • 25/11/08 31/05/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 27/01/2009 - 09:11

Perhaps the point is that the IoM knows only too well that they will be held over a barrel by HMG if they ask for a loan, so they don't want to ask if they can at all avoid it.

So where there are nice alternatives for them (come up with a "SoA' and hope all the creditors go home happy) they will pursue those until exhausted.