Actions taken or being taken

  • Anonymous
  • unspecified
  • Offline
Posted: Fri, 10/10/2008 - 04:35

If you are contacting someone, be it media or other, and you feel it might benefit others on the site, please give the details.

0
Your rating: None

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

Definitely not all over at all

  • Diver
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 20:09

No way am I letting some moustachioed idiot fob me off with '£50k is compenstation'. I'm lucky (and I've lost one of the larger amounts on here!) I'm young enough to start over and hopefully make some more money for my retirement...how many others on here can say that? Did you see Ruth? The lady works all her life (which is more than can probably be said for a lot of people here in the UK) and then gets shafted like this! I will be there to the end on this one....and by end I mean 'till there is nothing else left to do. We have a lot of options still open to us and a lot of avenues to try...we must stick together and not give up hope...if nothing else we owe it to future generations who may have prospered from what we may have left them.


All over? No way.

  • mikepapa
  • 10/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 22:03

I agree with you entirely.
Afraid I'm a little long in the tooth to start over, and at the prospect of having lost my nest egg gathered over 40 years of very hard work in the diving and salvage business, there no way I am going off quietly into the night.
The rest of my money that was tied up in market investments is pretty well shot to pieces - that was all part of the risk which I understood and accept.
However this is a differnt prospect, here we are all depositors not investors, and there is no way we should accept a 50K pay off from IOM PM to keep quiet.

Time to get our story heard loud an clear in the National News..... the sooner the better.


Well said Diver

  • shafted
  • 10/10/08 12/12/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 20:58

We must keep the hope alive they had my 390k only 4 weeks ago (SIPP) i am not giving up either


I agree with Diver

  • madmax836
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 20:21

I totally endorse Divers comments, am not so young but will never give up the fight, it is criminal what has happened to us, lets stick together and we will recover everyones money that has been stolen, whether it is large or small. We have all worked hard, saved and put money in a bank and now its gone. We cannot allow these thieves to get away with this, we may have to start making more noise sooner than later.


keep at it

  • bushmen
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 20:15

agreed, no way i am just giving up on my life savings.

we need to keep pressing in the media


I agree all. Even in bleaker

  • sleeplessnight
  • 10/10/08 30/06/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 21:04

I agree all. Even in bleaker moments lets not be defeatist, even in the darker moments, it will bring us all down. We ahve to fihgt for what is ours, this is theft - pure and simple. Todya ha not taken us far enough. Tomorrow we need to be more pro-active. I am willing to try and get anywhere to lobby and am prepared to spend hours on the phone tomorrow - but we are all sitting around waiting approval for the right course of aciton. I don't think we can afford to wait much longer.


I agree not giving up, but we need action now

  • humphrey
  • 10/10/08 01/03/11
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 21:20

I feel imjust impotent just reading the news and writing some emails, we need to act to make someone sit up and take notice of our cause.

We have been robbed and no-one who can do anything cares.


Can we move forward?

  • malc
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 17:34

We cant just sit and wait for one person to try and resolve this situation regardless of how dedicated to the task we think he may be.

Why did Gordon Brown take action for the UK investors? Because he believed that if he didn’t there would be such a scream that it would be heard around the globe.

Instead he is now being lauded as the saviour of the financial markets around the world. But guess what……….no one is talking about the Isle of Man. Check out the news stories, virtually no mention is made of Kaupthing IOM.

The IOM have said almost nothing. The UK government have said almost nothing. The Icelandic government have declared that they don’t care about anyone except their own people.

Bear in mind, there has been a delegation in Iceland over the last few days, what is everyone going to say when they come back having forgotten to mention the IOM?

Once the councils get their money back, no one is going to be interested in our plight, especially if we’re prepared to sit back and effectively do nothing.

We have to get together a petition or something that shows that all of us who have lost money can make just as much noise. Interviews on TV, radio and magazines are great, but we need to get our facts straight first. How much money have we lost, how many individual investors, how many businesses?

Interviews would be much more effective if we could hand over a petition from 1000’s of investors. It seems that we have addresses of government ministers, bank officials etc etc. Lets use them.

What if there is a run on the banks? I doubt that very much…if there is great….that will make someone do something.

Why do you think the UK government came out immediately to say that all depositors in the UK banks would be 100% protected??? Because they wanted to prevent such an event.

Why did the Irish government do the same thing (first!!)? The same reason.

What about the IOM government, “oh, we’ll take it up with the Icelandic government”, how wishy washy is that!!!

Lets give the UK government and the IOM government a reason to listen. The IOM is touted as the best, most highly regulated of the offshore jurisdictions. Let them know that if nothing is done ….not soon, but immediately then the whole world is going to know that it’s not the place to keep any money.

I don’t know how to set up such a petition online but I’m guessing someone out there does.

As for funding….my view is this (and no disrespect is intended). The person or persons need to show their full credentials. They need to lay on the line exactly what is planned. Who is doing what and when. So far I haven’t seen any of this, just lots of people desperate to accept any help. I don’t believe in ‘cloak and dagger’…..leave that for james bond.

What could we ask for?

How about the IOM or UK government do what Norway has done. Lend Iceland the money to pay the depositors back 100%.

How about letting one of the other banks take over, same as with KSF UK. It certainly appears that if the KSF IOM funds are frozen in London, then their should be no problem in giving them back.

A buy out is another possibility.

The IOM has its own government which has its own laws, except when the UK says otherwise. The inland revenue seem to be able to ask and get whatever they want from the IOM. This shows that the close relationship is indeed that ….close.

Someone mentioned the Kaupthing IOM domain is owned by the UK branch…another link. The real possibility that the IOM was using the UK computer systems.

The DCS doesn’t specifically refer to companies as being excluded from the scheme, (mentions partnerships etc, but not companies) yet the IOM say they are…

KSF lodged a guarantee with the IOM regulators. This was shown on their website, if it isn’t honoured is that not tantamount to fraud??

In my case, I instigated transfers on Monday 6th, none of which ever turned up…YET cheques that arrived that same day were encashed (I have all the documents proving this)……..again if we can prove that either the bank or the Icelandic government knew or even had an inkling that there was a potential problem whilst still accepting clients deposits, again that is tantamount to fraud. OR just THEFT.

How about this for an angle. The Icelandic government were in financial trouble, they needed money to bail themselves out never mind the banks. No one wanted to lend them money. So where are they going to get it from in the short term? The banks had billions of deposits. Well where are those billions of deposits?? Currently they are frozen by the Icelandic government, supposedly to protect depositors……or could they have been used to provide short term funding for the country? One things for sure on one day we had money, next day we didn’t…..

Why can’t we get someone, somewhere to stand up and tell it like it really is, to give us the answers we’re all trying to find on this website???

C’mon guys (and gals) there is a great (and very real) story here if we can put it all together.

One voice, one goal.

Malc
PS - Apologies for two posts....couldn't log on


The KSF Guarantee

  • Stakeknife
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 20:35

The KSF guarantee was provided to KSFIOM by Kaupthing Iceland and has nothing to do with the FSC. Kaupthing Iceland has not refused to honor it - but nor has it agreed to stand by it. Head of FSC believed to be in London today seeking UK Govt update.

Where this thing is really falling down is this:

  1. The rest of the Banking sector on the island is dead set against funding the DCS.

  2. The Manx Govt's standard response now is that it has increased the DCS from 15k to 50k, which brings it into line with the UK. Well not quite and here is why.

  3. On the Isle of Man depositors will have to wait for the rest of the banking sector to fund the DCS pot until it is big enough to cover all valid claims. This could take years. Forget what you read in today's paper - there are approximately 6-8000 KSFIOM clients with losses, not 200. And the total loss at the moment is many times more than £28m. Contrast this with the UK stance, where the UK government has guaranteed to repay all deposits irrespective of size. What it will do is pay all depositors and claim some of this back from its own DCS
    Scheme.

Quote from UK Treasury website:

The Chancellor has put in place arrangements to ensure that all retail depositors in the Icelandic banks of Landsbanki (including their “Icesave” products), Heritable, and Kaupthing Singer and Friedlander (including their “Edge products”) will receive their money in full.

The government will ensure that all retail deposits with KSF, which do not relate to Edge accounts (non-Edge retail deposits), will be repaid to depositors who are eligible to claim under the Financial Services Compensation Scheme, including in respect of deposits in excess of the £50,000 limit under the Scheme, with the government covering deposits in excess of the FSCS limit.

The Financial Services Compensation Scheme working with the administrator of KSF will endeavour to contact these individuals and make payments to them as soon as possible.

All non-Edge retail depositors will receive payments of the gross amounts of the balances on their accounts".

Most importantly however is this:

"The FSCS has financed its payout through a loan from the Bank of England".

In other words, UK depositors will get the full amount back almost immediately because the DCS has borrowed the money from the BOE (which will be paid back through time from the fees the Depositors Compensation Scheme charges its banks). The rest will be paid directly by government.

There could therefore not be a bigger difference between the IOM and UK Schemes. the IOM Scheme is not pre-funded and is facing stiff opposition from the Banks that will be asked to fund it AND the govt does not appear to be willing to provide funding up front and claim it back over time. The UK Scheme is pre-funded through an annual levy and does have the support of govt.

Believe me, this problem is too big to be resolved without govt intervention. Our efforts should therefore be targeted at getting IOM govt support. Otherwise as the days turn into weeks, so will they become distracted with other things and our losses become a more distant priority.


Agree with the content but not with the action

  • Diver
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 20:46

Absolutely agree with the way you've set the position out but I'm begining to think that the IoM governement has no vested interest (or doesn't think it has a vested interest) in seeing us get our deposits back. They come over as if they don't really care about anything in excess of £50k and seem completely disinterested in our plight. We need to get the UK government to see that they can't let us hang out to dry like this....the IoM is a UK protectorate, the UK goverment is responsible for protecting all overseas interests and foreign policy of the Island. If this situation doesn't fall under that remit then nothing does. The UK governement needs to force the Icelandic authorities to honour their obligations to the IoM or give the IoM it's share of any frozen assets in the UK.


"6-8000 KSFIOM clients with

  • occams razor
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 20:39

"6-8000 KSFIOM clients with losses"

What is the source of that figure, or can't you say?


i work there

  • Stakeknife
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 20:41

i work there


Do you have any particular

  • occams razor
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 20:51

Do you have any particular information as to the status of transactions initiated in the days prior to the suspension of the banking licence, where they are now, and the prospects of them being released (without going through any potential liquidation process)? Welcome to this forum by the way.....


This is a priority of the

  • Stakeknife
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 20:56

This is a priority of the provisional liquidator. Short answer is that no-one knows for sure yet whether they will come back for re-credit to your account or be allowed through to destination. The bank DID make these payments as requested. They were stopped by the correspondent banks en route through the payments system. If it is established that they are no longer the property of the bank, they have a better chance of reaching destination. There was NO advance warning of this happening.


Fund Transfers

  • Alastair
  • 10/10/08 30/09/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 22:11

Insideline - as the KSF internet site is down is there anyway we can establish which transfers were made in time. Even if we didn't know where they were and where which way they may go in the future it would be some reassurance to know if they left the account or not. Are the staff at the branch and are they able to give this information out. Failing that is there an approx cut off time for internet/fax and telephone transfers?

Thanks you for you help.


Action Plan

  • AlvisTA21
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 20:07

I agree with Malc. We need to make a very big noise and become a stone in the shoe of the IOM FCS and the UK Government too. The FCS Depositors compensation scheme is not a large box of cash sitting in a dark room waiting for people to come forward and make claims. As I understand it, when compensation is needed, the FCS simply charge an annual levy to all deposit takers on the IOM and eventually when enough has been collected the compensation will be paid out. If you read through their document it states clearly that this process could take a number of years! This is too little too late and by next week we could become old news and no-one will be interested any more. I see from the IOM today website that the deputy Chairman of KSF (IOM) was the Islands former chiefl financial officer and another boad member is former chief minister of the IOM. Not surprisingly they were not available for comment but they are doing little to enhance the reputation of the IOM as a safe banking area for our hard earned savings. The IOM can ill afford to lose its reputation so we must do all we can to fan the flames of publicity and they will surely not want to risk other depositors removing funds from other IOM banks. The website is awash with peoples comments and stories but I think we need to focus on appointing a Spokesperson(s) and preparing an action plan. It would also be helpful if the website had an area with an update on news and facts and progress to date. Can we move forward now with a Spokesperson and an action plan. We must keep ourselves in the media and make it clear we will not go away quietly.


RE; Can we move forward

  • rippedoff
  • 12/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 19:21

You're right Malc. There are obviously things being discussed to resolve the general Iceland problem which are way above us. Problem is: are those discussions including our plight? I suspect not much if at all. We must raise our profile as no one else is goung to do that. What has happened is theft. The Icelandic authorities could see this thing coming and chose to keep hoovering cash to keep the wolves from their own doors. We do need to co ordinate ourselves into a small team of spokespeople/strategic leaders as many good things have been suggested on this site but there is only a deluge of comments and so far no agreement on a small team to represent us. There is a real human story of interest here. Ordinary people who happen to have decided to pursue a job abroad/live abroad who have woken up one morning to find someone has taken their life savings. 21st century Britain allowing theft on a grand scale - publicity will find us favour I am sure. I'm with Malc (and the various others who have said similar things) we need someone to pull it all together.


What is the Plan?

  • malc
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 17:31

I would be very interested to have a few more details of the 'behind the scenes' activity.

Directors are personally liable for the way they run their company. It is quite obvious that the directors of kaupthing knew they were in difficulties. The icelandic prime minister blames the Uk for the collapse, in truth they only have themselves to blame. he announced that the country (not just the banks) were going to go bust.........did he really expect that not to have an effect???

The directors of Kaupthing were extremely quite, continuing to take deposits, failing to transfer money.

I'm not a fan of Gordon Brown, but at least he took decisive action, only problem was that was limited to UK investors.

I'm sure he didn't do it because he doesn't like iceland...more likely he was afraid of the huge backlash from investors.

Unless someone comes along and dumps a few billion into a pot, the IOM protection scheme is virtually worthless.

So there are really only two avenues open:
Someone takes over KSF IOM depositors, in the same way as ING AND guarantees 100% of the deposits.

The government (IOM or UK or ICELAND) guarantee 100% deposits, regardless of how that is achieved.

litigation is in itself not much use, as it could take forever. The THREAT of litigation is however a useful tool, much in the same way as newspapers, tv etc if handled properly.

The IOM would like to see this go away with a good result which maintains their 'status'...stops money being pulled out.

The Uk gov would like to see a good result so they can stand up and proudly state the banking system is the best around....attracts money.

Iceland i presume would like it to go away too.

Making sure it doesn't go away, until its sorted is our most powerful tool. if we are to allow time for 'behind the scenes' discussions to have a chance, then we must also put into place a Plan B...now.

We could do with a group of professionals from different fields:
A corporate or finance lawyer who could give some info re directors culpability.

A banker who could outline the process when transferring funds. this would answer a lot of questions regarding what KSF knew or didn't know.

Someone who could put into words of one syllable exactly how the depositor scheme works and who is and who isn't covered.

A tax professional. The UK inland revenue are very interested in those who have deposits in the IOM. So much so that despite not having lived in the uk for in excess of 15years, Barclays handed over my bank details to the UK revenue (without asking). if they have the authority to do that and are interested in collecting taxes from IOM depositers then surely we should be classed along with the KSF UK savers and get the same protection.

So what is plan B?
Malc


You will only waste time and

  • Stakeknife
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 21:00

You will only waste time and money pursuing the Directors. They had no advance warning of this. Kaupthing Iceland pulled the plug on a loan repayment to KSFIOM at the 11th hour. There is no belief within the FSC or Govt that the management of KSFIOM had any advance warning of this happening. Believe me. I know.


Brit Govt lends Landsbanki GBP100million

  • sabi Star
  • 10/10/08 n/a (free)
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 16:03

see timesonline - NEW - but no mention of us.


Brit Govt lens Landsbanki GBR 100m

  • Mrs Not Too Happy
  • 12/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 16:17

That was for the benefit of the councils, charities etc and best of luck to them if they can claw some or most of their money back.

Correct - no mention of us - I'm beginning to fear for our position.


A drop in the ocean

  • Diver
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 16:16

The £100m is small change compared to what is actually owed back to Landsbanki depositors (estimated at £4bn in some circles). It appears that this is not only just for individuals but is also only to cover the bare minimum guarantee that the individuals have which is somewhere in the region of £16,000 under the passport scheme.


PWC as liquidator

  • ItsTheft
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 15:37

I wouldn't worry too much about the liquidator clawing back money that has transferred out the door. I would imagine the fate of those transfers are going to be determined by law and banking regulations, not the efforts of one bank or another (or bank in administration).

Also, I was once employed by a company that went into liquidation and went through this same process of claiming monies owed. And the liquidator was... PWC. Long and short of it is we got a small fraction of our money after about 3.5 years. Started out with exactly the same stuff: dedicated web site, fired up people pushing for and getting limited press coverage, etc. But enthusiasm does fizzle after 6-9 months. Of course, the amount of compensation claimed in that case was ultimately down to a company that was broke. At least this bank has some assets, could be sold, and its all backed up, albiet to the extent of £50k, by the IOM FSC.

Fingers crossed about the transfers though. I initiated transfer of the whole lot on Tue 7 Oct, some BACS, some SWIFT Intl. Yes, I suppose I was part of the run on the bank, though it seems that is not what got them into administration.


Transfer of funds on 7th October

  • barbara.mariotti
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 16:17

Can you advise when you activated a transfer of funds and whether it was by phone or by internet? The timing is important. On the morning of Monday October 6th we tried to make a telegraphic transfer of our funds by internet banking, but our permission to do so had been rendered inoperative. That day after telephoning all morning (using nine different numbers – seven of which were provided by Kaupthing UK), I succeeded in speaking with a member of staff (Julie) at 11.45 GMT; she took our request for the closure of the account and the transferral of the funds to our nominated account (less £20 T.T. charge). She advised it was unlikely the transfer would be made that day, but it would be actioned by the following morning. At close of business the following day the transfer had not been activated. On the 8th October Kaupthing IoM was put into administration.


Transfer Oct 1 Missing

  • IsleofMuppets
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 16:30

I had an 80K transfer authorized on Oct 1. It never arrived. Now I read that the cut off for accounts with the liquidator is Sep. 30. My guess is that there were no transfers out of Krapthing after the 30th.


Timescale

  • cold-dose
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 15:56

It is important to realise that these things aren't ever resolved quickly.

However, it appears that neither KSF(IOM) nor KSF UK were 'broke' - merely illiquid.

Banks hold a lot of their assets in non-liquid forms, like mortgages and fixed term loans. They also need a proportion of liquid assets to enable them to manage their daily banking transactions - like the CHAPS transfers.

From the comments made by the various authorities, there was a bank run on KSF UK, which would have seen liquid funds flowing out. The FSA requested more liquid funds to be transferred from Iceland. Eventually the UK branch was assessed as not meeting the 'threshold conditions' to continue to trade - presumably about the proportion of liquid funds they were holding. Administration was the subsequent result.

Similarly, the directors of KSF(IOM) were seeing liquid funds leaving their bank. They couldn't obtain further liquid funds from KSF UK, and their Icelandic parent declined to help out. Likewise, they had their banking licence withdrawn, and the next day went into administration.

However, each bank is likely to still hold a substantial amount of illiquid assets - mortgages, investments in major companies, loans to other banks. These may not be convertible to cash immediately, but it does mean that there's probably a good chance of a decent proportion of the money being returned to depositors - possibly even everything.

There's naturally a lot of unknowns at the moment, but this shouldn't be compared to a normal company going into administration - and this is far too early to despair.


Assets

  • frozenrover
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 17:45

Cold dose
You appear to have far more knowledge than I on liquidations etc. If the liquidator only manages to recover, lets say 50% of the assets, how is this amount apportioned. Does everyone get 50% of their deposit ?
Would appreciate your thoughts - many thanks


Simplified form...

  • cold-dose
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 17:57

Money is handed out in a rough order of priority.

Secured creditors lent their money against a particular asset (like a mortgage is secured on a house). They get the asset.

Preferential creditors come next in order of getting paid - usually employee wages, tax - things of that sort.

The unsecured creditors then get paid proportionately to what is owed to them (the legal Latin term is 'pari passu'). So if there was only enough money to pay 50% of the total owed, then everyone would get 50% of what was due to them.

The money that was held up in transfer may be an exception - depending exactly where it is in the system - as CHAPS transfers are directly linked to a particular chunk of money moving through the settlement system (BACS transfers are not). However, that's a rather complicated legal issue that will have to be sorted out by the administrators.


cold-dose, nice to see your

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 17:35

cold-dose, nice to see your etting a tad more optimistc, assessmant is pretty much along our lines. Watch the BBC NW news, sorry gotta go the IoM has just started a meeting behind me!!! Timidy is not a strong suite so here I go!!!!!!!!!!!


Optimism

  • cold-dose
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 18:10

I wouldn't want to get up false hopes, but it's looking more positive.

Firstly KSF appears to have been largely sound in both the UK and IoM (if not in a position to 'trade' normally due to having failed in what was essentially a 'silent run' on both branches).

Secondly it appears that the parental guarantee hasn't yet been legally called in. KSF(IOM) won't be in a position to claim until it goes into legal default on the 24th October.

Kaupthing hf in Iceland isn't in administration (yet), it has merely been nationalised by the Icelandic government. They have declined to advance money to the branch under normal conditions, but they haven't yet formally defaulted on the guarantee - which could let the KSF administrators push Kaupthing Iceland into bankruptcy - something the Icelandic government would probably wish to avoid. So even if there is a shortfall in the assets, it's unlikely to be huge and there's therefore more chance of that commitment being met.

As an aside, if the funds are generally there then the business might be sold as a going concern, but if it's in that position then the main benefit of that would simply be getting everything moving again faster.

(Be aware that the above is largely my personal assessment based on available information!)


You are closer than just

  • Stakeknife
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 21:21

You are closer than just about everyone on this site would appear to realise. People, please take heed.


And your advice?

  • sosnovka
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 21:24

Would be? ...


thanks for that.

  • adrienne
  • 10/10/08 13/05/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 21:24

gives us all a glimmer of hope


Dont discredit yourselves by

  • Stakeknife
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 21:40

Dont discredit yourselves by doing anything daft. Some the ideas emerging above are ridiculous. Overseas investors need local people on the ground who have past experience and / or factual knowledge. The Bank has both eliquid and illiquid assets that it will be calling in and there are several interested parties out there. The UK Govt could also still step in. My advice would be to sit tight for a couple of days and see what develops. No-one will be able to influence anything different in this time anyway. Sorry if this advice is not as colourful as some of the other recommendations but the one certainty here is that this situation will not stand still. I am standing a significant loss myself but I also know that a lot of work is going on behind the scenes to repatriate as much of ksfiom's assets as possible.


In flight/frozen chaps

  • HOPPER
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 15:36

My MP called me at home this afternoon. I had raised the "missing CHAPS" issue via an email yesterday. I explained that I was not alone here, quite a few of us are in this situation, from the IoM, Channel Islands. I have agreed with my MP that I will send a letter today (email, pdf) plus supporting documents for the MP to send on to the FSA and (more importantly) as a written question to a UK Treasury Minister, which forces a written response. Am writing this letter for my MP now. I have also had a call from the KSFIoM today - I understand the staff who did CHAPS on their own accounts are in the exact same boat as all of us, none got through. I am just waiting on a few more details/reference numbers from my own example to include in the letter to my MP. I live in the UK and pay full UK tax, so my MP is listening right now. Maybe others could follow suit if your MPs will take this up too.

As BBlair below and others like me pointed out before, there is a conflict here, but I also have money left in three other accounts in KSIoM, so I am v. interested in both outcomes.


Letter to MP - Missimg CHAPS

  • mikepapa
  • 10/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 16:14

I am long term Brit expat living abroad, but do not have direct access to an MP in UK.
I am in similar situation as yourself, having transfered some my funds on Tues 7th by Swift/CHAPS
from accounts at KEDGE-IOM and KSF-IOM, and received confirmations Ref Nos etc.
I am happy to send copies of all to your MP to back up your/our case if you will let me have his name.

Smilar to yourself, I have also left funds in accounts at both banks and therefore have interest in both outcomes.

Certainly we would all like to share any written reply from HMT Minister - so please do post copy of reply as and when you you receive it.

Thanks


KSF (IOM) Phone Lines Now Open

  • Mike
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 15:31

I have just managed to speak to someone (John Mires???) at the bank KSF (IOM), phones are now up and running to take your calls. Although I could not ascertain that much information than already known, but it was reassuring to hear someone was still there.
They say the KSF (IOM) website will be up and running in the next few days with updates of the situation. Since they no longer have a bank licence and all funds are under the control of the liquidator, they are in the process of preparing bank statements for all of us, which will be dated from the 30th September, which will be sent out with a claim form, to our registered address, to enable us to make our claim on our funds from the liquidator. The letters are planned to go out around the 24th October.
“Suggest if anyone has changed your address, please contact the bank now to revise your contact details.”
The liquidator is presently trying to obtain KSF (IOM) assets from the UK. Also I was told IOM government is making representation in Iceland with regards to the parental guarantee, although no confirmation could be given as to who or whether the IOM representative was actually in Iceland. He did confirm that 3 potential buyers are still interested in taking over the bank, but could not verify who were the interested investors.
John sends his apologies for the anxiety and upset the situation has caused and hopes things can be resolved in the next few weeks.
Sorry guys we still need to hang on longer, more sleepness to come!!!!!


"dated from the 30th

  • occams razor
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 15:45

"dated from the 30th September"

That seems a weird date to choose, or perhaps they've just chosen the last day of the month. There were certainly transfers made after that date that did make it through. Though I guess in the scheme of things it is just a statement and all other transaction details will be accessible to the people in charge to analyse what is owed accurately.


Another point that may be useful at some stage

  • Diver
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 15:05

It occurs to me that the enormous bail out of the banking system we are seeing in the UK today (including the Government's guarantee of UK Kaupthing Edge, Icesave etc...) is being financed out of taxpayer's money. There are therefore a whole number of us on here that, as UK taxpayers, are contributing to rescue other people's accounts/savings while we potentially watch ours go to the wall. Surely not even this government can fail to see the irony (and huge injustice) in this situation.

I'm not for one second suggesting that there should be any segregation between UK tax payers and other depositors as we're all in this together. I simply mean that based on the above it has to be the UK government's duty to save all UK taxpayers and if that means saving others as well (who let's face it, almost certainly contributed to HM Treasury's coffers as well) then that's what needs to be done.


Crown Dependencies

  • DXB
  • 12/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 15:28

The trouble with the crown dependencies is that they are independently administered. Even if it were inclined to do so, it is questionable whether HMT has the power to intervene in the internal financial affairs of the IoM, particularly without a request from the Tynwald to do so. It is also difficult to see how HMT could step in to assist the IoM without in principle extending similar support to the other crown dependencies (in particular, Guernsey).


Not just Crown Dependencies

  • cold-dose
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 15:44

It would be difficult to draw an essential distinction between the Isle of Man and other British external territories... Gibraltar, Bermuda, even the Cayman Islands.

These off-shore locations have enormous amounts of money deposited in them - the additional liabilities to the UK taxpayer could be huge.

The issue of paying tax relating to the bail-outs seems to be based far more on where the banks pay tax. In the UK they pay 30%, and 25% of the government's entire tax income is from bank profits.

In the Isle of Man the banks pay only 10%, and they pay that to the Isle of Man Treasury, not the UK.

Not trying to rain on anyone's parade, but these are arguments that would need to be addressed.
Furthermore, the UK government wasn't regulating or supervising the Isle of Man's banks.


Progress...

  • 491
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 15:04

There has been some progress under the thread: "Appointment of Spokesperson".
My post entitled "Proceeding" tries to summarize where we are at.
It aint perfect, but i think its a good first step.
Blair


Email reply

  • Diver
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 14:52

I've had a short and generally standard reply to one of may emails I sent out yesterday but at least someone is potentially listening. The email was originally sent to William Hague Shadow Foreign Secretary.

Reply:
Dear Diver

Thank you very much for taking the time to contact Mr Hague and I can assure you that the issue you raise is one of which George Osborne, the Shadow Chancellor, is aware.

With kind regards

Kirsten Bird

PA to The Rt Hon William Hague MP
Rm 424, Portcullis House, Bridge Street, London SW1A 2LW
Tel: 020-7219 4611 / Fax: 020-7219 1890


Letter from Hague's PA

  • Emabroad
  • 10/10/08 30/08/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 17:49

Perhaps a follow up saying how delighted you are he's aware of it, and politely enquiring whether he proposes to follow up the issue, might not go amiss.

I am 'aware' of the area of particle physics, but wouldn't be remotely interested in asking, or have the remotest idea of what type of questions to pose, relevant to the situation.


Mat, BBlair, Expat - in flight monies

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 14:26

Hi
Mat, BBlair, Expat - having a problem posting on this website at the moment but hope this message gets across to you. I have just spoken with KSF Iom - got through eventually on 01624 699222. I asked for 24-hour transfer of some of my account money on Monday 6th and never received it. The bank today confirmed that the money had left my account and was stuck at KSF UK (I asked them to confirm bank balance and it was I would expect if money left). I was told that the temp liquidator was doing everything to get this moving but they were currently unsure whether it would move forward to receiving bank or back to KSF. I had a bit of a rant about money moving back into KSF and she advised me that moving it forwards was the aim. I asked her how best to keep up to date and was told the bank website should be up and running in a few days.

Can you please post this onto relevant forums as I know that a few of us had money in flight and this info may help.

On another note, fully support all the chat this morning re action group and will compelte poll when I can access.

I think that one of the streams for the action book could be to ensure that in-flight money gets released and sent to receiving banks rather than back to KSF - but perhaps that's only relevant if there are enough of us in the same situation as me.

Thanks to all of you for giving me a focus over the past few days!!

Shirley


Shirley, well done. My money

  • sleeplessnight
  • 10/10/08 30/06/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 15:15

Shirley, well done. My money CHAPS transferred on the Tuesday and some BACS on the Monday, wouldn't want this to lessen the argument of those among us that had not managed to do so, but if we can ascertain the number of us it's a start. Can we created new thread for this or is it compounding the website problems NG?


Inflight Transactions

  • 491
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 15:15

Re Inflight Transactions: There is an obvious confict of interest between those here who had money inflight and those who did not. I would imagine that there is liquidation protocol and law that deals with this issue and that Mike Simpson has some say in this matter. But it would difficult I think to have everyone who is part of this action committee to support the release of inflight funds which may be prejudicial to those who remained deposited.

That said, if I were one ofthose who had submitted "timely" fund transfer requests, I'm sure I would pursue the first priority release of those funds. My suggestion is that those with inflight funds work together as a group to that end.

One man's opinion. Just trying to keep in mind the natural conflict of interest this poses.

Blair


In flight transactions

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 15:29

Blair, I'm in position of having tried to transfer some of my money only at the beginning of last week so I've got a foot in both camps - interest in the inflight money and interest in the money locked in KSF IoM. But i agree that in flight money may be a different workstream, with its own set of problems to address.
All of that said I'm horrified at the lack of information we are receiving from concerned/responsible parties and I want to stay with this group and tackle all the issues until we all have our money back.


reply to inflight monies

  • madmax836
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 14:49

I agree with Shirley re monies in flight.

Hopefully the fact the bank was still liquid on the 8th. I faxed Royal Scandia a transaction (on the 7th) Royal Scandia (IOM) confirmed it would go through on the 8th, however on the 9th they told me it didnt go through. There may be a glimmer of hope (for some of us here) that the bank didn’t go under until the 9th then perhaps the liquidator from PWC will release the funds accordingly.

Whether this happens or not, I will support the nominated reps/spokesperson until everyone has got back ALL their money back one way or another.

Lets keep on fighting we are making progress. As they say never give up till the fat lady sings.

Well done to everyone who is/has contributed to this site/forum.

Thanx to All


8th October

  • cold-dose
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 13/10/2008 - 15:11

KSF UK went into administration on October 8th.

Did KSF(IOM) transfer your money to a bank that was already in administration?