Charities pushed to front of compensation queue TSC agrees with HMG not to compensate us!

  • fight theft
  • 10/10/08 28/05/13
  • a depositor
  • Offline
Posted: Sat, 04/04/2009 - 02:03

I am shattered by this latest article in today's Guardian. After attending the TSC comittiee meeting in February -I thought the MP's present were more sympathetic to our case instead.....
I never expected the TSC to "back HMG's in the decision in refusing to compensate British citizens who had money invested in offshore accounts in the Isle of Man and Guernsey with the Icelandic banks".
I am utterly shocked that they have been so pressured or brain washed by the Treasury. This is our last straw against our human rights and theft of our money! I love amimals, but destroying 10,000 individual British people over Animal protection is a nightmare that has re-shocked me ll over again!
Rest of article:
Saturday 4 April 2009
• Local authorities left to wait with other creditors
• Darling's use of Terrorism Act called into question
Charities with cash deposited in the failed Icelandic banks should be fully compensated by the government, a Treasury select committee report will recommend today, although local authorities, which had more than £953m invested, should be left to stand in line with other creditors.
The report also backs the government in refusing to compensate British citizens who had money invested in offshore accounts in the Isle of Man and Guernsey with the Icelandic banks.
The recommendations, which will now go before government, were warmly welcomed by charities caught up in the financial crisis that battered Iceland last year, causing all three of its big banks to crash.
John Low, chief executive of the Charities Aid Foundation, said the committee, led by Labour MP John McFall, had listened "sympathetically" to evidence provided by the organisation. "We are thrilled with the recommendations. They have recognised the injustice of the situation."
Research by the Charities Aid Foundation found 48 charities had lost a combined £86.6m in deposits with the Icelandic banks, attracted by some of the best interest rates for savers then on the market. But not all charities have admitted losses in public. The Audit Commission puts the figure at about £120m.
Cats Protection had over £11m deposited with Kaupthing Singer and Friedlander, one of the largest amounts at risk. Peter Hepburn, the charity's chief executive, said the report's recommendations were "brilliant" news. "These savings were to be used to fund new cat adoption centres to help cats in areas of greatest need in the UK, such as Lisburn in Northern Ireland and Felling, near Gateshead." He said the projects are at risk because the charity is unable to access the savings.
McFall said the committee, which has conducted a series of hearings into the financial crisis, had been unanimous in its decision to recommend compensation for charities. "The work undertaken by the charitable sector often provides the most vulnerable elements of society with invaluable support," he said. "At a time when more people than ever are faced with difficult economic circumstances, we believe that it is imperative that charities have access to the funds that were provided to them by the public."
The committee also recommends that the government clarifies the protection available to charities under the Financial Services Compensation Scheme, which protects individual investors.
The government is expected to respond to the report within two months.
The report acknowledges that some local authorities would feel "hard done by" as a consequence of the report, but said it would "seem perverse to reward those authorities who failed to protect their investment with yet more money from the taxpayer".
In all, 127 English local authorities, including 12 police authorities and 10 fire departments, had invested a total of £953m in the Icelandic banks. It is still unclear how much they will claw back from administrators, although they are preferred creditors. Kent headed the list with £50m on deposit, followed by Nottingham city council with almost £42m.
"The LGA, working with councils, currently expects to get the lion's share of this money back and is working flat out to make sure that the council taxpayer is top of the list for repayment," said Margaret Eaton, chairman of the Local Government Association. But she said the report had drawn unfair distinctions. "There must be a consistent and fair approach to compensation. If charities are to be compensated why should there no relief whatsoever for the council taxpayer? Councils provide vital services to society's most vulnerable people."
A separate report from the Audit Commission last month found seven English authorities had behaved "negligently" by continuing to make deposits with the banks even after they had been downgraded by credit-rating agencies.
The government said it would protect all individual savers with the Icelandic banks shortly after they collapsed in a turbulent few days in October. The banks had expanded rapidly and sought to increase their deposit base by attracting UK savers through accounts like Landsbanki's Icesave. Kaupthing, another of the big banks, bought the British firm Singer and Friedlander and launched a savings account, Kaupthing Edge. But in the weeks after the catastrophic failure of the Icelandic economy, it emerged that many local authorities and charities had also been investing with the banks.
The report questions the role that Alistair Darling, the chancellor, played in undermining confidence in Iceland by using anti-terrorism laws to safeguard the deposits of British savers in Landsbanki.
It suggests that Darling's use of the Terrorism Act had "inevitably" stigmatised the entire Icelandic financial system and had a serious impact on confidence in Kaupthing, the largest of the three big Icelandic banks, and at that point still in business. It recommends the government find a "less blunt instrument" for similar circumstances in future.

4.142855
Your rating: None Average: 4.1 (14 votes)

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

Cats Vs Humans

  • half0rdh0use
  • 28/01/09 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 05/04/2009 - 16:50

They say one is either a dog lover or a cat lover...personally i loathe cats, and have had two dogs in my life..but this shocking development in putting the livleyhood of animals ahead of those of the dominant species is not only abhorrent but morally reprehensible... and i've no doubt many of us could now find room to swing one....suffice to say nothwithstanding the goverments past six months stance to the depositors of KSFIOM, am i suprised they put animals ahead...protecting their own are they!

It is even more cruel that this development is made only a few days before the hearing...if they are hoping to provoke us further..then they surely have...

Off to write more letters........


so channel that anger.....

  • dj
  • 07/11/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 05/04/2009 - 06:38

Get those emails off to MPs and get posting on public chat forums.

At the TSC it was admitted that non-domiciled British Citizens cannot get UK bank accounts (at least without being present). Ian Pearson etc al are STILL spouting that there is no reason to use offshore banks.

www.theyworkforyou.com and serach on kaupthing. Then COMMENT on the statements made by idiots like Pearson. Dont reply on someone else doing it, do it yourself now.

Even the Number 10 Petitions are woefully signed by us. We will never get 100% of OUR money back until we start helping the DAG team and make more noise!!!! Six months and STILL most of the UK public have not got a clue what has happened. The Government are currently getting away with this and we are letting them.


Write to MPs

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 05/04/2009 - 08:52

Here's a link to MPs emails, I have just spent about 5 hours emailng this meessage which fits the 4000 chars required.

http://www.parliament.uk/directories/hciolists/alms.cfm

Message I have sent: copy or edit as you wish

On April 9th. the Isle of Man High Court will consider whether the recovery of KSFIOM monies will be dealt with by a Scheme of Arrangement or via a liquidation.Whatever the result, the fact remains that the HMG confiscated two thirds of our bank's balance sheet when it seized £557m of KSFIOM assets as it put KSFUK into Administration on 8th.October, 2008 and retained powers, quite exceptionally, under section 27 of Statutory Instrument 2008/2674 whereby no assets may be repaid to creditors by the UK Joint Administrators without the explicit permission of HM Treasury.Irrespective of any IoM High Court direction the clarification and maximisation of 'London monies' return is the single most important factor that will determine actual realisation depositors, especially HVDs. Consequently, contacting MP's to encourage HMG to intervene consistent with their Clause 27 reserved powers and to press for dialogue is of the greatest importance.There are 11,358 of us with some 14,059 accounts and total savings of £893,844,804 at risk. Most are UK citizens either retired or working abroad. Despite the HMG trying to present a view to the contrary, the IoM is a well regulated financial centre and those of us who have our money there are not a bunch of tax dodgers.The events of the last six months have been appaling for us and it is politicians alone who now hold the key to resolving this situation.. Please can you ask the Chancellor whether he is willing to work with the IoM government to find a solution;what discussions he has had with the IoM to find a way of getting 100% back to victims; whether the HMG would consider a loan to the IoM to enable 100% compensation; whether he is willing to undertake the following intervention, a simple solution within the UK Chancellor's power. I would ask you to urge the Chancellor to intervene with the UK Joint Administrators using his Clause 27 (SI 2008/2674) powers so that the inter-company sums and asset classes remaining are properly identified at KSFUK and that a quantified commitment be given to the IoM for such assets to be returned to the rightful control of the Joint Provisional Liquidators for KSFIOM.There is no doubt that KSFUK balance sheet position is complex, but if a quantified commitment is given by HMG for the return of London seized assets for time ahead, the IoMG would in turn be able to ensure 100% recovery of savers money, which is 'the PMs cry for all jurisdictions world wide; and up until the British intervention on October 8th. 2008 KSFIOM was a solvent well run bank with no toxic debt and strong core ratios. Furthermore, such a quantified commitment to return assets would potentially allow a third party financial institution to step in and buy the residual business thus opening up a greater range of possibilities for recovery, ongoing business, and a multiplier effect into broader economic recovery.We need a quantified commitment to return the lump of our bank's balance sheet locked up since Oct 8th. 2008 and over which the Chancellor has exceptional clause 27 reserved powers of return.The TSC has now published its report into the impact of the failure of Icelandic banks. The TSC has also agreed with many of the points raised, concluding that: the collapse of KSFIoM “was caused, in part, by steps taken by the UK Government to transfer deposits from the KSF UK branch to ING.”…..“the majority of those affected are not sophisticated, investors of high net worth who are somehow insulated from the losses they have incurred; and many people were “forced to deposit their money offshore, outside the protection of the FSA, and the Financial Services Compensation Scheme, as a direct result of the way in which FSA regulations were interpreted in the UK”.It concludes by “strongly urging the UK authorities to work with those of the IoM to resolve these issues.”I would urge you to use your influence to ensure that action is taken to comply, to deliver a 100% return of our money.


Come on everyone, do it!

  • dj
  • 07/11/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 05/04/2009 - 10:11

Thanks Expat. Come on everyone, get writing. The IoM Government can do nothing for us until HMG get the £557Million returned. We can see from the events in the last week that we are just not being heard; cats get their money but our families dont. Dave Whelan and Stockcube get their money back, but we dont. Many of us didnt want to have our money offshore, but HMG is still saying their is no reason not to use UK banks even though proved to be incorrect. They are getting away with it. And getting away with it because we are just not making enough noise. Public chat forums have not been posted on for months and our letters to MP's have dried up. We are acting like victims and will lose if we dont buck up our ideas and start pulling our fingers out.


My pleasure dj, don't be a

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 05/04/2009 - 10:45

My pleasure dj, don't be a victim is a good thing to keep in mind here, there may be many differing points of view, but bleating here isn't going to solve anything. I write about 25 emails a day, talk with other depositors, pester and hound MPs, write to the press, comment on blog sites, don"t get published and still iron my own shirts! Self help people, don''t wait for somebody else to do it for you, do something poisitive like make it clear to HMG they have our money and we want it back, oh please!!! The mechanism is through clause 27 or a loan it thats your preference. Take responsibility as the man said!!


Write to MP's

  • cypheath
  • 01/11/08 30/10/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 05/04/2009 - 12:33

Have done emails to MP's but not sure if they'll even bother to pick them up, as in Easter Recess 2-20 April. Maybe being cynical (how can you not be after what continues to go on) but was 9th April chosen deliberately, 6 months on from 9th October, coming up to Easter, UK Parliament in recess etc, etc?


Action speaks louder than words

  • Wanda
  • 12/10/08 31/08/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 05/04/2009 - 07:32

Thanks dj for your timely reminder about the No. 10 petition. I've added my name to the list and notice that the deadline to do so is 16th April and so I implore everyone to add their names now while we still have the chance to do so. Basic psychology teaches us that anger motivates people into action whereas fear paralyses us into inaction. I'm sure the news that cats and dogs are to be given preference over us has p****d off a lot of people and hopefully that will motivate them to sign!


Only 1162 people have signed

  • bellyup
  • 10/10/08 09/01/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 05/04/2009 - 16:05

@bellyup - why?

  • IceCrusher
  • 14/10/08 25/10/11
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 05/04/2009 - 17:09

Answer:

Thesaurus: apathetic
Top Home > Library > Literature & Language > Thesaurus
adjective

Without emotion or interest: detached, impassive, incurious, indifferent, insensible, lethargic, listless, phlegmatic, stolid, unconcerned, uninterested, unresponsive.


Cats...

  • WorriedWoman
  • 23/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 05/04/2009 - 01:28

Sorry, It took me awhile to catch my breath....

" Cats Protection had over £11m deposited with Kaupthing Singer and Friedlander, one of the largest amounts at risk."

The way we have been treated again and again. It is simply outrageous but expected.

Don't know if I should laugh or cry about this. Either way , it is not going to change their narrow minded ways of thinking.

ww

PS: DAG @ Thank you for never giving up.


Cats given preference over depositors ?

  • WorriedWoman
  • 23/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 05/04/2009 - 01:20

"Cats Protection had over £11m deposited with Kaupthing Singer and Friedlander, one of the largest amounts at risk."

I simply cannot believe this.........

ww


TSC / fight theft

  • icdbrazil
  • 10/10/08 30/11/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 04/04/2009 - 23:25

Compensation from the UK, as KSF UK retail savers were compensated was never on the cards, so no surprise there.

TSC report weak, but hey what do you expect, they had probably been instructed accordingly.

However, they have clearly stated that UK should work with IOM Govt in relation to KSF IOM , and we need to go hell for leather into ensuring that this does happen, and get loans in place. See Blog post by DAG Team ¨Response to TSC Report¨ which starts this process (many thanks).

This ties in with efforts to keep reminding all and sundry of Gordon Brown´s (& Darling´s at last TSC meeting) statement that all jurisdictions should vouchsafe savers. The Isle of Man is a Crown Dependency for goodness sake - get up on it and ensure they do what you recommend.


If you didn't like the TSC

  • nivit
  • 19/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 04/04/2009 - 16:51

If you didn't like the TSC report wait 'till you read the SoA affidavit.


Surprised is the last thing

  • dawes
  • 24/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 04/04/2009 - 14:48

Surprised is the last thing you should be, this was always going to be the case. The UK cannot start compensating depositors in foreign banks with funds provided by UK financial companies. Its unfair to charge UK companies to protect overseas banks who compete with better rates partly because they don't pay towards depositors protection.


Not Compensation

  • bellyup
  • 10/10/08 09/01/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 04/04/2009 - 17:54

Its NOT compensation.
The money is ours and we want it back what is wrong with that?


Of course nor compensation bellyup

  • fight theft
  • 10/10/08 28/05/13
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 04/04/2009 - 19:15

...but as usual in all bloody inaccurate articles re our plight, it's always this sort of innaccurate terminoloy used "compensation, bail out etc". Thanks a lot Guys!
Also how about Spellman's comments today re: we took a risk and we lost - end of story- we should be gratfeful to get any percentage back - how dare he? Again treated like risk taking FTSE investors (I wish I had have been with this money invested at least we'd get a more gauranteed return after waiting), not treated with respect again as depoistors. I will be answering his post later!


Treasury Select Committee Report

  • Jo
  • 13/10/08 31/08/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 04/04/2009 - 11:59

The TSC report can be found at: www.publications.parliament.uk

There is a lot of emphasis on the TSC's view that the UK cannot be responsible for compensation regarding deposits held in another jurisdiction (despite acknowledging that the downfall of KSFIoM was caused in part by the action taken against KSFUK).

However, the TSC does say: "We acknowledge the severe distress shared by many individuals as a result of this banking failure". It goes on to say that the UK should "work with the IoM and Guernsey authorities to resolve these issues, especially given the complexities arising from the takeover of the Derbyshire Building Society". I think this last statement is significant.


TSC report - the Derbyshire view

  • coldlightofday
  • 20/10/08 31/08/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 04/04/2009 - 16:53

I went to see my Derbyshire MP (Tom Levitt, High Peak) today. The party line is "not our jurisdiction". The other comment that "offshore banking is complex" I rebutted by pointing out that the Derbyshire Building Society had a subsidiary Derbyshire Offshore, very simple. Fixed term bonds were being sold after the time when negotiations for the sale to KSFIoM were under way and also after the sale was agreed !!
The reply that "Derbyshire is now only a brand within Nationwide" is totally inadequate.


TSC - useful but not strong enough and to indirect

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Sat, 04/04/2009 - 13:52

TSC output is useful, but insufficiently strong in my view.


Elgee, Dare I say what I

  • IceCrusher
  • 14/10/08 25/10/11
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 04/04/2009 - 15:45

Elgee,
Dare I say what I think? That this report is a complete cop-out! The TSC committee tread warily, hedging their bets whilst sitting carefully on the fence. No, there was no evidence that the Icelandics would not pay their guarantees; and yes it was considered heavy-handed to use Anti Crime and Security legislation (please do better next time); yes we do agree that the overarching principle is that HMG should not be responsible for the actions taken in jurisdictions outside of its direct control; but yes we believe that HMG/IoMG should tackle this issue between them (knowing that they won't).

We were put on the back of the agenda at every TSC meeting; scraped in at the last moment as an afterthought - and now we know just where we stand. We thought our letters really meant something to McFall and his Committee, but it was just grist to the mill. This was not a 'normal' banking failure, and when the TSC cannot find any evidence to conjecture if the bank would have failed whether Darling spoke his piece or not, then they cannot find evidence to the contrary either, it's just empty rhetoric.

Darling used the Anti Terrorism legislation as a 'shock and awe' tactic, he and Brown implied that they'd frozen ALL Icelandic assets; they scared UK depositors half to death and generated a run on all UK-based Icelandic banks. He was instrumental in causing KSFUK to fail with our monies in it. It doesn't take a bloody committee to see that for exactly what it was. Darling claimed the £550M was not the Government's - but even Hector Sants had to concede that we depositors were not treated equally due to the Treasury's Transfer Order against the IoM asset being moved. All of these arseholes would claim that a regulator's primary duty is to protect the unsophisticated retail depositor, but all stood aside and let ten thousand ordinary decent saver's monies be subordinated to wholesale deposits in a bank on the mainland not under control of the island's legislator.

We never asked the UK for compensation, we have reiterated that time and again - we don't want or need compensating - we do however want our money back!! We know the UK has it, we know they intend to distribute it amongst UK creditors including the Treasury and FSCS - and no bugger is speaking up for us. Having placed such hope in the TSC, they have let us down abysmally, and have left open a door by which any other party can point to this report and say "you were not supported by the TSC" from which will emanate even more misrepresentations of the facts and lead to a general undermining of our credibility. Thanks TSC, for nothing!


Icecrusher - you said it

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Sat, 04/04/2009 - 19:20

Give me a break! Here I am desperately trying to be uncontentious in the run-up to the next hearing and you go and say just what I would like to have said.

The TSC seems not to have had the necessary bottle.


@elgee

  • IceCrusher
  • 14/10/08 25/10/11
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 04/04/2009 - 19:52

No bottle eh, must have caught that from A Brown when he appeared before them!


'

  • Yorkie
  • 13/10/08 10/12/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 04/04/2009 - 15:40

'


HMG working with IOMG urged

  • sambururob
  • 10/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 04/04/2009 - 12:13

Let us hope that HMG will work constructively with IOMG, as urged by the TSC.
Arranging for the release of KSFIOM funds held by Kaupthing UK, would be constructive.
Urging the IOMG to accept a loan of £550m whilst the mess is sorted would be even more constructive.
It needs someone to make the first positive move....and it is obvious that the IOMG aren't capable so we need HMG to do so.
Probably dreaming!!


Comment to BBC report on TSC report

  • Dave1
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 04/04/2009 - 10:47

My comment to BBC. I urge all others to contribute NOW!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7982277.stm

Quite frankly, after all the damning evidence brought before the TSC in the past 6 months, I am utterly shattered that the committee have failed to recommend compensation in the cases of local councils and UK citizens with accounts in Guernsey and the Isle of Man.
The TSC have heard a litany of regulatory failures leading up to the collapse of the Icelandic banks.
In the case of Kaupthing, the FSA ignored harsh warnings given by Tony Shearer, the former boss of UK bank Singer and Friedlander, prior to its takeover by Kaupthing in 2005.
Then, despite inside information as to the looming problems in Icelandic banks, stretching back to at least early 2008, the FSA did pass on that information. Instead, the FSA & Treasury chose to plot behind the scenes, and invoked anti-terrorism laws at the very last moment to freeze the assets of Landsbanki. This understandably led to panic in the largest and still solvent Kaupthing bank, and a subsequent FSA freeze on its London business shortly after. This was a totally unnecessary and heavy handed approach, and ultimately caused the downfall of Kaupthing worldwide.
And despite what has been said in the press, there was little prior warning of credit rating downgrades of Kaupthing. That is why individuals and the councils continued to invest in the Icelandic banks right up until the day of its demise. Clearly they would not have done that if they’d had the right information.
The FSA had a long standing memorandum of understanding with the Financial Services Commission (FSC) in the Isle of Man, whereby information was regularly exchanged. In discussions in the months before the bank failures, the FSA agreed with that the FSC should move more than 60% (>1/2 billion sterling) of Kaupthing Isle of Man’s deposits to Kaupthing’s London branch for safe-keeping. Some would argue the FSA lured the FSC into that position. The FSA then provided no warning to the FSC of its plan to freeze the accounts, and with it the IOM’s funds, in Kaupthing London. So what about the safe-keeping? The funds have not been returned to the Isle of Man, and the FSA or Treasury has not even made an apology since.
I am one of the ‘unlucky’ c. 10,000 depositors with Kaupthing Isle of Man. The circumstances leading up the freezing of its assets on October 8th last year, and the run for cover by all those implicated since has left me with a profound sense of sadness. Not only because it’s unlikely I will see much of our savings back, and as a result the future for my family has been changed for ever, but because of the lack of accountability shown by those put in high places to protect the assets of individuals. I placed our savings in the bank because it was a AAA rated institution. And it stayed that way right to the bitter end. It was not an “investment”, with an acceptable element of risk. It was a series of deposits in a bank designed for safe-guarding of those deposits.
Why did we end up banking offshore? Because we have lived and worked overseas in recent years, and it was impossible for us to open a UK onshore account without a residential address in the UK. As an example of this, we hold a Lloyds cheque account London set up in more than 25 years ago prior to moving overseas. When we approached Lloyds to open a savings account at the same bank, we were refused, simply because we live overseas – and referred to Lloyds offshore. How fair is that, given the TSC’s decision today?
To top things off, Kaupthing Isle of Man and Landsbanki Guernsey are the only banks in Europe that have not been given guaranteed protection by their governments.
I am appalled by this whole affair. It has caused a great deal of distress in my family and in the thousands of other families just like us. Even more frightening, many impacted by this catastrophe are pensioners, and have no hope of rebuilding their lives. There are many people who have been made destitute by this gross injustice. Lives are clearly at risk.
There are many examples at: http://chat.ksfiomdepositors.org/sites/chat.ksfiomdepositors.org/files/K...
So I sincerely hope the BBC will choose to further highlight the plight of those UK citizens like us caught up in Kaupthing Isle of Man and Landsbanki Guernsey. It is not our fault, and now with the TSC report published today, it is clear no one on this planet really cares for us.


BBC article - where are the comments?

  • AJM UAE
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 04/04/2009 - 11:50

I'm probably just going 'screen blind' but I sent off a comment (like many of the rest of us) and can't spot them anywhere ...

Are they all just being checked at the moment or are they in a different location on the BBC website?

Help!


@TSC Charity Bail Out (depositor's get nothing)

  • IceCrusher
  • 14/10/08 25/10/11
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 04/04/2009 - 07:42

Hi Fight theft,
I am afraid this brings no great surprise to me as the last TSC meeting was carefully directed to cover only what Mr McFall wanted Darling to expound upon as I posted in the IoM and Manx news on the 20th March:

Sir,
If Chancellor Darling was so sure that the Kaupthing UK bank was streaming assets back to Iceland, why do you suppose that he took action against that bank only after using an anti-terror power against Landsbanki IceSave? After all, could the FSA not have determined beforehand that the Kaupthing bank was not going to meet its threshold conditions?

If the Chancellor really wanted to stop assets reaching Iceland it surely would have been prudent and more effective to put the bank under Administration sooner rather than later; as the PM said, extraordinary circumstances demand extraordinary measures.

Representatives from the FSA had been present in the bank in the days preceding its Administration waiting for the moment of reckoning. In fact, KSF UK and KSF IoM were the only banks that had any real worth in them; the need to fund the Icelandics with an IMF loan and force them to pay the guarantees on the IceSave accounts demonstrates that quite well. But KSF had real value, especially with over £1/2 billion of IoM assets locked in it under order of the Treasury. HMT/FSCS will be looking to get back as much of its bail-out monies as possible, and expects this due to being the largest creditor of KSF UK. The £1/2 billion of IoM depositor’s life savings will go a long towards paying the UK Treasury on a pari passu basis.

These matters went without discussion before the TSC as the Icelandic issue was barely scraped into the agenda during the closing minutes.

John McFall steered Darling towards the question of a loan to IoMG, which gave the latter a few seconds muttering over whether or not the IoMT had in fact asked for such a loan (as though he, as Chancellor, would be unaware had this truly occurred!)

The TSC let the depositors down this time; they had garnered heaps of evidence from Shearer/Aspden/Brown, the FSA/FSC and others, but failed to nail Mr Darling with any of it. Maybe the old guard of the CS had mentioned the bigger picture of Kaupthing h.f. in legal pursuit of HMG and negative revelations might not be so good for the UK in the long run.
IceCrusher


Cat's Protection

  • sleepless uk
  • 16/01/09 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 04/04/2009 - 07:36

It will no doubt give us all a warm feeling to know that all those unwanted cats will be tucked up nice and cosy after being compensated by the UK Gov,whilst it will probably be a lot of us scrounging in the bins for food instead. Whilst we all recognise the work people like Christies do,there are equally as many needy cases amongst us.If one gets paid,so should all of us.


HMG is Laughing in the face of it all! 100%100%100%100% NOW.

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Sun, 05/04/2009 - 14:13

It seems to me that HMG is Laughing in the face of it all! and this was engineered to make a POINT....

This was pre planned IT SEEMS we have been DUPED BY OUR OWN GOVERNMENT!

I am appauled at the whole affair, there must be a LEGAL way that our funds can be returned TO THE DEPOSITOR eventually at 100% ??

Not being a Banker or Solicitor Just a mere Nurse I am at a Loss in all ways what is going on? I have been reading many letters and trying to understand the Jargon, but its confusing to most ordinary people, we need all you guys in the Legal Know to convey what hope there is in bringing this to a Positive Legal conclusion for US.

HMG just cannot take our money just when it feels it can, its 3rd World Treatment, NOT the actions of a civilized Society, it appears to me that if YOU have any Money the Government thinks it has a GOD Given right to it!!

NO IT DOES NOT!! Grrrr

Aurora!!


Aurora, then we have to take

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 05/04/2009 - 14:33

Aurora, then we have to take the smile off their face don't we, yes there is a legal way to get HMG to return the money.

This is the text of a letter I have sent to various MPs,Ministers and influential people. I was not the only one involved inn writing this, co-operation is the name of the game here. I ask you to co-operate by emailing your MP as well please. Edit as you will to suit your situation.

Dear Sir
On April 9th. the Isle of Man High Court will finally consider whether the future of recovering KSFIOM depositors monies will be dealt with by a Scheme of Arrangement or via the process of liquidation.

Which ever route is chosen, the fact remains that the British Government confiscated two thirds of our bank's balance sheet when it seized c£557m of KSFIOM assets as it put KSFUK into Administration on 8th.October, 2008 and retained powers, quite exceptionally, under section 27 of Statutory Instrument 2008/2674 whereby no assets may be repaid to creditors by the UK Joint Administrators without the explicit permission of HM Treasury. As Hector Sants of the FSA poinred out KSFIoM is not being treated as any other creditor here.

Irrespective of any IoM High Court direction to call a Scheme Meeting and the outcome of subsequent voting, the clarification and maximisation of 'London monies' return remains the single most important factor that will determine actual realisation of cash for depositors, especially, but not exclusively, High Value Depositors.
Consequently, contacting MP's to encourage HMG to intervene consistent with their Clause 27 reserved powers. and for IoMG to press this dialogue is of the greatest importance.

There are 11,358 of us, with some 14,059 accounts and total savings of £893,844,804, which we may not access and which are at risk. Most of us are British citizens, some living in the UK, others retired or working abroad.

Despite the British Government trying to present a view to the contrary, the Isle of Man is a well regulated and transparent financial centre and those of us who have our life savings there are not a shower of tax dodgers !! We want our money back.

The events of the last six months have had a dramatic impact on the personal circumstances of KSFIOM depositors and it is politicians alone who now hold the key to resolving a complex and difficult situation.In particular, please can you write to the Chancellor to ask:
• whether he is willing to work with the Isle of Man government to find a solution
• what discussions he has had with the Isle of Man to find a way of
getting 100% back to victims
• whether the UK government would consider a loan to the Isle of Man government to enable 100% compensation
• whether he is willing to undertake the following intervention, a simple solution within the UK Chancellor's power that would actually cost UK Government nothing

I would ask you to urge the Chancellor to intervene with the UK Joint Administrators using his Clause 27 (SI 2008/2674) powers so that the inter-company sums and asset classes remaining are properly identified at KSFUK and that a quantified commitment be given to The Isle of Man Government for such assets to be returned in due course to the rightful control of the Joint Provisional Liquidators for KSFIOM .

There is no doubt that KSFUK balance sheet position is complex, but if a quantified commitment is given by HMG for the return of London seized assets for time ahead ( the original figure was of the order $557m being two third's of our bank's balance sheet), the IoMG would in turn be able to ensure 100% recovery=2 0of KSFIOM savers money, which is Gordon Brown's cry for all jurisdictions world wide; and the Isle of Man is a well managed (hence it's place on the OECD White List), and the depositors at KSFIOM are ordinary hard working or retired people), not a shower of tax dodgers, and up until the British intervention on October 8th. 2008 KSFIOM was a solvent well run bank with no toxic debt and strong core ratios.

Furthermore, such a quantified commitment to return assets due KSFIOM would potentially allow a third party financial institution to step in and buy the residual business at KSFIOM thus opening up a greater range of possibilities for depositor and creditor recovery, ongoing business, and a multiplier effect into broader economic recovery.

All we need from London right now is an overt quantified commitment to return the lump of our bank's balance sheet locked up since October 8th. 2008 and over which the Chancellor has exceptional clause 27 reserved powers of return. There is precedent already in monies being returned to Mr D Whelan amongst otheres, there is therfore, no legal impedement to this action.

As you know the House of Commons Treasury Select Committee has now published its report into the impact of the failure of Icelandic banks. Regarding the collapse of Kaupthing Singer & Friedlander (Isle of Man) Limited, the Committee has supported calls for the UK and Isle of Man governments to work together to find a solution. The Treasury Committee has also agreed with many of the points I and others have raised, concluding that: the collapse of KSFIoM “was caused, in part, by steps taken by the UK Government to transfer deposits from the KSF UK branch to ING.”…..“the majority of those affected are not sophisticated, investors of high net worth who are somehow insulated from the losses they have incurred; and many people were “forced to deposit their money offshore, outside the protection of the Financial Services Authority, and the Financial Services Compensation Scheme, as a direct result of the way in which Financial Services Authority regulations were interpreted in the UK”

Its conclusion is “strongly urging the UK authorities to work with those of the Isle of Man and Guernsey to resolve these issues.”

In light of this parliamentary reports statements I/we would urge you to use your influence to assure that action is taken to comply with the TSC Report and that both the UK and Isle of Man Governments work together to deliver 100% return of our money.

Yours sincerely


Expat Thanks!

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Sun, 05/04/2009 - 16:19

.... for your advice, have emailed MP'S before but will get onto it again.... we just have to dig our heels in !!!
AURORA!!


Cats

  • steveservaes
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 06/04/2009 - 15:16

I shall try very hard to run over a cat on the way home