DCS - reviving an old donkey

  • Anonymous
  • unspecified
  • Offline
Posted: Sun, 01/02/2009 - 05:59

Court hearing a success? What success would that be, like? Mebbe it was for some folks. Who am I to argue? But chew on this - who’s happy that we now have an EPS (Easy Pay-off Scandal) of 10k rather than the statutory DCS (that’s the Depositors Comeuppance Shambles, for any newcomers) of 50k?

It’s just been SoA (Suckers of you All) vs winding up (no, not you; that’s the winding up of the liquidator provisionally’s bank), like the telly’s stuck on Granada. What of the DCS? It’s out of sight and off the site.

I am very angry and fed up that the DCS has still not been activated. Fifteen weeks of adjournments and postponements and extensions and excuses. And another three weeks of worry in a cold winter coz we can’t pay the gasman for the heating.

How come the Easy Payoff Scandal has been devised from scratch and is now up and running (in its miserable 1k form), when the DCS is becoming a four-letter word? No, I’m not talking only to the under 50k losers here, wouldn’t the super losers also like 50k to be getting along with? But we’re all so busy wrangling details and precision out of the SoA, that we’re getting used to our plight, losing our fight - even our leaders sold out - while I got nowt; nowt at all out of that court hearing.

Liquidation, DCS up to 50k, the excess paid out penny per pound, and a DAG campaign for a top-up fund to cover 100% from the IoM? What d’ya reckon: a resurrection of a great old idea or something new you’ve never considered?

I want the DCS up and running, NOW! I want my heating on!

4.2
Your rating: None Average: 4.2 (5 votes)

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

Sweet FA so far!

  • drglowry
  • 14/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 02/02/2009 - 00:34

Thus far, we have seen Sweet FA of our savings. Despite the cheap publicity stunt of "early payout" (in my case, the 1,000 GBP would represent around .33 of 1% of what they have taken from me), not a single penny has been paid out, except to E & Y, Alix Partners, and others who are assisting this slow-motion bank robbery. So, who gains? Follow the money and see who is holding the bag?

Maybe steenJp is on to something when proposing: "Liquidation, DCS up to 50k, the excess paid out penny per pound, and a DAG campaign for a top-up fund to cover 100% from the IoM? What d’ya reckon: a resurrection of a great old idea or something new you’ve never considered?"

Whilst the push for a 100% guarantee has prompted a good many letters to the various parties who are either holding our money or are tasked to sort the mess out, now would be the time to notch up the pressure with an organised campan, as steenJp suggests. Making a list of individuals and organisations who should be petitioned would help. I, for one, will begin with the lists included in "LETTER TO IOM FROM A SMALL GROUP OF DEPOSITORS" and in "A LETTER TO TSC FROM A SMALL GROUP OF DEPOSITORS." Each or us needs to send our own, individually written message, I think.

Time is growing short. The clock is running.


EPS - 10K

  • id2cgs
  • 23/01/09 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 01/02/2009 - 10:09

IMHO neither of these routes is fair or equitable to the whole of DAG.

DCS only applies to private depositors. Bondholders get the £1K EPS because Insurance COs. claim it for them whether they want it or not! Small businesses etc, not sure but they don't appear to have ben offered anything.
DCS won't kick in anyway until after Oct 9th 2009 because of possibility of another bank failure.

The increased £10K EPS, according to Allan Bell's 2nd affadavit of 26/1/09 para 8 Ist sentence,:-
"The government is especially conscious of the impact of the provisional liquidation of KFSIOM on Depositors with deposits not exceeding £10000".

This reads to me that £10K will only be available to up to £10K depositors.

The foreign currency group may stand to lose 20%+ if the $, euro exchange rate against £ is different to that as at 9/10/08 and they are forced to accept sterling.

Smaller depositors may in time recover everything, larger depositors would take a h**l of a lot longer, probably never achieving 100% return.

Surely this does not support the DAG statement 100% return for us all!

As a bondholder neither route is of any help to me or my partner as we both have £20K in individual bonds. This was done by design in line with old DCS payment but we still fell foul, as we were never told we were part of corporate investment. We all have axes to grind and have entrusted our hard earned money to what we now know was a "time bomb waiting to explode" not a good, safe, well run bank!

However I personally would hate to see all our efforts and a delay of 4 months result in an unfunded DCS which is neither use nor ornament and will take at least 8 months to pay anyone anything!

What will the LP's £140 million give us all!


DCS

  • bobwin
  • 23/12/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 01/02/2009 - 06:24

DCS = up to 50k for all by law and why did they increase from 15K--PR?
I am not proud and will take the 10k EPS(or is that EPNS--early payment not scheme?)
It is 30C here so no problem with heating!
It is unlikely that the suits are suffering from cold toes this sunday and do they care--I don't think it will spoil the taste of roast lunch--salivating already.
I feel that the IOM don't want to activate the DCS because of the negative publicity--they want to say how clever we are and arranged things so all the customers would be better of than just the bare minimum--then they can fudge the issues for ever.
The DCS is stark and clear and the financial world is watching.
I look forward to seeing the votes on the poll i set so i can write to those who presumed a great deal---i am surprised they don't use their remote mind reading talents in a tv show---worth a fortune!

regards


DCS

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Sun, 01/02/2009 - 20:41

I too am currently favouring the DCS, although that was also my position at the outset. Like the DAG team, I gave the SoA route a chance and decided, on the basis of what little was supplied by way of detail and the absence of concrete terms and the required surrender of certain legal rights (including rights under the DCS if necessary at some later time), that the SoA did not merit further consideration.