FSC's Role in Transfer

  • malc
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
Posted: Sun, 26/10/2008 - 07:48

Creating a new Topic so that it doesn't get lost until we have all the answers. The purpose of this topic is to establish, who, what, when re the FSC and the transfer of funds out of KSF IoM.

Pretty certain this stuff has already been raised, but can't find it on the site.

According to the FSC's website, Mr Cashen, the Island's former chief financial officer, is a director of KSF (IoM) Ltd, Kaupthing Holdings (IoM) Ltd, Singer & Friedlander International Ltd and Singer & Friedlander Investment Management (IoM) Ltd.

Mr Cashen was previously the Island's chief financial officer – his signature appeared on Manx bank notes – retiring in 2001. He served in the Treasury with Donald Gelling, who is a non-executive director of KSF (IoM).

Asked whether Mr Cashen should now step down from his position with the FSC, Mr Aspden referred our inquiries to the Treasury.

Mr Aspden said 'defensive measures' were taken by the FSC after problems with the Icelandic banking system emerged to ensure that the bank did not have any 'direct exposure' to Iceland.

He said: 'Issues concerning Icelandic banks had been in the public domain for a while. The commission closely monitored and reviewed this and took defensive measures as a result. That's clearly something the board did of its own volition. Mr Cashen wasn't involved.'

Mr Aspden explained that the 'defensive measures' involved ensuring that KSF deposits were placed with the bank in London and not Reykjavik.

Mr Cashen was unavailable for comment.

What ‘defensive measures’ exactly were taken by the FSC?

‘Ensuring KSF Deposits were placed with the bank in London’

  1. On whose authority?
  2. What date & time did this take place?
  3. How much exactly was transferred?
  4. Where exactly were the funds transferred?
  5. What method was used to transfer the funds?
  6. Did the FSC have court authority to take over funds?
  7. Did the FSC ‘instruct’ KSF to send the funds?
  8. Who actually transferred the funds, KSF or FSC?
  9. What was Mr. Cashens exact role in the transfer?
    1. Were the FSC aware of the UK’s intention when funds were transferred?
    2. Have the FSC sort to have the funds returned based on the fact they transferred or instructed the transfer funds which, as they themselves state in their petition, were required for the bank to operate?

malc

0
Your rating: None

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

John Cashen

  • barrie stevens
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 26/10/2008 - 10:13

John Cashen of the FSC and on the Board of KSF (IOM) Ltd was for many years a very senior UK Inland Revenue tax official before returning to the Isle of Man.

He was also once a lecturer at the UK Inland Revenue Staff College.

I think that he was also the Island's Assessor of Taxes or senior tax man but I may be wrong..

John Cashen was the Island's Chief Financial Officer and his signature appeared on banknotes issued by Isle of Man Bank (part of RBS now part nationalised it seems!).

John Cashen was part of the IOM Treasury Tribunal I was invited to face along with then Treasury Minister later Chief Minister Richard Corkill following on from the many hundreds of letters I have published in the IOM and Channel Islands.

It is quite usual for the Isle of Man to hire or second Inland Revenue now HMRC officials to assist with tax enforcement and collection on the Isle of Man and there are several there now last I heard putting some ginger into the system

Everyone on the Isle of Man knows everyone else and their business and so
it is necessary to get outsiders in who have no family connections.

It is the same for both the VAT man and the Police.


John Cashen (Barrie is completely WRONG)

  • Manxboy
  • 15/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 26/10/2008 - 18:39

Your getting him (Cashen) confused with Ian Kelly the old Assessor of Income Tax who did work for UK revenue at a reasonably high level and returned to work for IOM treasury (tax). Stop posting Barrie you are a total embarrassment and are basically talking through your a**e. These people don't need to read your posts, they want their money back.

Any valid point you may make is totally dis-credited by your lack of knowledge. I guess I'm looking at a 5,000 word response to this post - full of complete **** like all the others.


"Everyone on the Isle of Man

  • cold-dose
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 26/10/2008 - 18:08

"Everyone on the Isle of Man knows everyone else and their business and so it is necessary to get outsiders in who have no family connections."

Nonsense... why then do most of the doctors, teachers, etc. get recruited from the UK?

Might it be that it's the logical place to go to recruit experienced and qualified professionals of this type?

Please stop drawing dodgy conclusions and stick to facts Barrie.


FSC's Role in transfer

  • malc
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 26/10/2008 - 07:49

What I'm trying to establish is a timeframe for the events that led up to and including the transfer of funds from IoM to UK.

When the joint petition was presented by Kaupthing & FSC, the funds had already gone. That means they must have had prior notice or instructions from the UK.

Question is did the FSC take it upon themselves to transfer funds or did they instruct KSF to do so. In either case, there must be some documentary record of this

malc


yes was it a co-ordinated

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 26/10/2008 - 15:52

yes was it a co-ordinated action and if so why weren't ksf iom put in a safe house? i've been bashing my head around tha for a week now


'Safe house'?

  • cold-dose
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 26/10/2008 - 18:10

Expat,

To put that in much more practical terms... why didn't KSFIOM demand collateral against the funds they advanced to KSF UK? Why didn't FSC advise such a move?


yes sorry cold-dose i coudnt

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 26/10/2008 - 19:13

yes sorry cold-dose i coudnt think of better way of xplaining a tthe time, think you for being so erudite


the aspden tapes

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 26/10/2008 - 16:44

Yes.. this link from Manx radio.
http://www.manxradio.com/readNEwsItem.aspx?id=26996
Note, "...Aspden has described how funds were switched from Reykjavik to London when the liquidity of the Icelandic bank was called into question". Full text from website below. There is another report (looking for it) of how this was commenced as early as "the Spring". Please keep in mind this decision may turn out to be genious IF we get it back - because if it was in Iceland right now, we'd have a 550 mil legal claim against a 3rd world fishing village. Lets get the facts. Blair

"A fuller picture is emerging as to how millions of pounds in assets from Kaupthing Singer and Friedlander (Isle of Man) were placed with the bank's United Kingdom operation, only to be trapped there when it was put into administation.

Chief Executive of the Financial Supervision Commission John Aspden has described how funds were switched from Reykjavik to London when the liquidity of the Icelandic bank was called into question.

But 'the gate came down', the funds were frozen in the UK, and are now effectively trapped there.

Political and legal moves are underway to have them returned.

Mr Aspden (pictured) says the FSC made a crucial decision in the bank's best interests, but could not have foreseen the outcome

He also says all creditors have to be treated equally and the Isle of Man can't expect to be a priority:

"The idea of just lifting out assets from London and repaying them to the Isle of Man, whilst appearing very attractive, could mean that the Isle of Man would be getting priority.

"I know that lawyers are looking carefully at the basis on which funds were placed with the London bank, to see whether such a segregation or prioritisation might be justified, but at the moment I think it's premature to presume that could happen."

Transcription of separate extract taken from the same interview:

"With the benefit of hindsight it might have been better originally if the deposits had come back from Iceland and not been put in London, but at the time this was something that we had discussed with the regulatory authorities in London. They were placed with a bank in London for deployment within regulatory norms, so I think it was a prudent decision.

"(It's) easy to look at with the benefit of hindsight, but at the time no one obviously knew what was going to happen


expat..Aspden

  • mikeinfrance
  • 12/10/08 28/09/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 26/10/2008 - 18:59

Expat , I assume you listened to the Aspden interview,
http://www.manxradio.com/listenagain.aspx (Tuesday/Mandate AM)

Haven't listened to it all the way through since Tuesday but I'm pretty sure he mentioned "as early as the spring" referring to problems with Icelandic banks/movement of funds to UK.

Other things that seem relevant to me are the fact that the funds were transferred to KSFUK following discussions with the FSA. ie the FSA were & are aware that the funds are in KSFUK

Aspden also said: "They were placed with a bank in London for deployment within regulatory norms, so I think it was a prudent decision".... What do you think was meant by "within regulatory norms" ?

Any way of finding out what's happening in the ongoing IOM/UK meetings in London?


the timeline is what doen't

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 26/10/2008 - 19:06

the timeline is what doen't add up spring or recently o both? thats what i want to know as well. i am also convinced that the fsa and fsc acted in concert, i cant shed anymore light on this at present, thats why i asked for a trawl through all our info to see what we have that might enlighten us. it has been driving me even more barking that i usually am trying to get this timeline sorted from here
i noted the seemed like a good idea at the time remark, this is why ive been going on about the fsa/fsc relatioship hoping somebody would enlighten me
as to the norms i am afriad i have to defer to cold-dose on that
we will find what we cn tomorrow of the meetings, the island is closed today!!


timeline - what it could have been

  • manx-person
  • 17/10/08 31/05/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 26/10/2008 - 19:19

My guess is they would have acted on something that was in the public domain
This could have been a periodic liquidity return that identified something
It could have been analyst research - ie the Morgan Stanley report
It could have been a rating downgrade
Or it could have been as a result of Consolidated supervision, if indeed this was taking place


I think we also need to know

  • expatfrance1
  • 15/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 26/10/2008 - 14:49

I think we also need to know what part did the FSA have in the transfer of funds.

It very much looks like a sizeable portion of the Landsbanki deposits were also transfered to their UK arm in or around the same time frame (last 6 months).

I find it highly unlikely that two regulators in two different offshore islands decided to take the same action at around the same time.

Were the FSA the catalyst behind this?


the right questions

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Sun, 26/10/2008 - 12:06

Those are the right questions. I am working on trying to find the answers.


FSC's Role in transfer

  • malc
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 26/10/2008 - 07:50

"Mr Aspden explained that the 'defensive measures' involved ensuring that KSF deposits were placed with the bank in London and not Reykjavik."

This statement would indicate

a) that the FSC knew that if they left the funds in IoM that Iceland might want to try and get their hands on them or
b) they knew the funds would be safe from Icelandic hands in the UK because they knew the government was going to seize the banks assets.

malc


If the aim of this transfer

  • expatfrance1
  • 15/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 26/10/2008 - 14:44

If the aim of this transfer of funds was to protect them from being got at by the parent bank in Iceland, why transfer them to another subsidiary of the same parent bank.

Not the brightest of moves I would suggest!


simpson comment at meeting

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 26/10/2008 - 16:32

Mr Simpson told those present that the point has been made to the FSA in London that much of the money involved was individuals’ money and it was “sympathetic”.

He added that it will probably transpire that what happened to us was a ‘”side effect” and that UK authorities didn’t realise that what they did would affect depositors in the IOM.


Expat

  • arny
  • 15/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 26/10/2008 - 15:24

Could you have a look at this please


yes i have been reading this,

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 26/10/2008 - 15:50

yes i have been reading this, there is also a transcript somewhere which bbliar postted that is contradictory, aspden said such things as
it seemsed a good idea at the time and in hindsight etc

that transcript is also contradictory but i can't find it

when was money moved spring or recently, where to and why wasn;t it ringfenced? inside suggested the money from ksf iom was ringfenced as other banks were being investigatd, not sure about thta but i can never erconcile fsc words with th actions


Expat, Is this the link you

  • expatfrance1
  • 15/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 26/10/2008 - 16:05

Expat,

Is this the link you were looking for?

http://www.manxradio.com/readNEwsItem.aspx?id=26996


there is also a remark by

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 26/10/2008 - 16:02

there is also a remark by mike simpson posted by dave bradden on the iom meeting with him, right at the end that intruiges a s well, but i have got so lost on this ite i can't find that either now


Link To Mike Simpson

  • expatfrance1
  • 15/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 26/10/2008 - 16:10

Malc

  • barrie stevens
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 26/10/2008 - 12:03

And when I tried to get this over I was called a conspiracy theorist!

The UK has a great deal of say behind the arras on the Isle of Man and it regularly rides roughshod over local interests when UK affairs are at stake.

It only takes a 'phone call and a funny handshake.


Conspiracy theorist

  • cold-dose
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 26/10/2008 - 18:14

No Barrie, you said that the UK was the political master of the FSC, not Tynwald.

The FSC reports only to Tynwald - the UK (including the FSA) has no powers to tell them what to do.

That doesn't stop the FSC deciding to listen to 'advice' from the FSA, but it's their decision and it's on their heads.