General Discussions

  • ng
  • 11/10/08 31/12/20
  • a depositor
  • Offline
Posted: Fri, 10/10/2008 - 05:39

Any general chat about what is going on that doesn't fall into any other categories.

IMPORTANT: How to post links to related News on other sites

As of 21/Oct/08 we have a searchable news archive. Site editors (and anybody else who wants to help) now have the mammoth task of find and re-posting all relevant links that were posted in forums and re-posting as a news item into the archive.

It would be appreciated if you didn't make the task even bigger than it currently is.

Please post news items using the Create new News item link near top of right side-bar.

4.833335
Your rating: None Average: 4.8 (6 votes)

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

I don not disagree

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 09:14

I don not disagree nealjohnson, but the devil is in the detail
there are a series of threads to follow in this debacle
1 the political angle between UK and Iceland, the who said what bit and the reaction of Darling and Brown in public statements
2. the Landbanski order and the legal thread of consequences. both 1 and 2 arguably caused a run on our bank
3 The KSF administartion in UK, how did the FSC/FSA handle our deposits, why are they exposed to being used for purposes other than giving the money back to us?
4 Who was acting under instructions from whom when money was moved to UK?

All these threads have a liofe of their own in some ways, but at certain moments touch each other, and it is how it all happened that may clarify how we get it back

hope that makes sense!!!


Still frustrating

  • ItsTheft
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 09:35

Yes, it makes sense, but it does get frustrating at times - so little info leaves us with inference and speculation. Like you, I am used to negotiating big deals and I know there are ways and means. Would just love to be priivy to some of these conversations, or better yet, priivy to a few more facts....

How much in KSF UK coffers? What sort of claims against them? Who will work to orchestrate a deal that results in us getting our savings? Chances are that there isn't a big pot of cash that can just be allocated to us, so someone will have to bear some pain. I mean, is there someone who will try and broker a deal whereby we all get our money back and it is funded partly by UK treasurey, IOM FSC, KSF UK, KSF IOM, Iceland (through loans from UK specifically for this purpose), etc.????

Would like to say, that though I am not particularly vocal on this forum, I do keep up, and I am behind you. Thanks for your commitment expat. For the record, I only have £30k in it, but I am in full support of a solution that does NOT result in us only getting IOM FSC compensation. I don't even use the term "lost money" or "compensation". I put money in that bank and just have not drawn it out yet.


neal thanks and yes it is

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 09:46

neal thanks and yes it is very frustrating at times, trynng to do a critical path analyiss almost, in my head, is a bit of a bugger.

I have always assumed that given how quickly some worked out what had happened that there woud be a lot of activity to save a lot of faces in this. i have to assume that deal is being brokered, 'cos its not logicl to think any other way.
but hen that assumes some of these people are logical doesn't it!!!


Grundberg, Mokatta, and Rakkison LLP

  • gerry paul johnson
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 09:29

Is there anything WE as a group can do to assist Grundberg etc in their considerations as to whether they can represent us?


Already in Touch

  • Diver
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 09:32

We've been in touch with this firm for a couple of weeks now. We're waiting to hear back from them on a few points we asked and they were also looking into whether or not they could represent us (if it ever came to that) or if they're conflicted. I don't believe there is anything else they need from us right now.


On the case

  • gerry paul johnson
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 09:42

Well done team, this just shows an element of what is going on "behind the scenes" for those who think that nothing is happening, although the days with no news are terminally frustrating.
Is it not now about time for a fresh update from Mike Simpson?


Mike Simpson update?

  • mikeinfrance
  • 12/10/08 28/09/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 20:07

Yes indeed What has he been doing for the last week?? Even his last update wasn't very informative!


Re GBP555m - explanation

  • sabi Star
  • 10/10/08 n/a (free)
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 11:55

That's certainly news to me. I've had the impression that everyone has been saying/querying this money was sent to UK by IOM FSC for various reasons including - safe keeping so that it was not transferred to Iceland.
Also - had impression it was sent in a lump sum - hence references to whether it was "ring-fenced" in UK as "our" money.
Further - it has be "seized" or "frozen" by UK govt?
Now none of above applies?


Yes yes yes!! KSF IoM were

  • Captain Mainwaring
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 08:29

Yes yes yes!!
KSF IoM were forced to move the money, it wasn't just a suggestion - whoever did the forcing must have some liability of their actions caused us a loss.


fsc liability

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 10:12

It appears the FSC acted in our interest by diverting money from Iceland to the UK. It will be difficult to fault them for that. The FSC could not forsee the UK action. It would have been nice if the FSC had somehow secured this transfer, wouldn't it? It would have been great if the money had remained on the island....


not quite they left it wide

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 13:25

not quite they left it wide open for the uk gov to take it, that is where the problem is and they know it! so yes they can be faulted


welcome aboard capt!!!!

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 09:48

welcome aboard capt!!!!


Well lets hope those who did

  • IceCrusher
  • 14/10/08 25/10/11
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 08:37

Well lets hope those who did the forcing are big enough to pay! Pray expound your theory dear chap, what's the scoop?

Ice


All the time we keep worrying

  • Captain Mainwaring
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 08:55

All the time we keep worrying about the amount etc and if we will get it back, but key to this is the fact the KSF IoM were required, not asked, to move money from Iceland to the UK because it Iceland was considered to be risky - am I basically correct about that?

Ok, if correct, if for whatever reason your force somone or something to do something, then you are assumed to take over the duty of care for that action - am I correct in assuming (and forget about freezing etc), that KSF IoM were required and not given a choice about the lodgement of these funds? If so, it seems to me that whoever did the requiring should assume duty of care for those funds, and exercised due diligence in their safekeeping , and if at any point as it has been suggested, the situation regarding the safety of those funds became in the least bit doubtful, then they should have moved them out again. Since they didn't, I would say that they have a duty of care regarding any loss (not including offsets - as they should have been aware that they were a liability to KSF IoM).

I'm probably getting all excited about this, when in reality the Treasury or whoever did not order the movement of the funds etc.


The search for deep pockets

  • Alastair
  • 10/10/08 30/09/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 13:37

As cold-dose says hopefully whoever did the "forcing" has deep pockets. FSA, IOM Treasury/Gov't or FSC. Is the FSC "independent" of the IOM Gov't?

Either way if forced I'd be surprised if we didn't have stone wall case against the relevant party for some failure. This should provide all the motivation to sort this out. A regulator found to be negligent would be terrible thing for future business.


FSC

  • cold-dose
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 17:28

The FSC is operationally independent of the Isle of Man Government, but is still a public body.

As for negligence - surely the obvious question is if the FSC were concerned about Icelandic banks, why did they just shift the funds to another part of the same bank? Why not spread the deposit across a few banks, or insist that there is collateral for the deposit?


And the Fate of the £160m Swag Lifted (Allegedly) by Reykjavik?

  • VikingRaider
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 00:54

While efforts to recover the £550-600m bottled up in the UK are to be commended, I hope some intepid souls are bending ears in Douglas and London to root out the oft-mentioned £160m booty spirited away by the Hole-in-the-Wall Gang in Reykjavik. National economic misfortune notwithstanding, this would be be a criminal act and the Icelandic Government should be pursued accordingly. Interpol, perhaps?


re And the Fate of the £160m Swag Lifted Allegedly by Reykjavik?

  • skintagainnow
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 00:55

Ah but -- on the balance sheet 30th Sept 2008

assets

cash with Kaupthing hf £195,086,000.00

liabilities

deposit from Kaupthing hf £185,156,000.00

so offset would apply and that drops it to under 10m, unless something drastic changed in the last week - and we are led to belive that no funds were transfered to Kaupthing hf.


A mere £10m to Reykjavik? Small change, really.

  • VikingRaider
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 05:49

Well, I suppose I would have only frittered it away on fine wine, good food and fast women when what I really need is a hard bed, a bowl of gruel and a candle to keep me warm. Every cloud has a silver lining.


Media

  • Stunned Mullet
  • 17/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 11:42

Looks like the story is going cold as there has been little in the media for some days. I think we need to keep the issue in the press and to that end, our ex-RAF colleague who volunteered himself for an interview I believe would be an attractive "human" angle for te press. I hope someone followed up on his offer? He's clearly a man of honour.

Stunned Mullet


Media

  • Ramsey resident
  • 22/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 12:24

See todays Daily Mail City and Finance section - new column space


Interesting web site

  • Maud
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 11:15

Interesting what David McGregor has to say about Offshore Banking.
visit www.offshorebankingalert.com. Maud


Strange

  • mikepapa
  • 10/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 01:21

Just had a quick look at it. Seems he is recommending IOM as a safe place for offshore banking. Rather strange under the circumstances!!


beware

  • joooojoooo
  • 10/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 23:49

Just someone trying to capitalise on our misfortune. Delete it!!


AN EXPLANATION OF THE £555M

  • Diver
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 10:34

From the numerous questions being suggested for the TSC surrounding the £555m (approx) that was deposited in KSFUK there appears to be a misunderstanding of the nature of these funds.

To KSFIOM those funds were a deposit in KSFUK just like we all has deposits in KSFIOM.

To KSFUK these were funds with which to do business. So, just like KSFIOM used our deposits to give mortgages and loans, KSFUK would have used these funds to carry on it's normal business of being a bank. As a result, I think it's very unlikely that there is £555m sat somewhere in a vault waiting to be returned to the IoM...it isn't that simple.

Therefore, questions requesting the Treasury/FSA/Administrators/Government to 'release' our funds back to the IoM are not particularly pertinent as there probably isn't anything to release.

What we need to be concentrating on is the fact that the UK authorities knew that we had deposits there and yet failed to protect them. We know that discussions took place between the FSA and the FSC and still we were forgotten when the crisis broke.

Yes we want our deposits back (all £555m) but it's not a matter of unfreezing cash. This will be a process of making sure we get our share of any proceeds of the sale of KSFUK assets (such as their loan book which we at least part funded) as well as holding the UK responsible for any losses.


Which partially explains...

  • uptight61
  • 14/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 21:24

Which partially explains why this hellish process is taking such a long time as things need to be wound up.....Thanks, Diver.


which is why my litttle

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 21:52

which is why my litttle evchange with cold-dose last evening about note 12 was so very important, you can;t ask the right questions unless you have the correct hypothosis, thats what all the detective work has been about to make sure we had the correct story line not a guess at it


request for Expat

  • mikepapa
  • 10/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 22:27

Expat,

getting a bit lost here - what topic page was your exchange with dold-dose of last evening posted on?
I should like to read it.

Cheers


no idea mikepapa, i never

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 22:29

no idea mikepapa, i never know what page i am on, probably general discussions


Ok .... obviously we both

  • mikepapa
  • 10/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 22:35

Ok .... obviously we both have the same problem.

I'm hunting for it now.

Anyone else with a link to Expat exhange with cold-dose last night please post link.

Cheers


mikepapa try the fsc transfer

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 22:39

mikepapa try the fsc transfer etc thread it might have been there,


OK found it .........thanks

  • mikepapa
  • 10/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 22:49

OK found it .........thanks


Expat just double check note 4

  • Ally
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 21:55

I saw you exchange with cold-dose last night but take a look at the related parties note - note 4

In 2006 the bulk of cash at bank was at KSF UK.

However if you look at the postion at 31 Dec 2007 the cash was split Iceland 396,692, UK 79,372.


yes intereting isn't it

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 22:01

yes intereting isn't it


Note 4

  • Ally
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 22:10

I meant this would tend to support the FSC's argument. As at December 07 they had almost £400 million on deposit in Iceland and only £80 million in the UK.

The FSC are saying they told Kaupthing to change this and so by 30 Sept 08 £557 million was on deposit in London and £195 million on deposit in Iceland but also they had £185 lend from Iceland leaving an exposure of only £10 million to Iceland and an exposure of £557 million (or maybe £390m if I can figure out if the funded sub-participation was secured) to London.


Yep, it looks like you're

  • cold-dose
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 01:04

Yep, it looks like you're right there. Good spot!


557 or 390 million

  • Monkeyface3604
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 22:34

Im no expert but 103 which is currently in IOM + 450 on the loan book would indicate 390 in London as all added up they come to the 850 (about)million. Unless of course they were extremely solvent....which according to IOM they were.....so maybe im just talking rubbish!!!


Monkey, you need to have a

  • thesunnysouth
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 22:49

Monkey, you need to have a look at the balance sheet attached to the Aiden Docherty affadavit. The assets/liabilities as of 30th Sept amounted to 1.3 billion with the cash line at £180m with only £103 thus far recovered


£103 million

  • Ally
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 23:09

I think it would be safe to assume the £180 million at 30 Sept was reduced to about £100 million (the amount now held by PWC as provisional liquidator) by customers withdrawing their deposits. As the customer liabilites on 30 Sept were £927 million but by 8th October customer deposits are mentioned at being in the region of £820 to £840 million.


Yep that would tally and also

  • thesunnysouth
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 23:14

Yep that would tally and also account for the request by IoM to Iceland for more funds. It would also suggest that the vast majority of the £557 is not liquid but invested. If it was liquid and IoM could use it to pay depositors withdrawals there would not have been a need to ask Iceland for money.
We need to get hold of the latest balance sheet for the UK KSF. That may give an indication as to how secure their investments are and what percentage of their loan book is IoM money.


KSF UK Accounts

  • Ally
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 00:03

I have a copy of KSF UK Dec 07 accounts, the latest publicly available but things would have obviously changed by October 08.

The bank had total assets of £5.8 billion. Of which only £257million was kept in cash and £383 in Treasury deposits which are instantly convetible in to cash, so approx £630 million was kept in cash form.

So I think it is safe to assume that any IoM money sent to London would have been used to lend on as loan mrtgages etc, so I would imagine today after a silent run on the bank there would be very, very little in the way of cash there.

In terms of inter-company transactions with the Isle of Man unfortunately this get grouped together with any group undertakings in the related parties note and so it is impossible to see the opposit entries we can see in the Isle of Man accounts.

If you what to look at the UK accounts if someone can explain how to I can put them up as an attachment (although it is 2.4mb) please let me know.


Very, very little cash

  • cold-dose
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 01:01

The reason the FSA moved in on KSF UK appears to have been lack of liquidity left at KSF UK following the run.


And one would have thought

  • Captain Mainwaring
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 07:52

And one would have thought that a little light would have switched on and someone would have remembered that they had charged KSF IoM to place money on deposit with the UK, surely someone should have considered that 500M ish of that money was already earmarked?


Ally, In some ways there is

  • thesunnysouth
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 00:16

Ally,
In some ways there is good news. Yes some or all the cash may have gone but that still leaves over £5b in assets albeit it is out of date the loans are unlikely to alter massively. HMG have handed over £2.3 in deposits to ING so who within KSF UK is owed £3billion? We know we are owed .5billion but I have not heard on the news anything about major investors losing their money as a result of KSF going down.
The sooner E&Y get working on the loan book the better we are in determining when we get the £557M back.
HMG must be pressing for this as well. They are owed £2.3B and HMG will want that back ASAP.


thesunnysouth

  • Monkeyface3604
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 22:51

Where can i access it???


Monkeyface

  • thesunnysouth
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 23:10

This was posted a couple of days ago. It takes a while to open as apparently its a 2mg download. Basically its his 2nd affadavit and a number of apendices. Number 7 I think is the balance sheet. Its the last page in this document. It ill explain some of the other comments on here regarding finances and makes things clearer.
http://www.gov.im/lib/docs/fsc/PressReleases/2ndaffidavitmradoherty.pdf

John


ally thanks for the hard work

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 22:24

ally thanks for the hard work looking at that i hope gutterd wiill expain our position on this, its good info but its what happened to the money in uk that is the question, as it stands there seems to be no documentation to say that the money is iom, that is the cruix of this in our opinion, not the rebalancing act itself, its again about the detail of the action


Expat - I agree with you

  • Ally
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 22:34

Expat

I agree totally with you. It seems some "oversights" could/have occured.

However I just wanted to highlight that some of the figure in the accounts can be used by the FSC to show action was taken.

Do we now if anyone can find out if the sub-participation was secured? I have asked Mike Simpson, still waiting for a reply? As if it isn't the the black hole in KSF IoM accounts becomes smaller and smaller numbers make for more numerous solutions.


they had to get something

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 22:38

they had to get something right ally!! no i am glad you raised it, it made us look and expand the phone bill again!!

the question has been asked but no response i am told. but look at the KSF london report it may be there but we can't find it!


Note 12/Note 4 - expat

  • manx-person
  • 17/10/08 31/05/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 22:47

Look at note 4 where there group is defined; it is relevant when reading note 12
I think that the 'excluded from BS' figures in note 12 might reflect client monies or some such matter with the IoM investment business license co for example

Remember that Isle of Man private companies are not required to file accounts on the public register (file).

I dont think this is as significant a find as some people think it is; but I could be wrong...