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.

times

  • bushmen
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline

Iceland Government Guarantees

  • Dave Stanley
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 07:51

The newspaper reports about Iceland agreeing to honour their obligations are referring specifically to the 20,000 Euros that the Icelandic government are legally bound to pay under the terms of the passport scheme. The ICESAVE accounts in both the UK and NL were set up under the EEA passport scheme whereby the home country (Iceland) guarantees the first part of any losses using their domestic scheme and the host country (UK or NL) tops this up to the level of the host country scheme.
When news of the Landsbanki collapse first broke, Haarde was quoted as saying that he wouldn't honour this agreement. It was this that prompted Darling to seize the Kaupthing assets in the UK. It seems that this has had the desired effect in relation the UK operations, as the repatriation of the frozen assets to Iceland has obviously been link by Darling to honouring this obligation.

Kaupthing was registered in the UK under the UK scheme and so the UK government was obligated to pay the full GBP 50,000 in compensation. In both cases the UK government has offered to guarantee the total deposits (i.e. on top of the 50,000) but they still want Iceland to honour its obligation to pay the first GBP 16,000 to ICESAVE customers. The Dutch have effectively said that they will loan the money to Iceland to cover the 20,000 Euros per ICESAVE customer and they will also administer the payment on Iceland's behalf (obviously not much trust left there). The Dutch solution has effectively transferred Iceland's obligation to individual Dutch depositors into an obligation to the Dutch Government. They can probably swap this for fishing rights or whatever if Iceland fails to pay the money back some time in the future.

None of these articles are referring to the Kaupthing IoM parental guarantee. The KSF IoM guarantee from the parent company was designed to allay any fears that potential depositors may have had about the potential viability of a relatively small business unit. The direct linkage to a much larger parent was designed to give that warm fuzzy feeling that everyone of this list must have felt when they signed up to lose their money. Most of the offshore operations of large banks include this sort of parental guarantee. This means that as long as HSBC (for example) still exists as a viable bank then its IoM operations will be supported. The trouble now is that Kaupthing (public company) no longer exists and they don't have to worry about things like brand reputation any more. The government has taken over what's left and the IoM guarantee is only one very small obligation that what's left of Kaupthing will not be able to honour. I'm not a lawyer but that guarantee gives us no more priority than the hundreds of other creditors queuing up at the door. In fact we have already been told that domestic Icelandic creditors are at the top of the list.

Just to reiterate, it's one thing for a government to renege on its obligations under international law (i.e. the 20000 euro passport scheme), that would have had repercussions in other international relationship for years to come. It's a completely different situation as to whether the host government running what's left of a bankrupt bank has to honour promises and guarantees made by the bank when it was a commercial company.


Kaupthing Iceland guarentee

  • cold-dose
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 08:17

Excellent summary, and all very true, except that Kaupthing Iceland as a company does still exist at the moment - just under direct control of the Icelandic government. Therefore the status of the parental guarantee is still very much a live issue to be resolved.


An interesting article? Where did it all go?

  • jetski
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline

cold-dose ring me please

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 08:28

cold-dose ring me please 07941 788059 we need to talk I think


Claim on UK

  • Knife Edge
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 07:44

Interesting snippet here on the Times this morning:

"Questions also persist about the collapse of the Icelandic institutions, and the knock-on effects of their demise. It has emerged that the FSA told the London-based capital-markets business of Kaupthing to move some of its £20m cash pile out of a bank account held with its Icelandic parent company “several months” before the bank collapsed last week.

A senior source at Kaupthing Singer & Friedlander Capital Markets, run by former KBC Peel Hunt boss Tim Cockcroft, said the cash had been moved into four or five UK bank accounts following concerns raised by the regulator.

The news suggests the regulator may have been flagging concerns about Iceland to business customers while local councils and consumers continued to deposit cash with the banks."

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_...


Australia guarrantees all deposits

  • sabi Star
  • 10/10/08 n/a (free)
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 06:51

Australia to garrantee all bank deposits for 3 years


.

  • JS
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 07:03

.


Leverage

  • tubefly
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 06:04

Interesting to see that Iceland is using the Russia / Nato combination to put the UK and IMF onto a shorter leash!
Such a lever might help in them getting funds that may ultimately be used to honor their commitments. Not sure things would be too good if the deal went the Russian way though? Just a thought - the IOM Govt. might want to consider getting a little leverage also - anyone know Putins number? More seriously, even though the UK is supposed to represent the IOM in Iceland isn't the IOM Govt. requesting to have someone on the team?
Yesterday and today are particulalrly difficult days as like all weekends the news is more Refelctive than actually Happening - and for us that makes it even harder - however ....tomorrows another day Dorethy?
Keep focused and do not lose faith in the objective or life.


Of some interest perhaps in Jersey paper

  • sabi Star
  • 10/10/08 n/a (free)
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 03:46

www.thisisjersey.com/2008/10/11/euro-talks-to-protect-finance/
"The govts. of major European banking centers are to be asked if they will extend any savings guarantees to Jersey in order to protect the offshore finance industry on which the Island's economy depends..."


Is it really the UK Government's fault?

  • Done like a Kipper
  • 10/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 03:18

Many people commenting on here seem to be of the impression that had HM Treasury not stepped in to put KSF UK into administration then KSF IOM would still be operational. From personal experience I very much doubt this to be the case.

I attempted to move my funds from the IOM at 8am on Monday 6 October and despite assurances that this would be actioned immediately the funds were never received by my UK bank. I was so concerned by the fact that the funds were not moved on my (repeated) instructions that I copied the IOM FSC into an email I sent to KSF IOM on 7 October. I'm certain other people would have also contacted the IOM FSC and I have no doubt that the FSC shares information/intelligence with the UK FSA.

It is likely that KSF IOM were in dire straits from close of business on Friday 3 October and were hoping for an injection of funds from either KSF Iceland or KSF London. Clearly no funds were forthcoming.

I therefore doubt that the UK government's actions was directly responsible for the losses we have all incurred with KSF IOM


This site

  • ng
  • 11/10/08 31/12/20
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 02:38

Structure is changing, trying to make things easier and cater for the relatively huge amount of content being added. My apologies if I've broken anything or made it more difficult. Please voice your comments here: What's needed?


Links to stories

  • occams razor
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 02:07

All, if you are posting a story from another website please also include the link to to the story.
People may want to see the story in its entirety from the original source. Thanks


Kaupthinghf guarentee

  • bellyup
  • 10/10/08 09/01/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 02:31

Where is this please i cant find it?


Bloomberg Link

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 02:43

Did a search and found the link to the Bloomberg info here
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601102&sid=aXXW.vOmh8Ao&refer=uk
Alan


Iceland's government will ``honor its obligations''

  • calpespain
  • 12/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 01:59

THERE COULD BE SOME HOPE HERE.....WHATS YOUR OPINIONS ? THIS WAS POSTED ON BLOOMBERG

celand Pledges to `Honor' Foreign Bank Deposits (Update1)

By Tasneem Brogger and Helga Kristin Einarsdottir

Oct. 11 (Bloomberg) -- Iceland's government will ``honor its obligations'' to depositors at failed Icelandic banks abroad, including the U.K., said Prime Minister Geir Haarde, who will meet a British delegation to the island today.

Everybody needs to show some flexibility here,'' Haarde told journalists at a press conference in Reykjavik late yesterday. Banking Minister, Bjorgvin Sigurdsson, said tensions between Iceland and the U.K. are based on amisunderstanding.''


guarantee

  • tsunamivictim
  • 11/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 04:12

Do you know if the "guarantee" will apply to KSf IOm as well as mainland UK? Was there guarantee for the whole sum or just a pittance....up most of the night and brain frazzled...


KSFIoM Guarantee

  • VikingRaider
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 07:42

Again, just to clarify, as part of the conditions of the transfer of assets from Derbyshire Offshore to Kaupthing, Singer and Friedlander (Isle of Man) Ltd. in 2007, Icelandic bank Kaupthing hf accepted verbatim Derbyshire Offfshore's 'irrevocable and binding guarantee' of 100 percent of depositors funds, an agreement verified by the Isle of Man government. What appears to be happening now is firstly the search for a private sector suitor interested in KSFIoM as a going concern or secondly, an IMF rescue package to pay off Icelandic/Kaupthing creditors -- KSFIoM depositors being near the first in the queue.


I hope this is so but am

  • bellyup
  • 10/10/08 09/01/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 02:27

I hope this is so but am confused some say the 'guarantee' is worthless

I took this off a post in money expert

'Sad to say, I had the Derbyshire Manx Bond that would have matured in November, a mid-000 figure. The irrevocable guarantee may be particularly useful for those with BIG deposits. As the Kaupthing hf subsidiary (KSFIoM) requested to be wound up, I believe Kaupthing hf remains liable for the guarantee and would therefore fall within HMG's jurisidiction for legal actions against Iceland, (as HMG takes precedence in international legal cases) but I'm an economist, not a lawyer, so we will need to find someone with legal knowledge for this. The HMG action might also prove faster than waiting the circa five years for IoM compensation mentioned in during the Tynwald debate, IF a big bank doesn't swoop in for a rescue.
Best'


Daily Mail

  • podather
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 01:31

Some more publicity bringing attention to out plight.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1076712/The-British-widow-lost-6...

I keep swaying from hope to complete dispair about every 20 minutes, we must fight this till the end, I owe it to my kids to keep my promise of a brighter future. Only had the account a month, transferred $500,000 in and then requested most to be swift transferred out on Monday, not out of panic just needed - suffice to say no sign of them with Uncle Sam...life was good till i awoke on Thursday , now I spend it all awake...and racked with fear for our future


Money lodged through Skandia with KSF

  • calpespain
  • 12/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 01:12

I have funds deposited directly with KSF ( 100k also 100k through Skandia IOM. If it goes to the IOM compensation scheme does anyone know if I will be able to claim for money lodged through Skandia. I have found Skandia to be unhelpful over the years. Any advice would be greatly received here in Australia....


Complicated

  • cold-dose
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 01:19

I'm afraid that whether money invested through other parties is covered seems like quite a detailed issue, and I doubt anyone could give you a definitive answer at this point. You need to contact Skandia and the Isle of Man FSC, and probably be patient whilst it is clarified. If the initial interpretation isn't helpful to your situation, you'd then need to consider getting professional legal advice (from a Manx lawyer) as to whether there was any value in trying to challenge the point.

But one specific of your case does also raise a potential problem. The limit of the compensation scheme is £50k per depositor (not per account), and even if the Skandia money is eligible you might then find that you've already had your full allowance from the directly deposited funds.


Cold -dose I am EXPAT and am

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 06:44

Cold -dose I am EXPAT and am at the Sefton Hotel IoM in room 223, my mobile 07941 788059, please get in touch asap. I am saying that on behalf of otheres as well as myself. You seem to be a man we need
kind regards


Lets just keep it low at the moment....

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 01:02

Sorry to have been a bit quiet for a few hours but have been really giving this a great deal of thought. This has been posted elsewhere, but i just wanted to ensure visibility of it.

We are mostly just panicking at the moment; hence the erratic movements and differing arguments for what to do.

Just remember that this has taken the business world by suprise just as it has us. Before we bring the whole European banking system down, by prematurely making alot of noise, lets just give negotiations a chance of coming up trumps. Other business is not going to interesting in taking on KSF IOM if we have made it unsellable by destroying the entire banking system.

If we see no movement in our favour, then we can act. In a co-ordinated, organised, and very targeted way. But until we have all the facts and the possible talks have not been played out, lets just keep a lower profile for now. I have the chains ready to lock myself to the Bristish Embassey railings; but that is tommorrows action. Lets just give talk a chance first.

Mat Walker


Thanks Mat for your help. I

  • cupcake
  • 10/10/08 12/06/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 02:31

Thanks Mat for your help.

I agree with what you have said, I too have lost my life savings.

What we dont want is to let authorities think that they can sweep everything under the carpet and not do anything about it


Clearing some confusion

  • cold-dose
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 00:47

There appears to be some confusion on a couple of points that is possibly leading some people down unfruitful paths.

Firstly, the UK government did not freeze any assets of KSF in the UK. The freezing order (SI 2008/2668) only applied to Landsbanki Íslands hf., the Icelandic parent of Landsbanki UK, and also to any Landsbanki assets in the UK that were now under the control of the Icelandic Central Bank or the Icelandic Financial Services Authority. It did not apply to any subsidiary of Landsbanki in the UK, and there was NO freezing of any Kaupthing assets at all.

Secondly, Kaupthing in the UK was not 'bought' by ING. For a start, the deal only applied to Deposit Management (Edge) Ltd (company 6690432), a KSF UK subsidiary with no direct relationship with any of the KSF(IOM) holdings - it was purely an Internet deposit bank. And rather than being a 'sale', the UK Treasury has transferred the liability to pay the amounts in the accounts to ING, and also given ING the many millions of pounds necessary to account for the total of all those deposits. Kaupthing UK now owes that money to the UK taxpayer, and the UK Treasury will seek to recover it through the administration proceedings.

Thirdly, the recent talk of Iceland being more positive about making guarantee payments for Icesave customers isn't directly applicable to KSF(IOM). Icesave wasn't a separate UK subsidiary of Landsbanki - the deposits were made directly into the Icelandic bank and hence should have been covered by the Icelandic depositor protection scheme - which is what the Icelandic government had been refusing to pay out on to date. Because both Iceland and the UK are in the EEA, the protection operated on a 'passport' scheme, meaning the UK protection sat behind it.

KSF(IOM) was neither protected by the Icelandic scheme, nor was it part of any 'passport' scheme. The Isle of Man is not part of the EEA, so the EEA rules are not applicable.

Also, the Icesave guarantee was directly from the Icelandic government, whereas the KSF(IOM) guarantee was from a private company that still exists - but is itself in administration.

Finally, the Swiss branch of Kaupthing has also effectively ceased trading. The Swiss authorities are paying out their depositor protection (up to £15,500) immediately. They take the money from the assets of the bank ahead of the liquidation process, and they aim to complete the payments within a few weeks.

Hope some of this proves enlightening.


Good Research

  • VikingRaider
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 08:01

Good work! Give that boy a lollipop! Nevertheless, if you read through the bumpf, you will find that as the guarantor of KSFIoM deposits is Kaupthing hf, Reykjavik would be responsible for £16,000 under the EU/EFTA passport scheme, but that pales in significance against the 100 percent guarantee that Douglas has cited in its request to HMG to pursue legal action againt Iceland.


I seem that have

  • Dave Stanley
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 09:14

I seem that have inadvertently repeated some of what you have stated in my recent posting and we seem to be going round in circles commenting on each other's posts. I missed your post after checking back on the site this morning. I find the format of this forum makes it difficult to follow particular threads. We have obviously come to a similar conclusion that people were missing the point. A fact highlighted by the fact that even though you clearly state that Iceland is not part of the EEA and therefore not part of the passport scheme, Viking Raider, responded to your post by repeating this false assumption. (probably had no sleep like the rest of us)

My question relates to your statement about the fact that the UK government did not freeze any of Kaupthing's assets. The article below take from the Guardian states that the decision, by the Icelandic authorities, to take control of Kaupthing was a direct result of the UK's actions as described. This may not technically have constituted an "asset" freeze but it did put the assets beyond the control of Kaupthing and the Icelandic authorities and had the desired effect, from a UK government point of view, of stopping Iceland from repatriating any funds in order to support domestic investors. I like most people on this list am only just beginning to learn about the intricacies of international banking but I would be interested in your opinion on this. The general hope seems to be that the if liquidators can prove that the actions of the UK government directly caused the failure in the IoM that we have some form of case against them. Other articles on the web describe the actions of liquidators in the BCCI failure suing the Bank of England (then providing the role of the FSC) in order to try and get compensation for investors.

Quote from the Guardian Online dated 9 October.

"The final straw came when Britain transferred control of the business of Kaupthing Edge, its Internet bank, to ING Direct and put Kaupthing's UK operations into administration.
"It did not matter that the parent company had sufficient liquidity and its position was solid," Kaupthing said in a statement."


BCCI

  • cold-dose
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 13:01

The Bank of Credit and Commerce International was a UK-based banking structure that was deeply involved in criminal activities and its internal accounts were rife with fraud.

The liquidators sued the Bank of England for $1 billion on behalf of the depositors and creditors, claiming that the BoE had known about the problems at BCCI but not acted - and that the BoE was therefore guilty of misfeasance.

Ultimately the legal case failed (and the BoE sought costs too), and cost the creditors a further £100 million in total.

There may or may not be liability to KSF(IOM) as a result of external actions, but it's something that ought to be thought about carefully and calmly, and with proper advice.

The actions of the UK authorities consisted of transferring the liabilities of Kaupthing Edge (a distinct company) to ING. It doesn't appear to have had any assets - they were all in KSF UK. This was done under the Banking (Special Provisions) Act 2008 (SI 2008/2674). These are the same powers used to transfer control of Northern Rock and the constituent parts of Bradford and Bingley previously.

The remainder of Kaupthing Singer & Friedlander Limited in the UK was put into administration. The justification given by the FSA for this action was that they had assessed KSF UK, and it no longer met the minimum 'threshold conditions' to trade as a financial services company in the UK. The threshold conditions are somewhat complex, and there doesn't appear to be any clarification yet as to what aspect the FSA had adjudged KSF to be in breach of.


Iceland EEA Membership

  • VikingRaider
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 12:06

The FSA (UK) defined the EEA as follows

The free-trade area established in 1992 which [at 31
March 1999] includes Belgium, Denmark, France,
Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Liechtenstein,
Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain,
the United Kingdom, Austria, Finland and Sweden.
FSA, Financial Services Compensation Scheme Draft Rules (July 2000) p. 48 annex B http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/cp/cp58.pdf

You may not have seen the following;

As most of you are no doubt aware, there were three levels of deposit security with Derbyshire Offshore that was accepted by KSFIoM upon transfer of assets in 2007. The first level was the irrevocable and binding undertaking of Kaupthing hf of Iceland to guarantee all deposits in KSFIoM. If Kaupthing hf failed to meet its responsibilities, then the Icelandic government would be responsible for the first 20,000 Euros or about £16,000 of deposits under the 'passport scheme' for deposit insurance agreed by European Economic Area (EEA) member states that includes the European Union and three of the four members of the European Free Trade Area (EFTA) Norway, Lichtenstein and Iceland (Switzerland is the fourth member of EFTA). The third level of security is the Isle of Man Deposit Insurance scheme which, as of 9/10/08 would top up the Icelandic £16,000 sum to £50,000.
The EFTA Court in Luxembourg requires national jurisdictions to hear cases before an appeal can be lodged. I found the following on Wikipedia (an expert will need to confirm its veracity).

In Restamark (Case E-1/94, 1994-1995 EFTA Court Report, 15) the EFTA Court found that it is inherent in Protocol 35 that individuals and economic operators must be entitled to invoke and to claim at the national level any rights that could be derived from the provisions of the EEA Agreement, as being or having been made part of the respective national legal order, if they are unconditional and sufficiently precise.

This means that if Iceland refuses or delays unreasonably a case there, the next step will be the EFTA Court in Luxembourg. Unfortunately, two of the three regular judges are Icelandic. I never thought I would learn so much so fast about international law!

Best, VikingRaider


EEA

  • cold-dose
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 12:30

Yes, Iceland is very much in the EEA.

The Isle of Man however is not part of the EEA, nor the EU.

'Passport' schemes apply when one EEA bank trades in another EEA country. KSF UK was a UK bank (company registered in the UK), and covered directly by UK deposit guarantees.

Likewise KSF(IOM) was a separate company, registered in the Isle of Man. Kaupthing was a whole network of distinct companies owned by the central group - not unusual for a multinational.

Icesave was not a UK registered company, it was an Icelandic bank with a UK website only. Therefore the deposits were made in Iceland, and covered by the Icelandic scheme. Back-up cover is provided by the UK scheme because of the 'passport'.


That is my understanding

  • occams razor
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 12:36

That is my understanding too.
That Kaupthing HF may have guaranteed KSFIOM is some way, and KSFIOM is currently not paying us, does not translate into an entitlement for us to use the passport scheme directly to Kaupthing HF.
The "passport scheme" is completely irrelevant to us.


EEA Relevance

  • VikingRaider
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 12:47

Crikey, I think we may have a test case for the EFTA Court! Hope they don't use all the Icelandic judges


EEA definition

  • Dave Stanley
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 13:05

Hi VikingRaider, I don't want to turn this into a flame war, not least for that fact that many people on this list the level of compensation (15000 16000, or 50000) or who pays it is completley irrelevent as they are looking at life changing amounts of money. But I, like you, am glued to this forum and searching the web for bits of information keeps my mind off things in between waiting for news. Also, like you, I am learning way more than I ever wanted to about the inticacies of these realtionships. The one thing, however, that we don't need on this forum is disinformation turning into fact.

The contracting parties to the EEA Agreement are three of the four EFTA states—Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway—and the 27 EU Member States along with the European Community.
The Isle of Man is not a part of the European Union, but has a limited relationship relating to the free movement of goods. By extension Isle of Man it is not part of the EEA and therefore not part of the passport agreement.

The link that you provided was to the United Kingdom FSA and that graphically illustrates one of the reasonswhole reason we are in this mess, the IoM is not part of the United Kingdom.

The passport agreement relates the where the subsidiary bank is registered and NOT where the registered home nation of the parent bank. Customers of Icelandic, French, German or whatever banks in the Isle of Man are not covered by the passport scheme any more than a customer of HSBC or Barclays in Never Never land would be, even though the UK is part of the EEA. AS far as we are concerned the IoM is Never Never land.

This is why the newspapers keep stating that customers in the Channel Islands are guaranteed nothing under the current rules. Even though the parent company is based in the EEA the Channel Islands are not. Switzerland has already initiated the payouts under its domestic scheme as Kaupthing Switzerland is not included in the passport scheme, for the reason given at the start of this message (i.e. Switzerland is not a member of the EEA).

Not once has any official of any juistiction referred to the passport scheme in relation to compensation from the Icelandic government . There does however seem to be confusion over the parent company guaranteeand whether this guarantee has passed to the new owner, i.e. the Icelandic government. This would be interesting to the people set to lose more than 50,000 as it was supposed to guarantee everything.


Icelandic Law - For what its worth

  • VikingRaider
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 15:01

I've been wading through the Icelandic Financial Services and Markets Act (1999) (http://eng.idnadarraduneyti.is/laws-and-regulations/nr/1165) that may have been obliterated by Haarde's emergency legislation, but article eight contains some interesting bumpf to keep in mind. Look at the last sentence first then read the rest.

In the event that a Member Company does not fulfil its obligations to the (Depositors' and Investors' Guarantee) Fund as described in this Act and the Government Regulation issued hereunder, the Board of Directors of the Fund shall immediately report this to the Minister and the Financial Supervisory Authority. The Minister shall then, following consultation with the Financial Supervisory Authority, grant a period of three months to the Member Company concerned to make amends. In the event that the Member Company concerned has not met its obligations within that time the Board of Directors of the Fund may, following consultation with the Financial Supervisory Authority, impose daily fines on the Company. Fines shall continue to be paid until such time as the Member Company concerned has met its obligations to the Fund. Fines may amount to between ISK 50 and 500 thousand per day.
In the event that a Member Company has not fulfilled its obligations to the Fund within one month from the imposing of the first fine, the Minister may inform the Company of his intention to revoke its operating license if the Company has not fulfilled its duties after a period of 12 months has passed.
Should the time limit described in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above expire without the Member Company concerned having met its obligations to the Fund, the Minister may, following consultation with the Financial Supervisory Authority, revoke its operating license. Commitments entered into prior to the expiration of the time periods described in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above shall be protected by insurance in accordance with the provisions of Chapter III of this Act.
In the event that the time limits described in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above should expire in the case of a branch of a Member Company established in another state within the European Economic Area, the Board of Directors of the Fund may then inform the branch of its intention to exclude it from the Fund if the branch has not met its obligations within twelve months. Should the time limits described above in Paragraph 1 expire without the branch having met its obligations, the Fund may, following consultation with the Financial Supervisory Authority, exclude the branch from membership of the Fund. Commitments entered into prior to the expiration of the time limits described in this Paragraph shall be protected by insurance in accordance with the provisions of Chapter III of this Act.
The provisions of Paragraphs 1-3 also apply to the branches of Member Companies established in countries outside the European Economic Area.

Interesting, eh?

Best, VikingRaider

PS If there are any young Icelanders reading this and thinking about their furture career alternatives, law school might be the best option as shovelling through the avalanche of legal claims about to descend upon the country is going to be one of the few ways of making a living in the New Iceland.


Am I the only one who is

  • Monkeyface3604
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 11/10/2008 - 20:16

Am I the only one who is starting to think, face up to it we're F*cked

Dont think i can get any lower

The scale of the whole thing dwarfes us!!!


I think you might be right

  • silvesc
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 11/10/2008 - 20:39

If the IMF is on the "brink of a systemic meltdown" I can't imagine a single bureacrat or financier in the Treasury or UK govt paying the slightest bit of notice to the IoM situation.

The IoM authorities simply do not have a voice at the moment with either the UK or Iceland, and they have no ability to manage this crisis on their own - its just too big.

We may get a few quid back through the new compo scheme, assuming some of the big boys (Santander etc) support their IoM branches for the inevitable run, but thats about it.

I was a little bit more hopeful this morning, but reading things more and more and watching other events unfold has left me very pessimistic.


It may seem a lifetime since

  • occams razor
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 11/10/2008 - 20:25

It may seem a lifetime since the news broke, but these are still early days.
Don't despair, there is still some hope I think... it's not over 'til it's over.


I'm up and down like a yoyo,

  • Monkeyface3604
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 11/10/2008 - 20:39

I'm up and down like a yoyo, one minute im i'm not gonna let this happen, then next im sitting here with tears in my eyes.
Thanks for trying to bring me into a postive state again.
Gonna go watch a film for a couple of hours and try and forget this whole bloody mess.


Jenny on Channel 4

  • HOPPER
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 11/10/2008 - 18:46

WELL DONE. A very normal person desperately trying to help out her mum. We owe her and those who helped her a huge thanks for raising our profile.


Any chance of a copy?

  • ng
  • 11/10/08 31/12/20
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 11/10/2008 - 20:02

Is there anywhere I can see it online, or get a copy?


Channel 4 News

  • bushmen
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline

Channel 4 news - Jenny's interview

  • C_south_africa
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 12/10/2008 - 08:27

Just to let you know her interview is about 10.5 minutes into the broadcast


This is very

  • bellyup
  • 10/10/08 09/01/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 11/10/2008 - 18:46

OK, it doesn't really affect

  • occams razor
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 11/10/2008 - 17:59

OK, it doesn't really affect us at all, but at minimum it would appear that negotiations with Iceland in some areas are being successful, and progress is possible between the two countries... so perhaps there is hope...

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Credit-Crisis-Significant-Pr...


Number of depositors

  • Lash Canino
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 11/10/2008 - 17:55

Apologies if this question has already been answered elsewhere, but can anyone tell me approximately how many depositors there were with KSF IoM - i.e. the number of individuals (as opposed to the total amount of savings)? Thanks.


Keep Quiet

  • Kev
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 11/10/2008 - 17:05

I also think that we should not keep quiet. The message on Sky news tonight is that the issue is all about ICe Bank and UKresidents. We could be completely forgotton if we are not careful. The reason why talks are progressing is that people are making a fuss, we need to keep this up and highlight who we represent, or it will just be ICEsavers who will benefit. My personal view is that if the UK government can get away with not sorting us out, then they will.

This will only be in the news for a week or two, then no onw will report it. We must make our case now and be heard.

Let's keep us te pressure


UK Treasury & Icelandic Govt. Talks - Update

  • Emabroad
  • 10/10/08 30/08/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 11/10/2008 - 17:59

No surprises here - despite the IOM's UK Dependency status it appears that British foreign policy is NOT including IOM investors in its representational brief:

[Source: BBC website story filed at 17:46 BST. 11 October 2008]

'Reads . . .
Progress made' in Iceland talks
Significant progress has been made over frozen UK investments in failed Icelandic banks, say the Treasury and the Icelandic authorities.

Arrangements have been agreed "in principle" for a quick payout to depositers in Landsbanki's closed internet bank Icesave, they said.

The delegations agreed to work closely on the other remaining issues over the coming days, the statement said.

The delegations met "in a friendly atmosphere in Reykjavík", it added.

British investors have roughly £4bn in the Icelandic bank.

Although Chancellor Alistair Darling had promised to compensate investors in full, the first £16,000 of a deposit is meant to be guaranteed by the Icelandic authorities.

It is understood Iceland has now agreed in principle to honour this commitment.

A Treasury delegation is in the Icelandic capital to seek assurances UK savers with money in collapsed Icelandic banks will not lose their deposits.

The group wants to establish a claims procedure for British depositors to get their money back as soon as possible.

The UK government is also pressing for the quick return of almost £1bn of funds invested by councils and other public bodies, including charities.

The Treasury delegation in Reykjavik includes officials from the Bank of England and the Financial Services Authority.
. . . Ends


Link to tonights UK Channel 4 editorial about our plight

  • worriedsaver
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline

I believe that was

  • occams razor
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 11/10/2008 - 17:41

I believe that was yesterday's programme.