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.

Planned to leave 550mln in the UK

  • Alastair
  • 10/10/08 30/09/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 16/01/2009 - 20:10

?


Can someone please explain?

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Thu, 15/01/2009 - 21:48

It is not a simple matter. My views on the subject are widely disputed, especially by the higher-value depositors, and so I would not wish to raise the temperature of the forum by setting them all out again here. You should know that I am not a higher-value depositor; my deposits are approximately £9000.

Suffice it to say that different parties would gain advantages from different proposals. The SoA would clearly be of advantage to the IoM government and may be of advantage to higher-value depositors (but I am far from convinced of this). The DCS would almost certainly be of advantage to lower-value depositors (essentially those under 50k) and therefore to the majority of depositors (by number, but not by value). The SoA proposed may (purport to) incorporate the advantages of the DCS for lower-value depositors, but (arguably) confers no additional advantage to them to encourage them to favour the SoA rather than the DCS. The DCS is statutory whereas an SoA would be a contractual arrangement.

Further comments from me will generate more heat than light in response, so I will stop there.


Money Market Currency Account

  • caledonia
  • 14/10/08 30/09/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 29/12/2008 - 11:13

Can anyone explain to me why having taken out a personal (not through an IFA) "One Year Fixed Rate" bond, I now receive a statement calling it a "Money Market Currency Account" ..... including the interest as at 9 Oct.


caledonia - statements

  • anrigaut
  • 19/10/08 30/10/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 29/12/2008 - 11:45

I think this is explained (sort of!) in the letter which came with the statements - see the paragraph headed "Fixed term deposits".

It appears that - because statements were "not historically" produced for fixed term deposits (so presumably the computer couldn't deal with them?) - the amounts in these accounts (plus interest to 8 Oct) have been credited to accounts for which statements can be produced "for the purposes of providing statements only". If you had no such account with them, they will have set one up for this purpose (ie in your case presumably the money market account).

Curiously, in my case a one year bond I took out with KSF-IOM has been credited to my instant access account, but I got a separate statement for a 3-year bond taken out earlier with the Derbyshire. Yet both of these are fixed-term accounts!

Anyway, the main thing is that all the virtual money seems to be there somewhere!


The tax man cometh.....

  • austria
  • 14/10/08 30/03/14
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 23/12/2008 - 14:26

Having just 'done the right thing' and contacted my tax office about my inability to pay my tax bill at the end of January, I have been informed that I will be charged interest on any delay after the due date, despite the fact that the UK Govt has my money! I was willing to pay by instalments, which I would have been able to do in the UK through my PAYE when employed - without interest - but as I no longer live in the UK (thank God), I will be penalised......I can appeal this AFTER I have cleared my tax bill.

So much for the Revenue understanding the situation and doing all they can to help. I am so angry I could scream.

I look forward to submitting a bill to the UK govt for the €5500 arrangement fee I have had to pay to get a loan to open our business, which I wouldn't have needed had they not appropriated my money in the first place (I know I can't, but it made me feel better writing it!).

Happy Christmas!!!


Tax

  • bobwin
  • 23/12/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 16/01/2009 - 12:16

I gather you are living in Austria--can you not qualify as not ordinarily resident? If you maintain a residence in the UK, you cannot, but if you rent your home and do not visit UK for more than 90 days a year you can!
Like Lewis Hamilton who "lives" in Switzerland now for tax purposes.

Regards


IMF REPLY JUST RECEIVED

  • caledonia
  • 14/10/08 30/09/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 12/12/2008 - 15:58

Dear Depositors,

Thank you for your message about the issue of foreign depositors with Icelandic financial institutions. We can ensure you that your message was read and forwarded to the relevant authorities.

As you may know, the IMF's Executive Board recently approved a two-year Stand-By Arrangement for Iceland on November 19, for US$2.1 billion. These financial resources will back Iceland's ambitious economic program, which aims to restore confidence to the banking system, stabilize the krona, and strengthen the budget over the medium term. Importantly, Iceland has expressed its commitment to recognize the obligations to insured depositors, and the IMF takes seriously the Iceland authorities’ commitment to a fair process involving equitable treatment of creditors in the bank restructuring.

You can read more about the IMF’s program with Iceland on the IMF’s website.

Best regards,
Public Affairs Division
External Relations Department
International Monetary Fund
http://www.imf.org
E-Mail: publicaffairs(?)imf [dot] org


John Wright's 8 December report.

  • dclf1947
  • 10/10/08 31/08/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 10/12/2008 - 01:57

Read this on the the main site under Legal. He has written it well and explains why information is difficult to divulge for the liquidator and others. The report cheered me up and I now feel plenty is going on in the background where previously I thought it has stagnated. Well worth reading.


John Wright report 8 Dec

  • steve
  • 14/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Thu, 11/12/2008 - 13:42

Yes dclf1947 it did make for a sensible read, but are we just susceptible to any grain of positive news. Could we have more comment on this please? Is there reason for hope?


Isle of Man is fully compliant with OECD transparency standards

  • steveejeb
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 09/12/2008 - 15:12

Buried in this interview with the OECD Director, he makes the following statement:

"Jeffrey Owens, Director of the Centre for Tax Policy Administration at the (OECD) Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, told Reuters."Only seven centres -- Aruba, the Dutch Antilles, the British Virgin Islands, Bermuda, the Isle of Man, Guernsey and Jersey -- were fully compliant with OECD transparency standards."

This is something we can hit back with when the "tax haven spin" is used against us. I am sure that Darling would be fully aware that the Channel Islands and the IoM are fully compliant with OECD standards. Yet, so he has chosen to spin the opposite view. Scandalous

Link:
http://chat.ksfiomdepositors.org/news-item/isle-man-fully-compliant-oecd...


Bah Humbug from IOM Treasury to Small pre-Xmas Payout

  • VikingRaider
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Tue, 02/12/2008 - 11:23

BREAKING NEWS: Treasury Minister Allan Bell adopted a Scrooge-like persona at Tynwald as he tossed aside appeals from MHK's for a pre-Christmas payment on account to KSFIoM Depositors. Small savers were uppermost in the mind of MHK's, especially as the claim that 20 percent of the bank's assets would shortly be available for return. Bell explained the complexity of the restructuring meant that none of the funds could be touched at present.


To a certain degree I can

  • expatfrance1
  • 15/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 02/12/2008 - 12:19

To a certain degree I can understand why Allan Bell opposes this at the moment, although I could do with a pre christmas payout.

I suppose if any money is paid out now, even on account, it will make it that much more complicated, if not impossible, to get anyone to buy into some sort of restructure.


expatfrance1 From interim payment to non-payment

  • steveejeb
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 02/12/2008 - 12:52

Yes, I agree with you expatfrance1. It would be hard to see how a reconstruction might take place if £10m,£20m,£40m was to start leaking from the system. Having said that I am pretty desperate for an interim payment as the credit card limits get close! Let's hope that the change of tack from interim payment to non-payment might mean a solution is getting closer?


interim payout.

  • mikeinfrance
  • 12/10/08 28/09/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 03/12/2008 - 18:56

steveejeb..Not sure that I follow your reasoning since any interim payout would mean that KSFIOMs liabilities would be reduced by the same amount. After 7 weeks I see no evidence of a solution getting any nearer and, despite what some have said,without the £557M from KSFUK I still don't see how there can be a solution, unless Santa comes up with the money.


I think you are right.

  • dclf1947
  • 10/10/08 31/08/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 02/12/2008 - 12:44

Although I need a payout and was initially upset with the news that there would not be one I think your theory is correct and makes a lot of sense. I just hope that there is a buyer soon.


They could have done something.

  • skintagainnow
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 02/12/2008 - 12:59

Not really, any payout however small would be offset by the amount on deposit, even if it does come down to %'s at the end of the day.

I never expected some of the figures bandied around - bloody stupid to expect 10>20K interim payout, but I was hoping for something, even a few hundred to tied me over, equiv interest payment for the last couple of months would have been fine.

Apologies to ng and the fighting fund I just can't forward anything, have to say feeling well down today, as no doupt many more.


VikingRaider

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Tue, 02/12/2008 - 11:32

Please tell us where this news is from ?


MHK News Source

  • VikingRaider
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Tue, 02/12/2008 - 11:44

Oops, sorry. Manx Radio AM, MHK Questions Live Broadcast http://www.manxradio.com/ Now talking about the Council of the British Isles.


Have we just suffered the ultimate betrayal by our Government?

  • steveejeb
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 27/11/2008 - 12:24

This comment was taken from "Lost Your Savings", another site trying to highlight our cause and seeking 100% return of what is rightfully ours.

"So, recapping some of the events of the last few weeks during and since the "negotiations" with IMF & Iceland went on:

*The British government promised the IoM government that they would represent them in their attempts to recover Kaupthing IoM’s funds from the Icelandic government
*The Chancellor told the Treasury Select Committee that Britain would lend Iceland the money to repay Kaupthing IoM depositors if Iceland agreed to repay it as part of an IMF package
*The British government delayed finalisation of the IMF package until Iceland agreed that it would include a British Government loan to repay UK depositors
*This package has now been finalized and so the opportunity for leverage is over
*The package appears to include arrangements to repay depositors in every European country EXCEPT the Isle of Man
* So have we just been subject to the ultimate betrayal by the government that seized our life savings? It would seem so."

http://www.lostyoursavings.co.uk/2008/11/21/final-british-betrayal/


Do you know where this info came from?

  • sami
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 27/11/2008 - 12:54

The package appears to include arrangements to repay depositors in every European country EXCEPT the Isle of Man

If this it true, it sounds very disappointing Stevejeb. Do you know if this is certain? It would be a real blunder and would show that IOM and UK have not been achieving the desired aims in their discussions.


GA Pilots

  • shafted
  • 10/10/08 12/12/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 26/11/2008 - 21:48

Just wondered if there were any other light aircraft pilots among us , if so and you want a chat e mail me, for some lighter dialog!


Pilots

  • Yogi
  • 18/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 27/11/2008 - 10:44

Sorry - not a pilot (nowhere near), but did used to work for the company that owned and flew the Islanders and Twin Otter to the Isles of Scilly from Lands End.

Was a good job and I loved having the occasional flight for work purposes - made me feel VERY important.


Contact MP's

  • Julienne
  • 16/10/08 31/08/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 25/11/2008 - 14:52

I still believe this is important and send off versions of the sample letters that have been posted on the NEW site - they really help my thought process..
ONE snag now is obtaining the email addresses of MPs - YES you can use http://www.parliament.uk/directories/hciolists/alms.cfm
BUT it was much easier with Divers posting on this site http://chat.ksfiomdepositors.org/action-or-task/contact-mps-4th-nov which has links to each Political party listing the Mps and their e.amil address - it made the process simple and quick. A great tool.
Unfortunately sincfe the change over to the new site these links don't work - they say either address not valid or page not found.

Would ther be any chance of mending the broken link??
Thanks a bunch IT people.


Spooks

  • thesunnysouth
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 17/11/2008 - 22:20

Having just sat through an almost collapse of the UK banking system, dodgy Russion investors, a shakky chancellor and insider trading, only to find MI5 saved the day I can but speculate as to what is in the sealed envelope at the High court and wonder how much of the KSF story was pre ordained in this drama.
Fascinating.


Spooks

  • Nixi
  • 20/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 24/11/2008 - 17:54

Maybe we could use a scam like that to get our money back ;-)
Or perhaps we should offer to build a large lump of the 2012 Olymips infrastructure and overrun by a billion or two then B off to the Bahamas or somewhere..
Ah well........ dream over...... back to writing letters!


who is elgee and hhy is

  • dj
  • 07/11/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 16/11/2008 - 22:37

who is elgee and hhy is he/she so divisive? i check the site and do the things to do each day mainly emails and letters to MPs but each day i see mostly elgee arguing with someone in recent comments. im sure i miss things because the elgee person puts on so many messages that do not help


who is elgee and hhy is

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Fri, 16/01/2009 - 00:55

I am very sorry indeed to read that, because I work at length to make postings on this forum that are designed to be informative, in spite of calculated disruption by and childish jibes from some other posters.


Don't take it to heart.

  • Captain Mainwaring
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 16/01/2009 - 06:19

Don't take it to heart, you know that forums can be challenging places. That is life in the fast lane of Internet litigation and politics. Some people even post hurtful things to cause a response, and before you know what has happened.......

You get put up on a stage and then people try their best to knock you down.

As you can see, even people who know what they are talking about like Diver come in for some flack from time to time - but you will notice that any unreasonable comments towards any individual are quickly suppressed.

That is the whole point of a forum elgee, as clarified in this Wiki article :-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_forum


who is elgee why divisive

  • manx-person
  • 17/10/08 31/05/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 16/11/2008 - 23:50

dj - below is an extract from elgee's stated experience in litigation.

Perhaps he wants to add to his "legal cv" a banking litigation matter.

Elgee's quote from another post


Quite apart from my own litigation, much of which I did in person and all of which has been successful (and one case of which is the leading authority in the relevant area), my work since about 2000 has been mainly as an expert witness and technical consultant in internet or computer-related litigation. I have been instructed in numerous cases including cases that have been to the Court of Appeal and one that went to the HL, and others that were widely reported. I am routinely engaged by the better-known city libel lawyers. At present I am working as an expert witness on 3 cases. Some 10 years or more ago I undertook formal training in law, but completed only the first year of a 2-year part-time course for the Law Society’s Common Professional Examination, so of course I am NOT a lawyer. My degree and my PhD are in physics.


Manx person

  • bellyup
  • 10/10/08 09/01/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 17/11/2008 - 02:12

Manx person what is your interest in the KSF IOM based on as you are not a depositor?


divisive

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Mon, 17/11/2008 - 00:07

I do not have a "legal cv", as you call it, and the extract that you give above discloses no information about the nature or parties in my own litigation or any detals of the cases in which I have been involved professionally. I would have nothing to gain (other than the return of my deposit) by being involved in "a banking litigation matter".


who are you

  • manx-person
  • 17/10/08 31/05/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 17/11/2008 - 00:27

Well i was just trying to provide my best guess at the question posed (the who are you bit) and thought it might be helpful to post what you said about yourself to avoid any misunderstandings.

Just trying to help; as the OP said there are so many postings here its difficult to follow sometimes.


your best guess

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Mon, 17/11/2008 - 00:54

I know different, but that is for another time and place.


Other Offshore Deposits

  • jerrawee
  • 16/11/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 16/11/2008 - 05:59

If KSF IOM depositors don't get justice and their money returned or protected in a newly resurrected bank, I can see wholesale withdrawal of funds from IOM, etc and a total falling away of trust in these financial locations which may never return.
This may be occurring already, or is under serious consideration by many pending the outcome to this situation. Could be ugly for all. Kaupthing/Iceland must be faithful to its guarantee.


Where we are

  • 5928
  • 14/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 16/11/2008 - 17:17

I have to say what we have achieved to date is wonderful. The awareness we have achieved together with all our efforts shows the wonders of modern technology.
Like others, I believe a great deal is going on behind the scenes. The fact that the EU will not allow the IMF loan to Iceland to proceed without the guarantee is great news.
We have to try and be patient which I can understand is so difficult for those extremely adversely affected by what is going on. But even us with smaller deposits are losing interest, but I am quite happy in terms of the common cause. A great injustice could happen without our united efforts.
PWC seem to be the winners out of all this. I sense from the letters I have received from Susan Kramer(mp Lib Dem MP) that we will win albeit my faith in Alan Beith(Chairman of the Justice Select Committee) is minute.
Keep up the lobbying. We are all doing a terrific job. The next couple of weeks will prove interesting.
Tomorrow's interview will be testing for our Darling chancellor. There are plenty of others, such as shareholders, who feel fleeced by this government so he will be given a difficult time.
Keep your spirits up all of you.
My thanks to the IT people administering this site.


Are we getting the run-around?

  • IceCrusher
  • 14/10/08 25/10/11
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 15/11/2008 - 20:36

I have just been going over the transcript of the TSC meeting again, and these comments [below] from Lord Turner (Chief of FSA) rather struck me on second reading. He is referring here to the involvement of the FSA with the FSC and management of KSFIOM bank. He is very clearly pointing the finger of responsibility at the 'managers, executive and directors' of KSFIOM for placing this large deposit in the UK bank and admits the asset was large relative to the size of the IoM bank. This is surely as good as an admission that the bank was sound - otherwise it would not have had this large sum of 'money'. This walks us some way along the path of confirmation that the failure of KSFIOM was a direct result of HMG action in the UK.

If the FSA approached the FSC and briefed them on their prudent regulatory processes, it was most likely unneccessary to advise a course of action, as these processes would have provided subtle persuasion in themselves. This is a circuitous route, but does anyone else think that there is more involvement here with the FSC, Directors and managers of the bank (I'll not name them here) than we are giving concern to? I am getting this vague feeling that not all is being revealed. We are being kept in the dark from all quarters, we have heard many conciliatory remarks, but as others on this forum have already expressed, there is concern at the lack of solid information. There is also concern at what exactly is the IoM Govt. doing? Why is there no proper DCS in place; there are scores of banks in the IoM dealing with £billions as we've seen, why can the Govt. not compel them to contribute more, and over a period of years so that compensatory monies actually exist before calamity strikes? Why do they have delegations supposedly meeting their opposite numbers in the UK, but nothing transpires and nothing is said about it either. We hear nothing from the LP, MS, who has been appointed by the Court to look after our interests; who has supposedly spent time with E&Y, but as far as these people are concerned we don't exist - it's our savings, but we are slowly but surely being excluded from the process as they all take their place in this 'game'.

Our savings were placed in the UK bank without any priority on them - just how negligent do you have to be to undertake a task involving £555,000,000 for crying out loud and not take this precaution - especially at a time when anyone in a bank associated with Iceland would at least have inside rumours of concern and should therefore have excercised due diligence. I am playing devils advocate a little, but my concerns are real, and I can't shake off this niggling feeling that we're being given the run-around. We should be priority retail depositors, and out of all the banks caught up in this debacle ours actually had money, but we are now on the back-end: firstly 'our' asset is now conglomerated with all other creditors and will be distributed round the UK bank pay-out, then we get the pickings to go around the IoM bank pay-out. If there is a goodly sum in the UK, we could come off better - but then why was the UK bank taken under Administration if there is so much in it to pay off so many creditors? Someone tell me I'm becoming neurotic...

Lord Turner:
"The only relationship we have had with the Isle of Man authorities in this is that we have explained to them our general processes of how we regulate banks, including how we would regulate, for instance, Kaupthing Singer & Friedlander, but we did not give them specific assurances to say, "This is a necessarily safe bank", because that would not be a reasonable thing for us to do. It is not for us to end up saying to somebody, "We can give you an absolute assurance on this". We can describe our general processes of prudential regulation, but at the end of the day it is for, in this case, the managers, the executive and directors of Kaupthing Isle of Man to make a decision about where they want to place that money and in particular whether they want to put it in a very concentrated fashion, because I think that was a feature, that this was a relatively large deposit relative to the size of Kaupthing Isle of Man."


Run-Around

  • Codpeace
  • 23/10/08 30/11/12
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 15/11/2008 - 22:40

I do agree that we seem to be purposely kept in the dark with regard to so many of the transactions. Do we know when the 550m was transferred to the UK? Would this have made any difference to the in-flighters or those whose requests prior to 8th October never made take-off if it was still under control of KSF IOM? I am convinced that the FSA were instrumental in having such a significant amout of funds transferred to the UK although finding any hard evidence of this will be tough. Why did they have to send it anywhere - if there was a storm on the horizon surely it would have been better to keep it in the IOM for the IOM customers. The directors failed the customers by transferring the funds and this surely is negligence or lack of due diligence.

Once again more questions than answers.....


Are we getting the run around?

  • gazfuk
  • 12/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 15/11/2008 - 21:26

Do you know what? Reading this, it occurs to me you are right.

Out of all this, we are the ones losing our money, we are the ones who need and deserve to be kept up-to-date with what is going on, yet we are the ones kept completely in the dark, save for the odd 'things are being discussed' rumours. If things are being discussed, we should be informed of at least their broad nature.

My patience in all of this is now wearing very thin and vague promises that everything possible is being done are just not good enough.

For me, the prime fault lies with the provisional liquidator who is supposedly working with our interests at the top of his priorities. We need answers, or at least some communication from him quickly. Frankly, his silence is deafening.

We need at the very least, an indication that we are important in all of this.


Reimbursement (full / partial) for accounts in USD, EUR

  • columbgc
  • 11/10/08 14/07/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 15/11/2008 - 16:17

I am hoping for a full recovery of my money and I have more then 50K in the bank. I would like to find out if anybody can have an idea how would they reimburse depositors with several currencies accounts (USD, EUR etc.). Would they convert all into GBP equivalent? I guess this being a first in the IoM, we could only speculate at this stage, however I would be curious what you think.


Anyone with Lloyds...

  • IceCrusher
  • 14/10/08 25/10/11
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 15/11/2008 - 10:42

I just copied the statement below from the Lloyds Offshore Website. I keep a very small cheque account offshore, but it is in Jersey with no DCS. Anybody else keep larger amounts because there doesn't appear to be any protection.

"Lloyds TSB plc does not guarantee the liabilities of its subsidiaries. The paid up capital and reserves of Lloyds TSB Offshore Limited was £319 million as at 31st December 2006. Rules and regulations made under the UK Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, including the Financial Services Compensation Scheme, do not apply to the financial services businesses of companies within the Lloyds TSB group carried out from offices outside the United Kingdom."


Jersey

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Sat, 15/11/2008 - 10:48

There is no DCS in Jersey. I live there and that is why I placed my deposit with KSF I originally thought I was dealing with KSF in the UK ( and their DCS scheme) only to find my deposit went to IOM where there was only protection at that time up to £15K. Anyway I thought I was being overly cautious so left it in the IOM. And the rest is history.......

Our chief minister has given a political guarantee that Jersey residents deposits will be covered in the event of a default (nobody knows whether this guarantee will hold water) but in the case of non- Jersey residents there is no protection at all.


More specifically, as I

  • go mann
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 15/11/2008 - 11:11

More specifically, as I understood it, Jersey residents depositing in Jersey-based institutions [i.e. the 47 that were listed in the JEP a couple of weeks ago].

The general view seems to be you have to live and deposit in the same jurisdiction, which is why Darling is disinterested in expats banking in IoM ... but will help KSFUK clients living in UK.


DCS- please explain

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Sat, 15/11/2008 - 10:40

Please can someone tell me that if KSF does not go into liquidation and there is a distribution of assets based on percentage deposit ie meaning that those under £50K deposit will get less than offered under the DCS. Will the DCS top up the shortfall ?


Yes - that is what will

  • frog
  • 10/10/08 13/09/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 15/11/2008 - 10:44

Yes - that is what will happen


re - DCS- please explain

  • skintagainnow
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 15/11/2008 - 10:44

Whether KSF IoM goes into liquidation or not, for those under 50K they will recieve 100% return, timescale for this return is the only unknown for depositors in this position.


DCS - incorrect

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Sat, 15/11/2008 - 10:49

If the bank does not go into liquidation then the DCS would NOT be triggered. In those circumstances, there would be NO topping up by the scheme of any money recovered.

Not triggering the DCS is presently the declared intention ofthe IOM government. In my view it is very unfair to depositors.


DCS - incorrect - well partly

  • manx-person
  • 17/10/08 31/05/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 15/11/2008 - 23:15

If the bank goes into liquidation the DCS will be triggered at this time, and not before.

It is the Courts of the Isle of Man which will decide whether the bank goes into liquidation.

There are separation of powers in the Isle of Man - what is important here is that there is an independent judiciary.

It is the treasury (a 'branch' of Government) and also a £10m+ depositor that made the successful application not to proceed to a liquidation at this stage, for further review later this month.

The decision is for the Isle of Man courts the judiciary are independent of Government.


Re DCS - incorrect

  • skintagainnow
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 15/11/2008 - 11:12

where in my simple reply did I mention anything incorrect about DCS.

Whatever happens the people under 50K will receive 100% return.

This constant sniping does not do the group or the individual snipper any good.

Ok some are peed off with things, we all are, get over it and return to the job in hand, a return of 100% of everyones deposit.


Yes but the only reason the

  • Ally
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 15/11/2008 - 10:55

Yes but the only reason the DCS would not be triggered is if there was at least £50k for everyone.

You don't have to be a genius to work out that the government will not trigger the DCS if they think they can do better than £50k. Therefore if they can do better than £50k per person there would be no need for DCS.

If the government stands up in court on 27th November to delay the liquidation they will have to sign affidvits confirming they have something better in the pipieline, i.e. more than £50k per depositor. If this does not materialise, then they are going to give people like you a field day as they will be litigated to death.

The only reason the DCS will not be triggered is because other alternatives are better.


Ally

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Sat, 15/11/2008 - 11:29

Either you are being naive, or you really believe that the IOM goverment does not want to trigger the DCS because it really cares about depositors.

There are several reasons why it does not want to trigger the DCS: (i) it does not want to put in £150m - it was cornered into agreeing to do so by the resistance of the banks to its second incarnation DCS; (ii) it thinks it might be cheaper for it to inject money into running down the bank rather tahn cough up £150m; (iii) the banks have made it clear that they will not go along with the latest DCS and they will litigate over making payments into it; (iv) as soon as the DCS triggers, it will become apparent to everyone that it won't work and that there isn't really a DCS in the IoM; (v) it wants to be able to claim that it doesn't have a liquidated bank.