HOPPER's Legal action on in-flight transfers

  • occams razor
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
Posted: Thu, 16/10/2008 - 19:07

(Moderator)
The depositor "HOPPER" has initiated legal action in an attempt to recover "in-flight transfers".
This concerns those transfers made in the last few days before the bank stopped trading, which have left KSFIOM, but have not arrived at the receiving bank
If you are interested in joining him on this, please read below:
(Moderator ends)

I AM NOW TAKING LEGAL ACTION - You can join me - HOPPER
As many of you know from reading my postings on this forum, I attempted to make a £900,000 CHAPS transfer on Monday 6 October 2008. I have done everything I can to find out where my money is. My best understanding right now is that my money is frozen somewhere in transit within Kaupthing Singer and Friedlander in London. I have waited long enough for answers which have not been forthcoming, and I have now instructed my solicitors and a barrister to recover my missing funds. They have put together a detailed legal argument based on my situation in a letter which has now gone to the London Administrators, Ernst and Young, today. There appear to be clear legal arguments which may allow me to recover these funds.
We have all helped each other on this site since this nightmare situation arose. In that regard, my lawyers would be pleased to act for any other claimants in a similar situation wishing to bring a similar action. Given that they have formulated some of the key arguments already, this team would seem a good and cost-effective choice. It will also mean that the London Administrators are presented with claims from a single source (or possibly, at a later date, a consolidated “class action”), which will make the approach more focused and difficult to disperse.
My solicitors are Gregg Latchams WRH in Bristol (www.glwrh.co.uk). I have used this firm for nearly 16 years. I know most of the partners there, but my contacts for this situation are the litigation partner Richard Gore and a senior associate in the company department, Tim Summers. The barrister we are using is James Ramsden at 4-5 Gray’s Inn Square (www.4-5graysinnsquare.co.uk), who, as you can see from his website, has considerable experience of this field and has achieved successful outcomes in similar situations. I have been speaking at length with James, Richard and Tim over the past three days. James also has experience of litigation in offshore locations and particular experience in the Isle of Man. In my opinion, this team provides a very good combination of an experienced barrister with a very capable firm of solicitors. I have deliberately chosen not to use a London firm at this stage (despite the fact that in my City banking career I worked extensively with all the big UK and US law firms) because I want a more personal service on this matter, in a firm where I can speak more easily to the partner in charge.
The legal team have set up a hotline for anyone wishing to investigate their rights or pursue a claim. In the first instance, please contact Polly Frost at Gregg Latchams WRH. Polly is on 0117 906 9452 or if easier for those of you overseas, email her at polly [dot] frost(?)glwrh [dot] co [dot] uk.
Each of us will have a different story here (CHAPS, BACS, dates, facts etcetera). Please remember that it is up to each of you to choose whether or not to take this action. If you want to take up this offer, all potential claims should be notified to the lawyers by close of business on Friday 24th October.
This evening Polly will mainly be taking contact details, but she and Richard Gore will be further in touch as from tomorrow with more detailed information (including as to the basis of their fees, the immediate actions and overall strategy.
I thought it best to put this up now, so that, for those of you interested in pursuing this action, you might have a slightly easier weekend

(Moderator) - This post was received by the law firm, am copying here so it doesn't get lost:
Username: Gregg Latchams WRH

Legal Action - from the legal team

Hello everyone.

This is a quick note from Hopper’s legal team at Gregg Latchams WRH.

Around 30 of you have so far taken up Hopper’s suggestion and made contact with a view to instructing us. We are delighted to receive this level of response in such a short time. We are working closely with our barrister James Ramsden and have some strong legal arguments.

Unfortunately time does not allow us to participate actively in the discussions in this forum. However please do get in touch with us using the contact information given in Hopper’s post if you would like to know more about the approach we will be taking, and whether it is likely to benefit you.

Polly can be contacted on 0117 906 9452 or at polly [dot] frost(?)glwrh [dot] co [dot] uk. In the first instance we will take contact information and some basic details of your potential claim against the Administrators. We will then be in a position to provide more comprehensive strategic advice.

Many thanks
Tim Summers
For Gregg Latchams WRH

(Moderator) - A subsequent message received from the legal team

Legal Update - from the legal team

Thank you Occams Razor - I can confirm that this is basically correct.

(Moderator: In reference to this post)

We might adjust the costs allocation from a strict pro rata basis (per size of claim) where this is reasonable - for instance if particular claimants within the group have a case involving more complex issues which require more work. We would of course communicate clearly with any client on this issue if it seemed likely to become relevant to them.

More details on our basis of charging are included in the initial letter that my colleague Richard Gore is sending to all those expressing an interest in instructing us to pursue an action.

We are not yet able to say what the likely overall cost will be. This depends on our detailed review of the facts of each case, and the response that our action brings. However, Occams Razor is also correct in his observation that the larger the number of claimants in the group, the less the costs for each claimant are likely to be. There should be economies of scale.

Moreover a large and unified group, with a well-articulated case such as we believe we can bring, should in practice be more difficult to oppose and disperse. We would therefore encourage anyone who is still deliberating to get in touch with us, to have a conversation (without commitment) and consider whether they wish to join up.

If you decide to proceed and instruct us, we will be able to give legal and strategic advice once we have considered the facts of your case. As at close of Friday we had spoken and written to around 40 depositors. We hope that more may follow in the course of next week.

By way of a reminder, Polly Frost can be contacted on 0117 906 9452 and at polly [dot] frost(?)glwrh [dot] co [dot] uk.

I hope that this is helpful and we look forward to further conversations.

Many thanks
Tim Summers
For Gregg Latchams WRH

4.666665
Your rating: None Average: 4.7 (3 votes)

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

in flights

  • HOPPER
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Tue, 21/04/2009 - 14:15

good summary. correct. the action i instigated is in the uk and is still ongoing. i will update when i can


any update on In-Flight Funds court action ?

  • MichaelB
  • 16/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 19/04/2009 - 10:15

Does anybody have any further information as to the progress of the in-flight transfer situation.

All seems to have gone very quite on this front ?

Has the Courts rejected the claims or is still ongoing ?

Cheers

MB


In flight still ongoing

  • adrienne
  • 10/10/08 13/05/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 21/04/2009 - 11:07

The habana case goes to court in IOM on the 30th. Hoppers action is in the UK and is ongoing.


Any update on this IN FLIGHT case in the IOM as at 30th April ??

  • MichaelB
  • 16/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 18/05/2009 - 21:26

Just wanted to know what happened to the Habana case in the IOM on the 30/04/09.

Any out come to date ?


MichaelB No update yet

  • fight theft
  • 10/10/08 28/05/13
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 18/05/2009 - 21:46

I would have loved to have heard about a promising outcome to this Habana case to give us all hope - but so far no word from anywhere icluding any legal team and/or media. Not sure if no news is good new in this case. Hope it would be! Hopper will keep you informed if any news breaks.


KFS 'transfers' will not be allowed to stand

  • Kenman
  • 12/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Tue, 11/11/2008 - 17:37

In todays I.O.M. report I read the following:

KFS 'transfers' will not be allowed to stand
Published Date: 11 November 2008
DEPOSITORS who tried transferring their money out of the Isle of Man's Kaupthing Singer & Friedlander bank in the days and hours before the collapse have been told their transfers will not be allowed to go ahead.
It comes as yet another blow for many of the 8,000-plus customers who had savings and investments totalling more than £820 million in Kaupthing Singer & Friedlander (IoM).

Desperately depositors were withdrawing between £30 million and £40 million a day in the days before the bank's demise.

Provisional liquidator Mike Simpson has taken legal advice of so-called 'funds in flight'.

A large number of payment transactions were requested by KSF (IoM) customers before the bank's demise which never reached their intended destination.

And in a statement, he has told depositors who had been left in limbo: 'We have sought legal advice in respect of how all such transactions should be treated, including obtaining an opinion from leading Counsel in the UK.

'This advice has confirmed that following the presentation of a petition to wind up the bank and the suspension of the Bank's banking licence on October 8, I (or any liquidator if one is appointed in due course) am unfortunately not in a position to now effect the transfers requested by customers prior to the date of petition.'

It had previously been hoped that transfers stuck in the clearing system, would eventually be allowed to reach destination.

But the provisional liquidator said over the last couple of weeks, he had sought to clarify the precise position of these transactions.

This had involved an extensive reconciliation exercise and liaison with other banks and with the administrators of KSF in the UK.

In some cases, it was found that no instructions had been issued to any of the bank's clearing facilities to allow an actual payment.

In others, while instructions had been issued to the clearing facilities these had not been processed due to lack of funds in the bank's accounts. This was in turn due to funds not being remitted from the KSF (UK) accounts when it was put into administration on October 8, precipitating the collapse of the parent bank Kaupthing's Isle of Man subsidiary.

In the majority of sterling transactions, the bank used its own account with its sister company, KSF(UK) to process payment requests from its customers. But these were either not processed or not cleared before the London bank's asset were frozen when it was place into administration.

There was also a handful of transactions where an error had been made in the information provided to the clearing bank concerned and the transaction had been 'bounced' back to KSF(IoM)s account.

Mr Simpson, of PricewaterhouseCoopers, said he had also taken legal advice over whether funds in flight could subject to some form of trust claim or proprietary interest but the lawyers had concluded that this was not the case.

He said the accounts of all customers concerned would be re-credited as at the date of initial debit entry, with the relevant amount, including any accompanying transaction charges.

If the bank is formally wound up on November 27, customers will be contacted to explain the process of claiming the money owed to them.


Any update on action on in-flight transfers

  • MichaelB
  • 16/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Thu, 09/04/2009 - 10:37

Does anybody have any further information as to the progress of the in-flight transfer situation.

All seems to have gone very quite on this front ?

Has the Courts rejected the claims or is still ongoing ?

Cheers

MB


IN FLIGHT TRANSFERS - FALSE ACCOUNTING?

  • flying pig
  • 16/12/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 29/12/2008 - 10:44

I see that bookkeeping entries have been made to KSFIOM accounts by Simpson to restore the balances as if the transfers were not made although many of us have screen statements and other documentation showing that that they were.

How can Simpson put these entries through unless he has received the funds back from KSFUK? What can justify these "book entries”, surely this is false accounting!

I believe that we are in a better position if our funds are frozen in KSF UK where we are "inadvertant" UK Depositors the return of whose funds were guaranteed by the UK government (although the UK Government froze my funds in the first place by abusing anti terrorist legislation)

The UK liquidator must be able by now to reconcile funds in transit and have full details of account names and destinations although according to Simpson this has not yet been done.

Does anyone else have views on this?


ruels according to simpson, iom and the uk..

  • hippychickrobbed
  • 03/11/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 29/12/2008 - 11:00

Listen nothing has been done by the book here, nothing. the whole thing as we all know is one grave injustice and we are simply the victims. Our ifa opened up a bond put 320k in on the 6th oct, apparenty our bond provider rang up on the 7th cancelled accounts , great people eh? and was told it was done, by a bank employee but afterwards we were told it was not the case. We still dont know if we have proper accounts but remain creditors of the bank. Its like you got onto a sinking ship but if you have a little boat on the side youvev got to stay and sink with it sorry. I have lost my faith in humanity over this, all people dealing with this horrible nightmare do they have a conscience what they have caused us.


MT103 Are they Real?

  • flying pig
  • 16/12/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 22/01/2009 - 12:45

Did anyone receive a MT103.

Alledgedly several which have been provided by KSFIOM are not genuine MT103's at all and are therefore useless . If you have one check with your bank or post them here without the details. (I assume that this is possible) If you do not have one ask now. I intend to.


in-flight transfers Belgium have been re-credited today

  • restless
  • 23/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 12/11/2008 - 16:55

Today, the in-flight transfers from Kaupthing Bank Belgium (a subsidiary of Kaupthing Bank Luxembourg) have been re-credited to the initial accounts following a court order. Those in-flights transfers were frozen in the beginning of October.


in-flight transfers from Kaupthing Bank Belgium

  • adam
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 12/11/2008 - 23:50

do you have the full details for this please. it infers that the accounts were re-credited as PWC have done to us.


in-flight transfers Kaupthing Bank Belgium

  • restless
  • 23/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 13/11/2008 - 10:45

On the 5th of November, one of the depositors with Kaupthing Bank Belgium made a phone call to the bank asking about the in-flight transfers. The employee of Kaupthing Bank Belgium told him the court in Luxembourg (Kaupthing Belgium is a subsidiary) approved to 'unfreeze' the money, but nobody received an official statement from PWC. On the 7th of November, the webmaster of one of the depositors groups in Belgium, called the spokesperson of Kaupthing Bank Belgium who confirmed the 'rumour', saying the money would be re-credited to the initial Kaupthing accounts. Since depositors in Belgium are still able to access their accounts online, most of them did on a daily basis. Yesterday, the 12th of November, around 2pm GMT, the Kaupthing accounts were indeed re-credited as seen on the bank statements online.

Note: On the 9th of October, the banking license of Kaupthing Bank Luxembourg (and consequently Kaupthing Bank Belgium) was suspended. PWC were appointed provisional liquidator.


in flight transfers, reply from KSFIOM

  • Kenman
  • 12/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Fri, 07/11/2008 - 19:26

Today I received a long two page letter from the provisional liquidators which endied by saying:

"I shall accordingly be making arrangements for your acount with the Bank to be re-credited as the date of the initial entry, with the relevant amount including any transaction charges. Following the hearing of the petition for the formal winding up of the Bank, on 27th November 2008. If a Liquidator is appointed, customers will be contacted with regard to the process for claiming monies owed to them".

There is a full page of detail regarding the in flight positions, but in my opinion it is not relevant to the situation.

I would assume that many of the `in flight' customers will have received a similar letter


Taking deposits

  • jeffh.cruncher
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 09/11/2008 - 21:10

According to Mike Simpson's latest. Depositors who tried to make deposits after the 8th of Oct will have their money returned as KSF IOM, as we all know, had its banking license withdrawn therefore could not function as a bank. This implies money paid in before this date was accepted & presumably becomes part of the liquidation pool. Logic, fairness & plain common sense would suggest that withdrawals actioned before this date should be allowed to continue to their assigned destination, as the KSFIOM was still a legally functioning bank. In flight transfers must be allowed to proceed to their final destination. Any other resolution has to be a travesty of justice & I'm sure all of us feel illegal.

So do Mr Simpson's latest remarks add anything to our cause? any other opinions?


Not so simple. We all know

  • Captain Mainwaring
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 10/11/2008 - 08:13

Not so simple.
We all know that banks play games with clearance of funds, crediting them at the last minute, and even when they have been credited, they can be drawn back.

If funds had actually been credited to your receiving account before the license was withdrawn then certainly they are yours, but if not, then prepare for a big fight that will not only cost you, but cost the rest of the depositors in defending it.

I really don't think (but hope that you do) have any chance in pursuing this, and that the only people who will win will be a bunch of greedy lawyers who will cream about £150K out of those trying to recover in flights, before giving up leaving a bigger loss on those trying.


2 letters from PWC

  • TCA
  • 12/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 10/11/2008 - 07:48

jeffh, there were as far as i know (at least) 2 different letters sent out to depositors from PWC. i received one dated 4th Nov which referred to my "frozen" withdrawal request on the 8th Oct itself and I also received one dated 5th Nov which refers to other withdrawal requests pre 9th Oct, which although debited and payments instructions were issued, they are now to be re-credited to my account.


Letters from/for Mike Simpson

  • Peasant
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 10/11/2008 - 08:53

TCA
I wouldn't depend on the dates on letters as being an indication of when they were sent. See copy of letter from them to me here, you may have scroll down the page due to comment links not working as they should.


PWC letters

  • TCA
  • 12/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 10/11/2008 - 10:21

Peasant, you're quite right. The "older" letter did arrive first. Your own letter in the link above is identical to mine. I just wanted to point out to the previous poster that there was another letter doing the rounds which confirmed Mike Simpson's position on in-flight payments.


Aikom

  • HOPPER
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Fri, 07/11/2008 - 14:07

agreed, hoppers lot are doing the same


in flight leag action

  • aikom
  • 16/10/08 21/06/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Fri, 07/11/2008 - 14:01

Now that I am consulting with my legal team, I am treating everything as confidential, that is I will not post comments directly on this site of a legal nature. Don't want the other side seeing our strategy. Anyone wishing to seek legal advice through my team can e-mail me. You can contact me through this sites contact form.


Confirmation:- Inflight funds returning

  • EIL
  • 14/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Fri, 07/11/2008 - 13:00

I just spoke to the bank an hour ago, To Ms.Emma Keig. I remember speaking to her initially prior to this crisis. She told me that all funds that had been actioned by KSFIOM and not recieved by the beneficiary will be called back and credited to the depositors account. We also had a payment sent by some customer worth US$ 20,000 that is also wrapped up in this mess. This payment was sent on the 8th October..

It is now claimed that this transfer that was expected to arrive 12th or 13th October is now said to have arrived prior to the bank's licence suspension, just so that they can add this aswell to the pool of funds.

They are just a bunch of BLOODY THIEVES. I can only say that they know where the bank is heading and the monies are just going to be distributed equally amongst all depositors.

I also asked them if there were any interested parties to buy the banks, to this she said that there were some initially but there are no more updates on this particular subject.


KSFIOM DEPOSITORS ACTION GROUP is the strongest force we have!

  • Jas III
  • 14/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Fri, 07/11/2008 - 10:59

Aikom I think you can count me in. I just need some details please.

I do believe it makes sense that there is case based on the category of transfer the depositor had and when it was initiated, and how far it got, before it was disregarded, as to liability. In my case I had 3 transfers clear to other banks outside the UK, made after my UK transfers were sent. Solvency is not an issue. It is all about the FSA action inside KSFUK that caused these to fail. Suits are in process now against HM-Treasury andthe FSA with KSF Hf & ICELAND to challenge the legality in how £535M was moved to ING, to protect KE UK depositors.

I pulled all the stings and called in favours from friends and family in the USA for legal refferals in the UK from top USA LLP partners and politians anyone of influence to get a consultation and advice for this case and specifically the funds classified and in-flight transfers. Everyone of the contacs I made with London fimrs have conflicts and cannot help depositors! Either they are engaged by PWC, E&Y or Iceland & KSF Hf. There should beno doubt that Mr Simpsons statement Lastly was backed by some of biggest guns in counsel our money can secure for him.

So no expense was spared in backing his statement to spending money before it goes to creditors let alone depositors. There was about £100M classified as in-transit, so his efforts to get back on his books were well motivated despite any statement he made to the contrary about wanting to allow them to released, unless they had to come back for 'whatever reason' , when it fact it seems evident in his Nov 5 statement, he made every effort possible to do the opposite, which most of us suspected he would. I learned this in advance from an insider at KSFIoM who is now forbidden to have contact with depositors and been reassigned to paperwork only. Mike's statement has been being carefully prepared for weeks now.

So how do depsitors have any faith or confidence now in anything the Provisional Liquidator has to say to us? One thing is very clear he does not have our interests to heart, "for any reason whatsoever"!

Lastly, with this in mind, we also need to be aware of what the consquence of this article mean to us!

"Manx govt to 'run down' Kaupthing IoM to avoid compensation trigger"
http://www.citywire.co.uk/personal/-/news/money-property-and-tax/content...

The strongest force we have is our unified voice and action through this forum and action group.
Is it any wonder that they are trying to wear us down?


Any hope

  • sedmunds
  • 16/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Fri, 07/11/2008 - 11:39

I too am trying to define our position on in flight transfers, however we appear to have no real evidence of whether the monies left the IOM or not. I appear to be in category A, although this to Mr Simpson seems irrelevant, as in his eyes no trust has been created and hence no statutory claim can be made on our monies.

I have monitored this forum regularly and after following many threads, does anyone else here get the impression that the net is closing in and we appear to have no way out. News of IMF initially promising now seems like IOM left out to dry, talk from buyers all now silent, are we now looking down the barrel with the best scenario being 30 pence in the pound ?

If anyone can shed any light on whether or not we have any realistic hopes of claiming back in flight monies or for that matter rescuing the phoenix from the flames it would be greatly appreciated.


(See) M. Simpsons letter for accurate category definition.

  • Jas III
  • 14/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Fri, 07/11/2008 - 12:02

Cat A is Latchams category assignment. This for the majority ascessed by Richard Gore, means that a claimiant has screen print from the account showing a debit and transfer if applicable. That unforuntately means nothing! M.Simpson breaks that down, in his carefully prepared posting dated 5 Nov, into 4 further categories, a), b), c) d). That define what I have posted for weeks about how the payment system is completely seperate from what accounts show, and if payment actually were sent, how they are sent, and how they clear. I hesitate to say more, because it at this stage it could work against us. These posts are being monitored and scrutinized quite carefully on all sides concerned!


Hope continued....

  • amar
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Fri, 07/11/2008 - 11:55

I must admit that throughout all this i have retained the firm belief that there are actions going on behind the scenes that will a satisfactory conclusion to this that will allow all parties a dignfied exit with us the depositors receiving all our funds.

Now however, and defintely following the run down statement from Brown of KSFIOM, I am getting that very uneasy feeling in my stomach. This will allow them to refrain from paying the compensation.

One thing for certain is that we must all stick together and continue with the tools we have, which is our bond, and see this through without giving up. I for one am in this till we have exhaused all avenues.


RE: my QC advice post

  • aikom
  • 16/10/08 21/06/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Thu, 06/11/2008 - 18:18

I see I made typing errors in my last post about me seeking QC advice. I meant to say "I have sought QC advice" and " I have actually employed a specialist legal team. I should get QC opinion tomorrow or Monday. Then I'll let you all know if we have a hope or whether opinion is " we should expect to get what we're given!"


Help to pay "up front"

  • alandob
  • 12/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 06/11/2008 - 18:50

I will be happy to help pay for your "initial" communication with QC. Please contact me direct and hopefully we can work out the details (this is critical and you shouldn't have to pay for this on your own). If we need to move forward I will 1 of the clients. I am also a Latchams client, so hopefully can add another consideration. Please email me alandob @ europa-network.com


In flight advice from QC

  • aikom
  • 16/10/08 21/06/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Thu, 06/11/2008 - 15:12

I do not accept Mike Simpsons, explaination to in-flights not leaving IOM. I am at this moment seeking advice for a very prominent QC and legal team fully experienced with banking law, transfers etc. This I am funding myself at an expense I can ill afford.
Should the advice be of a favourable nature to our cause. I will offer what is contained in this advice to anyone who wishes to view it. I will do this in return for a pro rata donation towards costs.
For example if 10 people what to be privy to the advice then the cost will be divided by 11 (myself as the 11th). If on the advice anyone wishes to proceed then they may contact the legal team themselves.

If the advice is unfavourable then I have born the brunt of all the costs

I assume all think this is fair


In flight advice from QC

  • ozdog
  • 10/10/08 30/11/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 07/11/2008 - 09:00

I was hoping that someone nearer the action than me (Australia) would not be prepared to just accept the statement of Mr Simpson at face value and consider taking some advice. Hoppers lawyers have presumably got an opinion that has given them a different view to that of Mr Simpson.
I might well be prepared to accept some of the apportioned cost but that would rather depend on the amount involved as I can ill afford any further expense.


Now this debate will begin in earnest

  • Kaupthing Over ...
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 06/11/2008 - 15:29

So Simpson reports on the advice he's taken meticulous steps to collect."" I have sought legal advice in this regard and am advised that such suggestions are incorrect and that instructions for a funds transfer give rise to no trust claim or propriety interest.""
I believe we can sensibly assume he's acquired the best advice that money can buy since we are actually paying for it.
It may well be from several sources.
This means one group of experts trying to outwit another.
Dust off the cheque books if you still have one people,it's just getting started.


Legal Costs and Transfers

  • IanAbroad
  • 11/10/08 13/08/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 06/11/2008 - 18:30

I agree that PWC will have had their own (very experienced) lawyers on the case and also sought counsel, probably from at least 2 sources.
A lot is going to hinge on just what has happened with these 'transfers' etc.
Who is correct? DId any money ever get debited/credited between accounts or are they just entries on a ledger that were never actioned?
Until these facts are out I doubt anyone can make a decision, and the only people who do know the facts are PWC, and we can see what they have decided.
I am sure the Captain and Jas lll will have more to say, and so far, they appear to have been relatively on the money, so to speak!


Notice from the Administrator

  • alandob
  • 12/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 06/11/2008 - 13:57

Please read the following link, which explains exactly what's happening - Terrible...

http://www.kaupthingsingers.co.uk/Pages/4015

NB: the above link is to the Liquidator's statement of 6/11 concerning his present view of the status of In-Flight transactions --- (L J moderator)


Transfers sent back to IOM

  • adam
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 05/11/2008 - 23:30

I wonder if there was actually a cut off point whereby they didn't actually send funds out of IOM, we could verify this with the internet transfer reference number, for example my transfer on Sunday/monday was 939X, then by the 9th when I did another it was 1121X, implies about 2000 transfer requests in a couple days.
I'm in with the Latchams action, & I hope nay sayers are correct, that we don't need the solicitors, however we all need insurance.


“In-flight” disaster.

  • alandob
  • 12/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 05/11/2008 - 15:36

I am a category “B” client with Latchams and spoke to the bank today. They confirmed my balance was minus the “in-flight” amount i.e. my money was out of my account – but was told that the funds were going BACK INTO MY ACCOUNT TODAY. A letter from the administrator would be sent out (by post) today detailing these transactions.

Has anyone else got anything to add to this disaster!!!


"In Flight" Disaster

  • cande
  • 15/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 05/11/2008 - 21:19

If you don't mind me asking, have you actually proceeded with the issue of a claim letter from Latchams which EY, PWC, FSA, etc. would have receieved today?


A remarkably poor way of

  • go mann
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 05/11/2008 - 18:21

A remarkably poor way of handling people's lives. Some get info, some don't ... some get absolutely nothing except standard auto-replies.

I take comfort from the impression that the "provisionally un-liquidated liquidator provisional" is actually getting some substance out of the computer system. Perhaps someone will eventually tell me what happened to my BACS transfer on the morning of Monday 6 Oct? Or possibly not, of course.


Deliberate Misinformation or Simply Incompetence?

  • softlad66
  • 10/10/08 27/04/11
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 05/11/2008 - 18:54

Deliberate misinformation or simply incompetence? Probably the former. However, in my opinion PWC have been working like this for years but unfortunately the internet and websites such as this one, make the task of misinformation (or incompetence) somewhat more difficult to get away with.


"in-flight" disaster

  • softlad66
  • 10/10/08 27/04/11
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 05/11/2008 - 18:07

When was the transfer made? 6th, 7th or 8th Oct? Was it made through BACS or CHAPS and was it a sterling or a foreign currency transfer?


Everything was correct with "in-flight"

  • alandob
  • 12/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 05/11/2008 - 20:02

CHAPS on the 8th and at 10:00 ( I flew from Spain to Douglas, in the bank) althought the notice was actually delivered by courier on the 6th and in sterling...


in flight situation

  • rippedoff
  • 12/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 05/11/2008 - 16:01

Alandob, your information is bad but not surprising news.

I was informed today by the bank that they are only giving account balances at 30 September whereas 2 weeks ago they were happy to give balances at 8 Oct. I suspect the reason for this is to assuage any distress at seeing balances shoot up and of course to give the liquidator provisional time to complete the action of in flight collections before we (or Hoppers lawyers) can stop him.

If you are correct it will be more difficult for legal teams working on our behalf to extricate those payments.


In flight Situation

  • IanAbroad
  • 11/10/08 13/08/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 05/11/2008 - 16:03

I just called them and they said they would only tell me my balance as of 30th Sep.
Maybe you got hold of a talkative one.


Legal Action on Inflight transfers - class action closed

  • gabriel
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Tue, 04/11/2008 - 15:18

Hello there - I have just been in touch with POLLY at GREG LATCHAMS WRH and she says that they are no longer taking new instructions for this case. IF ONLY I'D KNOW ABOUT THIS TWO WEEKS AGO!! Please can anyone advise me if there are other firms representing depositors on inflight transactions? I would very much like to join a similar class-action/group action to recover the withdrawals I tried to make before the bank stopped trading. Many thanks
Gabriel


This won't go down well, but

  • Captain Mainwaring
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 05/11/2008 - 03:04

This won't go down well, but to be honest, I think you have had a lucky escape.
I'd sit back and watch what happens for a while before making a decision.


Just wait a while

  • Yoda
  • 21/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Wed, 05/11/2008 - 14:44

Although, captain, you are the master of doom - in this case, I think you are right.
The Hopper case is already getting expensive, I was put in Cat B, but with little documentary evidence, I have decided to withdrawer and wait a bit.

Makes me very edgy though, not to be doing anything.


I don't mean to be gloomy,

  • Captain Mainwaring
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 05/11/2008 - 14:50

I don't mean to be gloomy, but I think the lawyers are having a field day with this.

As I have said before, I do hope these guys get what the hope for, but I suspect if they do, it will have nothing to do with the lawyers.

I'd keep what money you do have firmly in you hand for the time being.


I see this as positive news from PWC : MS

  • MichaelB
  • 16/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Wed, 05/11/2008 - 18:07

http://www.kaupthingsingers.co.uk/Pages/4014

Funds in transit – payment requests made by customers prior to the date of my appointment
As at the date of my appointment, there were in addition a large number of payment transactions which had been requested by customers but which had not reached their payment destination. Over the last couple of weeks we have sought to clarify the precise position in respect of these transactions, including seeking legal advice. We will shortly be writing to the individual customers concerned advising them of the position, as we have been able to establish it from the information we have been provided with, and will post a separate notice on the website.

Any comments ?


Interpretation of Michael Simpson's update 4/11/08

  • hopeful
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 05/11/2008 - 18:45

Whilst it is encouraging that he makes no distinction between actioned and non-actioned transfer requests it is a great pity that he does not comment at this stage on what is likely to happen to these funds. I suspect that he has not yet been advised by his legal team on what to do with these funds. If he had been advised at this stage that these funds should be ring-fenced and returned to the depositors he would have surely included this in his statement.


Kaupthing

  • frog
  • 10/10/08 13/09/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 05/11/2008 - 14:49

Well I called them this morning and they said they will be writing to people in the next couple of days who had requested transfer (or closure) prior to the bank being frozen. I wasn't told what the letter contained, but it is a form letter to everyone in this situation.

Interestingly:

  1. They had different spreadsheets from those who just asked for a transfer and those who asked for the account to be closed (I wonder why?)
  2. They made no distinction between those who have had the money withdrawn form their balance statements (in flight) and those who didn't.

Sit Back and Do Nothing...

  • softlad66
  • 10/10/08 27/04/11
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 05/11/2008 - 07:26

Yep, that's what I did when Kaupthing took over the Derbyshire IoM. I sat back and did nothing; look where that got me.