• cande
  • 15/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
Posted: Tue, 21/10/2008 - 21:29

Those with 'in flight' transfers shown as having debited their account prior to the 8 Oct may wish to read paragrahs 2.9 and 2.10 of section 5 of the KSF(IoM)Ltd Terms and Conditions contined within the documents at the following location (copied from a previous thread):


Form the file titled IoM-TC-1107v2.pdf (in the folder with 13 files) they are as follows:

Kaupthing Singer &
Friedlander (Isle of Man)
Limited’s Online Banking
Service Terms and


2.9 If you instruct the Bank through the Online
Banking Service, such an instruction may only be
cancelled if the Bank receive notification from you
of your wish to cancel the instruction before it is
acted upon by the Bank.

2.10 Records maintained by the Bank of any
instruction you give the Bank under the Online
Banking Service will be conclusive evidence of your
instruction and the time that it was given. Unless
there is an obvious error these records will be final.

This I thought might be useful as a basis for a claim to PWC as whether funds have left the IoM, are in the UK, etc. or not, from KSF(IoM)'s own T&Cs the fact that the money had been withdrawn from the account and could not be merley 'pooled' would seem quite clear.

I will also forward this to PWC (IoM), Hoppers legal team and KSF(IoM)Ltd.

Your rating: None Average: 5 (1 vote)

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

KSFIOM Terms and Conditions

  • kiwi38
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Tue, 17/02/2009 - 12:51

Cande, that link isn't working. Can you please check it and re-post.

Do you, or does nayone else have a full set of KSFIOM Terms and Conditions?

I have a large amount at stake here but as a secondary issue like a fool there were further funds (€20k) sent to my account early in October. Fortunately the sender forgot to put the full and correct account payee details on the transfer which under the normal Banking Policy and I think under the Money Laundering Legislation means that the money must be rejected and sent back to the payer. In this case however the Liquidator is happy that he has enough info (no payee name was given) so has taken this money and credited the account, rather than send it back as is the KSFIOM usual policy. I have had many e-maail exchanges with the LP but they won't budge. Seems they can change the rules (maybe even the law) to suit themselves. A full copy of the KSFIOM Terms and Conditions might help me.

KSFIOM Terms and Conditions

  • coldlightofday
  • 20/10/08 31/08/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 17/02/2009 - 13:57

I have an 8 page brochure. I have scanned it to pc as pdf, but the result looks like an argument between different software packages! I will keep trying to sort it out and will post as an attachment to a blog.

In flight transfers

  • romasanta
  • 16/10/08 02/10/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 17/02/2009 - 11:47

Well done cande. It seems very clear here, but how does this stack up with the PL Mike Simpson's position on this? - he seems convinced that he is in the right to claim these in-flights back into his domain.

I tried to access the link, but the site say "doc not found" - can you fix this?

Legal opinion from Mike

  • adrienne
  • 10/10/08 13/05/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 17/02/2009 - 15:12

We sent multiple emails from lawyers to mike requesting sight of the opinion he had obtained. and he never replied to any of us. One of the requests was issued by Linklaters.

Legal opinion from Mike

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Tue, 17/02/2009 - 15:31

That is exactly the right approach. Whenever an opponent tells you that he is doing or not doing something because he has been given legal advice to that effect, ask to see a copy of the advice.

As would be expected, p.l. has not produced it. You could therefore be forgiven for concluding that the advice is not quite as definite as he would have you believe.

In flight

  • IanAbroad
  • 11/10/08 13/08/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 17/02/2009 - 12:15

(2.9 If you instruct the Bank through the Online Banking Service, such an instruction may only be cancelled if the Bank receive notification from you
of your wish to cancel the instruction before it is acted upon by the Bank.)

I believe the issue is that although the bank received the instructions, they did not act upon them. This was the trigger for all the "Quitclose Trust" posts.
Especially the fact that the bank had debitted one ledger ( the accounts ) without the transfers actually being processed.

The Habana case, when it gets heard, will clear up this issue. However, the details are thin on the ground, and I have not read anywhere exactly how far the Habana transfer(s) got through the system. This will all come out in the court case.