Interest from 9 Oct 2008 to 27 May 2009

  • KSFIOMCRAP
  • 15/03/09 31/05/09
  • not prepared to answer
  • Offline
Posted: Tue, 08/09/2009 - 11:54

Dear fellow depositors,

I have some news from the FSC regarding the possibility to claim interest from the DCS or the liquidators.

As you might know depositors can claim interest only until 9 October 2008 (= date winding up petition was filed).

Even a below 50k depositor will therefore not receive 100% compensation as he is unable to claim interest until 27 May 2009 (=he date KSFIOM was liquidated).

The FSC has confirmed to me that the DCS will not change the legislation of the deposit compensation scheme which fixes the date to 9 October 2008.

The DCS has discussed this with "Queens Council" and decided not to seek an amendemend of the legislation.

The FSC has also confirmed that they will not raise this issue with the High Court and will not push for an amendemend of the legislation.

The FSC has also told me that it is not possible to claim the interest directly from the liquidators.

This seems rather odd to me because other depositors in other countries can make a claim for the full interest going beyond 9 October 2008.

For example German Kaupthing Edge depositors can make a claim directly to Kaupthing HF in Iceland. German Kaupthing EDGE accounts were held at a local branch of Kaupthing HF and Kaupthing HF has also repayed all depositors their full deposit already.

You can see the forms which need to be filled out under the following link:

http://kaupthingedge.foren-city.de/topic,5970,-formular-anspruchstellung...

My questions to the DAG:

What is the position of the DAG on this? Do they really care about below 50,000 GBP depositors? Does DAG really have the objective to ensure that all depositors get 100% of their money back???

If this interest can not be claimed from the DCS and the liquidators because of IOM legislation can it still be claimed from Kaupthing HF in Iceland?

Why is the DAG silent on this point? Can DAG ask the IOM High Court to amend the DCS legislation?

If Kaupthing HF can repay all the German EDGE depositors what is the situation with the parental guarantee of Kaupthing HF and KSFIOM?

I would really appreciate some feedback from DAG. I am not the only one who is asking for this and there have been several forums but no feedback from DAG so far.....

3.25
Your rating: None Average: 3.3 (12 votes)

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

INTEREST

  • justr
  • 12/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Thu, 10/09/2009 - 13:55

I have been lucky enough to receive a cheque for my deposit (in full ?) that being under 50K and feel relieved, however, the sum did not match that of my statement of 9th October 2009. I emailed IOM DCS asking why a few hundred pounds was 'missing' and the reply I had was

"The payment is calculated in accordance with the balance admitted by the liquidator.Where the contractual interest rate is greater than the statutory interest rate the balance is reduced accordingly etc etc"

first I have heard of that one !!!!

any comments anybody

I am lucky but continue to support those less fortunate at present and this site will continue to be part of my life until everybody has their 100%, still willing to demonstrate.


justr

  • giveus backourfunds
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 19/09/2009 - 18:48

This is something that has been raised before, I myself was down by £143.00 but it is down to the interest rate that they have calculated, being only 5%, so if you like me had a bond paying 7.10% you will only get interest of 5%. Shit I know but we have our money back and I for one would have taken it 11 months ago.

Those who are still waiting for the DCS payment I feel for you but I hope in time you get sorted. The rest over £5Ok well it will be a longish wait but I sincerely hope you get it back.

Goodbye and good luck to you all


Fuck you 'giveus backourfunds'

  • follow_the_tao
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 26/09/2009 - 03:26

Remember this my friend: You're a selfish short-sighted, self opiniated tw*t.

You got your money. Fuck the rest! You don't care, you never did. You were just interested in you little pile.

I made this point repeatedly. Nobody noticed. You were in good stupid company.

You made a lot of noise. You spoke sh"t. You clogged up the airwaves with your stupid opinions.

And you were given space. Incredible!

You are beneath contempt.

Bye bye.

And remember this: F*ck-you 'Givus backourfunds'. You brain damaged selfish idiot.

I hope you die in hell. Just a fond farewell. C**t. If I ever find out who you really are..... I might send you a christmas card.


follow-the- shit

  • giveus backourfunds
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 27/09/2009 - 09:23

follow, u sound like a bitter twisted bastard, you have always as most comments on here show, u and that chris watson (think you must be twins in the same retarded home)

Not sure what you found offensive with my comments (and i dont relly care), The fact I will not ever have to see you stupis crap no more is great, and while your crying over the KSF I will be out with my money.

The above is not intended to be a slant against anyone other than follow the crap and Chris watson. Follow the crap does not the fact that we have different opions, I am not bitter and twisted like him and accept that.

I think whoever monitors the site shoulk look at his coments and see if this is the sort of thing you want to promote!!!!!


For a supposedly educated

  • DAKON
  • 28/02/09 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 27/09/2009 - 01:44

For a supposedly educated man, you seem to be unable to control yourself, but then from a pig we should only expect a grunt.

As for the threats, I suggest that "giveusback" gets in touch with another member here who is well versed in sending emails threatening legal action - trouble is, legal action cannot prevent the action.

FTT, have you worked out yet, that you have done your money, and that DAG has achieved pretty much SFA apart from providing some consolation. It was all set in stone before the deed was done, but you are to short sighted to see that.

And for the record, I also couldn't give a toss about the rest, the only thing I care about is the amount of money I may have lost as a result of actions causing the liquidator to seek legal advice.

I also have to laugh at the weekly phonecalls to nice Mr S, I wonder if he was pissing himself laughing during them, or if he waited until he got off the phone.

I'm rather glad that so many were so short sighted as to realise that there was another way to get your money back, but since there was only a limited amount to go around, it's for the best.


Do we really need such bad

  • tsunamivictim
  • 11/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 26/09/2009 - 04:06

Do we really need such bad language on our site?
Sorry Tao but however angry you are, I just dont think language like this is appropriate.


I think it's time we called a spade a spade.

  • follow_the_tao
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 26/09/2009 - 07:26

If you examine the posting of 'givus backourfunds' you will find a trail of absolute dross.

This guy was entertained by the site whilst posting his venom.

What do you suggest we do? Be polite.

What do you suggest we did, do confronted with the hypocrisy of the IoMG? Smile?

No! You call them liars to their face.

They live with this everyday. They think they are politicians, they think it goes with their territory.

They are lying bastards. I won't retract this last statement. They are opportunists.

Exactly how nice to them do you suggest we be?


Thankyou for your support

  • tonycBrisbaneOz
  • 12/10/08 31/05/13
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 17/09/2009 - 23:06

Just another example of legalised theft.

In my case this excuse has been used to reduce my claim by thousands of pounds.

Regards, TonyC


"What is the position of the

  • DAKON
  • 28/02/09 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 09/09/2009 - 02:29

"What is the position of the DAG on this? Do they really care about below 50,000 GBP depositors? Does DAG really have the objective to ensure that all depositors get 100% of their money back???"

I could be missing something here, but surely all sub 50K'ers will have or will shortly be fully repaid, whereas many other depositors are still at 25%, do you not think that your assertion that no one cares about sub 50K'ers stinks of greed and self interest?

I agree that the matter of interest "could" be of some concern when nice Mr Simpson has paid everyone back in full, in the year 2525, but since interest for the past year on a 10K deposit would just about buy a Mars bar, would it be worthwhile actually taking councils advice on a point of principal?

Agreed that the matter of interest may become an issue, but not until everyone else has been paid in full.


I agree Dakon

  • bellyup
  • 10/10/08 09/01/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 09/09/2009 - 10:51

I could be missing something here, but surely all sub 50K'ers will have or will shortly be fully repaid, whereas many other depositors are still at 25%, do you not think that your assertion that no one cares about sub 50K'ers stinks of greed and self interest?
I agree that the matter of interest "could" be of some concern when nice Mr Simpson has paid everyone back in full, in the year 2525, but since interest for the past year on a 10K deposit would just about buy a Mars bar, would it be worthwhile actually taking councils advice on a point of principal?

The battle for the 50k people is won so postings on how no one cares about them is rubbish.
Who pays for consulting EC on these points of principle?
The people who contributed to the legal fund who of course include many people over 50k.
I am very happy for the 50k savers that they have got their money back.
I would be even more happy if I had my capital back 100% too.


DCS

  • giveus backourfunds
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Thu, 10/09/2009 - 11:34

Anothe day and no money or no news, do we have anyone at all that has had funds today this would surely indicate things are moving ?


steve

  • steve
  • 14/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Thu, 10/09/2009 - 11:56

After 11 months of stalling, no-one is now answering any calls , replying to emails or answering letters. Is the game now up and they have all done a runner?


steve

  • giveus backourfunds
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Thu, 10/09/2009 - 12:05

i am in the same boat, 3 e-mails and I even phoned yesterday and still nothing.

I am thinking of paying them a visit as I live on IOM


Steve, May be it would be

  • barrona
  • 17/11/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 10/09/2009 - 12:42

Steve,

May be it would be helpful if you did visit the DCS Scheme Manager and find out what the hell he is doing. I personally couldn't give a damn if he and his team are inundated with claims. What on earth did he expect! We have all been waiting for 11 months and are being treated with the utmost contempt.
This will come back to haunt the IoM.


contempt

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Thu, 10/09/2009 - 12:59

Coincidentally I made the same complaint two days ago to Peter Spratt and others at PWC - over depositors being treated with contempt. It appears to me that we are mostly seen as fools for having put our savings there and fools for expecting to get it all back after the collapse, or at best our existence is regarded as a nuisance.


DCS etc

  • steveservaes
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Thu, 10/09/2009 - 13:13

I had a named account with a signature as well as an EDGE so I should have been 100% done/dusted on getting my DCS payment straight away.
Having not received anything I have even been round to KPMG and given them full due diligence on me.
I even know Simbo personally.
But have I received my cheque?
Have I ******.


@gbof

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Thu, 10/09/2009 - 12:11

Has ANYBODY rec'd DCS payments yet by cheque, BACs or other ?

What the Donald D is going on ?


@bobby shafted -- DCS payments

  • burns284
  • 19/04/09 30/11/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 10/09/2009 - 13:36

The short answer to your question is YES.

If I remember correctly, 2 people have posted here telling us that they received cheques from the DCS last Saturday (5th Sep.), including one person who was complaining that he had requested a bank transfer. Presumbably these people are UK or IOM residents.

Absolutely noone has posted yet to say that they have received an electronic transfer.

At the begining of the week, I suggested that some patience was required as BACS transfers (the method used by DCS to UK clearing banks) would take 2-3 working days.

However, I must agree that it is now strange that noone who uses this site has received a bank transfer. This can only mean that the relevant transfers were not initiated last Friday .

The excuses given regarding the number of claims being processed (many thousands) are rather pathetic as anyone could have worked out last October that there would be many thousands of claims to the DCS.

Still, all we can do at this stage is wait. Bombarding the DCS with e-mails and telephone calls will only make matter worse. The complaints to IOM Treasury someone has suggested sound more reasonable.


What is the position of the

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Wed, 09/09/2009 - 09:26

DAKON - I know your reply was not directed at me, but I have something to add. The DCS claimants who have been repaid in full, of which (including those fully compensated under EPSs) there will shortly be some 7000, are obviously now in a much better position than the remainder with about £600m of deposits who have yet to receive more than 25%. However, it is proper to consider in advance what will happen if and when recovery reaches 100%, which is no longer a distant hope but now a small but finite possibility, and to ensure that all depositors rights (including those eliminated by EPSs and DCS) in respect of interest are preserved. That is of greater significance for those depositors who will haveto wait several years for full compensation under the liquidation, because in their case the interest payable may be a substantial fraction on top of the amount deposited, as well as substantial in absolute terms.


@Elgee the new web site

  • Ohdear
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Fri, 25/09/2009 - 18:24

I have signed to the new web site but have not yet received any information about login or password? Any update?

Thanks.


DAKON

  • KSFIOMCRAP
  • 15/03/09 31/05/09
  • not prepared to answer
  • Offline
  • Wed, 09/09/2009 - 09:04

I think there is some misunderstanding on this point. Below 50k depositors will not have all their money back unless they get paid back their deposit + interest until 27 May 2009. So below 50k depositors do not have a 100% recovery because of the way the DCS is designed which is not in line with the practice in other places such as with Kaupthing HF in Iceland.

Depositors who have more than 50k also benefit if the DCS legislation is amended to include interest until 27 May 2009. Imagine you have 60k as of 9 October and 62k as of 27 May 2009. If the legislation is not changed all you can do is to claim 60k from the DCS. They will pay you 50k now and maybe 10k later on (via liquidator dividends). If the legislation is changed you can claim 62k and will get 50k now and maybe 12k later on.

Agreed it does not make too much difference for large depositors at this stage because we are only at the beginning of the liquidation but it affects all depositors in the same way. Also if you have 50k and did not get interest on that for almost 8 months its worth about 3% which is 1.5k so more that just some penuts. The DCS regulation was set up to protect small depositors but fails to do so under the current legislation. Other jurisdictions are much more efficient to handle these cases and this shows that the deposit protection of the IOM is in poor shape.


interest

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Tue, 08/09/2009 - 12:39

I have been working independently on the interest issue, because it affects me personally (so I have not made it a DST issue, although DST did take some advice from Edwin Coe about this before the first creditors' meeting). I should have some answers this week, because by coincidence this issue has just come to head with PWC in relation to one of my two accounts. At present we are in dispute over the situation regarding interest for full-EPSs compensated depsitors, but teh same arguments go to the broader issue of claims for interest generally for all depositors from 8 Oct 2008, which is strictly not recoverable unless and until there is 100% recovery in the liquidation.


elgee

  • KSFIOMCRAP
  • 15/03/09 31/05/09
  • not prepared to answer
  • Offline
  • Tue, 08/09/2009 - 12:51

Thanks for your reply. There is a difference between the interest from 9 October 2008 to 27 May 2009 and interest after 27 May 2009.

I agree that interest after 27 May 2009 is a subordinated claim but interest up until 27 May 2009 should not be subordinated. Please have a look at attached link where you can see how interest is dealt with at the winding up of Kaupthing HF in Iceland:

http://www.kaupthing.com/Pages/4147

At Kaupthing HF interst can be included in the regular claim up until 22 April 2009 when the bank was wound up. Interest after 22 April 2009 can be claimed from teh liquidators but is a subordinated claim which will only be paid out if all senior claims have been paid in full.

WIth KSFIOM interest up until 27 May 2009 should be included as a senior claim. The fact that the FSC tells me that it can not be claimed at all is a joke!


elgee2

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Tue, 08/09/2009 - 13:25

On "amending the legislation". The court (even in the IoM) does not amend statutes - that can only be done by parliament (Tynwald). The court only interprets statutes.

If the court interprets the statute in such a way that depositors (or a class or classes of them) are deprived of the right to interest, then Tynwald might well be prevailed upon to amend. What appears to be happening instead is that FSC and PWC has decided that they are quite happy with their own interpretations, which disfavours non liquidation-only depositors and that neither party is going to apply to the court for directions or a declaration in respect of these issues. It may be that DST has to do so instead, although in the case of the DCS it appears that while only FSC can apply for directions, I do not think this precludes a depositor from applying for a declaration as to the law.


interest pre 8 Oct/pre May 09 and post May 09

  • banna
  • 15/10/08 01/03/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 08/09/2009 - 13:14

It seems to me that
1 whether interest is claimable or not will depend upon UK/IOM legislation and not what happened in Germany. UK insolvency law -as amended for IOM - needs to be examined.
2. The legal relationship between Kaupthing Germany and Kaupthing Hf might not be the same as the relationship between KSFIOM and its parent. Is Kaupthing Germany a branch or a fully owned subsidiary?

At the moment PWC quotes UK legislation which limits the ability to claim interest.
I have not examined the problem in detail, but elgee appears to be doing so and I would trust his conclusions after he has looked at it.


banna

  • KSFIOMCRAP
  • 15/03/09 31/05/09
  • not prepared to answer
  • Offline
  • Tue, 08/09/2009 - 16:56

On your questions: yes agreed what happens in Germany is a different story. In Germany Kaupthing Edge accounts are held at a branch of Kaupthing HF in Iceland. No german deposit protection applies and depositors had to go to the Icelandic deposit protection. However Kaupthing HF repayed all depositors so noone had to go the the deposit protection scheme of Iceland. ALso large depositors received all their money back!!!.

Nevertheless Kaupthing HF is unwound like KSFIOM is unwound and under the Kaupthing HF winding up process depositors can claim interest until their money was paid back. The moratorium on payments happened on 9 October 2008 and the winding up started on 22 April 2009. People received their money later though but with interest until 22 April 2009. They can even claim interest after 22 April 2009 although this is a subordinated claim.

I am just giving you this information about Germany because it shows that IOM is tricking depositors by relying on some legislation which is not in line with legislation in other places. Neither the FSC nor the DCS is doing anything about it and they are hiding behind some sort of "advice" which was given to them by "Queens Council". There is a need to put more pressure on them to act accordingly. Consequently it would make a lot of sense if the DAG would get the IOM High Court to look at this as it could increase the pressure on IOM (parliament) to amend their legislation. It is not only in the interest of small depositors.

Also given the fact that Kaupthing HF is able to repay German Edge account holders in full makes me get the impression the parental guarantee towards KSFIOM must still be worth something in the liquidation process. If everybody can claim more there is also a chance to get paid more in the end.


to KSFIOMCRAP

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Tue, 08/09/2009 - 22:29

Edwin Coe instructed by DAG/DST to follow up matter with FSC re DCS. I am continuing to follow up with PWC for the time being, after which that too wil go to Edwin Coe if necessary. I have given EC two questions to ask of FSC, which are related but not the same. One concerns entitlement to interest under the DCS itself, which EC have asked about previously and the other concerns the mechanism under which wholly-compensated DCS claimants will be able to recover interest in the event that the liquidation becomes solvent, since DCS will still retain a blanket assignment from such depositors. I recognise there are wider issues going to post-collapse interest, which will be addressed serially.


elgee

  • KSFIOMCRAP
  • 15/03/09 31/05/09
  • not prepared to answer
  • Offline
  • Tue, 08/09/2009 - 23:37

Dear elgee

Many thanks. I will also let you know if I get any further info.

What I know is that the FSC initially planned to raise the issue (of using 27 May 2009 instead of 9 October 2008 in the DCS) with the IOM High Court - I had logged a complaint with the FSC and received a letter from John Aspden on 19 June 2009 where he wrote:

".....further representation has been made to the Commission on this point and in the interests of fairness to all parties it is planned that we will make an application to the High Court to seek a ruling on the matter...."

But this never happened.

Mr Aspden also wrote:

"Treasury has stated that the DCS is to be reviewed later this year and I will make sure your concern about interest is raised with them."
....
"I do not feel it is possible to make a retrospective change, however it is planned that further clarification on the matter of interest will be sought from the High Court."

However later on the FSC told me they will not seek a High Court ruling. The FSC stated that DCS got Queens Council Advice that the relevant date should be 9 October 2008.

I tried to get the exact "Queens Council advice" documents but the FSC refused to hand it over to me. I have also made them aware of the fact that other liquidations such as the Kaupthing HF liquidation follow a different approach compared to the IOM DCS.

Depositors should be able to make a claim for the interest up until May 27 2009 - if the DCS regulation does not allow for it then it should be possible to make a direct claim at the liquidator which would be in addition to the DCS claim but just for any amount exceding the DCS payout.

For below 50k depositors it would be easiest if a claim could be made via the DCS but for that the DCS legislation apparently needs to change.


elgee

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Tue, 08/09/2009 - 13:13

I understand the distinction, but the problem I have had is that PWC insist that the proper interpretation of IoM law is that the date of liquidation was the date on which the petition was lodged (ie. 9 Oct 2008) and not the date on which the winding-up order was made (27 May 2009). I recognise that this appears unlikely, but that is something that DST would have to refer to Edwin Coe for further advice. Also, for DCS claimants the regulations governing DCS are themselves ambiguous in relation to interest earned after the collapse and before payment under the DCS as to whether interest can be claimed from the DCS (in which case it would obviously not require 100% recovery in the liquidation). There is the related issue of whether DCS-claimants can pursue claims for any interest not paid under the DCS in the liquidation itself, and if so it appears that that would require reassignment back from FCS to DCS-claimant depositors even in the cases of fully-paid DCS claimants.

In summary, it is a very complicated matter with arguments on both sides, and I do not think for a minute that either the FSC or PWC are confident that they are right. The statutes (regulations in the case of DCS) did not anticipate there being a delay of many months (8 in our case) between the collapse and the winding-up order being made or the collapse and a DSC default being declared. As for your question about DST's concern for DCS claimants, a good deal of legal advice obtained from EC by DST has been in respect of DSC claimants, quite apart from the fact that defeating the SoA has most certainly assisted DCS claimants in their recovery (as I long ago expressed the hope that it would) as well as liquidation-only claimants.


Interest Recovery -- for Tiny Tim's Christmas Gruel Treat

  • VikingRaider
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Thu, 17/09/2009 - 12:45

I put a claim in for the few hundred quid interest that remains outstanding and received a prompt response that the claim was in the system. If we receive the money before Christmas, Tiny Tim will be pleased!


Viking Raider

  • KSFIOMCRAP
  • 15/03/09 31/05/09
  • not prepared to answer
  • Offline
  • Thu, 17/09/2009 - 15:34

Hi Viking

how did you submit your claim for the interest and where did you send it? To the liquidators?


@VikingRaider are we all supposed to have claimed for interest?

  • sabi Star
  • 10/10/08 n/a (free)
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Thu, 17/09/2009 - 15:29

Has everyone put in a claim for interest? I was not aware we could do this - was there a form?
Another point - several people are opening accounts now in UK, France or Ireland - while still living "off-shore" - I think tax is deducted anyway from these accounts whether or not that person is resident - is that correct? What rate of tax would these "onshore" accounts have to pay?


Tiny Tim's Interest & Taxation Queries

  • VikingRaider
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 19/09/2009 - 17:34

I might be able to answer those queries.
Firstly, KSFIOMCRAP's. You need to send in a 'proof of debt' form to the liquidators. According to KSFIoM liquidators, '...under the Bankruptcy Code 1892 uncapitalised interest in excess of 5% may not rank for dividend until all other unsecured claims have first been paid in full'. Thus interest up to and including 5% from 8/10/08 until the time you received payment of the principal should be recoverable.
Secondly, SABI STAR; if you are non-resident in the United Kingdom you should notify your UK bank or building society and they will send you the exemption form from 20% tax on interest. (Same applies to your stock broker for corporate bonds).


Interest Promised, Interest Squelched? A Bumpkin Objects!

  • VikingRaider
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 13/03/2010 - 10:33

Well here's another episode in the saga of the missing interest. Several months ago the liquidators informed me that they had accepted my claim for several hundred pounds worth of interest (a trifling sum for the wealthy, but not for others) for the period October 2008-May 2009 but that payment would take some considerable time, others having first dibs on dividends. This was heartening, as my claim to the Icelandic authorities was deemed to have arrived too late. Now, I have received the following from the liquidators upon which I would welcome informed input;

'Pursuant to Rule 84 of The Companies(Winding-Up) Rules 1934 ('the Rules') I hereby give you notice that I reject your Claim which will not rank for dividend for the following reason(s)

The claim has been rejected, being the value of interest claimed for the period after 9 October 2008 and bank charges which do not appear in the records of KSFIOM. The winding-up of an insolvent company is deemed to commence at the time of the presentation of the Petition for the winding-up (see section 169(2) Companies Act 1939). Accordingly, interest cannot be applied after 9 October 2008, which is the date that the winding-up Petition was presented.
Please note that, subject to the power of the Court to extend the time, no application to the Court to reverse or vary my decision in rejecting your proof will be entertained after the expiration of 21 days (as specified in Rule 85 of the Rules) from the date of this notice".

I am, of course, writing an objection to submit to the court, but would welcome suggestions as to how this should be written.
We Bumpkins need to stand together!


Viking Raider

  • KSFIOMCRAP
  • 15/03/09 31/05/09
  • not prepared to answer
  • Offline
  • Thu, 24/09/2009 - 15:52

Hi Viking Raider,

many thanks for your help. I have been in touch with the Liquidators and they told me that I would NOT BE ABLE TO LOG ANY CLAIM FOR THE INTEREST WITH THE LIQUIDATORS IF I HAVE ALREADY LOGGED A CLAIM FOR THE DEPOSIT WITH THE DCS. THEY SAY I CAN ONLY LOG ONE CLAIM IN ONE PLACE.

They apparently do not have any clue and do not understand that the interest is something which is on top of what can be claimed at the DCS.

Do you have a contact person at the Liquidators who is maybe more knowledgable about these things? Did you send them a claim and if so what did they say?

Many thanks!


Beginner's Guide to Interest Recovery? Yikes!

  • VikingRaider
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Fri, 25/09/2009 - 16:26

All sounds very arcane, Ksfiomcrap, and I wish I could be of more assistance, but EPS2 covered the principal for smaller savers. Mr. Simpson appears to be the only contact on correspondence. Perhaps members of the second-oldest profession may wish to offer some pertinent legal pointers on this issue.


Viking

  • KSFIOMCRAP
  • 15/03/09 31/05/09
  • not prepared to answer
  • Offline
  • Fri, 25/09/2009 - 17:33

In a recent correspondance from the liquidators I was told depositors could not claim anything from the liquidators if they had claimed under the DCS because they have assigend ALL their rights to the DCS.

So it seems it might be necessary to get the DCS to reassign those rights back which seems to be possible at least once they have recovered the money they have paid out in full.

Maybe thats the way it should be done.................

Elgee - do you have any news???


@KSFIOMCRAP & Viking

  • anrigaut
  • 19/10/08 30/10/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 25/09/2009 - 17:55

It was agreed some while back that partially-protected depositors who applied to the DCS would be able - on request - to have their rights reassigned once the DCS has recovered the money they have or will have paid out. However, the situation of fully-protected depositors seems more uncertain. This is something the DST are following up and will be reporting on, as and when information becomes available, on the new website.

As I'm sure you will appreciate, it will become increasingly difficult to monitor and respond to queries on both sites and elgee has already said that he is unlikely to make further posts on this site.


elgee

  • KSFIOMCRAP
  • 15/03/09 31/05/09
  • not prepared to answer
  • Offline
  • Mon, 14/09/2009 - 17:28

Hi elgee,

I have had another correspondance with the IOM FSC. They told me they are only responsible for the DCS and as far as the DCS is concerned they have decided that the 9 October 2008 shall be that date on which the "elegible deposit" is calculated and which will be compensated via the DCS. They will not take any further actions.

They said that anyone who wants to claim interest (be it until 27 May 2009 or even further until the money was actually received) should liase directly with the liquidators.

From the liquidators I had different responses - some of which told me I would be able to log a claim for the interest (even if I have already been compensated for the deposit via the DCS). However in other correspondance from the liquidators I was told I could not claim any interest.

It seems this issue is not 100% clear even to the liquidators involved. Given the reluctance of the IOM authorities to amend the DCS regulations it seems the depositors/DAG need to do something about it. Would it not make sense to raise the issue with the IOM High Court so that at last there is an official ruling that can be followed?

I agree with you that the interest is also very relevant for large account holders who might have to wait a long time until they can get paid back their deposit. Even if it seems not so urgent at this point given that many do not even have their money back this should not fall under the table.

I really cant see why depositors do not have any right to claim interest after 9 October 2008. If this is IOM law then this should be somthing which potential depositors should be aware of, especially as it takes so long until the money is paid back.

In the liquidation of Kaupthing HF in Iceland claimants need to claim their interest before the end of the year in order for it to be considered for any possible compensation......


@elgee

  • expatfrance1
  • 15/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 10/09/2009 - 08:23

I am afraid that despite your continued claims, neither you, I or anyone else will ever know if defeating the SoA has assisted DCS claimants or not.

In fact, events over the past week, where DCS claimants are still waiting for their payment whilst the liquidator has already managed to pay the first dividend might suggest that the SoA would have paid out quicker as we would not have had to put up with the constant passing of information between the Liquidator and the DCS Scheme Manager.

But as I said we shall never know so lets give it a rest!


@elgee

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Thu, 10/09/2009 - 11:25

thanks - by why are you so intent on pouring cold water on the DAG team's or my efforts? Hopefully you will at least agree that we have not done the wrong thing for depositors


Hail to the chief

  • DAKON
  • 28/02/09 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 15/09/2009 - 00:22

What would we do without you elgee?


elgee

  • KSFIOMCRAP
  • 15/03/09 31/05/09
  • not prepared to answer
  • Offline
  • Tue, 08/09/2009 - 17:12

Many thanks for this reply. I agree it is indeed very complex and hence the IOM High Court should have a look at it. I would really like to get them to do this but I am pretty sure any request that is coming directly from me has a low chance o be looked at hence I am hoping for the DAG to get the IOM COurt to look at this issue.

It was not the depositors who asked the IOM to develop the SoA which took a lot of time to be developed until it was finally rejected. A lot of time wasted at the expense of depositors.


LIQUIDATION DATE v WINDING-UP DATE

  • pamigi
  • 01/03/09 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 08/09/2009 - 15:11

Dear Elgee - I am not sure that I have fully understood your comments but does the scenario also affect Currency Accounts and their GBP Valuation. For example a Deposit of EUR 63,000 was just under £ 50,000 on 8th October using the mid-rate of 1.263. The DCS is valueing the Deposits as at 27th May and this, at 1.1511 works out at £ 54,700 (approx). As DCS Limit is £ 50,000, it means that a depositor will only get 88% of the value of their Deposits back and not 100%. In my case I had instructed a transfer for all my deposits a few days before but it was not executed. I could have had EUR 63,000 but now I will have less than EUR 56,000 (as at todays X-Rates) - so much for 100% Compensation when I was within the revised archaic original DCS Limit. I would be interested to know whether you believe that a decision on which Date is to be used for Interest would also apply to Currency Account Valuations.


LIQUIDATION DATE v WINDING-UP DATE

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Tue, 08/09/2009 - 18:58

The answer I think is that the date for interest purposes is unrelated to the date for currency-conversion purposes. As I recall the date for currency conversion was fixed by the DCS regulations. If not, it may have been fixed by direction of the court. I would have to look back at other documents to be sure. In any event, the remainder of your deposit that is not covered by DCS is still recoverable in the liquidation, although I can see that at 88% that is unlikely to happen.

I am a bit mystified about your complaint, because of the two choices that seem to be available, 1.263 (Oct 2008) and 1.151 (May 2009), either way you would only be paid out £50k by the DCS (I am rounding slightly here), and either way if you wanted to convert it to Euros immediately you would have to do so at today;s FX rate, which would produce only about Euro 56k.