KSFUK - 6 monthly report out - seems good news to me

  • Gordon 45
  • 22/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
Posted: Fri, 30/04/2010 - 15:11

Hi Folks,

Just on to inform all of you that E&Y have posted their 6 monthly update on the website. Have not read through the 32 page document yet but did glance at the - 'estimated outcome for creditors' page - no. 18.

Will look through it and see what I can gain any knowledge on. But I do see a 4th dividend scheduled for late July at 5p/£ - which is what I guessed we would get in our 2nd dividend from them this year. I think unless they manage to sell off the £2b loan book balance that we will continue to get 5p/£ all the way along the line.

The other good point is that E&Y are now saying a return to unsecured creditors of between 65p-78p/£. Thus raising their previous estimate from between 60 - 75p/£ - good news and it should have meant some more back payments from E&Y with our current 3rd dividend - will try and work out the difference I expected of £11.45m based on 5p based on £229m..

I am concerned at the delay by the JLs in letting us know what they got back from KSFUK and feel it will be hidden within the April update, which means we wil not be able to establish the exact position of cash returned until we get our next 'fuller' update from our JLs. I was told we would get that after the COI meeting due in late April (or so I was told). Just need to wait and see when we get, hopefully, the part update for April followed by the 'fuller' update.

Will get back to you all if I can see anything of signifance that affects us within the KSFUK update.

Take care,

and god bless to all,

Gordon 45

5
Your rating: None Average: 5 (16 votes)

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

No conspiracy here, surely???

  • grapow
  • 20/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Tue, 04/05/2010 - 08:42

I too add our thanks to Gordon for his tremedous efforts. However having read the numerous replies to his update suggesting that Simpson (and PWC as an entity) have a conflict since they represent IoM in other aspects is surely nonsense. If I were the IoM I would want this particular affair shut down as soon as possible not prolonged!
PWC must have conflicts right across the globe and whilst I am as frustrated and impacted as much as anyone else, I give no substance at all to the "conspiracy theory".


Conspiracy or facilitation?

  • IceCrusher
  • 14/10/08 25/10/11
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 13/05/2010 - 11:33

Never say never....

"The case was filed in London, New York and Reykjavik by the board of Glitnir, which collapsed in October 2008 and still owes British local councils £200m. The lawsuit also targets accountancy firm PwC in Iceland, accusing them of "facilitating" the alleged fraud."


PWC

  • Brabander
  • 15/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Tue, 04/05/2010 - 17:19

I agree with Grapow. I do not believe that the poor level and quality of communications between the JL's and the creditors signifies that there is a conspiracy.
I do however believe that this is just symptomatic of the JL's total lack disregard for the creditors.
The unfortunate fact is that although we the creditors pay their bills the JL's act in the knowledge that their bills will be paid whether the creditors are satisfied with their performance or not.

WE CAN NOT SACK THEM IF WE ARE NOT SATISFIED.
I suppose the same applies to civil servants who get paid irrespective of their performance.

I will not be satisfied until we receive quarterly statements from the JL's containing, as a minimum, the following information:
1. Cash flow and asset statements which can be correlated with the previous quarter's statement.
2. A clear explanation of any discrepancies, write-offs etc.
3. A forecast of the magnitude and timing of the next dividend payment.

When I was the MD of an engineering company I would have shown my FD the door if he had produced the "information" so far produced by PWC. Poor show PWC!
I, and I am sure other creditors, would appreciate the view of members of the CoI.

Brabander


Re: PwC & updates

  • Knife Edge
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 04/05/2010 - 20:27

Hi Brabander

I'm one of the members of the CoI.

I just wanted to let you know (i) that DST alerted me to your post, and (ii) that - notwithstanding that the CoI has an obligation of confidentiality to the bank, as I'm sure you're aware - the CoI recently obtained PwC's agreement to the publishing of quarterly reports/statements.

That depends on the making of a court order, but assuming that it goes to plan, they should begin being posted from 1 June 2010. I cannot comment on the contents of those reports until I've seen one (and probably not in public then either) , but the CoI hopes that this helps increase the information flow and the transparency of the liquidation so as to go some way towards meeting depositors' justified concerns on this front. Certainly that was the rationale behind our making the request of PwC and we continue to strive to ensure that this is done.

K E


Quarterly reports

  • Brabander
  • 15/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Wed, 05/05/2010 - 08:03

Thanks KE.

Let us hope that these quarterly reports contain the financial information we need to allow us to judge the progress, if any, the JL's are making in recovering of OUR assets.
I fully realise that, at times, it is difficult for the JL's to release information if this could impact on negotiations with debtors. However, there is no doubt that, so far, the flow of relevant information from PWC has been less than acceptable.

It is a pity that the JL's now have to depend on the CoI to do the work they are paid for!


Conspiracy or Complacency?

  • IceCrusher
  • 14/10/08 25/10/11
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 04/05/2010 - 14:31

When the JLs finally get around to posting a report for our consumption we will be in a position to determine whether it is open, honest and reasonable, or obfuscated, devious and unreasonable. Previous reports have been unnecessarily complicated in part and required unravelling to determine the real contents. We shall see how they present the payment from E&Y and whether it openly declares our capital now held in the UK (exchange benefits and interest included) or not.


3rd Dividend

  • ASPEN
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 03/05/2010 - 07:24

Thanks IceCrusher that is what I assumed from my limited reading of the posts. Assuming our 3rd pay out will be in July this year...


Hi Aspen & Icecrusher

  • Gordon 45
  • 22/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 03/05/2010 - 13:17

Hi There Aspen,

Yes Icecrusher is correct, the 4th payment I mentioned in July is once more from KSFUK back to our JLs. Our 3rd payment hopefully will be in late June, but we need confirmation from the JLS.

But worth noting this 4th payment from E&Y on behalf of KSFUK will be a max of 4 months after their 3rd payment on 30.3.2010 and that to me sounds like more good news as it might just mean another payment back to our Jls from E&Y around Nov/Dec this year. That would be excellent, as it means they are getting their loan repayments back in on schedule - not like us. But just to remind all a 5p/£ return from E&Y only means around 1.25p/£ return from the JLS to us as the current value E&Y appear to be basing our returns on, is £229m based on my calcs, so £229m is approx a quarter of £909m (owed to KSFIOM creditors).

I am currently going through the E&Y full update issued on 30.4.2010 and it makes interesting reading if you try and compare how they go about getting cash back, seem to win more court cases or get the upper hand in negotiations with other people like our JLs than our JLS do. And they appear to have a sytematic way of going about things and updating their creditors. When I finish this checking I will put another post on the DAG for all to see - again only my personal opinion.

Thanks again Icecrusher, I agree with your statements entirely, our JLs should have issued the value of cash received from E&Y to us by now and I think they will try and hide the true figure amongst all of the monthly movements for April when they issue our April cash statement and maturity ladder update.

Quite sad really or worse,

Take care,

Gordon 45


JLS Information

  • Stunned Mullet
  • 17/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 03/05/2010 - 23:28

Hi Gordon 45,

The lack of any clear information from the JLS on KSFUK's payment and your comments concerning how they may treat those payments and disguise them within the overall numbers is alarming. I stuggle to comprehend why they would continue to prevent us, the creditors, from having information I would have hoped would be an entitlement. As we have representation through the Committee of Inspection, should they not be demanding clarity from the JLS?

Appreciate all you help and engagement in this matter. I'll be reading and following the painfully slow developments to the bitter end.

Stay well.


Hi Stunned Mullet

  • Gordon 45
  • 22/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 04/05/2010 - 20:43

Hi There,

Sorry if I am alarming you, don't mean to, all I was trying to say as was Icecrusher is that when the 1st divdiend came back from E&Y on behalf of KSFUK to our JLS they paid it on 22.7.2009 and we were informed on the KSFIOM Bank website the same day. When the 2nd dividend came from E&Y to our JLs it was sent on the 9.12.2009 and we were officially informed by our JLs on the 11.12.2009. The 3rd dividend from E&Y was sent on the 30.3.2010 and we still await confirmation plus amount of cash received, from our JLs as at 4.5.2010 - surely it makes you wonder why the big delay.

Unless that is - wait, we are due the monthly update on Cash Book and Maturity Ladder any day now for April 2010 (if the JLs stick to what they have issued monthly since around last August.

We are also due anytime now, a 'fuller' update on the entire situation (similar to that provided on 11.12.2009) or so I was informed by one of the JLs in March after the COI meeting had taken place in late April. Now I do not know if that meeting has taken place yet, perhaps others do?

But on attempting to speak with one of the JLs again I have asked on at least two ocassions with regard to the 3rd payment from E&Y and for clarity on amount received and what base value it was based on - no reply yet to that, although one of them said he hoped to talk to me last Friday or yesterday - no word yet.

And I have lots of questions to ask him if he calls me, or asks me to call him, and he already has most of my questions, excepting a few more on my further reading of the E&Y 6 monthly update issued on 30.4.2010. But I do have faith that he will make contact, just not sure when.

The April update because it only deals in finalised figures, and not all the internal movements over the month can hide the exact figure received from E&Y but hopefully the 'fuller' update if it is similar in content and layout to that of 11.12.2009 will show the exact figure received and that will allow us to workout exactly what we got, was it based on the 65p/£ and was it based on £229m or the £233.5m or something different. So it is hard to understand why the JLs are delaying issuing the value of the 3rd Dividend received by them from E&Y.

My bad mind just worries that although E&Y seem to be on top of what they are doing - getting money back in, selling off secondary assets, doing well in court cases and have upped their estimated dividend recovery from 50p to 60/75p and now to 65/78p/£ and I think it could go higher, our JLs in comparison went from 73/88p/£ then moved to 82.88/93.76p/£, sounded great, but it meant getting 100% back on the KSFIOM loan book to get 93.76% and I know it includes FX gains - but will they stay positive? We have no chance of 93.76% unless 'parental Guarantee, IOM governnment, the Life Coys, the UK PM or litigation makes a contribution. And based on the returns from the KSFIOM loan bok from Jan-March this year we are in trouble.

So it just makes you wonder why the delay. And please realise no one will be happier than me if I am totally wrong and returns in 2010 pick up strongly to make up the gap now appearing.

So the quicker we get the figures the quicker we can try and work out what it means and I can try and continue and complete my next table No.9. But right now I know I will put up overall costs of Liquidation back up to my initial figure of £25m not the new figure of £18m that the JL informed me they had done. and I will be cutting back my estimation of eventual returns to 80%, what I originally had until JLs showed 82.88%, unless the April figures and KSFUK returns warrant the lower estimate to stay at 82.88%.

I said a few days ago I was looking indepth at the E&Y KSFUK 6 monthly report in order to look at comparisons and make comments on it in relation to the way our JLs are doing things. Have done my handwritten notes and have now started to type it up to go on the DAG. hope to finish it to-morrow or Thursday and will post my thoughts for all to see and you can see what you all think, if any of you read it.

So lets hope and pray I'm wrong, although having said that, we should get 7-7.5p/£ this June at least from our JLs and if things do not improve re returns this year we might see a far lower figure in December, although I do have a feeling we will see a further dividend late this year from E&Y back to our JLs on top of the one now due in late July - my thoughts on E&Y latest report will say why I think this.

As always,

God Bless to all,

Gordon 45.


Hi Stunned Mullet

  • Stunned Mullet
  • 17/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 05/05/2010 - 14:03

Gordon 45, appreciate your response. No, you've not alarmed me. I'm learning to be a very patient person, especially as we have some 7 years to go before the final payout (we hope). Your involvement is, frankly, Priceless. I believe we are all fortunate you're a part of this, although I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy.

Be Blessed.


JL's inability to produce meaningful information

  • barrona
  • 17/11/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 04/05/2010 - 04:21

Gordon 45,

I'm sure my view is shared by the majority of partially protected depositors when I say that the JL's seem to be treating us with disdain and an inconvenience.

The lack of information from them is appalling. Despite the hands of the COI being tied with NDA's, surely something can be done to improve their method of communication. They can't be above the law. Is there a complaints procedure? If so, it should be invoked.

If it wasn't for you we would all be left in the dark. We know that Simpson has got a vested interest in all this as his company provides various accountancy services to the IoM.

If we had external JL's, I am firmly of the opinion that we would not be in the situation that we now find ourselves in.


Re: 3rd/4th Dividend payment

  • IceCrusher
  • 14/10/08 25/10/11
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 03/05/2010 - 06:14

Hi Aspen, I think you'll find that Gordon is referring to the E&Y dividend from KSF UK. The UK administrators paid out their 3rd dividend in March, but we have not yet been told by our JLs what that sum amounts to. We are hoping that the JLs issue a report very soon telling us all the latest information, but they are very slow to tell us anything and can generally be said to try and obscure hard facts below a layer of tinsel.


icecrusher

  • Podcar
  • 13/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 03/05/2010 - 07:20

We are hoping that the JLs issue a report very soon telling us all the latest information...

What if someone calls them and asks for information? Even when the report will become available without necessarily divulging the contents? Or has someone already done that?

What would happen if DAG members rise up and inundate their phone lines until they give us an answer?


JLs information

  • IceCrusher
  • 14/10/08 25/10/11
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 03/05/2010 - 10:22

Under the present arrangement, the JLs inform KSFIoM creditors by way of the Committee of Inspection and by issuing reports on the Kaupthing website; they are under no obligation to deal with creditors directly and say that to do so takes up valuable time for which we ultimately get charged. I clearly don't know how true any of that is, but it seems that it would take very little time or effort to post a simple notice on the website saying "The JLs have received £xxxm from KSF UK in their last dividend." We are all keen to know and from that dividend we could determine how much capital they are now paying dividends on. This is all very important, it seems from the recently released report from KSF UK that their set-off against KSFIoM has risen from £167m to £200m due to currency exchange and interest payments. We can only hope that our own assets with KSF UK have risen by a commensurable amount. Gordon is also looking at this situation very closely, but without more information from the JLs we are a bit stymied at the moment.


3rd Dividend Payment

  • ASPEN
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 03/05/2010 - 04:09

Gordon - In your recent post you say 4th dividentd payment in July...Do you mean our 3rd dividend payment? Regards, Al


Thanks Gordon

  • caledonia
  • 14/10/08 30/09/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 02/05/2010 - 20:33

for the time and effort you spend keeping us all informed. It is vey much appreciated.


Thanks Gordon

  • Julienne
  • 16/10/08 31/08/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 02/05/2010 - 14:47

Just once again to say thanks to Gordon for staying 'with it' and keeping us all informed -

j


March dividend

  • Podcar
  • 13/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 01/05/2010 - 14:30

I don't know if this is the right page for this topic but I wanted to let everyone know that I called Peter Halpin at the DCS a few days ago to ask if those of us who'd registered previously with the DCS should transfer back to the JLS in order to receive the money due from the March dividend. He said that the DCS will handle the next payout, at which time, he expects that every depositor will have covered the compensation payments. By the time the next dividend comes round, he said, we will all have been transferred back to the JLS.

I asked how long it would take to receive the money once the JLS has decided on the percentage to be returned and he said that if it comes through the DCS, it'll take an extra two or three weeks following the announcement. Once we're re-registered with the JLS, this waiting period will no longer apply.


@Podcar - re DCS

  • anrigaut
  • 19/10/08 30/10/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 10/05/2010 - 21:06

Just to be clear: what the DCS mean by "transferring back to the JLs" for the next dividend (now expected to be at least 10% to be paid in early July) is that, once your compensation payment has been recovered further dividends will be paid directly by the JLs and not through the DCS. As they say, this should speed up the payments, so is to be welcomed.

However, it does not however mean that your rights will be reassigned from the DCS to you, as was originally envisaged by the DCS. This is apparently because the JLs, who have to accept such reassignment, are insisting that each and every request for reassignment will have to be submitted to the Court - at cost to the depositor! DAG's lawyers believe this could be done once and for all, at minimal cost, and are working to achieve this for those who wish to regain their rights. As ever, the process is interminable.


DCS

  • Codpeace
  • 23/10/08 30/11/12
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Tue, 11/05/2010 - 19:06

Surely that is a totally unacceptable situation – the DCS will have no interest in the account since they will have been repaid the 50K by the JLS – what possible reason could the JLS have for not accepting the reassignment?

The DCS was the original problem as they wanted the whole account (not just 50K) – had this been done then the balance would have stayed with the JLS and this situation would not have arisen.

There can be no justification for this and it denies the depositors of their rights – have we not been through enough having our money taken from us – are we to be stripped of our rights as well??

Thank you for pursuing this inequitable situation. Is there no end to the underhand dealings of these people??


@Codpeace - re DCS and reassignment

  • anrigaut
  • 19/10/08 30/10/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 12/05/2010 - 08:46

The reason given by the JLs is that they have been advised (presumably by their lawyers) that reassignment requires court approval. This is presumably true. However, one application ought to be enough, but the JLs do not seem to agree. Also, the bank itself could apply for directions but so far the JLs have chosen not to do so.

As for the original problem, if they had been assigned rights to £50k only, the DCS would never (short of a 100% recovery) have been able to recover the full amount paid out to depositors whose Liquidation payment exceeded £50k. As an example, with a final dividend of 90%, the DCS would recover only £45k. Apparently this mistake was made with the first EPS payment! So they were obliged to ask for more than £50k and the simplest solution was to require assignment of the full amount until the DCS had recovered its share.

We were assured at the start that these rights could be reassigned on request to the JLs (via the DCS) at this point. It is the JLs who are now putting what we see as unreasonable obstacles in our path rather than doing their best to help us. Moreover, the DCS appear unwilling to fight on our behalf, so once again we have to take up the cudgels.


Can someone confirm when will

  • Ohdear
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 02/05/2010 - 22:06

Can someone confirm when will we actually receive March dividend? April? May? June?


Re: March Dividend/ Transfer Back

  • expatvictim
  • 10/10/08 01/11/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 01/05/2010 - 16:21

Podcar - I may be wrong, but I don't see how the DCS will be in a position to transfer 'everyone' back to the JLS after the next dividend in as much I dont see how every depositor could have had their compensation payments covered.

As I understand the DCS, the closer the initial deposit lost by an individual to 50k, the longer it will take for the DCS to recoup their 50k and therfore the longer to transfer that individual back (if at all) to the JLs.

For example:

Someone who had an initial deposit of 60k would have had 50k paid to them through the DCS already. For the DCS to recoup their 50k then the total dividend from the JLs will need to be 83%. (50/60). We are a long way off that.

By comparison, if someone had an initial deposit of 110k and the next dividend is 10% for a total of 50% then the DCSs 50k contribution would have been covered and that individual's remaining loss could be returned to the JLs.


Reversion

  • Tricky Dicky
  • 24/10/08 30/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 01/05/2010 - 17:11

Expatvictim

The way you have explained it is exactly the way I understand the system to work as well.

Good examples

TD


expatvictim Peter Halpin

  • Podcar
  • 13/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 01/05/2010 - 16:37

expatvictim
Peter Halpin seemed to anticipate that with this new dividend, everyone will have paid back their 50K. Maybe I misunderstood and he meant that the majority of depositors would have covered the compensation and would then be transferred back to the JLS.

Whatever the case, I wish they'd bloody well tell us how much we're getting and when it'll be.


OUTSTANDING DEPOSITS

  • pamigi
  • 01/03/09 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 01/05/2010 - 15:43

We have not had any updated Statement showing what the JL / DCS believe that we are still owed after the various payments made to date. As virtually all of our Deposits were in Euros we have calculated ourselves what we think is the balance.bearing in mind the Exchange Rates announced by the Liquidators. Clearly the JL /DCS must know precisely but have we calculated the same figure? Could all Depositors with Outstanding Balances please be sent a Statement now and then accompanying each Dividend Payment. It should be so simple. Any small costs incurred would almost certainly lead to a reduction in queries to them. At the moment we just receive a Payment without any calculations.


@pamigi - re outstanding deposits

  • anrigaut
  • 19/10/08 30/10/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 10/05/2010 - 21:55

I quite agree. I understand that those who claimed directly in the liquidation received this information with the first dividend. The DCS must have received the same information from the liquidators but did not pass it on to claimants. I raised this at the time with the DCS who replied that their first priority was to get everyone's compensation paid, but that once that was achieved they would make the information available on their website. Fair enough at the time, but needless to say nothing ever materialised!

I have recently returned to this issue on behalf of DST. The initial response was that they had no resources to implement further features on the website, that very few depositors had queried the amount of their balance, and that they had provided answers to all those with queries. The email from Mike Fayle concluded "Should there be other areas of disagreement, then the Scheme Manager would look at the individual circumstances and act accordingly. Could you clarify your concern?". When I gently pointed out that it was difficult to disagree with something one had not been told, he did begin to see the point and promised to "reconsider the issue with the Scheme Manager".

That was on 7 April and I have no news since. I have been on holiday, but intend to return to the fray shortly. Meanwhile, I suggest you simply write to ask what was the agreed amount of your claim (in GBP). That is precisely what I did following the above exchange and received a reply by return stating "The agreed assigned balance with the liquidator in total is £***. The full balance on contractual terms was £***. " The (small and expected) difference between the two amounts reflects the capping of uncapitalised interest at 5%, which we are aware of. So at last I know where I stand and am reassured that no mistake has been made - and it was so easy! Maybe if everyone did the same they would understand the point better!


Many thanks to Gordon

  • sabi Star
  • 10/10/08 n/a (free)
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 01/05/2010 - 09:26

Like to add my sincere thanks Gordon for the important work you do - which certainly has helped me a lot!
Very best wishes!


Gordon the messenger - thanks

  • sambururob
  • 10/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 02/05/2010 - 13:28

As ever only Gordon 45 gives us news or guides as to what the news may be. Whether it be good or bad, keep it up Gordon cos Wendy and I look forward to your postings and trust them.
This time the news seems to err on the good side.
Thank you so much for your diligence and your unselfish sharing of your understanding.


Thank you . . .

  • drglowry
  • 14/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 01/05/2010 - 06:47

Dear Gordon,

Once again, many thanks for your informative update and your considerable efforts on all our behalf.

Best,

Glenn Lowry


Thanks Gordon

  • Valentine
  • 18/10/08 31/05/14
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 01/05/2010 - 04:15

Hi Gordon

Once again, thank you so much for your untiring efforts in providing information for us. And it's been a long time since the news has been more hopeful.

It's you - not the liquidators - whom we should be paying.