New Class Action/Group Litigation

  • Gibson and Co
  • 17/11/08 31/05/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
Posted: Mon, 17/11/2008 - 15:24

"Dear Users,

We are a firm of solicitors based in the North East of England with a wealth of experience in high value and complex litigation in the commercial and banking sectors. Much of this experience was gained by the two partners in our litigation department, during their time working for a magic circle firm in London.

In the last 14 days we have been approached by a number of depositors with Kaupthing Singer & Friedlander (Isle of Man) Limited ("KSF IOM"), who wish to obtain legal advice concerning the status of their funds. Thus far all of our clients are in the same situation:

a) they were depositors with KSF IOM;
b) they requested that their funds be transferred from KSF IOM to a bank in England;
c) KSF IOM processed the transfer via Kaupthing Singer & Friedlander Limited ("KSF UK");
d) KSF UK either received the funds, or requested that the funds be transferred to their ultimate destination, on or prior to 8 October 2008;
e) The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc ("RBS") acted as a clearing facility for KSF UK; and
f) the funds were returned by RBS to KSF UK towards the end of the banking day on 8 October 2008.

We have analysed the legal position ourselves, and have also obtained an opinion from an eminent commercial barrister based in London. The upshot is that we are cautiously optimistic that there may be a method by which our clients, and depositors in a similar situation to our clients, can recover their funds.

A satisfactory resolution is more likely to be concluded if action is to be taken quickly. However, we expect that the Defendant to any legal steps to recover the funds would oppose the proceedings vigorously, and so costs could be significant.

We suggest, consequently, that a body of depositors, in a similar situation to the one detailed above, acting together would benefit from costs savings, and have a greater bargaining position when discussing any settlement. We would therefore be delighted to accept instructions from anyone in a similar position to our clients.

We understand that Gregg Latchams of Bristol are proposing a similar arrangement, but felt we should also offer our services in the event that your circumstances differ slightly from the class, or classes, of depositors represented by Gregg Latchams, or if you for any reason whatsoever would prefer to use an alternative firm.

It would be greatly appreciated if all expressions of interest could reach us by no later than 4pm on 20 November.

Michael Reed
Associate Solicitor
Gibson & Co

www.gibsons-law.com

Email: michael [dot] reed(?)gibsons-law [dot] com

Tel No; 0191 273 3817"


Note from moderator
At 15.12 hrs 18/11 this Post from a non-member solicitor has had over 900 'reads' without anyone signalling to the moderators (via the catch-all 'signal as offensive' button) their objection to it.

NB: this should be read as an observation and NOT an endorsement (or otherwise) of the solicitor's Post

0
Your rating: None

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

litigation warning

  • aikom
  • 16/10/08 21/06/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 23/11/2008 - 10:19

Please anyone who has any knowledge of the litigation we are bringing. DO NOT POST ANY DETAILS HERE. It is imperative that absolutely nothing is discussed for public viewing.

PLEASE DELETE ANY POST THAT CONTAINS ANY DETAILS, including whom we are considering bringing litigation against.

I'm getting fed up with people knocking others here. If you don't want to take direct action yourself or by joining a team. Shut the hell up and wait for compensation.

Anyone joining any litigation team do not post details here. If you are not willing to be completely confidential don't join.

Any further correspondence from me will only come via a direct email on request. Others please correspond directly with each other.


slippery slope

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Tue, 18/11/2008 - 05:44

Be careful, depositors. The Other Side have way more money to fund the lawyers on their side (using our money!).
Solicitors do not need to solicit on this site. You can find your own easily enough.
For the first time, I'm with Mainwaring.
A political solution is the best way. It will take time. For those of you with no money, this is terrifying. I'm sorry.
We should accept solicitations by solicitors in the same vein as we accept rants.
ng: solicitors soliciting is damaging in that it creates hope where none may be available. Our hope is the actions of each of us in pressing for resolution and compensation.
Adverts and rants have no place here.

Limited legal action to seek remedy against a specified person aiming for a specific goal may be cost effective. The person who decided upon the transfer of GBP555m to an Iceland bank in the UK would be a suitable target, assuming we would receive redress.


Gibson solicitors

  • aikom
  • 16/10/08 21/06/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 17/11/2008 - 19:02

Hi everyone
I am with these solicitors and have obtained advice that seems my only chance to possibly get my money back. I have specific knowledge of my in-flight transfer. if anyone has some knowledge of where their transfer is or has been, then you should talk to Michael Reed. If you don't like what he tells you then don't join. But I am at least now fully aware of what the law can do for me.
Michael will tell you how they will cater for a group of us sharing the costs, costs will not be set up like Latchams.
Time is of the essence, action is taking place now, they are not waiting for people to join in order "get on with it" so call asap.
I have enabled my contact form on this site, so you can contact me with any questions.

With the legal information already received from the barrister, I am completely convinced this is my only option, if there is no case here then I will hope for compensation, probably at least 2 years away.


I can only advise you as I

  • Captain Mainwaring
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 18/11/2008 - 04:29

I can only advise you as I have advised the rest. We all want to see a fire engine when this house is on fire, but it isn't a lot of good if there is no water in it and the hoses won't reach the fire in any-case. Doesn't matter what the fire chief tells you, there is nothing he can do for you.

I really find the actions of these lawyers abhorrent, I could understand it if a client posted and then the whole lot was done by private message, but out in the open like this? I just love the way they tell you how much they are going to fleece out of you for their cautious optimism, and if 20 join up, they don't split the costs 20 ways, they multiply them 20 times.

PWC have 110Million ready cash to deal with "cautious optimism" and as per my first post, it doesn't exactly make me to happy to see our money wasted on defending this.

If these guys were that bloody smart, they would have posted this a month ago.

And as for getting up to speed on how banking transfers work - anyone with Internet access can do that, so I shouldn't get too impressed at lawyer who is alleged to know.

I do hope you are successful, but a read of what has been said about the "other" action suggests that my original views weren't far off the mark, and PWC has had a month more time (at our expense) to do the homework on this.


New Action mentioned is not directed at KSFIom or PWC.

  • Jas III
  • 14/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Tue, 18/11/2008 - 11:16

Hi Captain,

I fully appreciate all your postings. I just wanted to add that the action above is not focused on PWC or KSFIoM to defend against. But rather on the banks in the UK that handled the transfers while KSF and KSFIoM were still considered solvent. This was before 'they were considered in-flight', but in route, and they had a duty to credit them. The reason many were not paid is because many banks in the UK had self protective sancations programed preventiing payments or credits to or from any Icelandic banks built their payment system computer from 6 Oct. This followed the Icelandic Crisis that was annouced in the UK Media on Sunday 5 Oct, that casued the subsequent run on the banks, that got us into this mess, and resulted in the FSA taking action against Kaupthing Edge UK. Until then Kaupthing was not at all a part of the problem. It was one Icelandic bank in the UK though that had assets. Then on Tuesday 7 Oct the Icelandic Govement announced adding 230M Euro ito Kaupthing Hf to keep it solvent. It was the run on the Kaupting UK by UK depositors who were fully portected that allowed them justify taking them to protect the UK depositors. But after the UK action announced on the 8 Oct, Iceland had no choice but nationalise. I do not want to get into more detail here. A lot was given away in the Hoppers topic that helped Simpson build his case solidly against releasing the missing transfers while he announced and pretended to be supportive of releasing these funds if he could! (LOL)!

So if your not concerned with money lost in-flight, then this action mentioned here should not be a concern to you or other depositors. Hopefully it can serve as good alternative for those that do. I think it must be hard however if some depositors may stand a better chance of getting someting others may not be entitled too. If however you and anyone knew and believed they got their money out of the bank before this happened no doubt they'd be fighting for this corrner too. Don't worrry though I still have more than £50k remaining in my 5 accounts at KSFIoM to wait for maybe getting a piece of one day, like the rest of us.

The only concern with KSFIoM is that Mike Simpson is appearently is obstructing justice, by denying access to information from the payment system. His lawyers will tell him when he has to cough up and there should not be much of a fight about that however. If a court demands he provide it. I believe there is some deep hot water that would preclude it from being altered, deleted or lost.Anyway my point is for the money I lost in route; I am thankful to Aikom, and I am impressed and very confident after speaking to Gibson & Co regarding my missing transfers to the UK, that were sent prior to 3 other transfers to banks outside the UK that were recieved and credited without a problem. The missing transfers has nothing to do with PWC, so our money remaining in KSFIoM will NOT be lost defending a fight from Gibson to try and get it back. Anyone joining this who is in ths situation as I understand should only help proportionally lessen the fees as a true class action suit should. Not as the other well know lawfirm did who used this opportunity and forum to exponetially muliply their profits though each who joins and then charge a percentage of the £100m to each member depending on how they had to loose! Yes good legal advice is not free or even close, but what happend here is not a good or fair example in my meger oppion. I amnot whinning, I am quite pissed of about it as one who fell into the that trap, and did not listen to my conscience on 17 Oct, or the the postings of others like yourself who smelled a wolf on the hunt.

Speaking of fees, have you seen the fees that PWC is getting for the Lehmans breakup? This is not for legal battles against them, but for heir feable and failing attempts to recover some of 350B assets lost. Its shocking! If Liquidation is approved Simpson I undestand he wants to get another joint liquidatior appointed to assisit him. Conversely I wonder how much remains in the koffers if KSFIoM is allowed to be quietly run down to avoid triggering the DCS compensation in light of some hope of a magic investor coming to buy the dwindling remaiing assets? So in every way we turn seems someone is after the KSFIoM cash. So the most important legal representation for everyone to have an inside postion to what happens 27th Nov, next week.

Nevertheless at this point nothing suprises me anymore. Its like a bad dream getting worse. I just hope we can begin to wake up from it sooner than later.

Your brilliant comments are needed in other topics that concern us all as whole and help keep us on track. - Thanks

Kind regards


JAS 111

  • aikom
  • 16/10/08 21/06/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Tue, 18/11/2008 - 18:48

thanks JAS, Aikom


AIKOM'S legal action on in-flight tranfers.

  • Jas III
  • 14/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Tue, 18/11/2008 - 19:38

Hi Aikom, I see you had my posting removed completely, before I could do anything about editing it for you. The baby was thrown out with the bathwater! I am a bit shocked really. There was a lot I worked on writing there that had nothing to do with direction of what I did not know at the time as 'your litigation'. That was not clear from the posting by Gibson & Co that i was defending because so many were against it. They were afraid it would cost KSFIOM assets legal fees to defend against. I mentioned that the biggest costs in the Lehman bankrupcy now are costs for the PWC liquidators trying to unsuccesfully to recover Lehman assets for creditors. I was shocked the weekly figure this amounts to for the 3 appointed. ! Its a very big concern for all of us to continue to be aware of, expecially if Mike asks for anotehr liquidator to be appointed. At what cost? I wrote about the importance of Divers advocate for us on 27 Nov.
The direction of 'your 'case is apparent in opening posting of common conditions more than anything I said. But obviously and understandibly you are sentative about it, as I was about the 'other' legal firm who took advantage to the own gain!

As I wrote to you in personal message. I already sent a legal letter directly to the party concerned in your liitigation, dated 20 Oct, under the direction of well know barrister who has to be anonymous, and put them on notice of their liability or the legal consequences were quite clear! It did not change anything unfortunately. The most damage done so far was in some postings in Hoppers legal group topic, showing M. Simpson what he was up against, but again here too, he had already been served a copy of Hoppers claim by 17 Oct by Latchams, (which they later rebadged sold to 24 people at an amazing cost and served again on two weeks later. The problem is that those posting closed the doors to getting anymore helpful information from KSFIOM staff, like screen prints etc and what they can say on the phone. I was told by KSFIOM staff that after what was posted he took very rigorous control over what was said, (sound familar?) ....I will not say anymore.
Thank you Jas


I Can Only Advise You....

  • Stunned Mullet
  • 17/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 18/11/2008 - 04:39

Mainwaring, I entirely agree with your comments. This lot should be within a group and not posting on the open dialogue pages. They apply only to those with in-flight transfers and have no relevance to any others.


Don't tell 'em you name

  • Captain Mainwaring
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 18/11/2008 - 04:53

Don't tell 'em your name Mullet.

I don't care about the member here getting together, but I do care about some money grabbing lawyer being allowed to post here, and what really sticks in my pipe is that we end up paying to defend the actions of these lawyers.

Truth is it makes me cry because I know the only people who will win out of this are the lawyers - and if they want to email me and tell me I'm wrong, then I'll delete my comments.

Forum mods should be deleting the OP, if one of the group who intends to employ these people wants to post, then that is quite another matter.


What different approach do they have ?

  • MichaelB
  • 16/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 17/11/2008 - 18:33

Compared to Hoppers Group what different approach do they have ? .... are likely costs any different ?

I think depositors in this group have already decided on what approach they will take when Hoppers Group was looking for members.


Class Action Representation

  • Grouville1
  • 26/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 17/11/2008 - 16:25

The posting by Gibson & Co only seems to be in respect of a particular group of depositors who asked for their cash to be sent to the UK, but it was returned by RBS.
This does not seem to be an offer in respect of the depositors as a whole
Please see above which states ;-

b) they requested that their funds be transferred from KSF IOM to a bank in England;

So if other users are reading into the posting that its for us all, then perhaps we need to clarrify their proposal


New Class Action/Group Litigation

  • namsak
  • 20/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 17/11/2008 - 16:13

Definitely count me in.

You can have 1% of any money you recover on my behalf over that which is covered by the IOM DCS.

By the way are you related to the Gibson & Co I used to know in Nigeria ?

Regards,
Namsak


One percent? I should coco

  • Captain Mainwaring
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 18/11/2008 - 05:02

Maybe I am speaking out of turn here, I don't know how much you have to gain or lose, but 1% wouldn't look at paying for a dozy second rate, unqualified trainee lawyer to do the conveyancing on a doughnut.

If you had a million in the pot, your contribution wouldn't come up to a sixth of what it has already cost the other group.

And for your info, when you accept "membership" of the DCS, you sign over your deposit to the scheme supervisor, so your lawyer wil get th best part of not much.

I made a transfer on the 6th that didn't get anywhere, and I am so confident that this is another remake of "The Barber's Cat", that I will give them 75% of whatever they get back.


Gibson & Co posting

  • ng
  • 11/10/08 31/12/20
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 17/11/2008 - 15:58

Whilst that post could be construed as blatant advertising, I'm happy to leave it on the site as the information may be useful to some members here. I would stress however that currently there is no formal arrangement between the firm and KSFIoM DAG as far as I am aware.


Yes thanks NG for leaving

  • Jas III
  • 14/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 17/11/2008 - 17:39

Yes thanks NG for leaving it.

I have spoken with many barristers now about this case because I have 2 transfers I know made into the London system and were not credited. Most of the top law firms and QCs in London have conflicts representing the other sides. I have just spoken with Michael Reed on the phone and I am quite impressed with his knowledge of how the payment system works and the case those of who had transfers out on 6 Oct or 7 Oct have where we know these payment messages where in the system. For once I have some confidence. I hope others might join in. There are 6 of us now. I'm told maybe another 5 or 6 coming in.

Of course I am also a fulling contributing to Divers advocate too, which I think is another issue and absolutely necessary

NG....BTW "post could be construed as blatant advertising"?
.
How about Hoppers Legal Action forum? They did not have a formal arrangement between their firm and KSFIoM DAG an wow talk about profiteering from advertising! Their ofrum was an off shoot that hijacked the original in-flights forum After Hoppers first posting, Latchams took over as Moderator directly and they spent the next 10 days doing nothing but selling their case and structuring an outragous, well planned, fee schedule to absolutelly make as much as possible by getting all the KSFIoM DAG members they could on board and netting £7200, followed another £18000 for an assement letter, written in two days. Then to get a claim lettter added in they made another £20000, which also took 2 days. Then add ££££ for each Cat B who also jumped in! I got nothing but 'red flags' every time I spoke to them.


Another firm looking to take

  • Captain Mainwaring
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 17/11/2008 - 17:21

Another firm looking to take 40K off of a group of desperate people for sending a letter?

Have these people no shame?

Honestly, this goes to show that lawyers are little better than fire engine chasing insurance "loss assessors".

You'll note the handy little note about significant fees - and it doesn't just stop with one sides costs, it's a terrible thing to say, but I hope that if PWC have to employ legal means to defend an action from these "lawyers", that the strenuously press for costs, because I don't feel like seeing my money being spent paying their salary and fee note.

What does the law society have to say about this sort of thing?

What will this site be allowing next?


Agree with you 100% Captain Mainwaring

  • jetski2
  • 10/11/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 18/11/2008 - 07:48

The only people who will do well out of all this will be the lawyers who IMHO tend to drag things out to get even more fees.


Multiple postings

  • Elpasout
  • 10/10/08 31/08/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 17/11/2008 - 16:28

Thats fine ng but maybe you could remove the duplicate postings - to 3 different sections (and advise them this is not a great idea?)


New Class Action/Group Litigation

  • Gibson and Co
  • 17/11/08 31/05/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 17/11/2008 - 19:04

Thank you to all of you who have taken time to look at my posting, and to comment on it thus far.

I obviously cannot comment on any problems you may have experienced with other solicitors/lawyers, but I can say that my only motivation in posting was to try to find as many people as possible in similar circumstances to my existing clients. It was actually two of my clients who suggested that I place a message on this board, as they rely on it fairly heavily for information, and anticipated that others would also do so.

My current clients are going to be taking legal action whether or not anyone else joins them. I hope and expect, however, that the more people who rally together, the less it is going to cost them each individually, and the more likely it is we can achieve a settlement without the need for expensive and/or protracted court proceedings. Whichever Defendant is ultimately chosen (we are currently considering a number but leaning heavily towards one), they are going to have much deeper pockets than an individual Claimant, and so it makes economic and practical sense to act as one body to try to even up the fight.

To answer the questions posed thus far:

  1. yes, our post was primarily aimed at account holders who tried to transfer funds to the UK, but we have in the last few minutes just accepted instructions to act for a depositor who was trying to effect a transfer between two banks in the Isle of Man, so we are willing to look at each individual set of circumstances;

  2. we have no connections to Nigeria, or any firm in Nigeria; and

  3. no fee structure or proposal has yet been decided upon. We intend to look at this once we have spoken to everyone who may be interested.

Michael Reed

Associate

Gibson & Co.

0191 273 3817

(DDI 0191 256 2975)

www.gibsonsolicitors.com

77-87 West Road Newcastle upon Tyne NE15 6PR

Fax no. 0191 273 3818


Gibson & Co

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

Hopper here. I have not posted comments for a while, given the legal action I instigated via Gregg Lathchams & our London barrister is moving forward. I will also not post again for a while - this is a one off.

I would however, state that I think the postings by Gibson & Co & by Aikom are very helpful to other folks out there with in flight money. I organised the Gregg Latchams teaming-up a while ago now, and I know some people missed the chance to join. I am glad that there is a second chance here, and congratulate Aikom for pushing this forward and organising this.

There are other users on the site who keep on whining about fees & criticising lawyers etc - the same folks I note who whined a few weeks ago when I set up the opportunity to join the Gregg Latchams action. Quite frankly, those individuals should stop whining about costs and try doing something proactive instead. If you think you have a cheaper method to achieve our intended aims, then go do it. You have had weeks to organise something and, what a surprise , nothing has happened - no suggestions whatsoever other than, "lawyers cost too much, lets do nothing".

We are all adults here, and understand that legal action is never going to be a cheap option - furthermore the legal posting by Gibson makes this quite clear - I applaud their open and direct approach. Each of us has the capability to decide on whether to join a group action or not. I decided it was a no-brainer, as did many others. I am glad that Aikom has pushed things forward and is offering another opportunity for in flighters to join a group action.


Cheers Hopper

  • aikom
  • 16/10/08 21/06/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 23/11/2008 - 10:18

Thanks for that Hopper, I couldn't agree more with you. I do want to impress on everyone with in-flights that obtaining good legal advice and then using it, IS absolutely the ONLY way we have a chance of getting our money. This is it for me, if this doesn't work, then the slim chance of getting the lousy £50k compensation in my life-time is all that's left.
I thought of joining Hoppers team way back when, but it wasn't right for me. I admired him at the time for his initiative, and so set about finding legal representation that better suited me.

Like I've said e-mail me if you want.


Latchams

  • Count Da Cost
  • 30/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 17/11/2008 - 21:17

Hopper nice to hear you are hanging in out there and that this forum is till of some use. Your legal topic column is not so forth coming these days.
I do believe you probably made out quite well on this. After two weeks they resold your claim letter for £43500 to 24 people with just new names and details subsstiuted in replacing your details. Plus all the other CATB they hooked.
Fact is is appears they had more in mind of making the absolute most they possibly can from this opportunity you gave them. I know you were trying to help. But I doubt their same outragous fee schedule applies to you,
Your wrong Its not about whinning, any more than this forum was created for whinning. It aboutwounded people looking for righteous action about getting robbed by KSF, FSA, HMG, and Iceland. At least these foreces did not sit back and calculate to take as much as they get away with! These words are about being quite angry at falling for Latchams and what they did. We have been robbed enough. For example have look in the mirror and see if you can keep a straight face saying Polly Frost is worth £150 hr for what she is doing!
This opportunity appears much more genuine!


IN FLIGHT FUNDS

  • flying pig
  • 16/12/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 19/01/2009 - 15:54

Is anyone having any luck here?

I did post somewhere that I had approached the UK FSCS as my money was in KSFUK and they said that the liquidator E &Y would have to confirm this. E&Y have not bothered to reconcile the funds they have .and indicated that they would rather hand them over (if at all) to Simpson. (Less hassle for them) It did seem that they have thought about claims from in flight depositors but have decided to ignore them unless they have cast iron proof that the funds actually were received by them. Simpson is not helping to provide proof of this. Is anyone else taking this route and is the legal firm (not Latchams, sorry cannot find the other firm's name as I have difficulty navigating this site) able to carry this on?

Funds for a legal action are a problem for me so I am doing a lot of egwork but I have too much at stake to simply roll over.