The possible £100m in-flight funds

  • skintagainnow
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
Posted: Wed, 21/01/2009 - 13:23

I've added some questions to the PWC for 26th Jan -- this is the thoughts behind the questions - what do the grounp make of them ---

In the last round of questions to PWC - a figure of £100m was introduced and not disputed by PWC as being the possible in-flight funds, these PWC stated formed part of the IoM exposure to UK, PWC also stated and has re-credited accounts with these in-flight funds, instead of "in his view" allowing them to continue thereby increasing the fund pot for all creditors..

Some thoughts along this, the fund pot for all creditors can only be increased if PWC receive those funds back in full, from E&Y - KSF UK, on the other hand if only a percentage of those funds are received then all creditors must surely be disadvantaged by the % return on the £100m.

My thoughts,

IoM exposure to UK -- £550m
UK exposure to IoM --£150m
In flight UK ----------£100m

If the in-flight funds were allowed to continue to their designated recipients and assuming set off applies the total exposure of KSF IoM to UK drops to £300m, the number of creditors to KSF IoM drop (numbers unknown) - the £880m now becomes £780m.

Surely a £300m exposure to a liquidated company is a more manageable figure for any restructure or SOA scheme always assuming only a percentage of UK funds are returned.

There are only 2 ways that the £100m in-flight funds could benefit all creditors if -
1) E&Y paid out 100% of the UK deposit
2) The in-flight monies were treated differently than the "normal upstreamed" deposit eg. the in-flight monies were returned as 100% of their value not a percentage of the total,

then we would have :-

in-flight - £100m
% return of £300m (assuming offset of £150m)

The reduction of KSF IoM exposure to KSF UK by 25% at a stroke.

Who is the only loser in this scenario -- the liquidator --- he doesn't get fee's for the recovery of that £100m or any % return.

Your rating: None