Question of what legal rights will be lost with Schedule of Payments route....

  • oliverdominic
  • 20/01/09 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
Posted: Fri, 30/01/2009 - 09:27

There appears no difference in the amount that will be returned to depositors between the schedule of payments scheme and the DPS. Under the schedule of payments scheme it will be the payment only and no chance whatsoever of anything further no matter what happens. Under the DPS there is the chance that further payments may be received from recovered KSF IOM assets in the future. Also possible is a further payment which may include lost interest if Kaupthing wins its case (which is being funded by the Iceland government) against the UK government. This may leave open the strong possibility of the KSF Depositors recovering the balance of what is owing to us on the basis of the success of the Kaupthing case against the UK government.

I am sure the KSF Depositors Group will prepare a paper outlining the pros and cons for depositors in the not too distant future. I am not sure that a majority vote by depositors in favour would have the effect of depriving those against the schedule of payments of their individual right to pursue Third Parties in the future. If depositors were so deprived of their right to such action it would smack of a dictatorial decision by the IOM government to protect the UK government from legal action and the potential embarrassment of losing its case just before a UK election.

3.25
Your rating: None Average: 3.3 (4 votes)

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

As far as I understand a SoA

  • expatfrance1
  • 15/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 30/01/2009 - 13:25

As far as I understand a SoA WOULD allow additional payments to be made as and when additional funds were recovered.

The other possible benefit is that the contribution from the IOM would be made whatever else happened to other banks on the Island. With the DCS the promised 150million will only be contributrd in full if no other banks go under between now and October.

Having said that, we still do not have enough information about the scheme to recommed one over the other.


SOA v DCS Comment from OliverDominic

  • grapow
  • 20/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Fri, 30/01/2009 - 09:54

One thing which clearly needs to be considered is that the DCS offers virtually zero relief to many depositors like my wife and I who are involved through an insurance bond, whereas the SOA appears to treat us all equally which is surely fair - that said, and like everyone else, 65% is an insult


dcs soa confusion

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Fri, 30/01/2009 - 13:31

The SoA (Scheme of Arrangement) is intended to replace liquidation (and therefore, indirectly, the DCS - the Depositor's Compensation Scheme). The DCS will compensate specified depositors up to 50k. Any extra money recovered by liquidation is on top of that. The DCS is not activated until the company is wound up (liquidated). So, the IOM is trying to prevent liquidation by coming up with this untested absurdity, the SoA.


DCS SOA Confusion - Comment on posting by steenjp

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Fri, 30/01/2009 - 15:17

It is unfair and rather presumptuous to call the SOA an "untested absurdity".

Depositors do not yet have enough detail (although the devil may well be in the detail) to compare the SOA to the DCS which by the way is also untested. The proposed SOA has flaws (for instance depositors should not have to waive any rights they may otherwise have had) but it is still only a draft and may be much more attractive once it is finalised. Maybe, just maybe, the IoM government is not quite as bad as the more vociferous depositors on this site would have others believe, and there is indeed a genuine desire to help depositors recover most if not all their funds.


to be serious for a minute

  • iainb
  • 11/10/08 01/02/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 31/01/2009 - 09:13

this is an important question...

what are the relative merits of the SoA vis a vis liquidation

the opinions of fellow depositors are welcome but i would remind you of what Mike Simpson and John Wright put in their affidavits..neither appeared to see any benefits in the SoA with regard to the final amount realised (although SoA may be quicker for smaller depositors)

This is not surprising...how could an SoA get more of the 400m (net) back from KSFUK or get a better recovery from the 416m loan book?

If the SoA enabled some as yet to be identified benefactor to put some permanent funding into the pot then it would have advantages but i don't think that is being suggested..for example at one point we thought IOMG may nationalise KSFIOM

We have been told (LP teleconference) that the cost of DCS will be 250m....that sum will comfortably be found...so any money that IOMG "lends" to the process will be recovered in due course.

all money realized above that sum will be distributed on a % basis so large depositors and bond holders will be no-worse off

from the examples from Alix, for a 138k depositor like me the SoA does not appear to offer any significant advantages...only the disadvantage of going with something untried and possibly losing the chance to take legal action against those who may have been negligent and shutting the door on any action against Kaupthing Iceland

Clearly the next batch of affidavits from Alix/Bell/IOMG may change this, but without some convincing evidence that realisations under an SoA will be superior to liquidation then I will support early liquidation followed by legal action against those responsible, a campaign against IOM as a world banking centre, a campaign against Iceland's entry into the EU etc..etc....

regds


Must maintain the right to legal action.

  • dclf1947
  • 10/10/08 31/08/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 31/01/2009 - 10:28

Basically if I don't get back 100% of my deposit within a reasonable period I want the satisfaction of the possibility of legal action against those who perpetrated the demise of my savings. I don't care what method the IOM chooses to give me back my 100% savings but if they want to go the SoA route there must be legally binding guarantees attached.


Liquidation Might even realise MORE!

  • Nixi
  • 20/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 31/01/2009 - 10:15

If, under the SoA, they can't sell off parts of the bank to raise extyra cash.. (and why would anyone PAY more?!?) then the liquidation route MIGHT realise more by legal action against some of the parties responsible for the collapse of the bank.. Such parties MIGHT, as the SoA stands today, escape under the SoA.. hence the need to absolutely ensure that the legal rights of a liquidator be enshrined in the SoA AND that the SoA manager works for the creditors and not the IoM government..
Just my view


simple approach ... no DCS need be triggered

  • rbirch
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 31/01/2009 - 10:38

nixi ... those have been my thoughts all along, but we do need details to make that call.

interestingly, now the Tynwald are to vote increasing the EPS to 10k, presumably they could go to 20k then 30k etc etc and therefore negate any need for the DCS. this then leaves the SoA for the larger depositors by default, and those that have not signed up for the EPS in a quandry ....

any views ?


Do not forget that legal

  • expatfrance1
  • 15/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 31/01/2009 - 10:26

Do not forget that legal action would have to be paid for, which might make any distribution smaller if we went down that course.

I am not advocating DCS or SoA at the moment but it is blatently clear that we need more inforation to make a decision


Liquidation v SoA

  • German Mike
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 31/01/2009 - 10:25

It is probably my antique bewlidered state, but can anybody tell me what single clear and decided advantage exists in the proposed SoA that does not exist in the DCS? I mean fact, not Government hype.

If there isn't one, why the fuss?


One possible advantage is

  • expatfrance1
  • 15/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 31/01/2009 - 10:37

One possible advantage is that in an SoA there would be a schedule of payments, so we would hopefully know what we would be paid and when. This might provide some certainty to some, whereas the DCS would pay out as and when the Liquidator felt he had money to distribute.

The other possible advantage surrounds the money thet the IOM might advance. People seem to be saying that if we go down the DCS route then the IOM Government would contribute 150 million. This is not the case, the 150 million would only all come our way if no other bank on the Island failed between now and October, so there is no guarantee.

In the DCS money would only be paid once assets have been realised, so this may be in a short time if they are sold at discount or over a longer period if they are run down in an orderly fashion. Under a SoA it would appear that the assets would be run down over a long period of time in order to get a better return, but that money would be paid out to depositors before this time from advancements made from other parties.

Having said all this, there is still a lot of detail that needs to be put into the SoA before anyone can make a decision either way.


soa untested

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Sat, 31/01/2009 - 07:51

Liquidation (winding up) is an accepted legal process. SoA's have no legal basis - which is why the deputy refused to entertain it.


SoA no legal basis??!!??

  • manx-person
  • 17/10/08 31/05/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 31/01/2009 - 09:04

Schemes of Arrangements do have a legal basis!
The Lloyds and TSB meger effected using a scheme of arrangement, for example.


manx-person

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Sat, 31/01/2009 - 09:34

Sorry. Thanks for correcting me, manx-person. As always, I appreciate your input on this site.


Not really. Administration is

  • Captain Mainwaring
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 31/01/2009 - 07:57

Not really. Administration is an accepted legal process, save for the IoM which is still in the 1930's and doesn't recognize the procedure.

His "employers" are in favour of it, if it is chosen, he will accept it - or his little silver buckles will tarnish for lack of use.


Deputy Deemster Corlett

  • Captain Mainwaring
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 31/01/2009 - 08:03

Deputy Deemster Corlett pondering the SoA.

http://images.allmoviephoto.com/2003_Pirates_of_the_Caribbean/2003_pirat...

Actually my wife did some googling for "Deputy Deemster" and came up with this:-

http://www.thechestnut.com/deputy/deputy-jail.jpg

Bless her.


cm wife

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Sat, 31/01/2009 - 09:36

You have a wife?


DCS/SoA confusion.

  • Captain Mainwaring
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 30/01/2009 - 15:29

Forgive my somewhat old-fashioned attitude, but shouldn't they have finalised the damned thing before presenting it? Or did they they think that a spreadsheet projected onto a big screen and pointed at with those little laser pens would do the trick?

PS, Who will play Deputy Deemster Corlett if we sell the film rights, and will the IoMG want a share of the royalties?


@capt

  • rbirch
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 30/01/2009 - 15:37

yes ... selecting the castings for the film should be fun !


@rbirch - Film sub-committee quorum core investigation group

  • Captain Mainwaring
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 30/01/2009 - 15:43

Well I shall of course play myself - (no cunning word play on that statement please).
I suspect that the costumiers will be fresh out of silver buckles, black silk stockings and poodle wigs once the news gets out, better keep this to ourselves and form a film sub committee quorum investigation group.

I understand that Laurel and Hardy from the last courtroom scene will in fact be playing with themselves during the great SoA debate.


I reckon Danny DeVito for the Cpt

  • skintagainnow
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 30/01/2009 - 15:43

I reckon Danny DeVito for the Cpt

It's an attitude thing,,

but whatever he says..


Three dots for an ellipsis,

  • Captain Mainwaring
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 30/01/2009 - 16:03

Three dots for an ellipsis, it's a punctuation thing...

Cheek devil, how dare you? I have a kind benevolent face and demeanor, and some say that I closely resemble Steve McQueen - after the crash that is.

Best call it a night, there is a strange man grappling with my Smirnoff, and I feel an IP address ban coming on if I keep up enjoying myself. I have to say the potential theft of my Smirnoff worries me most- it was UK duty free.


You stupid boy.

  • Captain Mainwaring
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 30/01/2009 - 15:45

Don't tell 'em your name - or for that matter if you are on the committe or not.


Captain Mainwaring - SupportingRole

  • manx-person
  • 17/10/08 31/05/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 30/01/2009 - 16:04

Are there any famous actors who are depositors?
I understand there is at least one mechant banker who is.
I think one of the merchant bankers was an an inflighter.


actors

  • deegee
  • 01/12/08 31/08/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 31/01/2009 - 07:06

Don't know if he's a depositor but I saw John Cleese on a Kaupthing ad on youtube - I believe he used to do management training movies for business seminars (how 'not to treat your workforce ' sort of guides).
Perhaps he'd be willing to do something for us? We might get good publicity.


Film rights?

  • bobwin
  • 23/12/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 31/01/2009 - 09:24

Monty Python, Dad's Army---they were documentaries compared with these suits who just want to make a lot of money in fees out of our misery.
Alix says 65% maybe--how much will they take out in fees as they go along--will the IOM Gov pay--oh yes, but we want it all back of course.
I think the Deemster has got a grasp from what he said at the hearing---although i am having trouble getting the full text as my laptop died and this new one don't like pdf. files yet.
it seems to me that the DD is getting ticked off with the suits and flash Harry's and their wonderful but insubstantial ideas.
Maybe an injection of common sense from an old guy who maybe still uses a quill pen is better?
It is good to see that despite the chaos, sense of humour prevails(well with a few notable exceptions) no names no packdrill, you know who you are.
I find the comments about hidden agendae and inside deals offensive to those who have worked hard and long for all---of course diver has maybe a million good reasons, but i don't see him being selfish--there are others with more who have done f**k nothing.
If I am wrong, i will apologise unreservedly and I hope if I am right, that all the knockers will do the same---I hope you have some money left because, if I were diver, i might well sue you for libel.
As i said, i have been absent(AWOL) for a week cos of my pc issues and i have to say, I am really disappointed with some of the posts.
I wish i could be in London to see Diver in action--I am really looking forward to the feedback from those who go there--please say thank you to Ziggy from me.


Humphrey GoCart

  • Captain Mainwaring
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 30/01/2009 - 16:05

Or perhaps he was just in the steering sub-committee.

Anyhow, you're just being silly now.


LOL - Feel like that at

  • skintagainnow
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 30/01/2009 - 15:52

LOL - Feel like that at times...

but would have thought that honour would have gone to someone else --- who shall of course remain nameless.


Marlon Brando

  • rbirch
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 30/01/2009 - 16:08

... come to think of it we could do with a Marlon Brando to make us an offer we can't refuse ! ... perhaps by 19th Feb.


Surely the other way

  • skintagainnow
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 30/01/2009 - 16:15

Surely the other way round

Why! make us the offer, we've got nothing left -- "somebody beat them to it"

but there's plenty of beds in govenment (choice of 3- governments that is) to lay a head or two.