RE UK REPRESENTING IoM IN NEGOTIATIONS WITH ICELAND

  • michelenona
  • 12/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
Posted: Fri, 07/11/2008 - 22:46

I cannot understand why the Isle of Man Government ever requested that the UK Government represent them in their negotiations with the Iceland Government. Let alone that they continued to endorse HMG’s participation in diplomatic talks.
Surely, even at the outset of this debacle, this obvious conflict of interests on the part of HMG was perceived to be counterproductive to the IoM? It seems to me that asking the UK Government to represent the IoM Government in this matter was akin to asking your worst enemies to represent you in a fight they started; against people only they have wronged.

The majority of us believe that the UK government was largely instrumental in (if not wholly responsible for) the sudden demise of our bank; and that without the HMG’s extraordinary, heavy-handed and ill-advised actions on that fateful October day, perhaps we would still be happily entrusting our savings to a solvent, solid, safe bank. The UK Government’s deeds also played a major role in precipitating the total collapse of Iceland’s economy.

In the last long and arduous month, the HMG has consistently denied any culpability for the events that led to the collapse of our bank. To the contrary, in fact! The self-promoting Gordon Brown has put a slick spin on his actions by portraying himself as the swashbuckling hero-of-the-hour, decisively and gallantly defending honest, law-abiding and tax-paying UK citizens against the Icelandic Bad Guys and IoM tax evaders. He’s a self-proclaimed legend in his own imagination: the new Winston Churchill, Messiah, Indiana Jones, Superman, et al… all rolled into one! Heck, apparently even the United States recognises him as the Saviour who will lead the way in solving the worldwide banking crisis. Yeah, right! (Oops, sorry, I digress. Rather bitterly, too!)

The UK government (i.e. Brown and Darling) have consistently demonstrated a total lack of concern or compassion for the plight of KSF IoM creditors. Let’s face it, my fellow depositors, we obviously don't deserve any sympathy - just censure and blame! After all, we are rich tax evaders/criminals who were both foolish and greedy when choosing to bank with KSF IoM; therefore we deserve our comeuppance!

To add insult to injury, Darling has never been afraid to publicly (and ignorantly) state that the Isle of Man banks are merely tax havens, and has implied that the HMG would like to see the demise of offshore banking. Well, they are certainly moving in the right direction to achieve that aim, I'll give them that! Nope, sorry folks, the HMG has no stake in serving our best interests in their ‘diplomatic’ negotiations with Iceland!

Additionally, the HMG felt justified in using their government powers to seize IoM banks’ funds in order to provide financial security to UK bankers – ‘robbing Peter to pay Paul’ - yet they categorically deny any moral or constitutional obligation to the IoM creditors because the IoM is not part of the UK. Ergo, not a single penny of the money taken from IoM depositors to bail out the UK banks will be repaid to them in compensation, because no UK taxpayer should have to foot the bill for any IoM bankers’ losses. Pardon? With that double standard in place, it was blatantly obvious that these guys were not on the IoM’s side! 'Catch-22' for us, alas!

However, the HMG’s antipathy for the IoM - its government, banks and creditors - is only part of the problem with their representation of the IoM against Iceland! Through the recent astonishing actions of those ignorant bully boys in power, the HMG has created an appalling relationship with the Icelandic government; and in the weeks that have passed, it has done nothing to foster a more constructive and cooperative association. They have twisted words, rewritten history, blatantly lied about the Icelanders’ role in the events which culminated in the collapse of the Icelandic/IoM banks. Consequently, why would the Icelandic government (those terrorists!) feel any obligation to resolve this issue? Yet, to give them credit, it seems they were at least trying to do the right thing! Their efforts were not reciprocated - in one of his post’s, ‘steveejeb’ stated that a fortnight ago the UK delegation left the negotiating table, and the country, without the courtesy of notifying the Icelanders that they were departing a day early. Jeez!

I am at a loss to understand why the UK perpetrators of this ‘crime’ against us – and the IoM banking system – were supposedly representing us. Can anyone explain it to me, please, because I simply don't get it!

And what now, I wonder? In light of the latest Darling-inspired events, where his comments clearly show his government's contempt for the IoM, will the IoM Government step up to the plate? Will it fight back against the UK? Will it commence negotiations directly with Iceland? Will it be ‘the little mouse that roared’? I do hope so!

It seems to me that we are all stranded on the tiny Isle of Man, inextricably caught between a rock (Iceland) and a hard place (the UK).

Michele

0
Your rating: None

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

Why HMG is representing the IOM

  • Lucky Jim
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 23:57

The short answer is the IOM Government asked HMG to represent it in negotiations with Iceland.


IoM foreign affairs

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Sun, 09/11/2008 - 00:31

The IoM has no choice in the matter. The British government has to represent it in foreign affairs.


account numbers

  • dave
  • 14/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 18:40

Re the numbers of accounts and members I believe that there are many depositors who do not know about the site. I met a depositor on Friday here on the IOM who has 3 or 4 accounts. They have 1 account that supports their mother in a nursing home. They have now got the details of the site. I wonder if we can get PWC to put the contact details on the Kaupthing iom website header.


Amount of depositors or accounts?

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Sun, 09/11/2008 - 13:53

We have/had a joint account, which would make one account but two depositors?


account /depositor numbers

  • mikeinfrance
  • 12/10/08 28/09/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 22:29

Remember that,as discussed on another thread, many depositors have more than one account,4 in my case, so I believe that there are many fewer depositors than 7K o r 8K. I've suggested to ng a poll to ask depositors how many accounts they hold.(no reply as yet)


Skintagain

  • Ally
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 16:53

I have spent more time looking at the monetary figures but the number of accounts did look high.

I think your example and knife-edge's are an explanation. When you add on accounts that had zero in them and then accounts where people only had a couple of thousand or less (that is not to belittle those people in anyway) who maybe just haven't bothered as its no big deal to them, it does make more sense.


No of accounts

  • jetski
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 22:52

Looking through past acknowledgements of deposits, it appears that we may have 2 accounts. Some with the Derbyshire account number and some with the Kaupthing account number. Even recent acknowledgements have had the Derbyshire number. Strange!


statements

  • giveus backourfunds
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 16:08

Hi Are we supposed to be receiving statements for out accounts this week ? I have not rec'd any letters from anyone since this dreadful mess started.

Can someone please answer


BackGround Noise Interesting and Concerning !

  • MichaelN
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 15:32

I was told by a very good source directly within the talks that involve PWC and IOM and KSF Directors the concensus is that the best hope of resolution is to get the IOM Compensation scheme to kick in supported by IOM Treasury Reserve Funds to allow immediate partial payments as a percentage of sum deposited clearly up to 50k .

The alternative they suggest may take a number of years to resolve and will ultimately involve Legal Action IOM vs UK vs Iceland in a protracted Round Robin with the UK ultimately unlikely to cave as they feel they acted to protect On Shore UK Resident Savings

There have been many posts regarding progress lately and glimmer of lights in certain directions and the work put in by so many but I felt as a pragmatist I owed it to the forum to share what was passed onto me personally .

There will be a resolution , it may take time and were in for a bumpy ride .

I dont feel that the two paths are mutually exclusive , ie the people with 50k or under who are hoping for a liquidation order shortly so that the DCS can kick in should not affect the path for the serious investors who must be besides themselves with worry .

I shared my story earlier , I had 500k in KSF and called Aidan Doherty 4 months ago when I read a worrying article in FT re Icelandic Banks . Aidan was fair and said , its your call , there are no guarantees and a level of uncertainty in his voice that made me move 450k out immediately . I was lucky but still had 50 k in there

I wish everyone luck in their endeavors , large or small and appreciate the unbelievable hours and effort so many have put in for the cause .

Personally I wrote previously supporting the delay of the liquidation now I firmly believe for the smaller depositors its the only route to get a quick resolution , I dont believe this jeopardises those with way more to lose .

Thank You to everyone for your hard work and the great thing about opinions is that everyone has one !!


transparent -you should have

  • Captain Mainwaring
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 16:37

transparent -
you should have moved it all out.
4 months ago you didn't know you woud get 50K back from the DCS, why risk the balance?


Capt

  • shafted
  • 10/10/08 12/12/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 16:42

Transparent, are you smelling a rat also?


Expectation Management

  • Alastair
  • 10/10/08 30/09/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 19:27

Looks like a good peice of expecation management/manipulation to me. Either the comment or the source but either way if London Transport and the Councils believe that they will be kept whole in early 2009 why would we be different - did your "source" have any comment on this?

Also the "there are no guarantees" comment is hilarious...

We need to see who gains most from the liquidation process and work back from there. It may be the small account holders but unless i misunderstand the process of the compensation scheme everyone gets back at the same % rate until 50k. So who stands to profit most from the liquidation?


liquidation or not

  • mikeinfrance
  • 12/10/08 28/09/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 22:48

Re your question:"So who stands to profit most from the liquidation?" I've been struggling for some time to come up with an answer.In the case of liquidation everyone stands to start receiving some sort of payout sooner rather than later and the liquidator continues to recover whatever assets he can for the benefit of the depositors.Whatever he has recovered so far can be paid out.In addition a different liquidator could be appointed.
In the case of no liquidation it seems we would just carry on in limbo, but there is the possibility that somehow the bank might be bought out and have its licence restored? Couldn't this happen anyway as I understand that in IOM an entity can be brought out of liquidation.Otherwise I'm not sure what other benefits there might be.
Any thoughts anyone?


liquidation or not

  • Ally
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 22:55

Yes a liquidation in the Isle of Man can be reversed.

I think come the 27th November if someone asks for the liquidation to be postponed again they will have to produce some evidence to support this.

If the Treasury advocate was again to stand up and ask for a postponment I think it would be because they would be confident of putting something together that didn't involve liquidation.

If this was the case then it would depend on the length of the delay but why not give them another week or two?


And your source

  • frog
  • 10/10/08 13/09/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 15:51

And your source being.....?

What you say has little logic behind it - and seems to go against the recent public comments.

I hope you get your own £50K back as soon as possible.


Aiden Doherty

  • bellyup
  • 10/10/08 09/01/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 15:46

I rang him 4 months ago too.
I was very worried I explained to him that it was my life savings and we were not young.
He filled me FULL of Guarantees and warm assurances .

My Mother always told me NOT to trust an Irishman I should have listened to her words.


Re Uk representing IOM

  • Tricky Dicky
  • 24/10/08 30/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 09:21

The IOM is known as a Crown Depenedcy and is the only one that pays "Imperial Contributions" to HMG. For this contribution the deal is that HMG provide "defence and representation on external matters".
So yes in this particular case HMG are both poacher and gamekeeper


I'm sorry I'm so ignorant...

  • michelenona
  • 12/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 09:49

... of protocol in UK/IoM government matters - but then again, what would you expect from a kiwi? Thanks for trying to explain this bizarre situation to me, TD.

Hey, I absolutely loved your succinct comment about HMG being both poacher and gamekeeper! Hope you don't mind if I borrow it? :)

Michele


EMAIL IMF

  • caledonia
  • 14/10/08 30/09/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 09:25

I too have always understood that IOM HAVE to go through HMG for any diplomatic talks with Iceland.

On another issue - I see plenty of reports at the moment re loans to Iceland from Europe and IMF with conditions with respect to Icesave customers, BUT NEVER anything about IOM ??????????? Have I missed something?


Here are some interesting

  • IceCrusher
  • 14/10/08 25/10/11
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 10:14

Here are some interesting aspects concerning the relationship of the Isle of Man with the UK and other nations. I think its pertinent to this thread. (From WIKEPEDIA)

Please note the comments about the UK having paramount power over the UK!
[I have edited to reduce content]

Under British law, the Isle of Man is a Crown dependency and not an integral part of the United Kingdom.

However, the UK takes care of its external and defence affairs, and retains paramount power to legislate for the Island.

As with Jersey and Guernsey, the Isle of Man is not part of the United Kingdom or a direct member of the European Community and its relationship with the EU is defined under Article 299(6)(c) and Protocol 3 of the Act of Accession, annexed to the Treaty of Accession 1972, by which the United Kingdom became a member of the European Economic Community.[2]

[edit] Commonwealth of Nations
The Isle of Man is not itself a member of the Commonwealth of Nations, as membership is only open to sovereign nations, but it is considered part of the Commonwealth by virtue of its relationship with the United Kingdom, and takes part in several Commonwealth institutions, including the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and the Commonwealth Games.

[edit] Intervention of the United Kingdom
The Parliament of the United Kingdom has paramount power to legislate for the Isle of Man on all matters but it is a long-standing convention that it does not do so on domestic ('insular') matters without Tynwald's consent.[3] The mechanism by which the Crown normally applies UK legislation is the Privy Council.

To extend UK legislation in this way, it would first require a 'permissive extent clause', which takes the following form:

Her Majesty may, by Order in Council, direct that any provision of this Act shall extend, with such exceptions, adaptations and modifications, if any, as may be specified in the Order, to the Isle of Man
Alternatively, the Act of Parliament can directly state that some or all of it extends to the Isle of Man.

This Act extends only to the Isle of Man

— Statute Law Revision (Isle of Man) Act 1991 (An Act of Parliament)
However, the convention of obtaining consent is only moral, not legal. Tynwald requested that the Kilbrandon Commission on the Constitution (1969–73) propose that the convention be enshrined in 'strict law', but this suggestion was rejected – partly because the UK Parliament could not make such a law binding on its successors.

Occasionally, the UK Parliament acts against the wishes of Tynwald – the most recent example being the Marine etc. Broadcasting (Offences) Act 1967, which banned pirate radio stations from operating in Manx waters. Legislation to accomplish this was defeated on its second reading in Tynwald, promoting Westminster to legislate directly.

This power of the UK Parliament is an ancient consequence of the Lord of Mann's feudality beneath the English Crown, and not a consequence of revestment. An early example of the English Parliament legislating for the Isle of Man was the Bishoprics of Chester and Man Act 1541.

Within the British Government, the Secretary of State for Justice has prime responsibility as Privy Counsellor for Manx Affairs, and Manx affairs are handled by the Ministry of Justice. Before 2001 the Home Office had this responsibility.

The UK Government justifies this ability to intervene in Manx affairs by pointing to the responsibility of the British Crown for the 'good government' of Man. This was the subject of a written exchange on 3 May 2000 in the House of Lords. In response to a Written Question by Baroness Strange enquiring as to the meaning and scope of the Crown's responsibility for the good government of the Crown Dependencies, Lord Bach, for the Government, replied 'The Crown is ultimately responsible for the good government of the Crown Dependencies. This means that, in the circumstances of a grave breakdown or failure in the administration of justice or civil order, the residual prerogative power of the Crown could be used to intervene in the internal affairs of the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man. It is unhelpful to the relationship between Her Majesty's Government and the Islands to speculate about the hypothetical and highly unlikely circumstances in which such intervention might take place.' If the UK Parliament was unable to impose legislation upon the Isle of Man it would have 'responsibility without power'.

In addition to this, the Kilbrandon Commission was firmly of the view that Parliament does have power to legislate for the Islands without their consent on any matter in order to give effect to an international agreement which the UK may have made on behalf of the Crown Dependencies. The Kilbrandon Commission went on to make the point that, if Parliament can legislate for the Isle of Man at all, about which there was no doubt, then surely this power knows no bounds - if Parliament can legislate, it can legislate in whatever area it chooses; this is, after all, implicit in the notion of the sovereignty of Parliament.[4]

The UK's secondary legislation (regulations and Statutory Instruments) cannot be extended to apply to the Isle of Man.

The Isle of Man is subject to certain European Union laws, by virtue of a being a territory for which the UK has responsibility in international law. These laws are those for areas not covered by the Protocol 3 opt-out that the UK included for the Isle of Man in its accession treaty - the areas excluded being free movement of persons, services and capital and taxation and social policy harmonisation. The exact extent by which EU law extends to Crown Dependencies is however unclear (see Rui Alberto Pereira Roque v. Lieutenant Governor of Jersey, [1998] E.C.R. I-4607)

The Isle of Man has had several disputes with the European Court of Human Rights because it was late to change its laws concerning birching (corporal punishment) and sodomy.

[edit] Advice of ministers
The Queen, the Lord of Mann, acts on the advice of her UK ministers, not those of her Isle of Man Government. In practice, this means that many decisions relating to the island are taken by the Secretary of State for Justice (previously the Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs, and before that, the Home Secretary).

This includes:

the appointment of the Lieutenant Governor
the appointment of the Bishop of Sodor and Man
the granting or refusal of Royal Assent to Acts of Tynwald
the appointment of deemsters
pardoning or commuting criminal sentences (the Royal Prerogative of Mercy), most notably the commuting of all death sentences passed on the Island after the UK abolished the capital punishment in 1965 (see Capital punishment in the Isle of Man)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_relations_of_the_Isle_of_Man


Ice you really are amazing!

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 15:28

Ice you really are amazing! But did you know that one day a year you can still officially kill a SCotsman on ther IoM!! Well thats what Dave Bradden told me!!


Now how can we get GB on the IoM on that day

  • skintagainnow
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 16:57

Now that could be interesting - now just remind me where does GB hail from - Dumfries & Galloway - and what country is that, AH - yes

what day was it and how do we get him there -- special presentation ??????


EXPAT READ THIS:- In the

  • Captain Mainwaring
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 16:06

EXPAT READ THIS:-
In the interests of harmony I said I wouldn't post again but....

Let us imagine a situation where the DCS was kicked off.

Corporate depositors (let us say skandia customers) are entitled to receive a payout from the DCS, together with a dividend from the liquidator.

They are required to sign over their deposit to the DCS as we all are.

From the DCS they receive 50K to be divided between them.

However, if they did NOT agree to become subscribers to the DCS, they would would be entitled to solely the dividend which would exceed the payout from the "beneficial" DCS.

Would therefore the subscription to the DCS not impinge upon their human rights?

Secondly - as born out by your recent posts, do NOT waste fortunes on representations at any liquidations hearings UNLESS you intend to appose or propose liquidation. So liquidation is decided upon, after that you won't get a say, you cannot start opposing the appointment of the liquidator or anything else, after that time it is a matter of due process until the first creditors meeting when something can be said.

Thirdly - And this won't make friends, but who cares? Do NOT chase after money in transit at this point - as I have said, the only people who will win will be the lawyers, and lawyers can't get lose out here.

Consider the first point carefully.
Good luck. CM.


thank you very much

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 18:25

thank you very much


Cripes!

  • michelenona
  • 12/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 10:37

Thanks for going to all that trouble to educate me, IceCrusher. Much appreciated.

I'm not sure it has all sunk in, because it is late at night over here, and my brain is on a bit of a 'go slow'. However, I couldn't help notice that one section of the Wikipedia article seriously needs updating: "Occasionally, the UK Parliament acts against the wishes of Tynwald – the most recent example being the Marine etc. Broadcasting (Offences) Act 1967, which banned pirate radio stations from operating in Manx waters." So... are you up for the job? If so, when you've finished with it, perhaps you'd like to scoot over to the entries for Gordy and his Sweetheart and update them, too. I was reading the entry for Darling this morning, and couldn't help thinking it was time someone like IceCrusher did a bit of an edit on it. Well, actually, to be quite honest, I was thinking more of a hatchet job than an edit. :)

Thanks again...
Michele


IOM??????

  • bellyup
  • 10/10/08 09/01/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 10:03

If you did I missed it too.
I keep hoping that this is because some secret negotiations are under way that will be beneficial to IOM savers.
Then again I was the last person to believe in the tooth fairy.


IoM and red herrings!

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 10:37

There is no reason to believe in tooth fairies bellyup, real people do things not myhths or rhetoric without foundation. Obviously eveyone is entitled to their opinion, thats what feedom of speech is about. However, there are number of statementsflying around suggesting they are fact when there is nothing to support those contentions.
For instance "the bank is not resucuable, we know that"! Really, sombody knows that do they, interesting that as time has gone on more and more here realise that is not the case, a number of larger stakeholders have come forward and can see that the bank is rescuable, the IoM gove know that as well. They are not a Red Herring at all, as time will show. Thoughtfull business and financial people are working together to assist a sensible and rational solution, those people have a stake in this as depositors, quite a big stake in some cases, not just £5,000, but many millions.
One of the great problems we all face is that we want this done and want it now, as the Doors once sang Well unfortunately the real world isn't like that and we are one of a number of positions in a larger geo-political game that needs to be dealt with.
Negotiiations in Iceland, well of course they are going on! How they are going I d not know, but that they are going on is very encouraging.
Did you know that between four institutions, two who have actually stated that KSF is being "looked at for purchase", have £229m in this? Did you think they are going to walk away from that?I doubt it. Did you know that at the fiorst liquidation hearing there were ten legal teams ready to fight liquidation? They didn't need to speak because the IoM Trausury gor an adjournment.
All of those statements are in fact on this web site alob=ne if people would care to look. They are all statements in the public domain, not supposition dreamt up to suit a cause. I am as frustraed as anyone in this, I have a family 2000 miles away who are getting pretty desperate to see me and vice versa, but i stay the course becaue I recognise that over time we can get our money, it is a rescuable cause, we get our money by the way with a controlled run off, but is not as politically expedient for the IoM, who have an entire baking system and economy at stake here

Please think carefully about al this, think about what is fact and what is noisy rhetoric designed to appeal to the worried, the frustrated, the lonely and the desperate. I am pretty despperate to go home, but we want our money first and that is what people with a big stake in this are working on, thank you for listening, but you are all free to exercise your rights as you see fit, I exercise mine by actively working with others to recover our money.


...the facts, whole facts and nothing but facts!

  • horace
  • 23/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 16:57

I like your response expat!

You are of course absolutely right; to quote your message "... there are number of statements flying around suggesting they are fact when there is nothing to support those contentions."

It would be great if we could have a 'DAG Fact' section on this web site where the ONLY information posted would be the FACTS as far as the DAG power teams (IOM and Ldn) have to hand!

More work for the boys and girls already maxed out in the back rooms, but it could be a central source of the only 'factual' information that we have.

Keep up the good work all you constructive and active DAG's!!!


Expat

  • thesunnysouth
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 15:08

Good afternoon and as per other posts keep up the work.
I am interested in the four institutions who have a combined total of £220 in this. You mention that they are known but as you know this site could take a week to negotiate and it would be interesting to know who they are for eg Skandia, norwich union or others. If big institutions like these are considering how to re structure the bank i am sure many people here would supprt that work. As per PWC any info helps partivularly as there are people who are near the edge financially and news is their lifeblood.
Hope the weather there is betther than here!
john


the weather is horrible today

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 15:24

the weather is horrible today sunnysouth, but i'm watching the rugby on the telly, first time in four weeks I've been avble to think about anything other than deposit money!!!

Big institutuions might be looking at structuring and sharing the equity, conversley they might be contibutors to a structure rather than allow litigation for instamce!. There are quite a lot of variables here.and well worth exploring some of them. The IoM Gold Team are good and proffesional, but sometimes we can think a little motre outside the box! br a bit more creative!
Can#t cooment on PWC we don't seem to get much either but that might chage in the nmext few days.


Expat, Ally & Skintagain

  • thesunnysouth
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 18:31

Thank you for some clarity in posts over the last few days. From everything on here we all feel that the IoM loan book is fairly sound and with at least 4 big hitters also trying to sort this out.
Re KSF UK HMG are in for £2.5b so they too are there to make sure E&Y get the best deals on any sale of that banks loan deal and again supposedly strong balance sheet.
Finally the IoM would be better off investing in the bank than paying out on the DCS if only for reputation let alone the loss of £150m.
Keep going you are all getting there and including the work of Diver the end may be a bit nearer in sight.


thx thesunnysouth

  • skintagainnow
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 19:03

Thx thesunnysouth,

all I've done is extract relevant bits of information into the one area, the info is from the affidavits and other articles in the public domain both IoM & UK, then put my own slant on how things could go providing the will is there externally and internally within the group. Ally I know has done a lot more work on the figures (and still is) there's another couple of set's of posts relating to these, & of course Expat's and the IoM team are doing a sterling job on the front line.

Diver and the london team are also working hard, just a shame some of this work is spent trying to keep the group moving forward in a common direction. Lets face it what we have achieved 0.0013% of the UK population in less than 4 weeks is simply astonishing - a full 15 mins of our questions at the Treasury Select Committee, a further 30 min debate in the House and several hours of prime time TV coverage, never mind a fully functioning internet presence with 24 hr IT support. Any private company having to fund what we have achieved for peanuts (notwithstanding a few hundred mill of deposits) would be running to millions and have took at least 6 months to get this far.

We also have the other people working in the background go man, occams, guttered, matt, ng, steff to name a few - more should be posted for their work but there's simply far too many - but to all I thank everyone for what each has done to get us this far.

Believe me, we are doing well and ARE on course for a solution that's in all our best interests.


Reply not from Expat

  • Ally
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 15:11

Here is an excerpt from a post I made earlier on another thread

Expat may have more information than me but for sure some of the big players are the Insurance companies

Skandia declared £63 million
Scottish Equitable declared £56 million
Axa declared approx £50 million
Clerical Medical - Declared "slightly less than Scottish Equitable"

I sure there are other institutions that haven't owed up too. Some of them not Insurance companies


I spoke to a friend of mine

  • SgKZ
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 09/11/2008 - 13:31

I spoke to a friend of mine who is reasonably well positioned in one of those companies (I won't say which) and he described that amount of money as being typical of what you and I lose down the back of the sofa. I got the firm impression that it would just be a 'shrug off' unfortunately.

SG


SgKZ please explain

  • 1log
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 09/11/2008 - 13:50

Do you mean that one of the big companies would be willing not to put up a fight for the money because it is not worth their effort??? or it is a relatively small loss compared to their existing assets, in which case are they willing to directly compensate their depositors? - since they obviously have a shed load of money to be able to ignore this travesty of justice???


Ally since when have I ever

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 15:26

Ally since when have I ever got ahead of you on this matter!!! I always expect you to tell me who they are!! Can confirm the Sqottishqitable figure though, ; a few nighs ago in The Saddle.......................................


for ally

  • bellyup
  • 10/10/08 09/01/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 15:18

Ally would you say the actual number of personal depositors is a long way from 8000?
I am surprised still that there are not more depositors registered here.
Bearing in mind that some dont use the computer / dont have internet etc but even so where are over 6000 people?


Bellyup

  • Ally
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 15:25

Yes, that is one of the numbers that has always mystified me.

I have played with the numbers a lot to try and work out how the £840million is made up and my gues would be £300 - £350 million at least is institional in one form or another. Could be a bit more or a bit less but I don't think I'm a million miles away

Skandia etc only hold account, so where 8,500 comes from I don't know. Unless this is the number of accounts KSF held but some could have had nothing in. e.g. my girlfriend opend an account in June of this year but following the news decided against transferring funds. So her account is still active but has nothing in.

I might spend some time over the weekend looking at that figure more closely. 8,500 has always struck me at high.


account numbers

  • mikeinfrance
  • 12/10/08 28/09/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 18:21

I've been wondering a lot about this question of the missing 6000 odd depositors but, as posted below, the answer could be simple ie many depositors have more than one account...I have 3 current accounts in different curencies plus an Edge account.
I wonder if a poll, in which each depositor could say how many accounts they have, would bring up an interesting result ?


Ally - Accounts vs Depositors

  • Knife Edge
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 15:45

Ally

Aiden Docherty's affidavit says there are "7,000 accounts" in KSFIOM (para 16, under KSF Legal link).

I for one had 6 accounts - Euro and Sterling Edge accounts, Euro and Sterling KSFIOM instant access accounts and Euro and Sterling KSFIOM term accounts. I doubt I'm the only one in that situation. Factor that in, and the number of people on the site starts looking more in line with what you'd probably expect.


Thanks Knife Edge

  • Ally
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 15:59

Yes if you factor examples like yours in its makes it easier to come to that.

Thinking about I was talking to someone the other day and they had 3 or 4 types of fixed bonds. Again one depositor 4 accounts


Ally - accounts

  • skintagainnow
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 16:35

Ally when I opened the account (20 Sept 08 dddooohhh) - the initial emails indicated they had opened 4 seperate accounts for me all sterling, I queried and this was reduced to a single account with a € account to follow. Could be I wasn't the only one this happened too - don't know if it was something in the dying days to push up account numbers or just simply a mistake. But again this could go someway to explain the high account numbers.


Thanks for your posts

  • bellyup
  • 10/10/08 09/01/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 13:30

Expat and Diver
Thanks again for your posts .
What would we do without yourselves and everyone else in the teams?


bellyup its not about one or

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 14:04

bellyup its not about one or two people, its not about who is the strongest or even who is right, its about being a unit and about challenging our situation. There will always be disagreements, there will always be some discord, but as long as we all walk in the same direction there is, as Ally just posted, a good chance we'll all arrive at the same time in a nice place!


Expat's press release

  • chb
  • 10/10/08 15/10/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 20:04

Expat,

You have (more than) earned the right to represent us and to create the press release you see fit. Please keep on doing what you're doing.


expat

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 14:39

In view of what you say above one has to ask why on earth you unilaterally put out that press release on Thursday congratulating the IoM government and thanking them on our behalf. On close scrutiny the announcement made on Thursday by their Chief Minister contains nothing to hearten depositors and indeed nothing remotely concrete other than the fact that the IoM government intends to do its best to avoid triggering its DCS.


since when to i need you

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 18:29

since when to i need you permission? and judgeing by my email inbox it would seem many disagree with your position! still life goes on!!


You don't need my permission.

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 19:12

You don't need my permission. But it is inappropriate to put out a press release on behalf of others without consulting with at least some of the others.


I would imagine he did

  • expatfrance1
  • 15/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 19:20

I would imagine he did consult with some of the others. It just didn't happen to include you!


Thank you expatfrance1, you

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sat, 08/11/2008 - 19:50

Thank you expatfrance1, you are totally correct and long will it remain so!