Reply to MP from UK Treasury

  • taiping
  • 12/10/08 n/a (free)
  • unspecified
  • Offline
Posted: Thu, 23/04/2009 - 11:09

Letter from the UK Treasury to Mr Paul Goodman, MP as per attached files.
I replied to this letter as follows:

23 April 2009.

Dear Mr Goodman,

Thank you very much for your email and for forwarding the response to your letter from Mr Paul Myners at the Treasury.

Of course, the letter completely ignores the circumstances of the takeover of Derbyshire Offshore by Kaupthing hf, and the refusal of Derbyshire / Kaupthing IoM to refund my deposit as I requested. Surely these matters come under the jurisdiction of the UKs FSA.

The failure of Kaupthing IoM was a direct result of the FSA action against Kaupthing UK on 8 October 2008. It is disingenuous to suggest that the fate of Kaupthing IoM is not intimately linked to that of Kaupthing UK, and therefore the UK government has some responsibility for the failure of Kaupthing IoM.

While the letter states that deposits in banks in the IoM are the responsibility of the Government of the IoM, and that it is the responsibility of the IoM's regulator concerning relations with the Icelandic parent company, I understand that it is the UK government's responsibility to represent the IoM in foreign affairs. Therefore, I would think it is the UK government, not necessarily the IoM government, which should be making representations to the Icelandic government for the full implementation of the parental guarantee for the Kaupthing subsidiaries in the UK and the IoM.

With your permission, I would like to forward this correspondence to the Kaupthing IoM Depositors Action Group (DAG).

Thank you again for your efforts which are much appreciated, for presenting this case to the Treasury.
I must admit that I did not expect a more positive response, but hopefully they will eventually realize that UK citizens are being disadvantaged by the refusal of the UK government to accept the plight of their own citizens.

By the way, the proposed Scheme of Arrangement by the IoM authorities is seen by many depositors as a way for them to avoid implementing the IoM Deposit Protection Scheme since it appears the DPS does not have sufficient funds to repay the depositors, and the SOA may not have any benefits for the majority of depositors. I have not seen details of the SOA so I cannot make informed comments.


Stephen Taylor

Bangkok, Thailand.

Document (428).pdf795.18 KB
Document (429).pdf670.43 KB
Your rating: None Average: 5 (6 votes)