Still Proud Elgee?

I have been abroad durng the past month and have only been able to read your ill argued comments a few minutes ago.
What a load of unadulterated rubbish! How can you blame DAG or Elgee for the cost of the SoA imposed on "us" the creditors by the unholy alliance of the IOMG and the LP (Mike Simpson).

I am a member of the HNW group and will not decry the efforts made by Gavin and Adrienne et al but I believe that they have made a serious error in not working out their differences with DAG. I am also not convinced that their strategy re the Liquidator is very sound. Until they can give me good arguments that their strategy makes sense I will support the DAG team.
The simple reason is that I am extremely concerned about the performance of the LP now Liquidator.
In the past his figures have often been questionable and even at this late stage they still do not make much sense viz a viz the loan book repayments/interest receivable. We need a lot better financial information than we have been given so far. I realise that their are still uncertainties and confidentiality issues but we have been given contradictory and plain incorrect data too often.
Hopefully his performance will improve but it seems we have missed the chance to fire a warning shot over the bows of PWC.
Posts like yours do not help our cause and show a lamentable level of ignorance of the facts.

Brabander

I just don't see any point in pursuing recriminations for perceived failures at different stages of the DAG campaign. I believe that it is inevitable in an international, heterogeneous grouping such as DAG, made possible through the facility of the INTERNET, that there will be differences of opinions. There would be differences if we all lived in the same street of the same town in "wherever".

It is in fact remarkable that so much has come to light and become possible through such ephemeral group action .. In fact I am utterly amazed by the successes of DAG and the many contributors to the process.

Spoiling and back-biting such as is becoming unfortunately popular on both "sides" will not assist the ongoing task of recovering maximum refunds for all depositors. Whether we are "High Net Worth" or just low-level depositors , with 50k plus a little (as am I ) , ALL WILL BENEFIT BY MAXIMISING the liquidation recovery.

Finally the writer above needs to remember that the SOA was the creature of the IOMG, and that whether the liquidation proceeded with an SOA or DCS the liquidator provisional (backed by the DCS Manager) stated the ultimate payout would be about the same, with minor differences of timing.

As the DCS is turning out, that would have been potentially the fastest way to go, but there was too much dis-information around at the time for anyone to see this clearly . In FACT it is the SOA process which has COST ALL OF US additional money in the long term because of the cost to the IOMG Treasury and the Liquidator being born by the Depositors.

Thanks to all the former Committee, DST, Casual Contributors and others, not to mention those who STOOD FOR THE CREDITORS COMMITTEE, KNOWING the potential future drain on their time and (ineviatbly) resources.

Thanks and Best wishes to all.

Womby

Yes, still proud. Of my colleagues on the DST, not of myself.

http://chat.ksfiomdepositors.org/blog-entry/setting-record-straight-dst

Its Theft:
I wish to protest:

First, DAG is all of us registered on this site - nothing more, nothing less. How do you propose to 'expose' us? Expose us as what?

More importantly, your post is based on a totally false premise - that the REJECTION of the SoA has cost depositors £1m.
The £1m (or more) was spent by the LPs (PWC) in assisting IoMT in developing the SoA. Had the SoA been accepted, there would have been no chance whatsoever to recover these costs, which would have been born by the depositors as preferential charges against the bank's assets. The very fact that the SoA was rejected allowed the possibility of claiming these costs from IoMT, thus 'recovering' the £1m or more for the benefit of depositors. That is what DST tried to do through the court. And that is what the LPs refused to support (if they had, it might have worked). So who was acting in the best interests of depositors?

Let's imagine that everybody has been making honest and well-intentioned comments.

What most people don't seem to acknowledge is that these are 'strange times'.
The current financial situation looks like turning into, or simply being, the worst financial train wreck since the Great Depression. See recent heavy duty comment on the subject, I'm not imagining this, I track the commentary.

Now my guess it that the average punter still hopes that 'normal rules' rule. These hopes look at each moment more likely to be dashed. The empeorors (sic): Spanish) have lost their clothes. The illusions seem to be dissolving. Now why is that? Various arguments exist, but one strand that is not questioned is the misbehaviour of the financial community and the regulatory capture of the political class, culpability clearly lies there.

Now let's get this straight. In these waters, turbulent and vicious, those that got us into this mess are themselves swimming to maintain their old advantages, they will stab their clients in the back with even more ferocity than they were doing before the crisis.

In this climate, in this environment it has been difficult to generate a consensus. I personally lost more of my deposit than most depositors had in total with the dismissal of the SoA. And I was vehemently anti SoA. Am I suicidal? Am I stupid? What is my motivation? Well it's this: I believe in doing what is right, not in doing what is most advantageous for myself. Yes, I'm naieve. But it was and is my choice.

The behaviour of the IoMG stinks to high heaven, as does the behaviour of HMG. Justice delayed is justice denied. We've been played, they split us with the change to the DCS in October, it is my opinion that the have lied with aplomb since that date. I have listened to MS and seen the results of his activities since October and believe he is simply watching his back first and afterwards ours. We're in a rats nest, and it is no surprise that IOM 'man' is not sympathetic to us because they get their living from preying on the naieve.

I have watched the apologists, those that thought pleading (basically) would work. It didn't did it?
The IoM will be fighting for it's life, the predicted contraction in 'financial services' (financial creaming) should hit them hard, the sector has to contract unless the sector manages to blow another bubble, and each moment their aim looks more problematical. It's the classic 'ladder'.

To come back to your posting 'ItsTheft', what should we have done, and much more importantly what should we do and what chance of advantage do we have?

Tell me 'ItsTheft' what is your answer?

My attitude, my solution, my way forward, is the same as the one I proposed from shortly after the beginning, when the direction of the IoMG became clear. We generate a consensus and we stick to it.
We work together or we die, we fail.

It isn't DAG's fault that the mainland media wasn't that interested, it isn't DAG's fault that the politicos of the IoM and HMG didn't listen. That is just the way it was. What was ridiculous, but understandable, was the ways we were riven. And no doubt you played your part, as you are doing now. It wasn't DAG's fault, nor was it the apologists (HNW's) fault. They were innocent to varying degrees.
It was everybody's fault.

Now. And I repeat that, in fact I shout NOW what do we do?

There are an awful lot of people lost here, there are those that recognise the reality and don't do anything other than log in occasionally to see what might be happening, although they have reconciled themselves to the apparently ruling reality.

I posted a small comment to Lieben the other day, I didn't get an answer, she was so obsessed with her own situation that she did not grasp the significance. She still has not replied. Shame on her, she doesn't understsand, poor soul, and so she will lose.

IF WE CANNOT UNITE WE ARE DEAD.

IF WE UNITE; IF WE CAN FIND A SINGLE DIRECTION; THEN WE WILL SLOWLY ATTRACT THE SUPPORT OF THE 'SILENT MASS'.

What might this single direction be?

It's simply the truth. It's right against wrong. It's the classic battle. If we "accomodate" we lose the high ground, and what other potential do we have. In such a corrupt mess as we find ourselves in what value, where is. the high ground? You don't seem to be clear. Tell me absolutely where is your high ground?
And then tell me why should others agree with you!

Nobody here seems to realise how exactly to conduct our campaign. I am pissed off with DAG because I dislike feeling like a mushroom, but in the final analysis I feel their position and actions hold the most water.
I believe they need to change some of their attitudes but I'm not here blasting them out of the sky.

I want to hear the result of DAG and HNW reaching an agreement.

Very few people respond to me. It doesn't dismay me that much. The world is full of, let's say, fools-

I'm not close to the centre, my personal circumstances have precluded this. But I watch. And I know that if there is not a impressive accord reached very shortly we can all resign ourselves to waiting to the scraps to be served up on our plates by self serving dissembling clowns like MS, IOMG and HMG.

I can't crack heads together from where I sit at present.
But I'm fed up. Particularly with Lieben, I think that Lieben is currently poison.
I posted she didn't respond.
Why not Lieben? Old habits?
And also, along the lines of Columgbc, I haven't liked DAG's "Well we can't tell you" appearance.

We need one direction.
People, myself included, can follow one direction.

Where the hell is it?

We need ONE direction.

It's theft: My answer is yes.

Also, I make the obvious point that the money spent by PWC on the SoA (the million that you refer to - and it was almost certainly more than that) was spent and incurred as a cost to the bank before we defeated the SoA, so the creditors would have incurred that expense in any event. It was not incurred as a result of the SoA being defeated.

We do not think that we have a cause of action in law against the UK government, merely a complaint. We have pursued that complaint fairly relentlessly, including with the Treasury Select Committee.

I note your statement that I am an idiot. Please forgive me for not taking the trouble to deny it.

It may help others to understand the issue by attempting to define just who is the DAG. My earlier posts on that topic are here, here and here.

DST members have been working very hard. Whilst there is a big difference between activity, effectiveness and efficiency, nonetheless the important point is they are apparently doing the best they can, and for that I think we should be grateful.

There is a tendency here in the chat forums for a lot of talk and relatively little action. DST are perhaps the other way around, even to a fault. For my part I do not want to criticise DST, only try and remind them that:

• Communication is vital
• Key decisions should not be taken on behalf of the DAG without checking that the DAG is in agreement.
• Some apparently obstructive by others behaviour may be in their best interests. ItsTheft's post here is probably a good example.