STOP ALL THIS WHINGING ABOUT NOT GETTING FORMS!

  • Anonymous
  • unspecified
  • Offline
Posted: Mon, 11/05/2009 - 08:28

The voting forms have been on the KSF website (http://www.kaupthingsingers.co.uk/Pages/4079)
since before all this whinging started about not receiving them by snailmail.
It is less trouble to download the forms and send them off than to post complaints about not receiving them. Get with it!

2
Your rating: None Average: 2 (27 votes)

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

Late forms

  • SBS
  • 28/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 12/05/2009 - 09:24

All well and good, my friend. However, the LP is employed by PwC, a large, highly regarded international company.

Has no one in the office heard of air mail?


Snail mail

  • Lostinspace
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 12/05/2009 - 05:16

Linsco, old bean,

A bank is supposed to be a professional enterprise and as such, it should be able to mail out these forms, whether they are on the internet or not. Barclays, HSBC and RBS seem to manage it without breaking too much sweat, so why not KSF?

They managed to break through the morass and send out two bank statements to depositors since the Oct 08 fiasco so why the big hold up this time?

Since there are millions at stake here and the IOM's reputation on the line, draw your own conclusions....


TT racing

  • bellyup
  • 10/10/08 09/01/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 11/05/2009 - 23:22

Linsco darling do go and sweep the TT track or whatever people in the IOM do for fun- far more productive than trolling about here.


@linsco: You don't seem too empathetic.

  • follow_the_tao
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 11/05/2009 - 22:32

I don't know who you are. Neither do I see you comments as being positive.

You've done this before. Why? Why are you trying to be provocative? Does it serve your purpose? Does it serve the interests of the depositors?

Many depositors are more or less pensioners. Many depositors are in far-flung places. Many will have been confused by the whole situation. Many are not sitting on the web totally informed. Many rely on more 'traditional' means of communication, and many expect from the authorities, and from their bank, 'honest communication'.

It is this that seems to be lacking. There appears to be a shortfall of the 'normal duty of care'.

Now you might keep banging on with your inflammatory posts but be aware that they are seen for what they are, almost groundless. You don't confuse me. But I am not so arrogant as to believe that there are those that do not have the right, as do we all, to expect more appropriate behaviour.


Not getting forms

  • Brabander
  • 15/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 11/05/2009 - 19:54

Linsco your comment has left me extremely angry. The attitude you have displayed obviously eminates from the IOMG!
We are creditors of the bank and have a legal right to be treated with consideration.
It is not our fault that the IOMG have treated us with contempt. They very well knew that the bank's depositors were wide flung across the globe. Despite having 7 months to come up with a load of rubbish in the form of an SoA they seemingly believe we need only a few days to decide whether to pass it or not.
some of us did not even get a few days!


Hi Linsco

  • brokefirefly
  • 12/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 11/05/2009 - 18:14

I think that those of us who are posting on the site that they don't have the forms are trying to do two things:

  1. See if others don't have their forms or if they are the only ones in their region

  2. Make the point that most depositors are NOT members of this site and, without the snail mail forms, may well have no idea that any vote is taking place. How fair do think that is?

The problem isn't just the forms. I have not received ONE piece of paper about Kaupthing since its failure on 8 October (despite phone calls to the bank, proof of address sent twice (the first lot of papers were lost), and an e-mail confirming that they now have my correct address on file). If I didn't read the UK news, I would STILL have no idea that the bank had failed. As it is, I don't even know the exact amount of my claim because I haven't received a statement as at 8 October. How many other depositors do you think are in this boat? Do you seriously think that every depositor (not just members of this site) is being treated fairly here?


Re - Proxy received by Edwin Coe ( inspite of Stuart's e-mail)

  • sabi Star
  • 10/10/08 n/a (free)
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 11/05/2009 - 10:35

Some of you who sent out your proxy some days ago may also have received e-mail from Stuart Roberts - sent yesterday - saying their proxies have not yet been received.
Edwin Coe have just told me this e-mail should have been dated 7th May ( not sent out yesterday).
I was told my proxy had arrived at their office.


Stuart's E-mail

  • Hoping and coping
  • 16/10/08 31/07/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 11/05/2009 - 11:56

Thanks for this. It's helpful. Ours (sent by courier) arrived and were signed for on May 6th, but I received two of these urgent e-mails - so I sent an e-mail to KSF(?)EdwinCoe [dot] com this morning to make clear that ours had been sent. Your comment explains things.


Voting Forms

  • taiping
  • 12/10/08 n/a (free)
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 11/05/2009 - 09:47

Not everyone has Internet access or a printer to print out the forms.
We should not be put in a position to run around after the IoM government. They have a responsibility to get the forms out in good time.
As of 11 May 2009 I still have not received the forms. How many others are in the same boat?
I have already submitted my "NO" vote from downloaded forms, but that's not the point.

taiping


A word of caution

  • Julienne
  • 16/10/08 31/08/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 12/05/2009 - 09:38

Just a word of caution to those who may have already or be about to vote NO

You do realise that a NO vote remains a NO vote forever - there is no 2nd bite at this cherry.
Should ( and I say should , because there is obviouslty no guarantee) the IOMT and IOMG wish to increase their offer or improve the SoA in any way - YOU HAVE VOTED NO - that remains even if the newer version is one you might have accepted -

Much better to put your proxy at the discretion of Stuart or another who will then be able to accept the increased offer.

Of course if your personal circumstances are such you would prefer liquidation then obviously NO is the way to go.


Internet access?

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Mon, 11/05/2009 - 10:25

Begs the question - how do these folk manage to post on this site without Internet access?


Internet access?

  • Wombat761
  • 30/01/09 20/03/15
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 11/05/2009 - 12:14

They use an internet cafe where communications may not be secure.
Regards


@scottr - folk without Internet

  • anrigaut
  • 19/10/08 30/10/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 11/05/2009 - 10:58

Are you being deliberately dense - or maybe just tired? Those depositors without Internet acces are NOT posting on this site; nor are they receiving the vital information that at question of importance to them is aboutto be voted on - and that they have a right to vote.


arrigaut, you are right

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Mon, 11/05/2009 - 12:50

As you say the majority of depositors are not registered on this site (approximately 70%) and many of those may not have access to a computer. In fact many may not even be aware of the latest SOA or that a vote is taking place. If I were not on the internet, I, in Canada, would not have a clue about what is going on. Nothing about KSF has been in the news since 09 October 2008 and that was a brief one minute blurb. In addition, I believe we have only had three mailings since then - one was the receipt of our bank statement with accompanying letter about the collapse and the other two were about the EPS. There has been nothing about the SOA so how in blazes would those without computer access know anything about it or the vote. Some may call it whining to voice compassion about the injustice served out to fellow depositors but I ask these inconsiderate members, who feel put out by these postings, what they would say if the tables were reversed.

We live in a major city in Canada, very close to a postal depot, and as of today (Monday, May 11th) we have not received our forms. There is no doubt in my mind that this delay is either deliberate or the result of complete incompetence on the part of the IOMG and / or provisional liquidator as we frequently receive mail from England within 5 or 6 days. Fortunately, we did not wait for the forms and mailed off the downloaded ones early last week.


not whinging - a serious issue

  • kiwi38
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 11/05/2009 - 13:46

The distribution of the voting forms in a timely matter is a very serious issue. One I hope that the Deemster considers, however I doubt it very much.

I am in Dublin and still have no papers. Yes, I downloaded mine and sent them in last week but that is not the point.


I agree kiwi38: it is indeed

  • anrigaut
  • 19/10/08 30/10/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 11/05/2009 - 14:20

I agree kiwi38: it is indeed a serious matter.

I personally do not in the least welcome the prospect of yet a further delay if the vote is declared invalid. But surely we cannot let it go unchallenged. Creditors (who can say how many?) are being denied the opportunity to vote on an issue whose outcome will be binding on them. It constitutes a scandalous violation of their rights. However the documents were sent out (assuming they were), it was clearly not done in a timely fashion.

Do you really think the Deemster will not even consider it? Where does the corruption stop?


@anrigaut

  • kiwi38
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 11/05/2009 - 15:07

Who knows what the Deemster will do. One thing for certain is that I have no faith in the IOMG or its legal system. Remember the 19 day adjournment that became a 60 day adjournment at the next hearing? Remember the £10M IOMG funds they would forego which became £2.8M? The SOA versus DCS calculator that was promised and then forgotten? The EPS payment before Christmas that many still haven't got as it looks like the treasury have run out of cash. The postal issue is a ploy - I refuse to accept it is a failure of the postal system as I live in Dublin and normally get post within one or two days. My IOM based company got its papers 2 weeks ago!

The last thing we need is another delay. I have given my personal and corporate proxy to DAG and hope like hell they can force this thing to a conclusion on the 19th however I am not hopeful given the quite obvious manipulation that IOMG are attempting to get away with.

At the end of the day the IOM has a population the size of a very small town where very few people are seen to be in power and I suspect even fewer people are really pulling the strings behind the scenes. In this environment coruption is always going to exist and flourish.

I know there is a focus on trying to get the UK to step in and help which seems like the only way that we will get a result.


@kiwi38

  • anrigaut
  • 19/10/08 30/10/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 11/05/2009 - 15:38

Yes - I remember; I agree and have done as you have; I have written to Gordon Brown and Jack Straw.

What more is there to say or do?

Nauseated...


@anrigaut

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Mon, 11/05/2009 - 12:36

Yeah, maybe very tired! I just want my money back a.s.a.p like we all do, and fear a further delay due to this voting issue and the possibility of the 50k compensation reducing to 20k after October if it is not all sorted out by then.


@scottr: You're frightened?!

  • follow_the_tao
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 11/05/2009 - 23:48

A simple question:

Who is frightening you?


Exactly taiping - the right

  • anrigaut
  • 19/10/08 30/10/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 11/05/2009 - 09:52

Exactly taiping - the right to vote should not be conditional on having acces to Internet and a printer!

And it seems many others are "in the same boat".


Not even in a Boat

  • Mekong
  • 14/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 11/05/2009 - 10:18

Remember approx only 25% of depositors are members of DAG and may be fully unaware of the current skullduggery being undertaken by IOMG.

The pattern of voting packages will be reflected accross ALL depositors so that will leave the IOMG with lots of non-votes which equals a vote for SOA some of relative high value.

Even if the Deemster allows scanned / email proxy votes to be counted, which I belive IOMG will not object if only to pacify DAG, SOA will sail through due to the approx 75% of the votes IOMG have only sent forms to potential SOA backers.

This Scam has to be exposed at the hearing for what it is.


@mekong

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Mon, 11/05/2009 - 11:00

Mekong, you may be right in suggesting that "approx 75% of the votes IOMG have only sent forms to potential SOA backers". However, can you plese state your evidence for this, both in respect of your estimate of number and the allegation that failure to receive voting papers biases the vote in a particular direction?


No Evidence

  • Mekong
  • 14/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 12/05/2009 - 03:52

Elgee,

I have absolutely no evidence at all to back up may "assumptions" but there has been / still is an ongoing chain of events that makes me lean towards my own conclusion.

The Vote is not a Vote for SoA its a vote against, if one does not register disagreement to reject the scheme it is accepted that one is in agreement .... Could you imagine the outcry if a country tried to run a ballot in a similar manner!

From what is being posted in various threads in this forum there appears to be a higher proportion of depositors who have not received their voting papers than those that have. IOMG cannot link DAG forum user names to actual account holders so one has to "assume" that this anomly is a reflection of the actual across 100% of depositors not the 20-25% represented here. A 20% sample will give results witin +/- 10% of the overall.

With my joint accounts well in excess of GBP 50,000 I have not recieved voting papers, in a seperate account in my wifes name only GBP 30,000 she received her voting papers, we live in the same house so how did that happen? Again not direct proof of conspiracy but it does raise a few questions in my mind.

Based on the above, actual fact in the case of myself and wifes voting papers, heresay from fellow DAG boardmembers and the way that the vote is worded, my train of thought leads me to conclude that underhand tactics are being deployed in order to secure a "YES VOTE" for SoA, but again this is only my opinion and we are all entitled to them as long as we explain how we reach them and don't ram them down anothers throat.


Evidence?

  • anrigaut
  • 19/10/08 30/10/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 12/05/2009 - 05:30

Of 22 depositors reporting non-receipt of forms in France to date:
5 are in class 1, 14 are in class 2, 3 have not stated.
The only person as yet known to have received forms in France is in class 1.

Of course, we don't know the distribution by class in France (either within the DAG or overall), so this doesn't tell us much, EXCEPT that it appears the fiasco does not only concern class 2.

Anyone else in France willing to contribute to this little 'survey', please see Tricky Dicky's post in the Geo:France group. This includes please any of you who actually have received the forms!

Thanks for your help.


I think there is no evidence

  • anrigaut
  • 19/10/08 30/10/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 11/05/2009 - 11:11

I think there is no evidence as to which way the vote might be affected (though one can speculate). But there is increasing evidence that a significant proportion of depositors - at least of those ouside UK - will be deprived of the opportunity to vote at all - and that is simply not right or fair.

As of today, 15 of 16 DAG members in France responding to a test 'survey' have not received their forms. There are 40+ DAG members in the "France" group of DAG and 400+ depositors (according to the PL's list of accounts by country). IF this survey is in any way representative (and I doubt it's far out), this suggests that 90% or more of depositors living in France have not received any official notice of the forthcoming vote. If this is true, for whatever reason, it's scandalous.


This is not about whinging...

  • anrigaut
  • 19/10/08 30/10/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 11/05/2009 - 09:36

... It's about the fact that - whether by incompetence or intent - this vote is clearly not being conducted fairly. Not everyone has access to internet and the majority are not members of DAG. How can we possibly know how many people still have no idea that a vote is about to take place which affects them closely, the result of which will be binding on them and in which their right to participate is being denied?

I don't want to see the vote cancelled, thus causing yet further delays, but I do want to know that it has been honestly and fairly conducted. And if it hasn't and the vote is in consequence declared nul and void, so be it - it won't be my fault.

A survey among members in the France group shows that, as of 10 May, only one of the 15 living in France who have so far replied has received any papers, a full 2 weeks after they were posted on the KSF site. And France is not exactly remote from the UK, or even from IoM. Of course WE have downloaded and sent off our votes. But there are 40-odd DAG members signed up to the France group out of over 400 KSFIoM accounts with addresses in France. How many of the missing 300+ are still unaware that they need to vote?


keep voting up to the evening of the 13th

  • KA
  • 14/10/08 29/06/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 11/05/2009 - 09:29

keep sending your votes by mail, fax or e-mail up to the evening of the 13th. Even the 14th will be OK, at a push......
every vote counts ! ! !


Re. - Just learned proxies are meant to be e-mailed (?)

  • sabi Star
  • 10/10/08 n/a (free)
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 11/05/2009 - 09:04

Had e-mail from Stuart Roberts saying my proxy forms had not yet been received.
But they were posted in UK last Monday 4th May by first class mail.
So have just rung Edwin Coe to ask them to check if they have got my forms and was asked if I had e-mailed my proxy - which I had not ( thought that would not be valid). Was told e-mail was valid(?)
Anyway they are checking to see if the hard copy has been received and will ring me back.


Postal delays

  • bobwin
  • 23/12/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 11/05/2009 - 08:50

So you are the expert---ex = has been and spert is a drip under pressure.
I have actually exchanged mails with Simpson and he says he will recommend that scanned voting papers be accepted but that the court will decide.
He also says that postal votes must arrive before the 27th May.

He does not say whether these are downloaded copies or coloured forms.

Whingers--I don't think so.

I note you joined on 17th February---explain why you were so late please.


Not everyone has a PC or printer

  • conned
  • 13/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 11/05/2009 - 08:45

@linsco.... with respect not everyone has a PC or a printer. Also the majority of depositors are not DAG members & it may well be that many do not get the forms. It is the responsibility of the LP to see that those entitled to vote get the means to do so.

This is turning out to be an utter fiasco. It smacks of a conspiracy to further delay proceedings. I hope the Court will recognise this and order liquidation.