Theft is Theft. By what law has Brown justified it???

  • Ormus
  • 19/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
Posted: Wed, 26/11/2008 - 09:20

My MP has told me "Theft" is "unparliamentary language" that cannot be used in the House to hurt the feelings of a colleague. Brown and Darling have "Seized" (a.k.a. Stolen in my language) my honestly earned, legally deposited money in a legitimate bank in a Crown Dependency territory whose banking practices were transparent and well-regulated, and upon which I continued to pay tax. My question is simple. By what Law/Right/Power/Invocation did he manage to do this? Someone must know. Is this what is being concealed in the Sealed Court Order? Either this action is legal or it is not. If it is, I want to know how. If it is not, then Cameron and all Tory MP's (a.k.a. Servants of a Democratic people) should raise this matter to the roof, as how can common criminals be allowed to continue running the country? If they have committed common theft, they should be out. It seems to me they have. Where might I be going wrong, before I land up in jail?

0
Your rating: None

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

Theft - no, not really, give it a rest

  • skintagainnow
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 26/11/2008 - 15:11

Theft, not really, just a layman's view on this & not one many of you want to hear.

KSF IoM deposited / upstreamed £550m of the banks liquid assets / funds to KSF UK for reasons we not yet clear on, this deposit in the UK is much the same as any other corporate unsecured deposit ie similar to the councils / TFL etc had with KSF UK and will be treated as such.

KSF UK was placed into administration by the FSA in that it couldn't meet the requirement threshold, a very large question mark hangs over the FSA's decision to place KSF UK into administration in so much was it "forced" or requested by HMG (the question mark over sealed papers) or was it simply due to the market forces of investor / depositor withdrawals following HMG's statements earlier in the week re : all Icelandic assets frozen, when in fact it was just the assets of Landsibanki that were frozen.

HMG's ongoing stance that the KSF IoM deposit can not be returned and must form part of the asset pool to be distributed to all unsecured creditors, is a problem but is normal in any liquidation, only if the funds are secured or ringfenced in some way that it may be possible to argue HMG / the administrators for KSF UK are acting illegally.

Please stop banging on about HMG stole our money, morally and ethically yes they probably did, legally - unless we have access to the sealed papers, transcripts of the FSC / FSA meetings, sworn affidavits from KSF IoM & KSF UK officials stating the deposit was secured and / or documentary evidence of the security - we don't have a leg to stand on.


Secured

  • dclf1947
  • 10/10/08 31/08/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 27/11/2008 - 02:04

To me it appears that the major problem is that the 550M was not secured. This suggests that the problem initially originates at KSF (IOM). If it was secured I am sure that would be common knowledge by now and Mr. Bell would not be saying that it may be difficult to get the full amount returned.


secured ?

  • mikeinfrance
  • 12/10/08 28/09/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 27/11/2008 - 03:42

There's a lot of conjecture over this question. IOM seem to think it was secured,at least that was the intention, but secured or not, the KSFUK transfer order forbids KSFUK from returning any funds to KSFIOM by virtue of para.27. Furthermore the E&Y report suggests that even they are still uncertain as to the actual status of those assets. Why Alan Bell thinks it unlikely that the money will be returned only adds to the mystery and suggests that he might know something that we don't !


Immoral and unethical theft

  • IceCrusher
  • 14/10/08 25/10/11
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 26/11/2008 - 16:01

Immoral and unethical theft works for me; I'm not trying to be 'right', or take the moral high ground - just trying to win back what is ours. The first casualty of war is the truth, and we've seen our opponents manipulate that to their favour already. Time to work a little propaganda ourselves - when you recount your story to others, are they not flabbergasted? Most people I know who have kept pace with this story are truly aghast at what's happening to us and how badly the Government is behaving.

Those other depositors were public bodies who used professional advisors to decide that their money should go on wholsale deposit in the UK bank - we did not. We were retail depositors who had our funds moved on our behalf in the 'cause of safe-keeping' and whilst they were being kept safe they were 'morally nicked'. The reason for safeguarding monies was to protect depositors was it not? I could almost believe Darling did not intend to bring calamity upon us and that it was an unfortunate happenstance - had HM forthrightly returned the unfortunate result of this happenstance back to the jurisdiction that owns it.

Extraordinary times demand extraordinary actions and extenuating circumstances demand alternative routes to find justice and satisfy a fair conclusion for all. If Mr Darling can underwrite 300,000 IceSavers and move 170,000 Edge deposits over to ING within a day, then he has already exhibited the extent of powers available to him - returning property to a jurisdiction that has suffered harm at his hand without just cause is reason enough; IMHO it is. We patiently await the proper response from the Rt Hon Purloiners.


Ice, it's just we can't keep

  • skintagainnow
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 26/11/2008 - 17:32

Ice, it's just we can't keep saying openly HMG stole our money that argument is far too easily discounted and could "turn people off" reading the more important ideals the site is promoting.

Yes! I agree the truth always does get lost somewhere along the line & never more so than in legal arguments - where the truth is whatever can be determined / interpreted from a law, regulation or A N other statement - whether based on fact or supposition, case in point Mr Dastardly's continual reference to tax dodgers / tax evasion etc,. - he knows that's not true for probably all of the depositors left in the IoM, (maybe some in the past but they will have long gone) but it does cloud the issue to the general public, although easily discounted. Notice here he never mentions Tax avoidance - which is a totally different kettle of fish (no pun intended to Icelandic produce), which is rife for the very high earners, the mega rich and other wealthy aarrhhmm dare I say some party donators, here any good accountant in their employ can easily retain many more X their fees in saved payments to the tax beast under the current UK tax laws.

Working the propaganda - then the best one we have so far is to simply concentrate on pulling the tax dodger issue apart, whenever Mr Dastardly mentions the tax issue the response from the media and other politicians should be well clearly Sir that statement is not true, would you care to explain / elaborate why You alone think it is, once one of the major untruths is exposed then others will follow - I have been informed by an Icelandic government official would be a good follow on.

As far as telling everyone - I personally wouldn't know, apart from the few thousand members and others that read this site (this semi anonymity is a wonderful thing), I don't need all the fingers of one hand to count how many others know, I am thankful for the site, it's quite a new experience to the norm - shutters down, do not enter signs up and tell neone nowt, aboot owt


skintagainnow

  • Ramsey resident
  • 22/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Wed, 26/11/2008 - 15:55

Well said

The arguement has been stated before and I repeat that if the UK had not frozen the funds they could well have dissapeared overnight to Rekjavik never to be seen again

At least where they are they will be available for distribution to the creditors including us


Theft is....

  • maxmin
  • 24/11/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 26/11/2008 - 13:35

Hi All as I understand the matter the KSFIOM money was 'transferred' to the UK or as they say 'frozen' 'seized' under the anti terror UK law and the money can not now be returned without the permission of the UK government. I don't think they are going to give any such permission. The £ms of funds have been sent to others. There may be some legal action to be taken, this will be costly against the government. It is very sad that we are all now being expected to sort this matter out on our own!! As a large tax payer I feel very let down by the IOM and UK governments.


Theft

  • Ormus
  • 19/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Wed, 26/11/2008 - 14:38

As I understand it, the govnt "froze" Icelandic assets under "Terror" laws to help pay back UK depositors in failed Icelandic banks over here. In a separate action it "seized" (stole) IoM funds (our deposits) illegally from a solvent arm of KSF, (thus precipitating it's colllapse), in order to fund his pledge to KSF(UK) depositors that their money, as opposed to ours, (because we have committed the hitherto unknown offence of depositing in the IoM) would be returned, thus currying favour with the majority of the electorate. The point is that this is theft in any normal language, and it should not require the pemission of the thief to enable it to be returned. This is what MP's of all persuasions should be banging on about, particularly Tories, and is what I think we should concentrate upon. His action was either legal or illegal, and we should be able to find out.


Theft ..

  • maxmin
  • 24/11/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 28/11/2008 - 00:46

Ok Ormus - I agree - but how are we going to be able to get the UK and IOM governments to agree to return our money. The UK don't intend to act. Both UK and IOM governments have done a very poor job of looking after our interest regarding the terms of the IMF loan to Iceland, everyone and his dog are included in the potential pay out, except KSF IOM depositors. God help us all !! and these people with their own jobs / interests / money - at heart. Don't trust any banks or governments to look after anything except their own. Don't get fooled again.


Thieves

  • jr
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 26/11/2008 - 09:55

You are absolutely right – it is theft plain and simple. Brown and the UK government took the action to freeze Kaupthing UK, and so any other related Kaupthing operation with assets in this UK bank should have them returned unconditionally.

What kind of a game are Darling & Brown trying to play?

Can you imagine what the UK government would have done if the IOM government had frozen the assets of an IOM bank which included assets of a related UK bank, and then refused to return them to the UK banking operation?

Really, I think we as a group we need to demand that the £550 million held in Kaupthing UK is returned right now.

Perhaps we should arrange a march to 10 Downing Street and let the media know to create as much publicity as possible, and give a clear message to these thieves that this situation will not be resolved until we get our money back.


''Rt Hon Thieves'

  • IceCrusher
  • 14/10/08 25/10/11
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 26/11/2008 - 13:52

I've been thinking along similar lines; what would those 'Rt Hon Gents' do if the situation were reversed? Darling claimed in the TSC meeting that he could not intervene in another jusridiction - but he can sure take their money! We are in an awful situation, no one is doing anything, Cameron has a gag on and there's no inter-party fight about it. Brown/Darling are sticking out their chins and saying 'yeah, what you gonna do about it then!' Even if they were to spend £400M on legal fees to win and keep the asset, they would end up £150M better off than giving it back, so a legal fight for it is a bit iffy - but maybe Diver's man may give us an idea if we go that way?
Ice


same thought

  • rk
  • 12/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Wed, 26/11/2008 - 12:49

I have had that idea as well.

Why doesn't IoM use it's own laws (there must be an equivalent to the UK Terror one) to "seize" £550m of UK assets using a sealed court order that are deposited / held on the IoM ??

Then of course, use these seized assets to repay us!

Then let's see how they bloody like it.....

How interested I'd be in how many (labour) politicians "excess assets" are held offshore or in offshore structures......


Well said

  • TykeinSingapore
  • 12/10/08 22/06/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Thu, 27/11/2008 - 01:32

rk, well said, you brought a smile to my face in these grim times!


re the thieves

  • ripped Off
  • 20/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Wed, 26/11/2008 - 09:47

I also agree, but what I would also like to know who put the joker Gordon Brown as leader, Labour got in because people who voted for labour voted for Tony Blair's idea's about running the country, Gordon Brown's view were never the same, so why is he there and still there