Turning to the Law

  • Podcar
  • 13/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
Posted: Tue, 28/10/2008 - 14:07

We're doing all we can to alert the media, MPs and others in positions of power to our cause. Isn't it now time to consult a lawyer

with the possibility that we might need to approach the courts. What I know of the law is limited to TV shows and movies, but I think there is something called 'show cause' whereby the defendant has to justify in court his or her actions. I have no problem AT ALL sueing the UK government for their actions - nor will I begrudge paying a lawyer who succeeds in returning my money to me.

How do you all feel - isn't it time to turn to the law?

0
Your rating: None

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

KNIFE-EDGE PKEASE CONTACT ELGEE

  • Diver
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 01/11/2008 - 14:54

Very urgent that you contact Elgee regarding Simcocks in the Isle of Man. You may have an answer we're looking for - this may be holding up the apppointment of a solicitor in the IoM. Thanks.


Legal representation

  • pwakeham
  • 20/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Fri, 31/10/2008 - 09:14

We will know today if GMR is prepared to act for us as well as the Icelandic Government. If they agree I think this would be a positive move provided the scope of action extends to full recovery of our funds including the deposits at the parent bank. If not we have a potential conflict of interest.

I 100% believe we need to have lawyers look at the merits of our case NOW. I for one have no idea what sort of action(s) might be available to us and only a lawyer can give us reliable guidance. We can then decide whether to act or not.

I am nervous that the media will get bored, the politicians will prevaricate and we will run out of time to brief a lawyer and take important decisions.


Statement From G M R

  • gerry paul johnson
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 31/10/2008 - 20:09

Sorry if I missed this subject at some point earlier today, but I understood that GMR were going to make an announcement as to whether they could represent the depositors. Has there been any announcement today?


I've just checked out the GMR

  • Podcar
  • 13/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 01/11/2008 - 12:35

I've just checked out the GMR site - up until late yesterday afternoon, they said they'd announce whether they could represent the depositors by October 31. Seems they haven't had a chance to finalize things yet:. Here's the announcement displayed on their site today, despite the Friday, October 24 date.

Friday 24, October 2008
Grundberg Mocatta Rakison LLP has been contacted by a number of depositors concerning deposits with Kaupthing Singer & Friedlander Isle Of Man. We are currently considering whether we can act for depositors in this regard. We fully expect to be able to make a further statement in due course.




GMR

  • Diver
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 01/11/2008 - 12:54

At least one of the two main partners dealing with this case has just flown back to Iceland. We are hoping to have a meeting with these guys within the next week to 10 days...clearly we will make sure it is as soon as possible but we do have to fit in with their timetable as well. In the meantime this gives us the opportunity to see how we stand after the TSC and the debate on Thursday.


GMR Statement

  • wipeout
  • 16/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 31/10/2008 - 20:15

Nothing mentioned on their web site yet. Monitor
www.gmrlaw.com


legal action is necessary

  • ksfmoney
  • 24/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 31/10/2008 - 17:56

I agree with the need for some kind of legal action as I specified here in an earlier reply. I would guess that almost all legal actions currently on-going by the various parties will be settled out of court and I would suggest that it's essential that to have some initial legal action out there so the three governments, etc know that we are serious and so the media has something else to report. It would be good if we could get on the coat-tails of the Kaupthing legal action. I would hasten to add that if I was the UK govt or HM Treasury I would be monitoring this website to find out what we're up to to be forewarned.


pwakeham: I absolutely agree

  • Podcar
  • 13/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 31/10/2008 - 09:41

pwakeham: I absolutely agree with you.

As for GMR, I'm not sure if the firm is considering supporting action for the bank - and by extension, the depositors - or for the depositors. If the former, then I'd prefer to have more direct representation.


Legal moves

  • pwakeham
  • 20/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Fri, 31/10/2008 - 19:56

Podcar: thanks for follow up. I have been in touch with three lawyer friends. One has done a quick check and advises that the "magic circle" firms are almost certainly conflicted. A second advises that we get our own representation because we may need to act against Icelandic and IOM authorities so locking in gmr may be wrong. I am briefing the third over the weekend. I have worked with him on a number of corporate transactions so he may not be the right partner but he will certainly give me a heads up on whether there is merit to a case.


I am in favour of hiring a

  • Podcar
  • 13/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 01/11/2008 - 14:23

I am in favour of hiring a lawyer who has only our interests at heart and I'm afraid that waiting too long will be to our detriment. I passed on a recommendation for an IOM advocate, who, if I remember correctly, is being checked out by Expat:

Alex Spencer
Advocate
For and on behalf of
Simcocks Advocates Limited
Ridgeway House, Ridgeway Street, Douglas, Isle of Man IM99 1PY
Tel +44 (0)1624 690300 Fax +44 (0)1624 690333

Whoever we choose to represent us, we need to move quickly. November 27 is not so far off.


Believe me

  • Diver
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 01/11/2008 - 14:30

We are moving..as quickly as we can


Legal Action or not ?

  • worriedsaver
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 11:58

Can anyone explain how the recent legal action that is being discussed fit in with the legal action being undertaken by the firm Gregg Latchams( " Hoppers " Legal action ) already ? I have already signed up for this as have many others and I am concerned that there may be a duplication here especially as this firm has already done a fair bit of work on this matter . Is this new firm better qualified ? If there is a legal action I would like to be part of it ,finances permitting , but I would not be in a position to be paying two legal firms at the same time . Obviously at this stage most of us with Latchams have only committed to sending out a letter of claim so may be it would not be a problem to switch . My view is that should we take legal action as a group that we should present a united front rather than allow ourselves to be divided and conquered . Is there anyone who would be in a position to clarify - Thank-you , I hope I am not missing the point ?


This appeared in yesterday's

  • Podcar
  • 13/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 11:02

This appeared in yesterday's edition of IOM Today:

"Kaupthing has instructed the international law firm Grundberg Mocatta Rakison LLP to begin a preliminary inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the transfer of the assets of Kaupthing Singer & Friedlander's UK subsidiary.

The law firm is also considering whether it can act for KSF (Isle of Man) depositors. "

Can we not apply directly to Grundberg Mocatta Rakison to do more than consider acting for the IOM depositors or is there a conflict of interest here?

I've spoken to a local lawyer who will recommend to me a lawyer in the IOM. What should we do? Talk to Grundberg Mocatta Rakison or find another lawyer who would coordinate with them, or work independently. I have to admit I'm almost at a loss to know how to proceed.

One thing is for sure, however, we do have strength in numbers. Whatever we do, whether it's an independent lawyer, a demonstration, a press conference, there should be a substantial number of participants.


See the GMR LLP www about them acting for KSF/IOM depositors...

  • Brian FISHER
  • 20/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 11:19

See the GMR LLP www about them acting for KSF/IOM depositors...They will publish an announcement tomorrow about this.


OK - read the statement.

  • Podcar
  • 13/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 11:35

OK - read the statement. http://www.gmrlaw.com/news/article/statement-from-grundberg-mocatta-raki...

I guess if the answer is negative, we need to look for our own legal representative.


I've read the responses here

  • Podcar
  • 13/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Thu, 30/10/2008 - 10:11

I've read the responses here and apart from the irrelevant discussion about who is a depositor, I sense an apprehension that seeking legal advice would somehow screw up any solution which might be in sight.

The fact is there is no solution in sight. Furthermore, it takes a long time to prepare a legal brief. We have less than a month to get our act together because once the bank is liquidated on November 27, we've lost - it's over. At least, let's get ourselves organized so that a legal representative can step in when everything else is lost.


Liquidation REversible

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

I thought I read somewhere that the Isle of Man is one place where Liquidation is reversible?


Legal Action yes when push comes to shove

  • Martin H
  • 12/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 28/10/2008 - 18:28

I am able and willing to contribute quite significantly to legal expenses when I can see what I am signing up for.
I strongly believe the right questions have been thrown up in the forum and channelled in the right direction to provide much more clarity as to who should be sued for what (e.g. TSC questions) while increasing the likelihood of a political solution.
I am against taking legal action on a broad front although I have no expert knowledge on the subject at all.


Legal action

  • Monkeyface3604
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Tue, 28/10/2008 - 16:47

I too would be up for some form of legal action.
First we need to get an idea of how many of us would be up for it
Then how much people will be able to contribute initially
Then find ourselves a damn good firm of pitbulls
Then have an intial meeting with them to ascertain exactly who we should be looking to take the action out against and what likely result is


Legal next steps

  • pwakeham
  • 20/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Tue, 28/10/2008 - 16:13

I strongly believe legal action has to be a priority. Action against both UK and Icelandic Governments would seem to be warranted but we need expert opinion on this. We should be prepared to act alone but I would have thought that IOM authorities - Government and FSC - and the provision liquidator might also be contemplating action. It would make sense to co-participate if possible before starting our own action, but we need to do this fast. Is anyone in touch with these parties? I am happy to contact FSC if this does not cross wires. I have already written a few times.


not quite time for legal action

  • broke1
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Tue, 28/10/2008 - 16:53

My feeling is that while legal action may be necessary, it should be as a last resort. I think if we start it now, it may foreclose (might be the legal word!) whatever good may be going on in the discussions. Legal action will really polarize the situation. The problem is that if we are sitting in front of computers in various parts of the world, it's hard to judge the drift of things. I am inclined to place more trust in the present strategies at the moment than not, even while being incensed and crushed by this, and even while mulling over new strategies for my own life.

If and when it's time for legal action, I am hoping that this can be debated on here and a consensus formed through a poll on the left, etc. But there is still another week, at least, as a window for negotiations and our own efforts with MPs and the media.

(My view, anyway!)


I agree - not yet time for legal action

  • sami
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 28/10/2008 - 17:05

Legal action is probably a waste of time and money at the moment, while political activities are taking place. We can progress things ourselves and therefore not throw further funds away unnecessarily. Lawyers' immediate response is going to be 'thank you, yes I can take on your case', but in actual fact if they had anything to offer at the moment, with this amount of depositors' money at stake, they would have come to us.


Legal action

  • user1123
  • 14/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Tue, 28/10/2008 - 18:44

Agree, not time yet. When/if it is time, a class action might be best directed at either the FSA, or FSC or both. Why? Well it was the FSC who in committee agreed to sanction the transfer of the 550 to London. They would not have done this without doing their homework, and without consultation with the FSA. They will have all their ratios, figures and correspondence embedded in commission minutes, which should be public record. These figures have either been calculculated incorrectly, in which case a class action is taken against the FSC, or if the FSA have given them incorrect information or misinterpreted the balance sheet of KFS(Uk), then an action might be against either the FSA, the FSC, or the FSC and the FSA jointly. My money, if I had any left, would be on the FSA messing up, which is why there is protracted "negotiation." If they have and we can get proof, then any threat of legal action would I imagine be settled out of court.
First step would be to get hold of the minutes of the FSC sanction. I'm not a lawyer and maybe we will find that the FSC and FSA are immune to prosecution? Would be interested in views from anyone with legal input.


I agree - Too early for legal action

  • klauseriksen
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 12:17

I also think it is too early for legal action. Whatever we do then we will not be able to resolve this legally before Nov 27th so if a political solution has not been found then the bank will go into default anyway. If no solution has been found before the bank goes into default then I think it is important to proceed with legal action as soon as possible after the default. I suggest a similar arrangement to the “In Flight Transfer” case where we all get together and contribute relative to the amount we have outstanding. In the meantime it could be useful for us all to do a bit of research with regards to which law firm we should approach after a potential default.


Legal action when time is right

  • beneix
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 12:29

Well put klauseriksen. I would be prepared to fund a group/class action.

It would be interesting to pursue any synergies to be had with Hopper's case in terms of joint strategies/sharing of costs, or at the very least we need to take some guidance, once we decide to take legal action, from the success or otherwise of Hopper's action up to that date.


i have to go along with that,

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Tue, 28/10/2008 - 16:58

i have to go along with that, give it a chance, in the scheme of things only two ( I agree hellish) weeks have passed, wait a little longer , please.


need for legal action asap

  • michael12
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 28/10/2008 - 16:10

i agree for need for legal action.
we are getting nearer to nov 27, when they will liquidate the company and we will be entitled to £50k spread over 15 years at least.
lets get legal representation for us all a group asap
thoughts?


In-flight Transfers

  • Hilbert
  • 25/10/08 31/08/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Tue, 28/10/2008 - 15:47

My money is caught as an in-flight transaction. I was too late to join the Hopper action. Are there others in this position and should we consider getting joint legal representation?


In favour of legal class action

  • ksfmoney
  • 24/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 28/10/2008 - 14:53

I am in favour of us all arranging a class action: the question is whether it needs to be specific or if it can be a scattergun approach and which is likely to succeed or at least get embarrassing media attention.

The various actions that come to mind are:

1) UK govt is discriminatory to a portion of UK citizens in bailing out some but not all (EU human rights and discrimination);

2) UK govt is planning to unlawfully (?) useseized upstreamed deposits to bail out UK banks and should return to original depositors in IOM;

3) UK govt misinterpreted Icelandic communications and seized UK Kaupthing bank assets when the freezing order just referred to Landsbanki (this is similar to the action being taken by City law firm Grundberg Mocatta Rakison for Kaupthing that Kaupthing has a strong case that the Treasury acted outside its powers under the Banking (Special Provisions) Act 2008 and the UK Government had rushed into the decision by mistakenly "lumping all the Icelandic banks together", and that Kaupthing would not otherwise have failed);

4) IOM regulatory bodies and individuals for inadequate supervision by allowing IOM subsidiary to invest all eggs in one basket in UK bank and not diversify risk (but they probably have no money to pay);

5) Iceland govt for poor regulation of their banking system allowing parent banks to grow too large;

6) Icelandic parent entities (and their now nationalised entities) to honour their parent guarantees;

7) Anything else you can think of !


Legal Action

  • DXB
  • 12/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Tue, 28/10/2008 - 16:52

An interesting thread, and one close to my heart. Some observations:

1) It's been a long time since I looked at the Civil Procedure Rules. Class action suits are a very American concept - probably worth checking whether such actions are recognised under English law (any litigators in the group?). (I am aware the 'in-flighters' are doing something collectively, but am unclear if this involves preparing a 'class action' suit or merely taking legal advice jointly.)

2) I'm not sure where this notion of using KSFIOM funds to bail out UK banks comes from. KSFIOM funds haven't been appropriated. KE depositors have been bailed out using the UK's own reserves. The KSFIOM account is still there, albeit frozen because KSFUK is in administration. If liquidated, KSFUK may not have sufficient assets to repay KSFIOM, in which case KSFIOM will recover what's available pari passu with other unsecured creditors.

3) The Icelandic government may have a claim against the UK government for the expropriation of Icelandic assets, but I don't see that either KSFIOM or the Manx authorities would do. (What Manx assets can HMG be said to have confiscated or deprived KSFIOM/the Manx authorities of? It would be difficult to argue, I think, that freezing funds in accordance with an established insolvency procedure is tantamount to expropriation.)

4) Unless some fundamental principle of the Icelandic constitution has been breached, I don't think the Icelandic government has a legal duty to ensure that the liabilities of its banking sector are confined to a certain percentage of their GDP/national reserves etc. It is not the function of the law to determine government policy!

5) As has been noted before, a guarantee is only as good as the credit-worthiness of the guarantor. The most cast-iron guarantee from a company with no money isn't worth the paper it's written on. We could sue Kaupthing hf, but it is in receivership and probably won't have the means to satisfy the judgment debt. The shareholders in a company aren't directly liable for the company's debts or defaults (the company is a separate legal person to its shareholders), so even if Kaupthing hf has been nationalised, the Icelandic government aren't legally responsible for honouring the guarantee.

We need to consider our potential defendants and causes of action a bit more carefully! Also probably worth bearing in mind that, even if we have valid legal claims, any redress obtained through the courts (e.g. damages) may not be commensurate with the desposits lost!


Class action?

  • cold-dose
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Tue, 28/10/2008 - 22:47

They are available in English procedure, but they're not the same as the US version that everyone knows about.


That's Depressing DXB

  • BustedFlat
  • 20/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 28/10/2008 - 20:55

DXB - from what you write we are simply screwed!! I'm not so sure. One point :

Kaupthing hf wasn't liquidated. When Iceland nationalized Kaupthing hf they nationalized the whole thing, not just the domestic portion. That means that the Icelandic government took on the foreign debt as part of the Kaupthing hf legal entity (no?). I believe that it was only afterwards that they convieniently seperated the foreign debts (correct me if I am wrong). I think that they need to honour those debts and that it is not unreasonable for the international community to expect them to do so - especially since they were happily reaping the benefits of the banking sector prior to the meltdown. Indeed no Icelandic bank should be allowed to re-enter the international banking arena until these debts are paid in full or at least a commitment to do so has been given.

I agree that hasty legal action here is probably pointless but I don't think that KSFIOM depositors need to feel as helpless as your email suggests.


Depressing?

  • cold-dose
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Tue, 28/10/2008 - 22:55

DXB's statements are realistic. False hope isn't real hope, and just because some of these avenues aren't as open as was thought doesn't mean that others aren't.

Look at this as a way of avoiding wasting time and effort in the wrong direction.

As for the nationalisation of Kaupthing:
- firstly, why the assumption that the debt of a limited company devolves upon the shareholder if the shareholder happens to be the government?
- secondly, there isn't any suggestion that this 'nationalisation' involved taking any ownership of Kaupthing. The Icelandic version of the FSA sacked the directors and put it's own people in control - something very akin to administrative receivership.

Iceland are quite explicit that they did not taken on the liabilities of their banks. They are also quite explicit that they will not be paying out an eyrir more than they have to by law.


Re Topics for Class Action

  • Hilbert
  • 25/10/08 31/08/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Tue, 28/10/2008 - 15:58

A topic not mentioned, but one which affects many people, is the money held as an in-flight transaction.


A class action is what is

  • Podcar
  • 13/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 28/10/2008 - 15:35

A class action is what is called for - as to what it entails, I think that's what a lawyer, based on the law and the circumstances, decides.

How do we take this forward?


Class Action

  • gerry paul johnson
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 28/10/2008 - 15:43

I made this suggestion earlier, with the (not so) tongue in cheek suggestion that we instruct Ms Cherie Blair to represent us.
I do not think that she could have any conflict of interest there.


Class Action

  • manx-person
  • 17/10/08 31/05/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 28/10/2008 - 15:58

I think whether Cherie Blair has a conflict is best answered by her!!!.
In any case, not withstanding the reforms made regarding access to the bar, in contentious matters, as I understand it the Barrister is required to be instructed by a solicitor and cannot take such instructions under the "Bar direct" initiatives


Manx-Person

  • Diver
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 28/10/2008 - 17:01

Apologies if this has been asked already...I cant seem to find an answer to this question: Are you a depositor in KSFIOM?

Thanks


diver

  • manx-person
  • 17/10/08 31/05/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 28/10/2008 - 18:17

You cant find an answer to this question?
I have completed the questionnaire on the user information.
And the answer is no, I am not a depositer.


no, he is concerned citizen

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Tue, 28/10/2008 - 17:07

no, he is concerned citizen and i belive a friend of john aspden, i could be wrong but i think thats what he said some time go


no, he is a concerned citzoen

  • manx-person
  • 17/10/08 31/05/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 28/10/2008 - 18:16

Not a friend of John Aspden !!!!!
I have met him in a business context, as I have with a number of the FSC staff
And I have dealt with the FSC over a number of years as a director of businesses that are licensed by them.
Which isnt a Bank by the way ;-)


alpoogies for the slight

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Tue, 28/10/2008 - 18:20

alpoogies for the slight there are so many things to keep track of!! but i thought you suggested that ou were favourable towards him, my mistake!


Well as unpopular as it might

  • manx-person
  • 17/10/08 31/05/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 28/10/2008 - 18:24

Well as unpopular as it might be on this forum I do have alot of respect for him.
But I have been critical in public of his decisions in the past.
Anyway no offence taken at your comment!!!


manx non was intended i

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Tue, 28/10/2008 - 18:28

manx non was intended i assure you, i for one value you contribution. i do not do paranoia! i read all i can and ask what i can


I Spy Strangers

  • gerry paul johnson
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 28/10/2008 - 17:39

Enough Said


I spy strangers - gerry paul johnson

  • manx-person
  • 17/10/08 31/05/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 28/10/2008 - 18:19

We are all strangers here...
That is the nature of this forum isnt it?
What are you alluding to? Ask me directly.
People on these forums assume too much


Yes, but with a common goal,

  • Captain Mainwaring
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 05:10

Yes, but with a common goal, save for those who aren't depositors.

You could be here for the following reasons:-
1) You want to support the cause and offer advice to depositors
2) You have a vested interested in the outcome of what happens to KSF IoM - maybe you want a good result, maybe you want a bad one. This could be because a result either way could harm or benefit you.
3) You just fancy a little dabble.

In any case, possibly you are best equiped to answer yourself without people having to resort to twenty questions.


Cunning

  • IdealisticRealist
  • 12/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 17:01

It would not be particularly cunning of Manx-person to come onto the forum and announce that he/she is not a depositor, if in fact he/she were intending to lead us astray. It would be very easy for him/her to claim that he/she is a depositor. Look: I had £10m in KSF IoM. Actually, I didn't. It was nothing like that amount, but nevertheless I'm out of pocket and as someone said back on the moneysavingexpert forum in the first crisis days, it is all relative (thanks Ocramsrazor for your sensible words back then by the way). Anyway, in-fighting on this forum is not going to solve anything, and if Manx-person has openly admitted that he/she is not a depositor, then we all know where we stand about his/her suggestions: take them or leave them.


Cunning

  • manx-person
  • 17/10/08 31/05/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 29/10/2008 - 17:21

Thanks for that.
For your information I have been to the bunker and met people there and offered to help.


I have met manx and he is a

  • expat
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Fri, 31/10/2008 - 10:17

I have met manx and he is a good man, he has as it happens somewhat changed his perspective since we talked! He is trying to do his bit to help. No like Gordon Brown he cannot feel our pain, but like one or two others he wants to try to alleviate it. It is difficult at times to recognise what has happened here, you only have to look at some of the responses from MPs and the treasury to see the state of denial and lack of knowledge that seeps through this affair. WE need to educate and get as much assisance as possible to end this.
When spoke to manx it was difficult for him to accpet some of what I said, but i have noticed a real change in his perspective since then, so......................