Voting response

  • Tricky Dicky
  • 24/10/08 30/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
Posted: Mon, 18/05/2009 - 17:26

Hi Members
According to Royal Skandia 50% of its members have voted of which 90% voted for the SoA. Apparently there are 600 members of Skandia which would mean that 30 people voted against the SoA.
Within this DAG there are 67 members registered within the DAG Group for Royal Skandia.
So if any of this Group voted AGAINST the SoA and said so to Royal Skandia could you please put a comment below saying that.
If we find there is more than 30 'AGAINSTS' comments then we know that Royal Skandia figures are incorrect.

If any of the figures above are incorrect please let me know

Your rating: None Average: 4.3 (7 votes)

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

RSK Bonds: Vote Against the SOA

  • stornaway
  • 28/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 19/05/2009 - 08:34

Trustee holding RSK Bond of GBP440k with GBP250k on deposit with KSFIOM instructed RSK to vote AGAINST the SOA.

"If any of the figures above are incorrect please let me

  • chris watson
  • 23/10/08 31/03/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 19/05/2009 - 05:25


Seeing as no one else has flagged this up, and it's only an observation, but I believe "OVER 50% of its members have voted". If so, and if there are only 600 members of Skandia, this means between "30-60 members could have voted AGAINST", and not just 30.

Anyway, like I said, just an observation and meaningless if people's minds are already made up that the vote was rigged/Royal Skandia are lying.

More RS Bondholders against SOA

  • Eric
  • 01/11/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 19/05/2009 - 05:19

Two names on our bond and we informed RS we were against the SOA.

Royal Skandia bond holder against SoA

  • backtowork
  • 02/11/08 08/06/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 19/05/2009 - 01:11

I wrote to Royal Skandia and informed them I was against the SoA. Where can they be getting these numbers?


Royal Skandal

  • mortobri
  • 20/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 18/05/2009 - 22:00

I voted AGAINST the SOA


  • hkbased
  • 26/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 19/05/2009 - 00:37

1 vote against the SoA here too

Royal Skandia

  • Blue
  • 30/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 18/05/2009 - 18:20

Joint Bondholders and we voted AGAINST SoA.

No vote for SoA

  • cypheath
  • 01/11/08 30/10/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 18/05/2009 - 18:02

My partner and I both voted NO for our two seperate deposits and I posted my response to them on the EPS 2 and Bondholders thread earlier today.


  • chb
  • 10/10/08 15/10/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 18/05/2009 - 17:41

Three names on our bond. We voted against the SoA

I voted against joint bond ,

  • humphrey
  • 10/10/08 01/03/11
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 18/05/2009 - 17:31

I voted against joint bond , sent skandia both names
One relative voted against, skandia trust.

I voted against SOA.

  • bigrock
  • 10/11/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 19/05/2009 - 08:22

I voted against the SOa (single bond £35,000). I find it very hard to belive that 90% of replies received by Skandia voted for the SOA. Is there anyway of getting an independent verifcation of the voting result?

Todays Meeting

  • giveus backourfunds
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Tue, 19/05/2009 - 12:21

Hi, Just back from the meeting and sorry to say for some but the SOA looks like it will get the required votes.

The 3 classes of voters that Mike Simpson had proposed clearly favoured the SOA in all 3 classes. (These were proxy votes) I would say of all the votes being submitted 80% for and 20% against.

In total I would guess about 100 people were there with the majority being class 2 and listening to them they seemed to be voting for the SOA.

I am sure someone on this site will have the exact figures though.


  • bobwin
  • 23/12/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 19/05/2009 - 15:12

Looks like you might be wrong give us back ---check out the DST report

I also voted NO to the SOA via RS IOM(see attached)

  • madmax836
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 18/05/2009 - 19:19

From: Madmax836
Sent: 30 April 2009 14:21
To: RSK FM KSF Feedback
Subject: FW: RE: Bond ................

Good afternoon

I refer to your letter dated 22/4/09 from Mark Halewood General Manager, re KSF IOM.

My name is Madmax836 my Bond Policy No is ............................

I would like to reject the SOA as proposed by the IOM government, due to the fact

  1. Why after the depositors receive 70% of their money, does the IOM gov then take their money back in full and only then, they would distribute the remainder to the depositors (if there is any left)
  2. After the news from E&Y receivers in Britain for KSF, that they expect at least 50% of the monies to be returned to the IOM. The IOM gov then up their SOA from 60% to 70%
  3. I feel that the IOM gov as with every other gov in Europe ensure that ALL depositors are guaranteed their 100% back. Then and only then, they can take any monies that they have put out back. We as innocent depositors should not suffer. If they do not , I feel that the bad press will affect their financial institution forever.

I look forward to hearing from you

Best Regards