Well Mr Bell & Mr Spellman, late again

  • Tricky Dicky
  • 24/10/08 30/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
Posted: Fri, 03/04/2009 - 09:14

Well it looks like deja vu, IOMG seem incapable of producing this document for the Courts and us on time AGAIN. This is getting absolutely ridiculous, and shows to me the apathy, with which IOMG have treated us all along this trail.
To show my apathy to them I intend to vote against the SoA and show them that the last 5 months and £1,000,000 (of IOM tax payers money) has been totally wasted .

4.809525
Your rating: None Average: 4.8 (21 votes)

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

Spellman

  • Diver
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 03/04/2009 - 23:01

Unfortunately everyone is now getting a front row seat to see exactly what dealing with Mr Spellman is actually like. What is also unfortunate is that none of what is transpiring is at all surprising - he talks a great game, tells people what he thinks they want to hear, makes all sorts of promising noises and then goes away and does sweet FA.

Everything that is being done on the IoM is being done with only one aim - to get the best possible solution for the island irrespective of the damage it does to depositors. Mr Spellman is right at the centre of all of this and will continue to be so unless he is shown (in public and preferably in the House of Keys) to be 'full of it'.

It looks like the IoM have, once again, failed to produce documentation on time, rumours abound about whether or not they will produce 'the calculator' they promised and there is still no evidence of how any SoA will be better than liquidation - and we're now in April.

The fact of the matter is this; Mr Spellman, along with all the other 'dignitaries' on the IoM will do everything possible to preserve their own status. reputations and jobs and the rest of us can go to hell as far as they're concerned. Its only a matter of time before they start playing depositors against each other to further their own agendas and to push through their wishes for the future of KSFIOM.

I have to agree with a lot of other sentiments on this thread and say that depositors must act, if at all possible, to have Alix and Mr Spellman removed from their involvement because they're of no help to us at all. Whilst they are in place and whilst other misinformed depositors continue to place their trust and hopes in them we will not get what we deserve - 100% (or as close to it as possible) back.

I'm in a very lucky position in that I'm not anywhere near everything that's going on any more and I'm enjoying being able to watch events unfold without having to deal with them on a daily basis, but what I see is no real change at all. How are we better off now than in February? What more information are we being given now? The answer to both would seem to be a resounding 'nothing'! The IoM have had their overly indulgent Deemster give them an incredible amount of time to sort out this mess and to provide the info depositors need...surprise surprise...they've still come up with nothing.

The next court hearing will be interesting...if for no other reason than to see what new way the IoM approach the Deemster in order to buy yet more time....we should have liquidated in February and the same still stands.

All just my opinion...not of anyone in any group (core or otherwise).


Spellman & Alix

  • steveejeb
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 04/04/2009 - 14:02

Hello Diver, I see that the Mr. Spellman issue has got to you too, it was good to read your views. Having spent four months at the coal face trying to negotiate or get straight answers or any replies that were worth the paper they were written on, must have been a nightmare. I think perhaps the words of Upton Sinclair go a little way in describing what it must be like dealing with such people. Those words are:

"It is difficult for a man to understand something when his salary depends upon him not understanding it"

You are quite right in your assessment of the island's "dignitaries", all they are trying to do is desperately hang on to some kind of offshore status and maintaining themselves in their undeserved employment whilst trying to protect themselves from prosecution by ensuring the SoA is forced through. The latest SoA also highlights their "best efforts" for depositors as we now discover that (effectively) £7.2 million is being taken out of the pot and being given to the IoM in preference to the the depositors (the IoM had previously asserted it would be left in) http://chat.ksfiomdepositors.org/forum-topic/key-issue-against-soa#comme... As you rightly suggest, they are looking after themselves and not their "customers".

So here we are 6 months down the line. Yet another attempt at selling the SoA has emerged although this time the document has increased to 74 pages whilst the projected returns have gone down from 65% (mid January) to 60% now (early April). A more realistic current projection is probably 55% and of course that figure continues dropping. One has to ask oneself what exactly has been achieved in over 4 months since Alix partners were employed to find better alternatives to liquidation? The answer, just one idea, one plan, SoA. Nationalisation, part-nationalisation, loans, island bank assistance (the list goes on) have remained unconsidered.

The IoM hired Alix, Mr. Spellman seems to have been joined at the hip with them ever since they were employed, why? Their futile and expensive endeavours (£6,000/day) have done nothing for depositors or the IoM reputation. Unless there is some strange associated reason why either Alix or Spellman can't be removed, then they should be. He and they should go now,


Conspiracy of silence

  • bobwin
  • 23/12/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sat, 04/04/2009 - 14:00

Well said Diver --- nice to know you are still watching--they really are a bunch of Bankers--very big Bankers----ooops typo


At times like this

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Sat, 04/04/2009 - 01:34

I am often wrong, and those instances are always a matter of regret. When it turns out that I was right, quite apart from surprising myself it is often the cause of even greater regret, because I really wish that I hadn't been (matrimonial issues come to mind as an example). I fear that my long-vaunted criticisms of the IOM government may be an instance of the latter type.

I still hope that IOMG will do something to demonstrate that its often-voiced claim to be acting in the best interests of KSFIOM depositors is remotely true. Unless I have missed something, that is a vain hope.


IOMG arrogance

  • kiwi38
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Fri, 03/04/2009 - 14:35

Six months on and still the IOMG give us and their courts the "two fingers". How can IOMG fail to deliver their affidavits on time and face no consequences? Have the brothers Corlett agreed that practice is OK?

This needs to be aired in the UK media. We are being spat upon by the IOMG because we trusted them with our savings. It is clear HMG need to step in here and sort this out as IOMG are incapable.

Spellman must be removed. He was in charge of this and has done nothing but waste hundeds of thousands trying to sell a smokescreen to us via his friends in Alix and Partners.

Come on IOMG. Do you have any honour? Do you have any decency? "Darling" appeared to leave the door wide open in his last TSC statement for IOMG to ask for a loan to resolve the issue. Once the depositors are taken care of then IOMG, HMG, the Icelandic Govt and the IMF (as required) can sort this mess out behind closed doors.

Mr Bell - if you are reading this step in now. Take ownership of this issue. Stop playing games as the IOM people are the biggest losers alongside the KSFIOM Depositors. Sort it out. Underwrite our savings 100%. Save your economy and let the rest of us get on with our lives.


WE HAVE TO LET THE WORLD KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON..

  • hippychickrobbed
  • 03/11/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 03/04/2009 - 14:52

They have reduced people to poverty , christ how much more can we take


IOMG - how insensitive can you get?

  • anrigaut
  • 19/10/08 30/10/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 03/04/2009 - 12:19

There was a time, a few months ago, when I was naive enough to believe some of the assurances of Mr Bell and others- that they actually cared for our plight and were seeking a way to get us our money back. All trust has now gone. Not only has the IOMG/treasury spent huge sums of money to try to fob us off by concocting a half-baked scheme to avoid the shame of a bank in liquidation, now they cannot even produce their scheme on time for their own court. How do they think the desperate depositors might feel about that? Do they care? I think not. Contempt of court? Or do such details not matter on this island in the Irish sea?

Come on Mr Bell - you must know that your scheme is not worth the paper it is (not yet, it seems) written on. Indeed, maybe the fact you have apparently not produced it means that you have in fact abandoned it in favour of a real solution which returns 100% to all depositors - as all other responsible governments have done? I wait with baited breath!


More IOMG reverse spin

  • Tricky Dicky
  • 24/10/08 30/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 03/04/2009 - 10:07

Sorry guys - I think this has gone on long enough now, as I commented under the heading "Crystal Ball" about 3 weeks ago if and when we do see these documents, do not be suprised to see that the return has fallen again from 60/65p in the £1 to perhaps 55p in the £1.

I wish all those going to the court on 9th April good luck and a loud voice


Enough is Enough!!

  • sleepless uk
  • 16/01/09 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 03/04/2009 - 16:57

After trawling through the Gough affidavit,we really need the Dag lawyers to deal with this.On the face of it nothing has changed,there are only two winners here, IOMG and the lawyers,God knows how much Gough has charged for this load of rubbish,but it would keep my wife and i for about a year probably.There is nothing for us larger depositors only the prospect of years of stress waiting and watching the administrators and lawyers dip their bread. LIQUIDATION NOW and Bell and Co must be exposed to the world for the inbred cheapskates they are.


More lawyer speak

  • Tricky Dicky
  • 24/10/08 30/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 03/04/2009 - 17:19

well you are right sleepless uk - it also going to be interesting to see the PROMISED comparison document between the SoA and DCS and the online calculator.
Mind you promises to provide info and IOMG actually providing them do not seem to go together.


Re: More lawyer speak

  • Ally
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Fri, 03/04/2009 - 21:42

TD

Apparently there will now NOT be an online calculator. I beleive the lawyers have advised them against it.

There are a couple of spreadsheets doing the rounds amongst some depositors that pretty accurately reflect the estimated payouts of the SoA and of liquidation/DCS based on the information available on both.
I know a couple of these spreadsheets have been viewed by people who should have a very good idea of how liquidation and the SoA will work and they thought the spreadsheets worked. The SoA real is a pile a rubbish but now matter how you play with the numbers I can't see how liquidation/DCS can be better than the propsed SOA (my view there being based purely on the amount and timing of funds flow back to depositors).


More lawyer speak 2

  • Tricky Dicky
  • 24/10/08 30/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 03/04/2009 - 22:12

Hi Ally,
Thats what I understand - but they (the calculator and comparison) were promised by IOMG/IOMT/Alix, and as yet I have seen no official statement saying they will not produce them - after they said they would - its not difficult to put it into black & white just so we know exactly where we stand. If they say they are going to do it either do it or say they are not - its simple.

I also understand that there are some 'homegrown' DAG spreadsheets doing the rounds - but homegrown they remain, they will not be based on the figures used by IOMG/IOMT/Alix, so they will not be able to be compared side by side with the words of the latest affidavit.

As regards which is better or worse, the new 70 odd page SoA to me is now more unclear than the previous 6 page one. It seems as though the whole office of some solicitors has had a go at it and tried to out do each other with wordage and logorrhoea.

Because of the delays, the arrogance of certain personnel, the stupidity of others, the fact that this mess could have been sorted out more quickly, I personally will NEVER vote for a SoA - why because it will cause those, who have brought myself and all the other depositors to this point, deserve some level of their own medicine. As I have said before its now more about justice than money, and this is my way of having some justice. If the SoA fails it will be interesting to see how certain people will explain spending 6 months and £1million + of IOM tax payers money on a white elephant. The IOMG could have had 10,000 ambassadors by Dec 2008 if they did the right thing, to me now they have 10,000 antagonists, and they could have also saved an extra £5 million on their 'International PR what a good place to put your money' budget. It seems some personnel lack the long term view and have been looking only at short term gains.


re: More lawyer speak 2

  • Ally
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Fri, 03/04/2009 - 22:23

TD

I wouldn't disagree with a lot of your sentiments at all. If the SoA fails I think there will be nothing to explain as far as IoMG go in relation to the SoA. They will just say they tried their best and it was always up to creditors who voted against it. There will be no uproar amongst IoM taxpayers as to why £1m was spent on an abortive SoA. £1m is pretty samll fry even for a govt as small as the IoM, but that is just my opinion.

As for the spreadsheets, I know of one at least that has been run past Alix partners, based on a presentation they did. So yes the figures they were using and which have ended up in the affidavit.


Promised to the Courts?

  • kiwi38
  • 11/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Fri, 03/04/2009 - 17:43

TD - I can't recall the detail of this but didn't one of the last IOMG affidavits promise to the Courts that a clear comparison document between the SOA and DCS (liquidation) would be provided to the KSFIOM depositors? Can DAG check the past affidavits to confirm this point as it could be important next week to show the DD yet more contempt of his court and utter disregard for the depositors.


@IoMG reverse spin

  • IceCrusher
  • 14/10/08 25/10/11
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 03/04/2009 - 10:19

We know already that the 24 month repayment has been dropped from 35% to 30%, but the latest word from Spellman is that 65% was still being anticipated. We await with bated breath...

Let's hope the Deemster gives those in the Court benches a chance to speak (as Fight theft bravely did on a previous occasion). Perhaps we should draft a suitable, succinct, but telling statement for some bold soul to read out on our behalf?


Affidavits Late Again

  • steveejeb
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 03/04/2009 - 09:40

I have been looking on the site and wondering when the affidavits would be published here. It now appears that once again the IoMG have failed to produce their documentation in a timely manner by the due date i.e. yesterday. Talk about disrespect, they seem to have neither the wit nor competence to do the right thing by their own courts. What chance therefore for the depositors!

It beggars belief that the IoM G seem happy to ride rough shod over their own court procedures and show such contempt towards its own legal process by failing once again to have their documents presented to the court in time. No wonder the likes of Spellman and co. cannot be trusted to find a timely 100% solution to our plight as even beyond the 11th hour they are still trying to fiddle their own presentation into something that they want to look acceptable. I would hope that DD Corlett will look upon this in a very poor light.


remove Alix and Partners and Mr. Spellman

  • KA
  • 14/10/08 29/06/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 03/04/2009 - 10:20

remove Alix and Partners and Mr. Spellman

Alix and Partners and Mr. Spellman have done nothing for us. We need a second opinion brought in. We need consultants who are prepared to start from the premise that 100% return is possible and ( if absolutely essential ) work back from that.
We do NOT want a firm brought in for damage limitation by the IOM .
Alix and Partners and Mr Spellman's behaviour has been as shameful as the IOM's


Late AGAIN

  • tsunamivictim
  • 11/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 03/04/2009 - 10:44

I agree wholeheartedly. It looks as if Alix & Co were just a smokescreen to hope we would accept their pittance and disappear. Now the SOA is late again!!! How do we get rid of these jokers!


Changes

  • Tricky Dicky
  • 24/10/08 30/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 03/04/2009 - 11:19

If I remember correctly, back in the early days Mr Bell was saying that there could be a way for 100% return - if I'm wrong I stand corrected - or if anyone has the information to hand it might be good to reproduce it again here.
Perhaps if Mr Spellman and Alix Partners were not on the scene then Mr Bell might be able to be shown as a man of his 'old words' and arrange this 100% repayment as originally planned.
Come on Mr Superhero act now!


Contempt of Court

  • bobwin
  • 23/12/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 03/04/2009 - 09:56

Does this exist in the IOM?

Apparently NOT

Wish I had the DD's addy.