Write to your MP template by IceCrusher

  • IceCrusher
  • 14/10/08 25/10/11
  • a depositor
  • Offline
Posted: Sun, 31/05/2009 - 11:04

I have taken the excellent template issued by DST and vamped it up a little using some of the suggestions from Lucky Jim. Let us all try once again to get under the skin of these soulless politicians. Please feel free to use and modify as you see fit.

Dear MP

The demise of Kaupthing Singer & Friedlander (Isle of Man) (“KSFIOM”)

I am writing to you in connection with the demise of Kaupthing Singer and Friedlander (KSFIoM) an Icelandic subsidiary bank that up until October 2008 operated in the British Crown Dependency of the Isle of Man. As you are no doubt aware, it is public knowledge that regulatory failures have been occasioned by both the Financial Services Authority (FSA) of the UK and the Financial Supervision Commission (FSC) of the Isle of Man (IoM). It is equally clear that significant political maneuvering has taken place to avoid articulating direct and honest answers to the many questions that have been raised in respect of the whole Kaupthing debacle.

It is imperative that an independent inquiry is carried out in both jurisdictions to fully determine the events surrounding the insolvency of KSFIoM. The UK Government’s palpable reluctance to come clean on these matters indicates no other course of action remains to find the truth and restore rights and properly recompense those savers who have been grossly and unjustly penalised as a direct result of the actions taken by a British Prime Minister and his Chancellor. I therefore make this appeal to your sense of propriety; that you personally make representation to the UK Treasury; the UK Justice Department; and the Government of the Isle of Man to insist upon a complete explanation of the human tragedy wrought upon ten thousand ordinary decent British subjects. The effect of this dire situation has not diminished with time – it cannot, because the majority of those affected are either retired or nearing retirement. This state of affairs continues to bring severe distress and financial penury eight months after Chancellor Darling uttered those fateful words “The Icelandic government — believe it or not — told me yesterday that they have no intention of honouring their obligations here.”

•An unprecedented set of circumstances instigated by the UK Government during October 2008 resulted in the collapse of an erstwhile healthy, solvent bank. Why did the FSA not follow form in its understandings with the IoM regulators and adhere to common agreements rather than avoid confidential consultation? Failure to advise the FSC about its intentions regarding KSFIoM compares starkly with a similar situation worked far more amicably between the British co-regulators when Bradford & Bingley (IoM) was in difficulty.

•Why did the FSC and the FSA (the latter were closely monitoring the Icelandic financial situation at the time) permit or perhaps even instigate the transfer of more than fifty percent of KSFIoM's assets to Kaupthing Singer and Friedlander Ltd (KSFUK)?

This transfer:
• was made to another single bank within the same group as KSFIoM;
• went without any form of protection for KSFIoM and;
• left the assets exposed to an insolvency of Kaupthing h.f. in exactly the same way as if the monies had remained in KSFIoM.

•An ‘Arrow’ report is said to have been prepared by the FSA giving KSFUK a clean bill of health just one month prior to the UK Government's action in rendering this bank insolvent. When will the FSA publish the findings of this report?
•On what basis did the UK Government implement S.I 2674 thereby providing its Treasury minister with overriding control of more than 50% of KSFIoM’s assets transferred with the assistance of the FSA for ‘safekeeping’ to the UK in the weeks preceding UK Government action? (Assistance that was similarly and most coincidentally afforded to the Guernsey regulator). This overarching prerogative was not simply withheld from the Treasury Select Committee (TSC) by Mr Darling during questioning in November 2008, but defiantly denied.
•Court papers relating to the administration of KSFUK were sealed at the time the order was made to transfer assets from this bank to the Dutch subsidiary ING. This highly unusual step was implemented at the behest of the UK Treasury and remains in force today. Now that the cloak and dagger games with Iceland are at an end and the UK Government attempts to behave in an adult manner in its relations with Iceland, why are these papers still sealed?
•Why did the UK Treasury set up two, Bank of England trust accounts, almost two weeks before the events of 8 October 2008 in which money being transferred out of KSFIoM was secretly held?
•Exactly how did the UK Treasury arrange the transfer of the retail business of KSFUK – a significant and complex transaction with a value of some £2.6 billion pounds (being the sum of deposits held by 160,000 Edge customers) within hours of the court order being made? To say nothing of the 22,000 Heritable customers also moved to ING whilst 10,000 KSFIoM customers were just dumped cold…
•Why did the IoM FSC change its handbook and regulations in the months just prior to the collapse of KSFIoM – to give itself immunity from liability?
•Why does KSFIoM remain the only Kaupthing subsidiary in the world that has not recompensed its depositors in full?
•Why did the Ministry of Justice – being the department responsible for dealing with Iceland on the IoM’s behalf – delegate this responsibility to the UK Treasury, which was itself gravely implicated in the events leading up to the insolvency of KSFUK? These very events have opened the way for Kaupthing h.f. to be granted leave for a judicial review in the UK High Court. The Treasury is inherently conflicted in this matter and should not have been so delegated, nor should it have accepted this duty. Why then did the Government of the Isle of Man limply accept this unseemly situation instead of insisting upon the authority of the Justice Ministry to properly undertake this State responsibility?
•Why does the UK Government not urge the IoM Government to uphold the TSC’s recommendations and thus work together towards a common solution that will bring mental and financial relief to KSFIoM depositors in line with the commonly adopted best practice of recompensing retail savers in full?

The actions of the IoM Government over the last eight months suggest that it will do almost anything to conceal the truth and ensure that its island; its regulatory body; and its politicians are protected regardless of the consequences for its customers who deposited their money in good faith with a regulated bank on the IoM.

Justice, transparency and truth are what KSFIoM’s depositors seek. Eight months of inexplicable delays and obfuscation by the responsible authorities have served only to heighten depositors’ despair at the tactics used by official bodies that ought to have protected saver’s interests, but which have instead increased the anguish of thousands now facing an uncertain future. KSFIoM depositors have done nothing more than place their family and retirement savings in a bank located in a AAA-rated British economy regulated by a body frequently commended for its performance. Yet depositors have been unable to access their savings for eight months now, whilst in every other major jurisdiction in the world – including Iceland itself - retail depositors have been protected against the consequences of the financial crisis on the global economy. This intolerable situation has brought untold mental anxiety to thousands.

After suffering acute distress and a deep sense of hopelessness for the past eight months, depositors firmly believe that they justly deserve the full and proper attention of those UK politicians elected to represent them, and that the Ministry of Justice should now uphold its sovereign duty and properly conduct its responsibilities in respect of international relations between the Crown Dependency of the Isle of Man and Iceland with a view to securing agreements over a Guarantee that was issued by Kaupthing h.f. to mollify depositors concerns and encourage their continued patronage of the bank. The Resolution Committee has to realise that the issue of such guarantees is viewed very much more seriously than mere commercial nectar glibly given in enticement – lest we undermine the very notion held dear in every connotation of the word ‘guarantee’.

All KSFIoM depositors are determined to be reunited with 100% of their money and will not rest until the truth behind this debacle has been exposed for all to see – as recently demonstrated by the depositors’ rejection of the IoM Treasury’s proposal for a scheme of arrangement which would have prevented further legal initiatives into those matters outlined above. The way is now open for depositors to rigorously pursue these issues, and once the proceeds of liquidation start finding their rightful way back to depositors, then so they will have the collective financial clout to act in unison against the perpetrators of wrongdoing: British and Icelandic.

Accordingly, I hereby request that you forcefully propose that a full inquiry be made into the circumstances that brought about the demise of KSFUK and KSFIoM and which will be conducted under a totally independent committee.

Kindly take this case to the appropriate authorities and do your utmost to ensure that truth and honesty prevail in the governance of the British Isles for the sake of all our destinies. Please do not pass this letter to a subordinate for some form of standard reply; I swear that you will have me on your doorstep if you do.


Your rating: None Average: 5 (14 votes)

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

This is what I intend to send out to all and sundry - any commen

  • steveservaes
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Mon, 01/06/2009 - 09:30


Kaupthing Singer & Friedlander UK/ Isle of Man

I am writing to you with all respect to ask you to assist in righting a great wrong inflicted on depositors of the Isle of Man Kaupthing Bank.

Last October the bank was placed into provisional liquidation in the IOM as a direct consequence of Kaupthing UK (a regulated UK bank, regulated by the UK FSA) being placed into administration by the UK government, after the UK government transferred its Kaupthing “Edge” depositors to ING, using powers under terrorist legislation and a secret sealed order, in order to “save the UK banking system” (“the Intervention”).

This impacted very heavily on the Kaupthing IOM Bank since over half that bank’s retails deposits were deposited with the UK Bank. These could not be recovered because of the administration of that UK Bank. Things were worsened due to the UK Government imposing a unique requirement a part of the secret sealed orders: that the administrators of the UK Bank give full priority for 6 months to transferring all UK retail depositors to ING Bank. The UK Government, either for party political reasons and/or “to save the UK banking system” had already agreed to pay back all UK retail depositors in full and stand in their shoes for reclaiming deposits from the UK Bank in administration. The UK Government subsequently took control of the administration creditors committee and used its voting power to deny the IOM Bank, being the UK Bank’s biggest “real” creditor (not counting the artificial creditor status of HMG arising through its pay-off of all other retail depositors in the UK Bank).

The administrators of the UK Bank have finally reported back to its creditors, including the IOM Bank (“KSFIOM”) stating that they expect to pay back a minimum of 50p in the pound to creditors. Given the large exposure of KSFIOM to this loss of up-to-50% of the monies with the UK Bank, KSFIOM’s depositors stand to lose very substantial parts of their life savings.

The IOM has not felt capable of fully compensating those depositors although it has agreed to make sure all recover their deposits up to £50,000. The IOM may feel reluctance to go further, since it can strongly be argued that the potential losses to KSFIOM depositors have arisen directly as a result of matters within the control of HMG in the UK and that fairness and natural justice direct HMG in the UK to make up any further losses to the KSFIOM depositors.

The case for this can be made out whether or not KSF UK lost the KSFIOM money (and that of its other non-retail depositors, councils, companies and charities) because of its dealings before the Intervention because of bad dealings, or wholly because of the Intervention.

The case for compensation if the fall of KSF UK was due to bad dealings and not the Intervention

KSFUK was a UK-bank, subject to FSA regulation.
Contrary to what Gordon Brown has said in relation to enquiries about Christies Hospital, KSFUK was not a bank under Icelandic Regulation.
Depositors in KSFUK were entitled to UK FSA Deposit Protection.
However, if KSFUK has lost 50% of its assets this points to extraordinary levels of bad dealing within that bank.
It is to be remembered that KSFUK is a deposit-taking institution and not a private hedge fund.
The FSA had a duty to its depositors, including KSFIOM, to ensure monies were not subjected to unreasonable risks. The loss of 50% of the bank’s assets suggest that they were subjected to unreasonable risks – and there are stories circulating in the press as to extraordinary risk taking, including significant inter-company loans and offshore loan arrangements.
The FSA were also on-notice to take special care in relation to KSFUK due to :-

(1) the fact that the former MD of Singer & Friedlander advised them in advance that he did not think the new Kaupthing management at takeover were fit persons for the roles they were undertaking;
(2) special arrangements made by countries allowing Kaupthing to set up deposit-takers (UK, Germany, Holland) to supposedly prevent over-exposure to Iceland;
(3) the launching of the “Edge” savings accounts in 2008 offering headline rates at a time when the markets would struggle to generate sufficient profits to pay them, at a time it should have been known to the FSA that there were concerns about Iceland (Kaupthing Hf – the parent) needing to suck in deposits. Early in 2008 the UK FSA warned the IOM FSC about this, leading to the channelling of KSFIOM funds into KSFUK rather than Kaupthing Hf.

Notwithstanding this need to take special care it seems the FSA failed to do so. Had it done so, the creditors of KSFUK would not face losing 50% of their monies with KSFUK. KSFIOM and its retail depositors would not face this.

How was this money lost and what did the FSA know about it? Will we ever found out or will we forever be bound by sealed administration orders issued under secret anti-terrorist powers behind closed doors?

I would humbly submit to you that transparency and justice should not permit a government to prevent the truth of such an affair reaching the public, especially, as here, where members of the public have been deprived of their savings.

Accordingly, I would ask for your support in (a) unsealing all relevant orders and bringing all information into the public domain; and (b) establishing a public enquiry into what happened within KSFUK and the FSA during the relevant period; and (c) in the event that failure by the FSA to regulate KSFUK as per its statutory duties is found to have caused the losses suffered by KSFIOM’s depositors (through the loss caused to KSFIOM) approving full compensation to KSFIOM and its depositors.

The case for compensation if the fall of KSF UK was not due to bad dealings but due to the Intervention

If the KSFUK losses were caused by the Intervention – in that it led to defaults on contracts etc that generated liabilities for KSFUK rendering it insolvent - then the case for compensation by HMG is even stronger.

(1) Mr Darling generated a collapse of confidence in Icelandic banks that was not justified by the conversations he had with his Icelandic counterparts. Those conversations related to depositor compensation in respect of “Icesave”, a bank who (according to recent estimates) will have sufficient assets to repay its savers in full anyway. So depositor compensation should not have been an issue. Mr Darling failed at the time to make clear that KSFUK was a UK Bank with UK depositor protection (ie 100%) and could be said to have used this tarring of all Icelandic banks with the same brush as a means of pushing the Icelandic Government in relation to depositor protection. So it could strongly be argued that Mr Darling chose to sacrifice KSFUK for the benefit of the UK tax-payer in relation to broader dealings with Iceland.

(2) Mr Darling justified the transfer of KSFUK deposits to ING as being necessary under terrorism legislation/ transfer of banking rules “to save the UK banking system” or similar (although we haven’t seen the order, which is kept sealed). If this was indeed necessary, then this was done for the benefit of the UK tax-payer in that saving the UK banking system saved the UK tax-payer many many billions of pounds. In this sense, it could be considered as akin to an act of salvage, where one part is sacrificed for the benefit of the whole, or an act of requisition in war. In both these cases, the party whose property is sacrificed is, under English law, entitled to look to the beneficiary for compensation.

(3) Mr Darling then stepped into the shoes of the paid-off KSFUK depositors. To benefit the UK tax-payer he has used his vote to exclude KSFIOM from the creditors’ committee of KSFUK, despite KSFIOM having far-and-away the biggest “real” claim. Presumably, the reason is to try and control the administration in such a manner as will limit KSFIOM’s claim against KSFUK and generate a better “pot” with which to compensate the UK Treasury.

(4) To benefit the UK depositors and tax-payers Mr Darling imposed a 6-month unique overriding objective on the KSFUK administration, during which Ernst and Young were ordered to put the interests of the depositors being transferred to ING first and leave other creditors, including KSFIOM, to one side.

(5) And it is not to be forgotten that in advance of the Intervention, the FSA stopped following their agreed and civilised code of co-operation with the Manx FSC (used recently with Bradford & Bingley) since this would have led to the Manx FSC being notified of the true position within KSFUK, thereby allowing KSFIOM to be notified and remove their exposure to it. For the benefit of the UK-taxpayer the most-uncivilised step above was taken, so that the funds of KSFIOM would swell the pot available to KSFUK’s creditors, principally the UK Treasury, who would otherwise, after stepping into the shoes of UK retail depositors, have much less to pay back their monies given under the UK compensation scheme. In effect, the FSA/UK Treasury did a “sting” on the IOM, of a kind Gordon Brown had just criticised the USA for in respect of Lehman Brothers. In fact, whether or not the losses within KSFUK were caused by bad dealings before the Intervention or by the Intervention itself, in either case the deliberate decision by the UKFSA/HMG to lay aside the usual communications procedure with the IOM FSC (not only a fellow part of Her Majesty’s realms but a part for which the UK Ministry of Justice has constitutional responsibility) prevented the IOM FSC from advising KSFIOM to remove its exposure to KSFUK, thereby allowing the retail depositors of KSFIOM to do so. Had this happened – and it would have in any decent and responsible system between friendly states with an ongoing regulatory relationship – the problem would not have arisen. The deliberate failure to apply the usual system – some might call it a “trick” – effectively means the retail depositors in the IOM compensate the UK tax-payers for the losses either caused by poor UK FSA regulation of KSFUK or the UK Government’s Intervention.

Accordingly, in relation to the Intervention it appears that KSFUK may have been made a sacrifice for the preservation of the UK banking system. To the extent it was – by how many billions (maybe trillions) of pounds has the UK state benefited from the sacrifice of the monies of the non-retail (and hence uncompensated) depositors of that bank? Wouldn’t any reasonable person conclude that it was fair that the UK state should not only compensate but thank those non-retail depositors for the anguish they have been through in order to benefit the UK state in the last 8 months? Who has the shoulders to better bear this loss – a small group of (often elderly) depositors in the IOM or the UK taxpayer, who has either benefited from all this or elected those responsible for causing it?


Whether the losses in KSFUK that fall so heavily on the retail depositors of KSFIOM were caused by poor regulation of KSFUK by the UK FSA or by the Invention there is a very strong argument that the UK should compensate the savers in KSFIOM for the reasons above.

I respectfully submit that the bare minimum the KSFIOM depositors deserve in this case is a transparent public inquiry into exactly how and why this happened. It is not British, transparent or just that this be hidden behind sealed and secret orders. It is not consistent with the Human Rights legislation introduced by this Government.

To the extent that there has been communication about this matter from HMG thus far it has sought to obfuscate and to point to the letter of the law. In relation to recent banking and other matters, HMG have declared that not only the letter but also the spirit of the law (including natural justice and fairness) should be adhered to.

It should also be borne in mind that despite the UK Government’s constitutional duties to represent the IOM in foreign affairs there has apparently been no serious attempt to oblige the Icelandic government (who have subverted normal insolvency law in taking all the parent company Kaupthing Hf’s assets to compensate retail depositors of that bank, leaving probably nothing for unsecured creditors such as KSFIOM who have the “benefit” of a parental guarantee from Kaupthing Hf) to treat creditors of the nationalised Kaupthing hf parent fairly and in the same way as Icelandic retail depositors.

Furthermore, the depositors are most upset by Alistair Darling’s slurs about “tax-havens” and the like, used as an excuse to cover-up the actions taken and justify them. The IOM is in the same bracket as the UK as fair as international standards are concerned and Mr Darling’s words seem to invite the construction “if people bank in the IOM they have no rights and the UK can take whatever steps they wish, with whatever consequences follow, with no recourse”. As a resident of the IOM and a tax-payer (and previously a tax-payer all my life in the UK) I am appalled by Mr Darling’s words and the implications following from them – the history of the world warns what consequences may follow where politicians first insult before then throwing aside all normal rules of ethical behaviour.

I would also point out the incorrectness of the argument that no compensation should be paid to IOM savers because they do not pay UK tax : their money has been invested through KSFUK not locally in the IOM and KSFUK pays UK corporation tax on the profits made with their money.

In the event that the public enquiry above shows that the losses of KSFIOM were called by either poor regulation of KSFUK and/or by the Intervention I respectfully ask that you do all you can to secure the depositors of KSFIOM due compensation. These have been stressful times for the world. The dust has now settled somewhat on the fury of last October. The UK banking system appears to have been “saved”. Justice now demands that those whose future was flung into that breach are given the respect, thanks and restitution that their sacrifice and their noble patience since last Autumn cries out for.

I look forward to hearing from you.

MY ex MP's reply to Ice's template letter ........

  • cypheath
  • 01/11/08 30/10/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 02/06/2009 - 12:54

Have added this intro as I'm so p****d off with the whole lot of them, my ex MP is on the list & now on Mat's Wall of Shame too.

Dear Mr XXXX,

As Westminster reels under the ongoing naming and shaming row of MP's expenses, it seems only fair that you and your colleagues on both sides of the house, make some attempt at reparation to those honest hard working people who have been cheated out of their lifetime savings by the actions of your own government under the leadership of Prime Minister Gordon Brown and his Chancellor, Alistair Darling.

We depositors have been branded "tax evaders" by the very same Alistair Darling who has been implicated in this affair, along with many others from all parties, you know who they are!

The list is growing by the day, will justice be served in dealing with these wrong doers?

I think not, just as it has not been served for those unfortunate people who now eight months into the scandal of KSFIOM, are no nearer to being re-united with their money 100% unlike all UK Residents and other non UK depositors in Dunfermline Building Society, Northern Rock, Bradford & Bingley (inc B&B IoM), RBS, HBOS etc etc.

We cannot stand down at the next election and retire with a very handsome pension.

Due to this debacle some of us no longer own ONE house let alone two or possibly more homes on which a nice fat PROFIT has been turned at the tax payers' expense.

We cannot LEGALLY avoid or evade anything and get off scott free, say sorry, step down and walk away.

Some of us are homeless and destitute, some are suicidal and ill, many are old, infirm, long retired people who have worked all their lives for Queen (some for King) and Country only to have their life's work stolen from them in the years when they should be relaxing and reaping the benefits of all that hard work.

How can Nadine Dorris begin to liken the plight of MP's being suicidal at having been caught out in the current scandal, to that of someone who has lost everything - home, family, future this is what we are talking about HERE!

The demise of Kaupthing Singer & Friedlander (Isle of Man) (“KSFIOM”)

I have written to you before pleading for justice and common decency as you were my MP in XXXX before I moved abroad. Yes, you did reply once, unhelpfully but I have heard nothing else from you despite subsequent cries for HELP. Perhaps now the boot is on the other foot, you and your colleagues may see fit to get off you backsides and actively do something to right this inhumane wrong!

Once again I precis the whole sorry story which definitely smells of the Kipper which we depositors feel we have been done up like.

The demise of Kaupthing Singer and Friedlander (KSFIoM) an Icelandic subsidiary bank that up until October 2008 operated in the British Crown Dependency of the Isle of Man and was financially healthy according to its directors who re-assured worried customers ringing in with enquiries as late as the day before the bank was placed into provisional liquidation, that all was well.

As you are no doubt aware.................


I have today received this reply from a somewhat rattled MP !!! to my letter of 31 May. I cannot see anything in my letter which is insulting to him, can you?


The last time I replied to you, and other investors in KSFIOM, I found myself pilloried and abused on some strange website. I have huge sympathy for your plight and the plight of so many others who have lost everything, but it really doesn't help me and my colleagues when you tell us how appalling and criminal we all are and then ask for our help!

I DO understand what you must be going through, never mind what rubbish you are reading about MPs in the press. Insulting me and others is not going to win you more sympathy and help.

However, leaving all this aside, I really do want to see justice for you. The question is what can best be done to help? I have already made representations to the Chancellor both personally and in writing. I have also raised this matter with the Icelandic Government, many of whose members I know personally, however, after previous correspondence with you and other KSFIOM investors I find that my attempts to get the Icelandic Government involved are ridiculed and dismissed on this website I mentioned.

I will arrange to meet a Treasury Minister as soon as possible to try and find out exactly what the UK Government is doing and what hope there is for the investors and depositors in KSFIOM to get their money back as soon as possible. I will also pursue the Icelandic Government as well, even if you and others think this is not the way forward.

As I said, I very much understand your anger and bitterness at the way in which you believe the UK Government has let you down, and it is imperative that you do receive the justice you deserve.

Finally, you said that I would have you on my doorstep if I passed this email on to a 'subordinate'. I have not done so, but nevertheless you are most welcome to come and see me in Leeds or in London if you want to talk about this further. Sometimes, personal contact is far better than correspondence, so if you'd like to meet when you're next in the UK (I know you live in Cyprus) please contact me to arrange a suitable time and date.

Yours sincerely,

Fabian Hamilton
Labour Member of Parliament for Leeds North East

House of Commons
London, SW1A 0AA

Telephone: 020 7219 3493
Constituency: 0113 249 6600
Fax: 0113 235 9866

Great amendments Icecrusher.

  • sleeplessnight
  • 10/10/08 30/06/09
  • unspecified
  • Offline
  • Sun, 31/05/2009 - 12:11

Great amendments Icecrusher.

Well vamped Ice.

  • anrigaut
  • 19/10/08 30/10/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Sun, 31/05/2009 - 11:54

Well vamped Ice!
Too late for me as I already sent my version (revamped a little also) to Nick Clegg (MP for my former constituency who sent one standard letter in reply to my previous 5 emails). Nothing venture ...

Please, please EVERYONE on this site - join NOW in this collective effort to get a public inquiry. If all MPs could be bombarded with such requests on Monday morning ... We have nothing to lose (but our money!) - and we will not go away.

Great letter thankyou

  • caledonia
  • 14/10/08 30/09/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 01/06/2009 - 09:05

and mine is in the post.