Bradford & Bingley shareholders strike back!

cogito

ad44downey wrote: »

I've never understood this sort of thinking. It seems obvious to me that's she's lost £750 plus.

We got this same sort of wooly thinking when HBOS was going down the pan

Me neither. £1500 actually which would have been quite a useful sum.

scott_lithgows

Lost my free shares which were given to me even after I voted against the demutualisation.:silenced:
Anyone know how much in dividends I got in the years that B+B were a bank ? (basic 250 shares)

JayTee99_2

scott_lithgows wrote: »

Lost my free shares which were given to me even after I voted against the demutualisation.:silenced:
Anyone know how much in dividends I got in the years that B+B were a bank ? (basic 250 shares)

up to (and including) last payment on May2 of this year,
the princely sum of 310.75 GB pounds (no pound symbol)

6022tivo

TypeR wrote: »

You INVESTED
IceSave/Kaupthing Customers are DEPOSITORS

BIG difference my friend.

Yes, but ICESAVE depositors knew the risk of depositing over 35k???? But they were greedy and some invested more.

I invested in B&B as I was greedy, I accept I have lost the lot..

I don't see why ICESAVE customers are getting more than the 50K limit that applied on the day of them going under....

It really gets on my t1ts that good old Gorden Brown is making himself popular by saying he is covering everything even above 50k... Icesave customer knew about the limit, but greed took them over.... Annoys me that my tax is paying greedy Icesave customers out....:mad:

guppy

6022tivo wrote: »

Annoys me that my tax is paying greedy Icesave customers out....:mad:

Annoys me more that my tax is bailing out the greedy millionaire bankers though!

captainkevos

6022tivo wrote: »

Yes, but ICESAVE depositors knew the risk of depositing over 35k???? But they were greedy and some invested more.

I invested in B&B as I was greedy, I accept I have lost the lot..

I don't see why ICESAVE customers are getting more than the 50K limit that applied on the day of them going under....

It really gets on my t1ts that good old Gorden Brown is making himself popular by saying he is covering everything even above 50k... Icesave customer knew about the limit, but greed took them over.... Annoys me that my tax is paying greedy Icesave customers out....:mad:

Perhaps surprisingly to you, 6022tivo, I am somewhat sympathetic. As an Icesaver and I deposited only £35K, I consider my fellow Icesavers to be very very lucky to have been given AD's pledge that they will not lose a penny as a result of the Icelandic bank's debacle. I'd say that they are probably more accurately described as either ignorant (of the £35K limit) or reckless (if they still deposited over £35K) rather than "greedy", but that's just my opinion. The Icesave interest rate was not much better than say, Anglo-Irish, so we were not rate tarts in that sense, but I think some people are just too lazy to have the foresight to spread their money around in different accounts/banks and thereby be covered by the £35K limit (Now £50K, although I heard on Sky News yesterday from GB that AD & FSA were planning to increase this)

Although I did feel for the woman who spoke on the BBC NEWS channel on the day of the collapse who looked set to lose £150K of her £200K life savings. :eek:
It's my understanding that all the taxpayer's money will be repaid once the frozen Landsbanki assets in the UK (valued at around £4billion I believe) have been sold off.

d.edna

bazster wrote: »

Precisely. So what were you doing when your directors were bringing the company to it's knees with their recklessness and negligence? Just take the profits and ask no questions, was that it?

I actually wrote to the board with a vote of no confidence in them.

They ignored me.

They were too busy destroying the bank

ESKIMO

I would like to quote pages 22 and 23 (respectively) of;

The Bradford & Bingley plc Compensation Scheme

Independent Valuer - Peter J Clokey

Assessment Notice in respect of shares and subscription rights

5 July 2010

p22

Conclusion

5.46 I therfore conclude that in administration equity would receive no distributions, and therefore there is no compensation due to shareholders and holders of subscription rights.

Mr Clokey then goes on to say;

p23

6. My assessment of compensation

6.2 Accordingly, no residual surplus would be available to shareholders.

6.3 I therefore determine that:
(i) immediately before the transfer time the ordinary shares in Bradford & Bingley had no value; and
(ii) it follows that immediately before the transfer time the subscription rights also had no value.

6.4 I therefore determine that no compensation is payable under the Scheme to shareholders or to holders of subscription rights.

This 'Assessment Notice' is literally not worth the paper it's written on.

As a 'shareholder' of (now) 'absolutely nothing', i feel so sorry for the taxpayers, (oh wait a sec, i'm also one of them) that have had to cough up approx £4million or so to compile this meaningless report.

I ask you this, why is it then, that the administrators and liquidators make all the money? Are PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP really worth that much and is it really value for (taxpayers) money to come to no amicable solution?

I will be contacting Taxpayers Alliance about this. Not impressed one iota.

A very disgruntled 'shareholder'.

cardsharps

ESKIMO wrote: »

A very disgruntled 'shareholder'.

you mean EX-shareholder.

DiggerUK

Like a lot of people I took advantage of the boom.
Like a few other people, I started to read the writing on the wall and realised it was coming to an end.

The very last piece of paper equity I sold was on the 7th of August 2007 at 1507 hours.
It was my shares in B&B.
I received 4.18750 per share, less 15 pounds Commission/Charges.

All you whingers and whiners had the same choice.
I have no sympathy for dimwits and nitwits at the best of times, so I am quite happy to tell you that gold on that day was 330 pound an ounce, and has just dropped to 780 pound an ounce today.
Sad or what.