NI Presbyterian mutual society, Short of funds for withdrawal?

sickasaparrot

Thanks expat
I take it then the best course of action is to push DETI for a public enquiry and then following that consider court proceedings against the Directors?

expat68

sickasaparrot wrote: »

Thanks expat
I take it then the best course of action is to push DETI for a public enquiry and then following that consider court proceedings against the Directors?

I think you will need to wait for next detailed proposal from administrator at end May to determine whether an inquiry is justified. If there is an inquiry it should be as broad as possible - as crazymess said after 3 months most people still cant work out who was responsible - people do want answers and it has impacted 10,000 people.

I have been previously sceptical of the idea but as all other options seem to be closing this one at least is still in theory open if DETI are supportive.

amadan22

has everyone given up on number 10? i still think guarantor is a better approach than "bail out" as this implies that, if we're given the freedom of liquidity, we'll do the bull in a china shop, rob the place dry and leave the situation worse off?

goodbyepci

amadan22 wrote: »

has everyone given up on number 10? i still think guarantor is a better approach than "bail out" as this implies that, if we're given the freedom of liquidity, we'll do the bull in a china shop, rob the place dry and leave the situation worse off?

This has always been my point
I know that £50 million was requested before administration.

But I'm surprised the administrator didn't ask in his voting papers, who actually wants their money right now immediately?

It would give him a ball park figure on need for cash.

He could be surprised by the answer?

Congregations may be prepared to leave their money in place.
Congregation/charity money is not the same as personal savings.

I wonder what the breakdown is?



Thoughts?

abeliever

Liquidity .....In my view, best post in ages!

For the administrator .....it's all about cash flow. On one side ...where can he find £'s (& when). On the other ....who needs £'s (& when).

With a simple spread sheet it should be possible to model this .....provided he has ...."who needs £'s (& when). He already can estimate the other side of the equation.

If the Mutual was a football team ...we'd quickly establish who really needs money now ...& who's more than happy to wait until Tuesday fortnight!

If not enough money available to go around over, say, a five/seven year timescale, then He (the Administrator) does need the help of us all - Shareholders, PCI, MPs, MLAs etc to go out and find the shortfall.

abeliever

Should also highlight that I'm very,very aware that some folks have real & immediate cash needs (needs - not wants!) .... & that this must be taken into account by the Administrator ......& other PMS shareholders.

BelfastGran

Petition forms can be printed off the following web site:

PETITION TO THE PRIME MINSTER CONCERNING THE PRESBYTERIAN MUTUAL SOCIETY:

NEW DATE

DATE HAS NOT BEEN CHANGED YET ON THE FORM WHEN IT IS PRINT OFF MANY FORMS AND GET FOLK WHO HAVE NOT ALREADY SIGNED TO DO SO - PLEASE

presbyteriannomore

Just been reading about the Allen Stanford case. Apparently investors were assured that their money was safe & available anytime when in fact 80% was tied up in property & illiquid assets - now who does this remind us of! The difference (apart from the much larger amount involved) is that Mr Stanford now faces arrest & possible charges, whereas PCI likes to blame Gordon Brown for their mess. When will they realise that the £50K guarantee only served to shine a light on what the directors had been doing for some time & hoping to get away with - it was not, and never will be the root cause.

Perhaps you need to call in the FBI to deal with the PCI:rotfl:

Toastandbutter

Guys, glad we are all friends again...

Please note I am not sure my point was understood at all ref the legal links.

I nowhere suggested that directors should be sued for wrongdoing, I am not at all clear they have done anything unlawful.

All my posts have been about shareholders' rights to access information from the PMS about how investment policies were made.

Has THIS angle been discussed before?

Also...

http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/Details-of-review-into-mutual.5000374.jp

T&B

Nomad25

The statement noted that the Ulster Federation of Credit Unions has its own savings protection scheme for affiliated members.

Why did the PMS not join this [surely the directors should have done this?]