NI Presbyterian mutual society, Short of funds for withdrawal?

abeliever

This (today) from Jim Allister website

Statement by Traditional Unionist MEP Jim Allister QC:-
"The revelation that the FSA did indeed find that the PMS "was conducting regulated activities without the necessary authorisation or exemption", is, in my opinion, a very significant finding with far-reaching ramifications as to HMG's liability.
This amounts to a finding of oversight failure by the DETI appointed Registrar, for whom, I believe, DETI carries vicarious liability. The essence of the situation is that PMS, unchallenged by the Registrar or DETI, was operating inappropriately by engaging in activities which ought to have been FSA regulated. If they had been so regulated, then the investors would have had protection. Such failure cannot be ignored. Thereby, I suggest, liability falls on HMG via DETI.
I am disappointed that to date, though these failings arose predominantly when DETI was controlled under Direct Rule, there remains an avoidance of responsibility-taking by DETI under devolution. Now, is the time for DETI to face up to its responsibilities and not just acknowledge its failings, in light of the FSA finding, but the consequential burden on government to grant to the investors the protection which they would have had if DETI had performed its oversight duties adequately."


......implies that HMG (FSA & DETI) has failed re financial oversight of PMS

Ballygal

Surprise! Surprise!
I too received my D Frank letter today!!!!
I also received a reply to one i had written to Dr Patton. At the end he tells me that a report will be made to the General Assembly on the Tuesday afternoon 2nd June (Of which we were already well aware) and should i wish i can check with Church House nearer to the time (Kindly giving me the telephone number!)
So i think he is expecting us!

freddiemae

Just listening to Jeffrey Donaldson covering his tail - still banging the old drum of the government 50k guarantee. The govt had a 35k guarantee previous to this and it did not cause a run. The run was caused by those who could read the accounts working out that all was not right and taking their money out.

seatzie

I was lsitening to Radio Ulster on the way in to work, I'm not involved in this at all, just hoping you guys get your money back but Jeffrey Donaldson did say the trail of events included Banks telling people their money was not safe in PMS, surely theres a legal case there?

goodbyepci

http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/PMS-should-have-been-regulated.5196997.jp

freddiemae

seatzie wrote: »

I was lsitening to Radio Ulster on the way in to work, I'm not involved in this at all, just hoping you guys get your money back but Jeffrey Donaldson did say the trail of events included Banks telling people their money was not safe in PMS, surely theres a legal case there?

Well their money wasn't safe there was it?

The NI govt is desperately trying to spin the blame off themselves and will blame anyone they can think of.

freddiemae

goodbyepci wrote: »

Nothing to do with reading the accounts
Accountants got caught in this debacle

The information wasn't in the accounts

There must have been rumours that the house of cards was about to fall, word got around and the run started.

Sorry I thought I had heard that they wrote down the value of the commercial properties in the last accounts in summer 2008. I think it was on the TV programme early on. This would have been a tipping point for some if it had happened.

readyforaction

Newsletter today

Well said Mr Allister.

This is becoming a thorn in the side of many.
Everyone, keep the pressure on the letter writing.
Sorry to sound like broken record but PMS investors cannot sit back and say nothing. There are enough of those types of characters round already who are saying nothing.

ballyblack

re 'Good Morning Ulster' broadcast on BBC radio this morning

The broadcast on iplayer now available

PMS subject is discussed 1hr.45min into broadcast and last 5 minutes


Link;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00jzvw2

freddiemae

goodbyepci wrote: »

freddiemae
They may well have done that, the 2008 accounts were a shortened version, I don't have them to hand right now, but will look that up later.
Sadly it would have meant nothing to me, and probably 99% of the other savers.

I just trusted the PMS!

I phoned for reassurance several times and was told everything was 100%, my money was 100% safe, they weren't doing any of the things which contributed to the banking crisis, the value of my shares would not change, etc. etc.

You've heard it all on here before ad nauseum!!

What disturbs me now is the fact that Arlene Foster's dept rushed in the gagging order to prevent any details of the people who took money out last
from becoming public. I would think that the Data Protection Act would have been sufficient protection - why a gagging order? Whose names needed extra protection? I am going back over old material which has new meaning in the light of the FSA statement.