NI Presbyterian mutual society, Short of funds for withdrawal?

goodbyepci

Cheesed off
Having read all your thoughts. Does the PCI know something that we do not know.
Is that the reason they are so silent?
My guess is that the PCI know there has been mismanagement at the PMS.
Whether they knew beforehand and turned a blind eye, or found out early Nov is debatable.
To quote the PMS literature "the Board of Directors is composed of experienced and respected ministers and laymen of the church"
That is aside from all the other tangible PMS/PCI links which have been discussed before.
PCI have to face up to their responsibilities in encouraging their members to save with PMS since 1982.

goodbyepci

presbyteriannomore
My copy of the report still hasn't arrived today!!

Do youhave savings in the PMS?

presbyteriannomore

goodbyepci

Yes, I have a small amount of leftover interest in my account from when I withdrew my savings mid-year when I left the Presbyterian Church some time ago. I received the original letter that was sent in November.

crazymess

I have been trying to post and it doesn't seem to be going through.

Does anyone know if a post can only be a certain amount of letters long?

The one I was trying to post was a bit long winded!!!!

crazymess

Are we not going ahead with the Petition to PCI - not much point complaining if we don't challenge them?

The Petition to Downing St seems to be doing okay - 279 we need to promote this more.

Just a thought:

What about petitioning the Irish Government for help - there are Presbyterians in the South??

I don't care who guarantees the money - as long as it is guaranteed.

Wonder what Stormont would say to that!!!!!!!

johnny_black

Arlene Fosters Department introduced legislation to allow the PMS the protection of Administration. Content to take the protection this offered but apparently unable to play by the rules i.e. transparency and openness a Court injunction was sought to deny the creditors this very right.

As far as I am aware the creditors were not asked to vote for this but obviously have paid for the legal advice and all other costs incurred relating to this.

Ref 414
Now another rule has to be broken, or lets call it an arrangement to reapply the societies normal rules and precisely which of the societies rules this applies to or more to the point where in the rule book does this particular rule appear as it is not referred to by the number which appears alongside each rule.

5th Resolution in effect this resolution proposing that the creditors vote to permit the Shareholders to vote for a Creditors Voluntary Arrangement as it is Creditors who vote for a Creditors Voluntary Arrangement. Hence the name.
At present Creditors are the only ones who can vote but by agreeing to the 5th Resolution this seemingly would not be the case.

As PMS is now under DETI Legislation I think it would be most helpful to hear Arlene Foster's views on all the apparent changes and the choices that have to be made, and from the information provided, can an informed choice be made without each and every member seeking professional advice?

Resolutions 1-4 : Basically one question answer Yes or No.
5th Resolution Perhaps a bit more thought for this one?

Timescale 12-18 months seems more like timescale for liquidation not an orderly wind down. Who knows but would 5 years be more like the time scale to allow for some recovery?

Looks like get this agreed quick (only 2 weeks now). Hopefully get everyone a few pounds in the future but how?
Sell loan book? No-one wants it
So have to sell some property within the next 12-18 months and get a decent price that seems quite optimistic
18 months nothing has improved proposed to liquidate - Net result - massive losses for all especially the creditors as they waved their right to be treated as creditors.

Seems there are 2 separate issues here.
Creditors should be allowed to vote as Creditors for:
Option One: Creditors Voluntary Arrangement
Option Two: Liquidation
A Creditors Voluntary Arrangement and an orderly winding down is going to take a considerable amount of time to allow for recovery and surely Creditors would be best placed to make an informed choice on proposals with this in mind.

Regarding shareholders funds, surely PCI/Government could create a fund to start to reimburse at least a percentage of this as soon as possible to alleviate shareholders cash flow problems.

It would be most helpful for an open and transparent investigation into the way in which the directors executed their duties and responsibilities as directors.
Was there a strategy and what was it?
Or was it just the more we get in the more we can give out?

Money on demand 21 day rule.
Categorical assurance that they do not under any circumstances speculate with funds entrusted to their care.

Two points above hardly an exhaustive business plan but if adhered to would have saved a lot of concern and worry.

Mark789

Fellow forum posters and viewers, I feel I owe you an apology.
My previous postings have shown a level of optimism and faith in a mutual society promoted and, allegedly, controled by the Presbyterian Church that my reading of the administrator's report, that I had forwarded to me by my parents, suggests was completely unfounded.
My reading of the report leaves me disgusted.
My parents, like so many others, believed that they were handing over their hard won savings to an organisation that would use them to lend money to fellow members of the Presbyterian community/congregation on a "conservative" basis, while providing a reasonable return for them on their retirement savings.
If we ignore the investment properties, where recent information has led me to change my initial view that members have simply been affected by the credit crunch, to a view that we all need to know the links between directors, staff and advisors and the vendors of any properies; I am seriously concerned about the information in the report about the composition of the mortgage book and the security on which it was based.
To discover that less than 20% of the loan book was lent to congregations and for homes for owner occupation shocked and horrified me. The agricultural land I can understand and accept; the buy to let properties, building sites and development land and commercial properties are completely contrary to my parents' and my understanding of the aims of the society.
I have changed completely my views in my last post on the advisability of taking directors and managers to court. It may not result in a positive financial result for members, but I now believe that members have been deceived and that those who took advantage of their trust and faith shoule be made to pay.
We need a public inquiry. We need to know of any connections between directors and managers and the "large" borrowers. We need to know of any connections between directors and managers and the vendors, or their agents, of commercial property. We need to know who withdrew large sums from their investments during October and any connections between them and the directors and managers.
We need people to be held to account for their management of the society. I, foolishly, believed that my parents had invested their savings in a conservatively managed mutual society operated in line Christian principles and guidelines. The frightening assessment of the current value of the mortgage book suggests that this assumption is far from true. An estimated realisation value of less than 50% on the mortgage book suggests VERY high risk lending policies with loan to value ratios more in line with loan sharks than a conservative mutual society.
Sorry for the rant, but what can be done?
I am concerned that the people who would know the best way to proceed are probably the ones who withdrew their money and precipitated this cricis. My real concern is that their actions only served to highlight what I now believe to be serious maladministration.
We need to keep signing the Downing Street petition, but I expect little from a self-serving vote seeker like Brown.
Does anybody know how we can precipate a public enquiry?

Whatnow?_3

Mark789 - I think that it was very high risk too.

Public enquiry sounds a good idea

expat68

Is there an online petition facility for NI assembly to request a public enquiry into the running of the PMS. The directors are responsible for running the company in line with the constitution / rules and must be held accountable when a company fails - the credit crunch just accelerated the inevitable. Did the last published set of accounts make it clear the scale of investment in development land and buy to lets? I think any enquiry needs to review if there were any related party tranactions, level of exposure to specific individuals, any lending to limited companies which clearly cant be presbyterians.

The administrator has already (4.12 report) been contacted by the FSA whose role it is to investigate irregularities in the Finance System. If the administator becomes aware of any irregularities i believe it is a requirement of his professional bodies to report it to the relevant authorities.

Does anyone knows how to get an online petition to Assemby/ Arlene Foster started?

expat68

[EMAIL="arlene.foster@niassembly.gov.uk"]arlene.foster@niassembly.gov.uk[/EMAIL]

I'm sure the e mails are filtered initially but if there are enough constructive and appropriate e mails then at least there is a chance she might see one of them. I think the forum members need to agree a consistent theme for any e mails and then send individually. For openers I think the request should be for an enquiry into the running of the affairs of the PMS to reassure members that everything was being run in accordance with the rules of the society and that the directors are confirmed as having fully complied with their statutory duties. That way we can all move on in the knowledge that this is due solely to economic conditions.

Looking at Anglo Irish Bank there were clearly issues with the directors running of the company in conjunction with the economic conditions. Everyone needs reassurance that this was not the case with the PMS.

On another note I wouldnt be surprised if Liam Clarke of the Sunday Times gets his teeth into this one - I'm hoping anyway.