NI Presbyterian mutual society, Short of funds for withdrawal?

freddiemae

joylikes2shop wrote: »

Freddiemae PLEASE don't go ...In my opinion you've provided much useful & helpful advice and suggestions in the past and your contributions would be missed by many if you were to 'bow out now.'

We're all old enough to make up our own minds about what has happened and what might happen now and in the future.

I think there is room on this forum to hear everyones opinion,as long as it's not a personal attack on the savers ...we can do without that sort of contribution.

Thanks I just didn't want to cause friction among you. I hope as an outsider I can maybe see things differently and hopefully point you in the direction to get your money back. I know people personally who have lost money and are in hard times as a result but unfortunately they seem to be too afraid of the church to put themselves forward and I hoped to help them from the sidelines.
Keep on at the Newsletter to find out why they didn't print that proven story about an alleged " non related third party" being given info about the problems at PMS weeks before the savers. It proves a direct link between the church and PMS in my opinion

Toastandbutter

what proven story is that you aretalking about FM?

crazymess

Freddiemae

Glad to see you haven't gone:

We need all the help we can get here!!

So what about a delegation of savers going to Downing Street????

freddiemae

freddiemae wrote: »

Quote from report""

. The Moderator’s Advisory Committee met on two occasions to
consider the response of the Church to the evolving situation of the Presbyterian
Mutual Society. On 21 November the Clerk of Assembly outlined the position
of the Society as it was then known. The Chairman of the Directors and
Secretary of the Mutual Society had asked for a meeting on Monday, 27
October. At that meeting they indicated that the Society was no longer able to
meet demand for payments and the Directors had invoked the rule delaying
payment for 21 days. They indicated that a letter was being sent to all
shareholders.
4. At a routine meeting of Clerks of Presbytery, held on 6 November,
the Clerk of Assembly alerted Clerks of Presbytery to the problem, but took the
view that shareholders had the right to be told by the Society before any
comment was made by the Church. There was useful discussion as to how
Presbyteries might be able to support their members and the Clerk of Assembly
agreed to alert all Ministers as soon as it was clear shareholders had been
informed. It was recognised that Ministers in Congregations would be critical in
offering support to those deeply affected and upset.
5. On 12 November, the Clerk wrote to all Ministers including a copy
of the Presbyterian Mutual Society Directors’ Statement to shareholders and a
Press Statement issued by the Society. (Copy of letter appended). In the letter he
stated:
“It is easy to point out that the Mutual Society is a separate legal entity
which is quite separate from the Church. It is also clear that the Church cannot
in any way underwrite the commitments of the Society. However, the reality is
that many Presbyterians who have invested in the society are now
understandably worried and we have a responsibility to care pastorally for
them.”
Since then the Church has been considering all possible ways to fulfil its
responsibility to care, recognising that much of this support must be given at a
local level.
6. On 14 November, the Department of Enterprise, Trade and
Investment announced that it had rushed through urgent legislation to allow the
Presbyterian Mutual Society the option of going into administration or a
voluntary arrangement. This information was e-mailed to all ministers the
following day, again emphasising the Church’s responsibility to those deeply
Quote""

Pardon me but if the Church has nothing to do with the legal entity of the PMS why on earth were they told first before the shareholders. This beggars belief. I cannot understand why you are not out marching in the streets to be honest. All the ministers are emailed and told and you are left in the dark. Its an incredible insult to you as shareholders.

Other posters checked this out and agreed with me that it proves that PCI was informed weeks before savers. Follow on from post 2455 to see other responses.

Toastandbutter

FM - what report is this in and isnt this old news?

freddiemae

brick wrote: »

Load of PMS info here.

http://www.presbyterianireland.org/assembly/pdfs/General_Board.pdf

I hadn't seen it before - apologies if already posted.

This report put out just before the general assembly is hardly old news since it has not been taken up by the mainstream media. IMHO it signifies a direct link between the PMS and the PCI since it would not be ethical for PMS to give out sensitive information about problems in the funds of PMS to another party without being liable to be sued.

sickasaparrot

A letter printed in the Newsletter on the 3rd April '09 covered the meetings in October '08 between PCI and PMS, and other links between PCI/PMS.

freddiemae

I don't know how closely you follow financial markets but as Betrayed has said a few posts ago - In the market if sensitive info was given to third parties before shareholders and the market then it is a criminal offense. You cannot just go around giving sensitive information about your financial organisation to people with no legal links to you.

sickasaparrot

jon_groovy wrote: »

And did the PMS give sensitive info to PCI before everyone else ? If they did, then this is big news.

I know that ministers and congregations had info before others as some lifted their money hence contributing to the collapse.

Jon-groovy, if you have this information and it is not just hearsay, it would be in everybody's interest if you passed it on to the administrator so that it could be included in his investigation.

justme12_2

Does anyone know when did the presbyterian mutual society actually stop paying savers withdrawals requests?