NI Presbyterian mutual society, Short of funds for withdrawal?

Toastandbutter

Dr Who

not sure if you were referring to my post about an Pearson when you were talking about conspiracy theories???

If you werent forget my next comment, sorry.

But if you were, I would mention that it is not a theory that Pearson launched a review into regulation overseeing the PMS when he was DETI minister here.

That is a plain fact and in the public domain, which nobody is denying, least of all DETNI.

The significance of this in relation to PCI is that DETI has a statutory responsibility to oversee regulation for industrial and provident socities.

plus it is directly plugged into the Government that has the funds to do something about it.... and has set up a working group to look at the issue...the chair of which was supposed to have overseen a review of regulations for the PMS etc.

Are your reports about PCI's role as substantiated as this?

They certainly dont have the clout nor legal responsibility as Government in this matter, imo.

T&B


PS ref the savers coalition problem, why not get a feature with contact details in the News Letter????

Toastandbutter

Joy

perhaps one of the children of the savers could set up a facebook page for the coalition???

;-)

Ballygal

My daughter is administrator of a Facebook Group and says it is easy to set up. The main thing is you have to decide what kind of a group you want it to be. A google search on this aspect revealed the following:

The option to create a group can be found at the top of the Groups page on Facebook. When you create a group, you have the option of making it as open or exclusive as you wish. There are three different access levels:

Open: For "global" groups, everyone on Facebook can view the group and join. If the group is exclusive to a specific network, only the people on that network can become a member. The Wall, discussion board, and photos are all visible to anyone viewing the group.

Closed: For "global" groups, everyone on Facebook can see the group, but the administrators must approve all membership requests or personally send invites. If the group is exclusive to one network, only people on that network can see the group. Only group members can view the Wall, discussion board, and photos. If you are not a member, you will not receive News Feed stories about closed groups.

Secret: These groups cannot be found in searches or viewed by non-members. The name of the group will not display on the profiles of members. Membership is by invitation only. Non-members will not receive News Feed stories about secret groups.

Group administrators can change these options at any time by clicking on "Edit Group Profile."

Hope this is of use if people wanted to start up a PMS group. A decision of what degree of openess would be needed before one was created.

totallyletdown

Ballygal wrote: »

My daughter is administrator of a Facebook Group and says it is easy to set up. The main thing is you have to decide what kind of a group you want it to be. A google search on this aspect revealed the following:

The option to create a group can be found at the top of the Groups page on Facebook. When you create a group, you have the option of making it as open or exclusive as you wish. There are three different access levels:

Open: For "global" groups, everyone on Facebook can view the group and join. If the group is exclusive to a specific network, only the people on that network can become a member. The Wall, discussion board, and photos are all visible to anyone viewing the group.

Closed: For "global" groups, everyone on Facebook can see the group, but the administrators must approve all membership requests or personally send invites. If the group is exclusive to one network, only people on that network can see the group. Only group members can view the Wall, discussion board, and photos. If you are not a member, you will not receive News Feed stories about closed groups.

Secret: These groups cannot be found in searches or viewed by non-members. The name of the group will not display on the profiles of members. Membership is by invitation only. Non-members will not receive News Feed stories about secret groups.

Group administrators can change these options at any time by clicking on "Edit Group Profile."

Hope this is of use if people wanted to start up a PMS group. A decision of what degree of openess would be needed before one was created.

I can set up a facebook group in in about 2 minutes if you want. I can also set up a seperate webpage for folk to post details privately etc

irishjohn

totallyletdown wrote: »

I can set up a facebook group in in about 2 minutes if you want. I can also set up a seperate webpage for folk to post details privately etc

Looks like there is a way to get things moving again!! Not too hasty though - best to decide how closed it should be if a facebook page

totallyletdown

irishjohn wrote: »

Looks like there is a way to get things moving again!! Not too hasty though - best to decide how closed it should be if a facebook page

I have set up a group on facebook on called PMS savers.
It is totally private (for now - waiting on advice).

If you want to join PM me or else search for 'pms savers' in facebook

Toastandbutter

just my opinion / feeling, but if the facebook website was intended to try and improve communication with those feeling out of the loop, then keeping it private will only make things worse.

if you are just going to make it private then what has it got to offer over and above this forum??????

I thought the purpose of it was to allow actual contact details to be promoted???

Having said that, I think those that feel hurt that they are "out of the loop" should take heart.

I doubt anything has killed this forum;- there is really is little new to discuss right now.....

please try and stay cool and objective, I havent seen anything to suggest that this coalition is anything other than a group of well intentioned people trying to add some pressure.

Perhaps these people would be more reassured if more and regular detail of the coalition was posted, even if it is just to say "we met and had little to discuss".

BETRAYED

[QUOTE=Toastandbutter

......I havent seen anything to suggest that this coalition is anything other than a group of well intentioned people trying to add some pressure.

...........[/QUOTE]


Correct. The people whom I know in the Savers' Coalition are all doing what they can to help.
Believe me they are foresighted enough to have discussed what further part they may play in the event of an unsatisfactory outcome from the Working Party and an agreement between the two Governments on proposals for a resolution at the end of this month.
Since PCI have not assisted in any way in PMS members having one official lobbying body I shall be asking the Savers' Coalition to advertise a meeting that members or those representing them can attend and set up offically an Action Group.
I do know that a percentage of members , being still loyal Presbyterians, would be happy to leave substantial funds in a restructured PMS. Proper legislation and regulation would guarantee their funds there to at least 50K.
The administrator so far has only shown that he is on course for a 'run down' and liquidating assets over time.
UK Gov. and HM Treasury may tell him and Arlene Foster that there are other options.

For those thinking of other forms of 'social networking' sites I would think it is best to wait to the end of the month.

silentpci

I feel that the coalition and joylikes to shop are doing all they can on behalf of all of us.I admire them for it takes time and energy to go to meetings and report to us on the forum. My heartfelt thanks go to them for working on behalf of all of us savers.
Keep up the good work and we pray for a happy ending to this long running saga when so many elderly people are so worried and feel let down by the churc .

yamis21

Well that has got things going again on forum. I admire Joy and all those in the coalition for the work they are doing, I only wish I had more time to be involved!! Thanks to everyone for all their effort. It is now a waiting game.