NI Presbyterian mutual society, Short of funds for withdrawal?

Flinflon

BETRAYED wrote: »

There is a proposal that in January 2010 a one day conference be held in a Ballymena hotel to learn about what a Mutual Society is and to have speakers on the subject.
1 Historyof PMS
2 What members/creditors of PMS can do in the circumstances in which we find ourselves.
An advertisement re. event will be in News Letter early January.

1. Who made this proposal? Sounds like a good idea :T, as long as some action is intended, and it's not just a day-long re-hash of our whining, and information we already know.
2. Why a history of PMS? If so, it should be a very short one.
3. Let's deal with the here and now and propose/discuss ideas that will make the decision-makers (or decision-delayers, as they seem to be) sit up and take notice. I, for one, am sick and tired of delays/no information/no answers to reasonable questions, and the feeling that there is nothing we savers can do but wait.
4. How can a significant turnout of savers be guaranteed for this meeting?

Thanks in advance for specific answers to those specific questions!

Ballygal

Report has just arrived in post folk!
On a VERY quick glance:
1 Thinking in New Year of renting out part/whole of Glengall Street to bring in income.
2 Notes the views of big loan capitol holders in relation to money back so he is reconsidering how much to give to whom by way of distribution applying to high court for direction.
Sorry i have to dash off so I'm sure other forum members will put up the other main contents on this site for those who haven't got theirs yet!

abeliever

When all is said & done, it was "borrowers" - who took on commitments that they have not subsequently honoured !

It is a sad day when, in terms of personal responsibility, people do not face up to paying back the money that they borrowed !!

(I accept that commercial property is down in value ....but it still provides ongoing rental income ....at or above market rate)

crazymess

http://www.presbyterianmutualsociety.co.uk/

expat68

So by my reading current realisable value of loans is £102m, the investment properties £97m and cash £23m. Total of £222m.

The creditors i.e. loans by members to PMS are £204m and the shareholders £101m so there is currently a £83 shortfall. If the crediors get priority then shareholders will get 18p in the pound back as things currently stand.

In January the administrator said the total value of the assets and cash was £184m so based on his current report there has been a £38m improvement in 12 months - so trying to be optimistic things are getting better.

I think if people could get some money out they would be prepared to sit tight and wait for further recovery??? At the speed the working group is going the assets may be worth £300m before they manage to issue a report !!

If what the administrator says is true a lot of large members will vote to give priority to creditors and leave a lot of the shareholders (mostly low income pensioners) high and dry. While this is perfectly legal I'm not sure it is charitable or christian as long as there is the chance of full recovery in the medium term.

HOPE

Thank you Expat. The gap is less wide.

The Adminstrator is obviously holding out for Government intervention and will have good grounds for doing so. OFMDFM and others have recently said it would be a few weeks. It is all in the hands of the Ministerial Working Group as to how quickly a resolution can be reached and as far as I can see there is nothing we can do but be patient. A little of our money will be a help in the interim.

I am a loanholder and personally I want to see all savers have their money returned £ for £. No saver deserves to lose out and I know a number of shareholders who are suffering terribly.

BETRAYED

If the Administrator likens himself to Moses leading the children of Israel
in the desert, I think he has lost his way and is ripping us all off at the same time.

HOPE

BETRAYED wrote: »

If the Administrator likens himself to Mosses leading the children of Israel
in the desert, I think he has lost his way and is ripping us all off at the same time.

Betrayed - Do you not think that you are being very unfair. He is working under a court order and has to do things by that order. Would you prefer that he proceed now with an orderly wind down of the Society and end up with very little and shareholders nothing or that he continues thereby allowing us the chance of government intervention.

I know what I would prefer - to wait if it means I get all my savings back.

Flinflon

HOPE wrote: »

Betrayed - Do you not think that you are being very unfair. He is working under a court order and has to do things by that order. Would you prefer that he proceed now with an orderly wind down of the Society and end up with very little and shareholders nothing or that he continues thereby allowing us the chance of government intervention.

I know what I would prefer - to wait if it means I get all my savings back.

Well, with all respect, your preference about waiting is irrelevant, Hope. We have no choice--it's not a matter of preference at all. But waiting does NOT mean you will get all your savings back. The whole last sentence is a non sequitur. The key word you use is "IF". So let's go back to basics: The administrator, who may be in a conflict of interest in any case, pleads "I'm tied by the court." He pleads in his report, "More time, please." Let him do his own pleading--leave us not do it for him. We are in our own unique position, which I believe we must use to every advantage we can: keep the pressure up on politicians, keep advising the media, and above all keep the faith with one another--not with the PCI, not with the PMS, not with the administrator or politicians. All of them were there to serve us; they need reminding of that, forcefully and frequently. We may be vulnerable, we may be victims, but we're unique and we have some power, if we can only use it properly. Sorry to sound like a fusty old teacher; I mean it all kindly, and I am as frustrated as any of you.

HOPE

Flinflon

The matter of waiting is relevant. This is a political issue. The Administrator is taking his lead from HMG. We have to wait whether we like it or not for a decision. The savers have pressurised the politicans. PCI have done all they can to push for a resolution. It is up to the Working Party to finish the job, no one else. I agree it is a unique situation but I also recognise that we are very lucky that the govt is even considering helping us bearing in mind the mess we were left in with no financial protection. Equitable Life savers have still not received a penny since 2000 despite winning an EU and UK case. If you have any suggestions to secure a quicker decison I would be glad to hear them. In the scheme of things we are lucky that banks are interested at all because the PMS is a small society compared to other financial institutions where banks could do a lot better.

I used the word "if" we get our savings back deliberately because I am cautious but I am also hopeful and I intend to remain positive and focused. Read the signs, read what the Lord Myners says. I see this as a comparision with Dunfermline.