NI Presbyterian mutual society, Short of funds for withdrawal?

BETRAYED

jon_groovy wrote: »

Can someone tell what PCIs last offical word was regarding the PMS.
They have been strangely quiet now for awhile.

Dr Carson spoke on Radio Ulster early yesterday (Friday).
Sorry I don't know what he said because I now turn off when I hear him speak.

Silent_Witness_2

Lester_F wrote: »

What is your name?

Professor Leo Dalton, c/o BBC 1, [What's in a name?]

no_more_f.w.o

Silent_Witness wrote: »

Professor Leo Dalton, c/o BBC 1, [What's in a name?]

Doh

I was sure you must be Emilia Fox!

Silent_Witness_2

expat68 wrote: »

Silent Witness - don't go silent just yet. So if I understand correctly does the HCCT plan involve the creditors getting the vast majority of their funds back via strict legal interpretation of the administration process (vs. the reality of how the PMS was run on a day to day basis) followed by the shareholders sueing the directors/ advisors etc for any residual losses they would incur? My thinking is that the majority of people with savings under £20K probably dont have the funds or back up to pursue a legal case - this is why although legally they have the same rights as creditors the theory falls down on the financials and know how.

If HCCT get their funds back (less £20K) do they walk away and leave the savers with less than £20K to their own devices?

Can you also end speculation as to who is paying for your most excellent legal advisers?

On your first question - The next person to issue proceedings could be a small share holder who would qualify for legal aid.

On your second the short answer is no.

On your third question - While others have talked the talk the HCCT
support group walked the walk.

As an interesting aside - 539 members at various stages held share capital in varying amounts but by the date of the adminstration they no longer held any share capital!!

no_more_f.w.o

Silent_Witness wrote: »

As an interesting aside - 539 members at various stages held share capital in varying amounts but by the date of the adminstration they no longer held any share capital!!

By implication

Does this mean that 539 members were aware of the difference between shares and loans?

539 members had heard a whisper that all was not right?

539 members acted accordingly - and cashed in their shares?


:think:

expat68

Silent_Witness wrote: »

As an interesting aside - 539 members at various stages held share capital in varying amounts but by the date of the adminstration they no longer held any share capital!!

Thank you SW,

Interesting point - so you could have people saying they have funds invested in the PMS and they are sharing the pain of members while knowing they will almost certainly get it 100% back at some point. I bet that list of names is an interesting one !!!

Lester_F

Should it be called Londonderry or Derry? maybe Stroke City for some. One of her most prominent citizens has a similar identity crisis. Is it Silent Witness or Arnold Don? I prefer to address him as Don.

Don, please tell us how much money you have made or will make out of the PMS crisis? Don't be shy.

readyforaction

Lester F,

Whoever Silent Witness is, it's good that we are getting all of this information.

If you think it is this person Arnold Don, why don't you give him a call and discuss your points with him.

For the rest of us, just let us get the constructive information while we can. We don't want SW frightened off.

Thank you Lester F.

fivealive_2

readyforaction wrote: »

Lester F,

For the rest of us, just let us get the constructive information while we can. We don't want SW frightened off.

Thank you Lester F.

I don't think SW is easily scared

freddiemae

http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/PMS-is-not-part-of.6048266.jp