NI Presbyterian mutual society, Short of funds for withdrawal?

pms_overload

Who is to repay the £50m "Hardship Fund"?

goodbyepci

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article7100976.ece

Lester_F

BETRAYED wrote: »

This link to Mark Patterson Show has interesting interview with Ernest Howie and Gwen Smyth

Go 11.50 minutes on

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00s0cpl/Mark_Patterson_13_04_2010/

It certainly was interesting to hear Ernest Howie try to justify why his charity had £670,000 sitting in the PMS rather than putting it to the charitable use he states that it was intended for.

Ernest Howie also stated that he received "advice" to put this huge sum of money in the PMS. I wonder who gave him this advice? Could it have been his friend, Silent Witness?

He also insisted on describing shareholders as "shareholders" but creditors as "savers". At one point he compared shareholders who we all know are small savers in the PMS with shareholders in Northern Rock. He continued the false comparision by comparing creditors who we all know are large savers in the PMS with Northern Rock savers.

Most revealing of all Ernest Howie talked about how you can't spread the gospel without spending money. He was repeatedly challenged by Mark Patterson on the contradition between the teachings of Jesus and the "capitalist" version of Christianity that he practises.

Toastandbutter

Hi Lester

I must listen to the interview, but just on a point of information...

The High Court has confirmed that in legal terms the PMS shareholders are comparable to building society shareholders, while PMS loanholders are comparable to building society savers.

If a building society goes bust, savers get their money back as priority over shareholders.

That is exactly the situation PMS savers now find themselves in.

I'm not saying I like it, but it is a factual, legal description of the situation.

Toastandbutter

an interesting question - if Mr Howie had not intervened wouldnt we now be in the same place anyway?

joylikes2shop

http://www.dromoreleader.co.uk/dromore-news/39PMS-MOVE-WELCOME-NEWS-TO.6239762.jp

Lester_F

Toastandbutter wrote: »

Hi Lester

I must listen to the interview, but just on a point of information...

The High Court has confirmed that in legal terms the PMS shareholders are comparable to building society shareholders, while PMS loanholders are comparable to building society savers.

If a building society goes bust, savers get their money back as priority over shareholders.

That is exactly the situation PMS savers now find themselves in.

I'm not saying I like it, but it is a factual, legal description of the situation.

ToastandButter,

Ernest Howie referred to Northern Rock. Northern Rock is not a building society. It is a Bank.

All those with money deposited in the PMS were savers. (Although some politicans have tried to argue rather unconvincingly that they were investors and not savers).

Loan receipt holders in the PMS were classed by the PMS as creditors and were in fact lending their deposits to the PMS. This fact is at the core of the Court's judgement.

PMS shareholders were not shareholders in the normal meaning of that term; that is, those who had invested in shares listed on a Stock Market.

The comparision made by Ernest Howie between shareholders in Northern Rock and shareholders in the PMS was completely false.

john2009

Lester_F wrote: »

PMS shareholders were not shareholders in the normal meaning of that term; that is, those who had invested in shares listed on a Stock Market.

The comparision made by Ernest Howie between shareholders in Northern Rock and shareholders in the PMS was completely false.

I agree with Lester F on this and have one other thing to throw into the mix.

I could walk into the PMS office at any point and ask for my shares to be repaid. A 21 day period could be imposed but wasn't. If I had shares in a building society or a limited company, I would have to go through a process of transferring the shares or asking the building society or company to buy the shares of me. I couldn't walk in and simply ask for my shares.

Shares in PMS are completely different from shares in a building society or company. To suggest otherwise is wrong.

crazymess

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/northern_ireland/8639428.stm


1248 And here's the last question, which comes from caller Gerry. He wants to know her view on the government bailout for the Presbyterian Mutual Society (PMS). Mrs Long is a favour of it as elderly people lost access to their money. She says there were issues with the PMS regulation, that those who failed should be held to account, but savers should not be left in an invidious situation.

expat68

The Administrator was

i) meant to be in a position to declare and pay first dividend to creditors by end April

ii) Organise a postal vote to nominate a creditors commitee

Is anyone aware of any progress on either on these? I would have thought there might be a little bit of urgency on these matters but it appears not...