NI Presbyterian mutual society, Short of funds for withdrawal?

goodbyepci

Published on Tuesday 12 April 2011 09:15
SINCE the ‘fall’ of the Presbyterian Mutual Society, the News Letter has been a source of information and sometimes hope for us. Thank You.
However, I’m disappointed that the headline ‘PMS savers offered £232m’ failed to mention that the bail-out was effectively being made by the larger savers, and the government loan of £175m is to be paid back, with interest and costs, before any saver gets a penny of the deferred money.
I’m quite sure Assembly executive minister Arlene Foster is pleased.
Her department failed to do its job, yet they have wrangled a scheme that costs them very little, but gives them lots of glory.
I am glad that everyone is getting something, but at the very least the larger savers contribution should be acknowledged.

Bogoff

PCI.U.O.Me wrote: »

I'll throw this into the mix and tell me if I've got this right. Someone with a total holding of £20,000 (shares only) will get back at least £19,400, but if you were unfortunate enough to hold, in total £20,001 (£20,000 in shares and £1 in loan notes) you would be back £17,400.85......£2000.00 less than the first group, for the sake of £1 over, surely that can't be correct?

I've been to an information meeting and Arthur Boyd used an example of just such an anomaly and showed that he will apply a smoothing factor that means in the example shown the person with £20,001 will recieve £19,400, just as the person with £20,000 does.

Seemingly there are a few hundred people who would have been affected by this unfair outcome caused by the switch from one band to another. in the case illustrated at the bottom end of the over £20,000 band. this has been recognised and Mr Byod has dispensation to apply this smoothing factor to right any imbalances like this.

expat68

My parents sent me copy of the report. What I hadnt realised until reading it is that the £1m contribution from the PCI is repayable unlike £25m of DETINI's financial assistance. PCI could clearly have stipulated that repayment of the £1m was not required. Once again PCI approach doesnt quite send the right message..........

jon_groovy

expat68 wrote: »

my parents sent me copy of the report. What i hadnt realised until reading it is that the £1m contribution from the pci is repayable unlike £25m of detini's financial assistance. Pci could clearly have stipulated that repayment of the £1m was not required. Once again pci approach doesnt quite send the right message..........

wwjd ????????????????????????????????

brick

Bogoff wrote: »

I've been to an information meeting and Arthur Boyd used an example of just such an anomaly and showed that he will apply a smoothing factor

Now covered in Q&A - http://www.presbyterianmutualsociety.co.uk/questions.html

Toastandbutter

goodbyepci wrote: »

Published on Tuesday 12 April 2011 09:15
SINCE the ‘fall’ of the Presbyterian Mutual Society, the News Letter has been a source of information and sometimes hope for us. Thank You.
However, I’m disappointed that the headline ‘PMS savers offered £232m’ failed to mention that the bail-out was effectively being made by the larger savers, and the government loan of £175m is to be paid back, with interest and costs, before any saver gets a penny of the deferred money.
I’m quite sure Assembly executive minister Arlene Foster is pleased.
Her department failed to do its job, yet they have wrangled a scheme that costs them very little, but gives them lots of glory.
I am glad that everyone is getting something, but at the very least the larger savers contribution should be acknowledged.

....by my reading the News Letter has persistently highlighted the fact that the proposed scheme would only work if larger savers were willing to defer removing all their money....I dont think the edition in question was any different, as I recall.

As for DETI, I dont think anyone would say they have covered themselves in glory in this matter, albeit the minister constantly claims that putting the PMS into administration was a great achievement.......

......almost two and a half years ago.

brick

expat68 wrote: »

My parents sent me copy of the report. What I hadnt realised until reading it is that the £1m contribution from the PCI is repayable unlike £25m of DETINI's financial assistance.

Could be mistaken, but I thought the non-repayable £25M of financial assistance (although billed as DETINI's) was that which originated from central government, and that DETINI do want all of their own separate £25M back.

I imagine some of the other posters will know for sure.

expat68

brick wrote: »

Could be mistaken, but I thought the non-repayable £25M of financial assistance (although billed as DETINI's) was that which originated from central government, and that DETINI do want all of their own separate £25M back.

I imagine some of the other posters will know for sure.

I think you are right though DETINI contribution now listed in total as £50m - always easier to be generous when its not your money !!

goodbyepci

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/opinion/letters/pms-plan-is-like-the-curates-egg-15142792.html

brick

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13116264