NI Presbyterian mutual society, Short of funds for withdrawal?

freddiemae

This thread is now becoming very focussed and realistic. I don't want to butt in since I don't have money in the PMS but genuinely feel for the older people who must feel utter despair at the loss of their hard earned savings.

2 questions which should be put to the adminstrator are

1. Did the Directors act outwith the legal restrictions placed on mutual societies? (Mark Durkan alluded to this)
2.Did the Directors have Professional Indemnity insurance ?

If the Directors did act illegally then they could be personally liable for losses and this could have very serious consequences for them.

Grrrandad

In my opinion the only positive actions being taken in relation to our current worrying situation are, firstly, the petition instigated by Dr Callaghan and secondly the belated attempts by clergy/politicians to force the Government to act responsibly in the situation.

Whilst we all may have wonderful theories on, who was to blame, what action should be taken and the various possible outcomes, the fact is we have to await the outcome of the recent vote and then focus on mapping a way forward together- which takes account of ALL savers - big and small.

Remember, a 'small' saver's loss could prove to be more damaging than that of a 'big' saver.

crazymess

fivealive wrote: »

On Sunday past my minister announced that you don't have to save with the PMS to sign but that you do have to belong to the PCI! Is he correct?
I also wondered if you have to be over 18 to sign the petition or can I get all my kids to sign it?

NO NO NO - anyone can sign the petition - for goodness sake - where is your Minister getting his information from? Anyone, colour or creed can sign the petition.

crazymess

freddiemae wrote: »

This thread is now becoming very focussed and realistic. I don't want to butt in since I don't have money in the PMS but genuinely feel for the older people who must feel utter despair at the loss of their hard earned savings.

2 questions which should be put to the adminstrator are

1. Did the Directors act outwith the legal restrictions placed on mutual societies? (Mark Durkan alluded to this)
2.Did the Directors have Professional Indemnity insurance ?

If the Directors did act illegally then they could be personally liable for losses and this could have very serious consequences for them.

1. The PMS say in their leaflet - loans to presbyterian individuals - so that probably includes say - 8 million to a property developer - because he is an individual - but is he PRESBYTERIAN?

I don't think money could have been lent out to Companies and I think this is an interesting one!!!!!!!!!

2. I understand each Director has insurance and think the name is Director and Officers' insurance.

expat68

http://www.humphreys.co.uk/articles/shareholders_1337.htm

One to keep in the back pocket - think there are some big investors out there who will have little choice but to try to recover their money. Also remember that the administrator has to file a report with DETI on directors and compliance or otherwise with statutory requirements. It wont be made public though.

Hopefully matters will be resolved so the PCI dont have to watch 6 of their clergy get dragged through the civil courts -win or lose no one would derive any pleasure from that. Assumes pf course that someone has enough money left to actually pay for the lawyers though "no win no fee" cases are becoming more frequent.

soothsayer_2

expat68 wrote: »

I disagree that the PCI should only underwrite the savings of the needy - this is too difficult to define and will only serve to divide the PMS investors who are largely of one voice to date. Likewise a moral obligation is harder to enforce than a legal one - this will come down to how big the PCI think the downside is - if a big chunk of their offering income dried up it could push them to intervene more quickly. Likewise many presbyterians will be reluctant to contribute to church property funds while all of this is going on.

I understand your point that members should seek to avoid division if at all possible. However, we are talking in the main about ethical savers and investors who should hopefully understand. Without appearing too simplistic there are 2 groups:
1. Those individuals, perhaps mainly savers, who are experiencing real hardship and need to recoup their money without delay.
2. The more wealthy larger investors who may be persuaded to take a longer term view over recouping their investment, if they are reassured over a new direction & turn-around of the PMS.

The first priority should be the needy.
If the matter is handled sensitively it should be possible to reach consensus over this. This approach would also increase the pressure on the PCI to meet its obligations.

no_more_f.w.o

Quote freddiemae
This thread is now becoming very focussed and realistic

Greetings fellow PMS savers
this is my first post, and I have to strongly disagree with the comment above.
I am a saver and have been watching this site for 3 months now.
It has always been focused, realistic and a great source of comfort to me.

Unfortunately non savers came on here recently and tried to patronise and unsettle everyone telling them to do things which they had already done days ago..........new posters please read the whole thread before you throw your weight and opinions around.

Hopefully that unsettling time is past........looking forward to joining in..........

:j

Nomad25

Posting this quickly with thanks to MSE regular peter999:

The Bank of England has announced that it has lent £185bn to financial institutions since April under its special liquidity scheme (SLS).

The SLS was set up to allow banks to temporarily swap assets that were difficult to trade, such as mortgage-backed debt, for UK Treasury Bills.

I'll get a link to the whole post, but on first thought, this is a good argument for previous suggestions on here re PCI putting its' assets against a financial rescue from HMG.

Nomad25

Rather than link to the post, here's a link to the BBC coverage:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7867355.stm

and it's very encouraging to see what would appear to be some of our more senior [not to be patronising] folk joining this thread, to you and all the other newbies.......

no_more_f.w.o

Here's what I have done since the administrator's report came out

• Written lots of letters to politicians
• Taken legal advice
• Met with my MP
• Signed the Downing St petition

Here's what the PCI have done since the administrator's report came out

• Written lots of letters to politicians
• Taken legal advice
• Met with MPs
• Signed the Downing St petition

The difference is I'm not sitting on £43 million ................ go figure