NI Presbyterian mutual society, Short of funds for withdrawal?

D.A.

jon_groovy wrote: »

don't all past moderators attend as well ?

Yes, those who aren't dead.

fivealive_2

D.A. wrote: »

Yes, those who aren't dead.

Profound :doh:

fivealive_2

goodbyepci wrote: »

Sickasaparrot posted a great list of links between PCI and PMS a few days ago, which could be incorporated in the leaflet

Is there no media links today or have you got so carried away with Expat's good idea that you forgot to post them? :rolleyes2

goodbyepci

fivealive wrote: »

Is there no media links today or have you got so carried away with Expat's good idea that you forgot to post them? :rolleyes2

Doesn't seem to be any today.
Though the News Letter post theirs a lot later now.

jon_groovy seems to have some sort of secret access to the News Letter articles :cool: :T I can never find the articles now.


They must have realised we weren't buying the papers! :rolleyes:

yamis21

Great idea :T :j

JC74_2

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/my-church-may-lose-pound1m--moderator-14169785.html

http://www.presbyterianireland.org/NEWS/news2009/news0652.html

The new moderator, Rev Carson has a vested interest in protecting his own congregation which apparantly has 1 million invested in PMS.

The General Assembly commences on 1 June.

Lets hope he resolves the issue of PCI stepping in and helping PMS members. I'm sure he doesn't want this to be his legacy of being moderator as well as Mr Patton's.

BelfastGran

jon_groovy

Many Thanks for News Letter posting. Very interesting.

Toastandbutter

Sorry if I have missed this, but have none of us good folks taken advantage of a free consultation with a good firm of solicitors, ie with commercial experience?

ie to see what rights we have for transparency of information we are looking for?

I know alot of interesting info has been mentioned but has anyone checked out options for going forward in the real world?

Neednt cost any money, I expect, and would not in itself require anyone to go public, at the first stage anyway.

Toastandbutter

when I say would not require anyone to go public, I mean the actual gathering of the information regarding what real options there are would not require anyone to go public. No reason why we could not do it.

crazymess

Toastandbutter wrote: »

when I say would not require anyone to go public, I mean the actual gathering of the information regarding what real options there are would not require anyone to go public. No reason why we could not do it.

Who do you suggest is at fault here?