What's KR building society like?

Dabble26

Kent Reliance was a good local based society and I understand it had to try to modernise a bit. Unfortunately the management under Lazenby chased reduced costs at the expense of that local touch. When you call them or they call you, everything seems to be dealt with in India. The 3 members of senior management (Lazenby, Proctor & Scruton), apart from being too highly paid for the skills they appeared to bring to the organisation, were in charge at a time of "easy" money but still seemed to be able to lend badly. Now by their own admissions - at a recent press conference - the losses are bad and the society seems to have no chance of survival. These ar the same people, except Proctor, who seem to be going to be in charge after Flowers gives them more money (sweets) to play with!

Hidden in the transfer document (I think about page 63) is the startling disclosure that when the transfer happens Flowers could be needing to put in enough money to equate to 75% instead of the 40% they are trying to convince us members (whose votes they want). Are the Board aware of this fact as well as the management obviously are? This Mutual will be lost within weeks despite what the glossey literature tries to say. A "No" vote is needed and I would prefer to see a real mutual look after what is left and find somewhere else for the overpaid management to play their games.

Incidently, Lazenby was the Building Society CEO who said just a few years ago at a Building Society conference that he wanted to get rid of all branches as they were a costly nuisance. The writing was on the wall back in those days. So, briefly thats who Kent Reliance are, or are just about to be "were".

jimjames

You might find some info on my blog of interest. It is amazing that they can publish a document that doesn't give full information to members who are voting.

http://www.rainham-history.co.uk/html/KRBS-Kent-Reliance-Building-Society-takeover.html

I've been interviewed by BBC South East and local press to drum up support for the No campaign. If JC Flowers get the deal then rather than 100% of profits being used to benefit members of the society (investors & borrowers) then at least 75% as you have mentioned will be given back to the private equity firm.

http://blog.rainham-history.co.uk/2010/10/is-krbs-takeover-good-for-investors.html

We only need 25% of the votes to be No in order to block the takeover. This quote is from a leading expert in building society/bank deals.

"the biggest winner by far in this deal is JC Flowers .... members’ welfare would be very much a secondary concern"