How to get my money back?

rizla_king

Gaz83 wrote: »

Wooft.

What a !!!!!!.

Just a troll if you look at some of the bullsh!t they posted on other threads.

Pixie5740

rizla_king wrote: »

Just a troll if you look at some of the bullsh!t they posted on other threads.

I did wonder that myself after reading other threads this user has posted.

As for the OP, legally you don't have a leg to stand on but hopefully your brother is decent enough to repay you some or all of the £35,000 once you've spoken with him about it.

BillJones

bigadaj wrote: »

It sounds as though mr dorsettys has been bankrupt twice, I wonder if this was to do with any of the pensions he used to sell or whether there were other unnamed schemes that left others out of pocket?

I have to assume that he is a troll. Genuine bankrupts don't tend to come out of it (twice) saying that money does not matter.

bigadaj

BillJones wrote: »

I have to assume that he is a troll. Genuine bankrupts don't tend to come out of it (twice) saying that money does not matter.

I'm not so sure, he's still posting and indicated that he has as worked in financial services. Historically financial services was an intense sales environment, and despite the claims of paying for talent, it tended to attract people who certainly weren't the most intelligent but were very driven by sales targets and bonuses. Someone from this background would never acknowledge that they hadn't performed well and wouldn't take responsibility for the harm and damage that their bankruptcies would have caused to their creditors. They would consider any mug they could sell a dodgy product to as fair game.

BillJones

bigadaj wrote: »

I'm not so sure, he's still posting and indicated that he has as worked in financial services. Historically financial services was an intense sales environment, and despite the claims of paying for talent, it tended to attract people who certainly weren't the most intelligent but were very driven by sales targets and bonuses. Someone from this background would never acknowledge that they hadn't performed well and wouldn't take responsibility for the harm and damage that their bankruptcies would have caused to their creditors. They would consider any mug they could sell a dodgy product to as fair game.

Well let's hope that he isn't in it any longer, then. Nowadays we tend to prefer well educated people, and have always wanted people who are honest. It's why there's still a test of "fit and proper" applied to anyone that wants to get near actual financial decisions.

And yes, I know that some people have fallen short of these ideals, but most people in the industry are like me, and have never even thought of mugging a client for an extra pound in the bonus cheque.

bigadaj

BillJones wrote: »

Well let's hope that he isn't in it any longer, then. Nowadays we tend to prefer well educated people, and have always wanted people who are honest. It's why there's still a test of "fit and proper" applied to anyone that wants to get near actual financial decisions.

And yes, I know that some people have fallen short of these ideals, but most people in the industry are like me, and have never even thought of mugging a client for an extra pound in the bonus cheque.

Unfortunately the finance industry isn't perceived like that at all, which must be depressing if you are involved in it and perfectly honest and fair.

The problem is the disasters that have occurred throughout this sector in the last decade or so, including several areas such as libor which are undoubtedly criminal, have destroyed trust, understandably so.

The fsa or now Fca definition of fit and proper hasn't proved to be any more reliable than that of the football association, with similar outcomes.

BillJones

bigadaj wrote: »

Unfortunately the finance industry isn't perceived like that at all, which must be depressing if you are involved in it and perfectly honest and fair.

It's strange. When I joined, it was seen much like going off to be a doctor, lawyer, or engineer, as a "good thing", the right sort of job for someone leaving university who was willing to put in a few more years training, and then to enjoy a good salary afterwards.

Nowadays perception has got so bad that many people simply don't believe that an honest person could bear to work in a bank.

If that were the case, of course, none of the banks would dare deal with each other, where the reality is that people in business know that executing a financial deal with a named bank in London is about as safe a transaction as you could possibly imagine.

The main effect of the changing public attitude, sadly, has probably been a reduction in charitable giving by bank staff, and a greater willingness to look at tax reduction strategies (legal ones such as pension contributions). While we still appreciate that we've done well out of life, it gets to be less of a pleasure at giving back when the people who you feel will benefit are standing outside calling for our heads.

bigadaj

BillJones wrote: »

It's strange. When I joined, it was seen much like going off to be a doctor, lawyer, or engineer, as a "good thing", the right sort of job for someone leaving university who was willing to put in a few more years training, and then to enjoy a good salary afterwards.

Nowadays perception has got so bad that many people simply don't believe that an honest person could bear to work in a bank.

If that were the case, of course, none of the banks would dare deal with each other, where the reality is that people in business know that executing a financial deal with a named bank in London is about as safe a transaction as you could possibly imagine.

The main effect of the changing public attitude, sadly, has probably been a reduction in charitable giving by bank staff, and a greater willingness to look at tax reduction strategies (legal ones such as pension contributions). While we still appreciate that we've done well out of life, it gets to be less of a pleasure at giving back when the people who you feel will benefit are standing outside calling for our heads.

Fair enough, but the unabated greed exercised by the sector has been distasteful for a long time, the fact that many of these excesses have been paid for by the taxpayer, or wider society in terms of reduced interest rates or lack of lending to businesses etc

Financial services is obviously a huge sector, but another problem with its excesses is that it's sucked the life out of so many alternative industries. Britain used to invent most things and be pioneering and be at the forefront of developments which we just aren't anymore.

I'd agree with your analysis of banking being analogous with other professions but it's returns have been far higher, with little justification when compared with non financial services. It was, of course, not considered to be a profession until recently, but a trade like journalism, I recall this being pointed out by john humphreys to the head of the British bankers association which didn't sit too well with him.

Interestingly despite the comparison with the us as financial centres, there is far less evidence of the benefits of unadulterated capitalism benefitting wider society, in the states there is far more altruism and voluntary donations from the super rich bankers, in the uk it's just whinging about paying tax and trying to avoid it, whilst squirrelling away as much as possible. All on teh basis that these people are so talented when in general they aren't any more than similarly educated professional people.

Bit of a rant but I dont think may of it is too extreme, no surprise that the dislike and contempt is still palpable when the effect of gambling is still being underwritten by the taxpayer because the talent that lost everything at rbs and lloyds needs to be retained to earn it back, not really credible is it.