House buyers insist on 'No vote' clause for Scottish purchases

mystic_trev

sss555s wrote: »

Headquarters 25 Gresham Street
London EC2V 7HN, United Kingdom

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lloyds_Bank

You'd better get used to it. After Independence most of Scotlands Financial Services Industry will be based in, and operated, from London.

ruggedtoast

sss555s wrote: »

Which Scottish banks?

All the banks are UK banks until after the 18 month negotiation period is finished.

By then we will have a better idea of the situation of how things will be after the independent date.

The common sense option would be to leave things as they are and see what happens.

You're trying to cause a run on the banks before we have even voted.

Despicable!

Sensible.

Bank runs are a self fulfilling prophecy. If you are fortunate enough to have enough cash funds to exceed the FOS guarantee then moving them out of Scotland is quite sensible.

It's probable that retail funds would be guaranteed up to an unlimited amount by the government for a British bank, as happened with Northern Rock. Its quite possible they wouldnt extend that privilege to a soon to be foreign bank.

Then after the split, God knows what kind of banking guarantee would be in place.

jamesd

A sensible move by the purchasers, since they can't commit to what their mortgage lenders might do and those lenders may withdraw the mortgage offers if there is a yes vote, to avoid the foreign mortgage exposure.

sss555s wrote: »

All the banks are UK banks until after the 18 month negotiation period is finished.

Or unless it seems necessary to impose capital controls to force the money to stay in Scotland.

sss555s wrote: »

The common sense option would be to leave things as they are and see what happens.

I'll be using common sense to protect my interests and ensure that I have no liquid money that could be subject to capital controls in the next few months. If there is a yes vote I will move one of my pensions from a Scotland-based asset management firm, if my employer doesn't move the whole pension scheme from the firm first. Unless the firm itself moves its business South and offshores the support work to Scotland so most of the jobs can stay there, that is.

I expect that few foreigners who saw the Irish experience will be foolish enough to leave money in Scottish institutions where it will be converted to a currency that will be devalued unless capital controls are introduced to prevent that. Sensible people will get the money out before that can happen. Including sensible Scottish people residing in Scotland.

Graham_Devon wrote: »

What happened when Ireland joined the EU?

First question isn't that, it's what happened when the Irish Pound ceased having parity with the Pound Sterling, which effectively happened in 1978 when Ireland joined the Exchange Rate Mechanism and Britain didn't. From March 1979 it became necessary to have an official exchange rate between the two Pounds:

"At first there was some hope that it would prove possible to hold the Irish pound’s value at one pound sterling while still respecting the fluctuation limits in the EMS, despite the fact that Britain had not joined the new exchange-rate mechanism. But the strength of sterling in the early months of the EMS, buoyed up as it was by North Sea oil revenues and by the tight monetary policy of the Thatcher administration, put paid to that hope. It is arguable that a continuation of the sterling link into the early 1980s would have proved politically unsupportable, considering the loss of competitiveness that it might have entailed at a time of rapidly growing unemployment associated with the fiscal adjustment of those years". "Encyclopedia of Irish History and Culture", Vol. 1, James Donnelly ed., Macmillan Thomson Gale (2002)

So do bear in mind what really happened when listening to pointless promises of keeping "the" Pound. The Irish experience is that it was impossible, in spite of hopes and promises.

At the time of Euro transition for Ireland it had already had a different currency, "the Pound", but not THE Pound, for twenty years. The exchange rate with the Pound changed from IR£1.12 to IR£1.287 almost instantly, producing an immediate loss for British investors with money in Ireland. Subsequently the values have moved with the Pound/Euro rate and that has at times changed that initial loss to a gain, though it's probably back to a loss again now.

The Irish Pound ceased to be legal tender in Ireland after around two years but that had become almost moot: by then the exchange rate had dropped to 0.787564 Irish Pounds per Euro and some shops were refusing to accept the devalued currency even though it was illegal to refuse it.

Graham_Devon wrote: »

All those issues you lay out above, Ireland have already been through.

Right. Those who take the trouble to look at what happened will not find good news and will presumably act as I am if they care about preserving the value of their money.

I'm not going to ignore the Irish experience in my decision making, so I am going to withdraw my assets from Scotland and Scottish firms if there is a yes vote. That's not out of any dislike for Scotland or Scottish people, it's out of being sensible with my own money.

jem16

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

I've moved a 6 figure sum out of Scotland and Scottish banks. My family have all done similar.

I would advise anyone else to do the same.

So what banks are considered Scottish in this instance?

What banks should they be moved to?

My parents are interested in this, as am I.

sss555s

What a load of "twaddle"

Capital controls are just the latest scare tactic.

There is no way that can or will happen.

It's nothing more than the desperate panicking faux NO supporters attempts to get the vote to go their way.

jamesd

I'm not a yes or no voter. I'm simply going to act to protect my money and ensure that it doesn't get converted to a currency with an exchange rate vs the Pound Sterling. Ensure. That doesn't mean believing politicians or speculating about all going with the most optimistic hopes. It means acting to guarantee the result by not having it in Scottish institutions.

If you want a yes vote and don't like that, tough. My job is to protect my money, not try to get a vote in a particular direction.

Falsely claiming that it's scare tactics doesn't change the reality of what I am doing or that it is the correct action to protect my money. Scaring is irrelevant to my decision-making, it's about protecting my money whether the vote is yes or no, not whether the vote is yes or no.

sss555s

jamesd wrote: »

I'm not a yes or no voter. I'm simply going to act to protect my money and ensure that it doesn't get converted to a currency with an exchange rate vs the Pound Sterling. Ensure. That doesn't mean believing politicians or speculating about all going with the most optimistic hopes. It means acting to guarantee the result by not having it in Scottish institutions.

If you want a yes vote and don't like that, tough. My job is to protect my money, not try to get a vote in a particular direction.

Falsely claiming that it's scare tactics doesn't change the reality of what I am doing or that it is the correct action to protect my money. Scaring is irrelevant to my decision-making, it's about protecting my money whether the vote is yes or no, not whether the vote is yes or no.

What I am saying is it costs to move money and investments in one way or another.

Why cause panic just now? The bank in question may well move it's headquarters South of the border or Scotland may continue to use the pound and be backed by the BOE as a lot of people are expecting.

There are 18 months of negotiating if YES wins. That is still a big if.

Everyones finances will be as safe as they are just now during that time.

That is why I call it a scare tactic.

And my post wasn't directed at your personal situation.

Thrugelmir

What's the likely impact on the value of Land and Property assets once the Land and Buildings Transaction Tax comes into effect next April? No rates have been announced yet. Presumably as the outcome will be determined by whether the vote is YES or NO.

jamesd

sss555s wrote: »

What I am saying is it costs to move money and investments in one way or another.

It costs me roughly nothing. A bit of time to request moves.

sss555s wrote: »

Why cause panic just now? The bank in question may well move it's headquarters South of the border or Scotland may continue to use the pound and be backed by the BOE as a lot of people are expecting.

It's not panic. It's simply prudence. I agree that the move may happen but I don't need to rely on may when I can instead act. Nor does anyone else. Even those in Scotland can act to protect their interests, whether they vote yes or no or not at all.

So far as keeping the Pound Sterling goes, that's cloud cuckoo land and won't happen if there's a yes vote because it's not in the interests of the United Kingdom of Britain and Northern Ireland for it to happen. As the Irish experience demonstrated it's also probably not in the interests of an independent Scotland either. Tough for politicians who promised something daft, they should deal with that instead of carrying on the pretence. The Irish people could deal with it and the Scottish people are no less able to deal with it. Same for cross-border trade, Northern Ireland to and from Ireland has been happening for decades with different currencies and it's not that big a deal. If it gets British banks making Euro transactions easier eventually, so much the better.

sss555s wrote: »

There are 18 months of negotiating if YES wins. That is still a big if.

Yes, but the time to act is before there is trouble, not after. The more apparent the trouble becomes the greater the chance of outside intervention that could make it difficult to act later. Just look at what happened in Cyprus if you think that waiting is the sensible choice.

sss555s wrote: »

Everyones finances will be as safe as they are just now during that time. ... That is why I call it a scare tactic.

That's not so. Because of the potential for adverse changes there may be a desire to do things like imposing restrictions on moving money and those things are not things that the FSCS will protect against, just as it also doesn't protect against exchange rate issues.

sss555s wrote: »

And my post wasn't directed at your personal situation.

Right, but it may be useful to know why I am acting and that it is completely unrelated to trying to cause a yes or no vote or having any good or ill will.

While I have no ill will towards Scotland or the Scottish, independent or otherwise, I do promise that if the country chooses to default on its debts I am personally going to impose my own economic boycott on the place and encourage others to do the same. Bankruptcy and IVAs and such are all fine for those who are in financial trouble. Choosing to default is a different matter and I will not sit back and just accept it.

Thrugelmir

sss555s wrote: »

and be backed by the BOE as a lot of people are expecting.

The remainder of the UK is not going to stand as a back stop to the AS's yet unfunded plans.

UK politicians have their own seats to hang onto next year. So the result is going to impact manifestos. The UK electorate has a voice to that will make itself heard.