Become a Nationwide member without "windfall" signaway

MORPH3US

I have had a nationwide account since 2004... how do I know if I am a "sign away" customer or not?!?!?!

M

bristolleedsfan

MORPH3US wrote: »

I have had a nationwide account since 2004... how do I know if I am a "sign away" customer or not?!?!?!

M

all new members who joined nationwide since november 1997 are "signaway" members, imoh i wouldnt lose sleep over it if i was u.

bristolleedsfan

MattB wrote: »

That doesn't mean transfer of all account onto NBS systems. If only!

portman are saying that from tuesday 28 august members will be able to " transact anywhere in the new enlarged branch network".

MarkyMarkD

bristolleedsfan wrote: »

my belief which others share is that if nationwide were to ever change its status, nationwide would treat all its members fairly, and would make sufficient payments to the charitable foundation ( to keep the charitable foundation happy) in the same way as northern rock has done.

The charitable foundation's trustees have a fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of the charity itself.

That means in practice that if Nationwide did anything to undermine the terms of the charitable assignment, the charitable foundation would have a duty to take Nationwide to court to prevent them taking these steps.

The trustees of the foundation are independent from Nationwide. If they failed to act correctly, all sorts of things could happen to them individually. I can't see any reason why they would accept that course of action.

bristolleedsfan

[quote=MarkyMarkD_;5949881]The charitable foundation's trustees have a fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of the charity itself.

That means in practice that if Nationwide did anything to undermine the terms of the charitable assignment, the charitable foundation would have a duty to take Nationwide to court to prevent them taking these steps.

The trustees of the foundation are independent from Nationwide. If they failed to act correctly, all sorts of things could happen to them individually. I can't see any reason why they would accept that course of action.[/quote]

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

if the charitable foundation trustees had a " fiduciary duty to act in the best interest of the charity itself " then it would be pressing nationwide to convert to PLC status " ( the foundation trustees would know that the only way of getting such a vote through would be with the support of the membership and with the signaway now being in effect for 10 years and counting) to guarantee a yes vote would require those signed out of a windfall to be "signed" back into a windfall.)

e.g look at northern rock source Wikipedia

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

Charity

"The company donates substantial amounts annually its own charity, the Northern Rock Foundation. The foundation was formed when the company was floated, with an initial donation of 15% of the share capital and a covenant to donate 5% of the company's annual profit thereafter. In 2006, Northern Rock was the second largest charitable giver in the FTSE 100 after ITV."

There will be those that will be attempting to bring up the same hypothetical, speculative argument about nationwides signaway in 5,10,15,10,20 years :eek: time if nationwide is still a building society by then. every day that passes the number of nationwide signaway members against non signaway members increases.

before you say that building societies give so much per vote to charity out of their profits, they give relative pennies to get themselves out of a moral hole theve dug themselves into, and to get good press in daily mail and mail on sunday newspapers whom are apparent mutual building society supporting newspapers. :rolleyes:

evidence ( i prefer fact and evidence rather than speculation and hypothetical situations) :rolleyes:

http://www.nationwidefoundation.org.uk/faqs.asp

Q: Who funds The Foundation?
A: It is funded by contributions from Nationwide Building Society, Society employees, members and customers. A £2.5 million donation was received in 1999 followed-up with a further payment of £7.0 million in April 2000, in support of a two-year grant-making programme. £2 million has been received each year subsequently, for charitable giving

up until 2006 i make that a total of 21.5 million to nationwide foundation


http://www.nr-foundation.org.uk/sn_faqs.html

from northern rock PLC annual accounts 2006 http://companyinfo.northernrock.co.uk/downloads/results/res2006PR_AnnualReportAndAccounts.pdf

"Since 1997, Northern Rock plc has donated £175 million to The
Northern Rock Foundation, which was established when Northern
Rock Building Society converted to a public limited company. The
Company covenants 5% of its pre-tax profits each year to the
Foundation, and was ranked third largest UK corporate giver in
The Guardian’s ‘Giving List’ (November 2006)."

yep two xtra years are involved re northern rocks donation to its charitable foundation so lets add 4 million onto nationwide BS donations to its charitable foundation :rolleyes:

DO U UNDERSTAND MARKYMARKD the difference between 175 million and 25.5million ( the 21.5 million is swelled by a larger donation ( 3.5x normal annual donation in second year by nationwide to save themselves from apparent

DIFFERENCE markymarkD = nationwide charitable foundation would be better off if nationwide converted to PLC status, so if the charitable trustees had a "fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of the charity itself " then the trustees would be pressing nationwide BS to convert to PLC status. :beer:

The trustees of nationwide charitable foundation would want nationwides "signaway" members to become eligible for windfalls because the trustees would need the votes of the current "signaway" members to be assured of a vote for nationwides convertion to PLC status to be supported by the required majority.

i make no apology for being repetitive clearly one person is being argumentative for the sake of it or doesnt understand what the majority of people have said on the subject both here and elsewhere.. :rolleyes:

cheggers

I'm a pre 97 member with nationwide, and have a portman account.

Should I maintain the portman account after the windfall or just close it. I can not see Nationwide ever paying out 2 windfalls to me if they ever convert in the future.

Speculator

You will not receive two allocations of shares if Nationwide decided to convert. However, Nationwide may base the number of shares that you may get on the aggregate balance of all your savings accounts.

cheggers

Speculator wrote: »

You will not receive two allocations of shares if Nationwide decided to convert. However, Nationwide may base the number of shares that you may get on the aggregate balance of all your savings accounts.

Thought as much, going to close the Portman account once I get my windfall and invest the £100 in another building society.

Not got massive balances with either Nationwide or Portman, only keep them at £100 each for membership rights. So the aggregate balances would not be massive.

MattB_4

bristolleedsfan wrote: »

portman are saying that from tuesday 28 august members will be able to " transact anywhere in the new enlarged branch network".

Yes. Because they will.

BWZN93

Im going to stick my head above the parapet here - Im a Nationwide employee and will try and answer any questions anyone has. Give me a shout if anyone needs any clarification on anything.

Jo x