Help please with Certified Shares

JAG61

I currently have many Paper share certificates for Barclays as they send them to me as a reinvested dividend. Some are these are really low value 9 and some as high as 63 with the major being 2222.

I now live in New Zealand and I can not sell these certificates over here and wonder if any one can help regarding the cheapest option on selling so many certificates (over 30).

Thanks

lozzy1965

I would have thought the contact name on the certificate should be able to advise.

JAG61

I have just rang the registrars who tell me I can not sell these shares in the UK through them or anybody else as I am not a UK resident. I have managed to stop more certificates coming through and will get a cheque. I can find no way of selling them at present.

I may end up gifting them away to my MUM.

actfast

Hi JAG61, just replying to another question you raised a while back.

FSA Pension review bulletin No 5 (published August 1999) says "In cases where investor has not yet accepted the original offer, redress should be calcukated in accordance with the guidance, valid assumptions and relevant information as at the time when the offer is acepted".

So the assumptions should not I think be those as at the date of the original offer in 2003 , but instead at the date that you accepted in 2015. These assumptions are available from FOS website.Quite a difference and should affect your compensation.

xylophone

Does this help at all?

https://geoexpat.com/forum/155/thread342391.html

actfast

Actually the FOS assumptions are for cases outside the pensions review.

There's some confusing guidance from the FSA/ FCA but the latest one FG17/9 says :


"This guidance [and assumptions] should also be used to determine appropriate redress where a respondent upholds a complaint received after 3 August 2016 about a pension transfer between 29 April 1988 and 30 June 1994 in circumstances where either:
9.1. the firm did not review the relevant pension transaction in accordance with the regulatory standards or requirements applicable for the review of the transaction at the time
9.2. the particular circumstances of the case were not addressed by those standards"


So I guess if youd complained (after August 2016) they hadnt done it right you would have got it redone on the current assumptions which have much lower discount rates than in 2003 so much higher compensation.

Vortigern

actfast :rotfl: you've posted on a thread that is over 12 months old.

The OP JAG61 is not active on this forum (not seen since September 2017)

Your post is not relevant to the subject of this thread.

Welcome to the forum!