SVS Securities - shut down?

manorhouse

I am surprised to find no posts on yesterdays e-mail to clients .
Despite constant hints that clients will have to pay towards costs buy having some of there shares sold this does not look likely the way i read it even if they had one million invested .
If it was the the choice between this and being in the Woodford income ( safe ) fund, which do others think would be better at present ?
May be some are unlucky to be in both .
It appears there will be an option to move to a broker of your choice .
I prefer cheap dealing ones.
so suggestions here would be interesting to many.
Also if others could post time deadlines as they are set we might all find that useful .
Thanks to anyone who has posted accurate information .

masonic

johnburman wrote: »

Now there is a creditors committee why have we not been told which clients or class of clients will have uncompensated losses I. E who will suffer losses, *after* FSCS compensation?

Since when is there a creditors committee? A resolution passed that a committee should be established if possible (as per the creditors meeting on 10/10/2019 and report dated 17/10/2019), but I'm not aware of any action taken since then.

In answer to your question, it will not be known who will suffer losses until the final costs of the administration are known (i.e. at the end of the process). I doubt you will be provided with any information relating to anyone else's losses.

johnburman

See letter on the svs LC website of 17 October. A creditors committee was established.

Wonder who is on it in addition to the FSCS

masonic

johnburman wrote: »

See letter on the svs LC website of 17 October. A creditors committee was established.

Wonder who is on it in addition to the FSCS

This is what it says in the letter:


The creditors committee has not yet been formed. All we know at this point is that between 3 and 5 people were proposed to serve committee, so nobody who was interested in doing so will be refused membership. However, one or more of the proposed members may be unwilling to serve on the committee, should this take the total membership below 3 the committee would not be formed.

manorhouse

Looks like i might of been the only one to get an update from LC this week.
But i am sure others must off maybe someone could copy on here ?

pafpcg

manorhouse wrote: »

Looks like i might of been the only one to get an update from LC this week.

I received an email on Monday with links to the creditors meeting. The material was bland, short on detail and I couldn't see anything that we didn't already know; I didn't bother to comment. It was useful only in confirming the earlier reports.

pafpcg

masonic wrote: »

If they are paying 29 salaries using client assets then that's going to annoy those whose losses end up over the FSCS compensation limit. What possible justification could they have to do so?

It's possible that one of those 29 has knowledge of some critical issue without which the transfer-out won't work. Since it's not costing LC anything, why not play safe? The cynic would also point out that the management of those 29 ex-SVS staff will add to the fees that they will be able to claim....

manted

The most striking detail I found on the latest report was that only 18mn worth of votes were cast as a proportion of 277Mn in client assets .. a measly 6.5%

fmmajid

Leonard Curtis are really dragging this out and again I re-iterate they are milking every second. People are locked out of their portfolios for no reason, missing out on trades and losing out on potentially thousands of pounds.

A total outrage and disgrace.

Eastneuk

I’m sure a meeting of the Credit Committee will be held in the not too distant future. It is I expect in the interests of those on the Committee to have this closed ASAP.