upland
Member of DD Central
Posts: 478
Likes: 175
|
Post by upland on Jun 28, 2018 13:03:22 GMT
|
|
chriscross
Member of DD Central
Posts: 62
Likes: 70
|
Post by chriscross on Jun 28, 2018 13:18:25 GMT
I'm right with you there Upland, signed on the dotted line..
It is laughable at just how insecure our secured money really is in this Country.
|
|
|
Post by dan1 on Jun 28, 2018 13:25:57 GMT
|
|
|
Post by thecleaner on Jun 28, 2018 15:17:07 GMT
Signed Sealed and Delivered.
|
|
gareot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 75
Likes: 63
|
Post by gareot on Jun 28, 2018 16:17:18 GMT
I've signed. Cheers upland.
|
|
mason
Member of DD Central
Posts: 662
Likes: 640
|
Post by mason on Jun 28, 2018 17:50:21 GMT
I'd have more sympathy for this petition if P2P investment firms were covered by the FSCS like other investment firms.
|
|
travolta
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,458
Likes: 1,167
|
Post by travolta on Jun 28, 2018 18:02:29 GMT
Done plus Significant Other ….petition now @ 115.Only 99885 to go before some slimeball kicks it into the long grass
|
|
|
Post by GSV3MIaC on Jun 28, 2018 19:48:49 GMT
Someone might want to post same in other place(s) .. maybe MSE as well? Self and significant other both in .. apparently one signature per Mind is not allowed. 8<.
|
|
|
Post by brightspark on Jun 29, 2018 6:48:04 GMT
As we now know one of the problems of Collateral's ring-fenced assets is that the records of them may not be available. In olden days when a business went bust it required a deliberate act on the part of someone to shred anything that might embarrass. The law requires records to be retained so their destruction would be illegal. Nowadays simply not paying a few bills appears to result in records being lost. I am no lawyer but it raises in my mind the question that legislation on business records retention may not have kept pace with new technology - perhaps someone knows better?
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,598
Likes: 4,183
|
Post by agent69 on Jun 29, 2018 7:52:34 GMT
I think the idea of an administrator dipping his hand into a ring fenced pot of cash is scandalous, but unfortunately it only affects a small number of people, so I don't see this petition ever reaching critical mass.
|
|
andy1
Member of DD Central
Posts: 103
Likes: 107
|
Post by andy1 on Jun 29, 2018 8:57:11 GMT
I haven't and won't sign it because simply tearing up an existing process without any suggestion of what should replace it is pointless. If it had something useful to add I'd consider supporting it.
Administrators are sometimes necessary and nobody is going to work for free. If the company doesn't have the resources to pay then who should if not the clients? Me as a general tax payer? No thanks.
|
|
mason
Member of DD Central
Posts: 662
Likes: 640
|
Post by mason on Jun 29, 2018 12:17:32 GMT
I haven't and won't sign it because simply tearing up an existing process without any suggestion of what should replace it is pointless. If it had something useful to add I'd consider supporting it. Administrators are sometimes necessary and nobody is going to work for free. If the company doesn't have the resources to pay then who should if not the clients? Me as a general tax payer? No thanks. The suggestion is that instead of the first £50,000 being covered by the FSCS, instead it should all be covered by the FSCS. The FSCS is an industry funded scheme, but ultimately money would come from the clients of the companies paying into it. It seems Beaufort investors stand to lose a third of their capital to administration costs. Perhaps this isn't a worst case scenario, so anyone holding investments of say £100,000 or more with a single firm could be at risk if a similar situation plays out elsewhere.
|
|
upland
Member of DD Central
Posts: 478
Likes: 175
|
Post by upland on Jun 30, 2018 6:14:04 GMT
I think the idea of an administrator dipping his hand into a ring fenced pot of cash is scandalous, but unfortunately it only affects a small number of people, so I don't see this petition ever reaching critical mass. Very true but it would be nice to start somewhere in hope. If anybody knows of any other suitable forums / boards to spread this petition too them please do so. Its a very tricky problem as one wonders whether no administrators would ever take this sort of job on if there was only the company assets to help swell their coffers. ( )
|
|
upland
Member of DD Central
Posts: 478
Likes: 175
|
Post by upland on Jun 30, 2018 6:24:20 GMT
As we now know one of the problems of Collateral's ring-fenced assets is that the records of them may not be available. In olden days when a business went bust it required a deliberate act on the part of someone to shred anything that might embarrass. The law requires records to be retained so their destruction would be illegal. Nowadays simply not paying a few bills appears to result in records being lost. I am no lawyer but it raises in my mind the question that legislation on business records retention may not have kept pace with new technology - perhaps someone knows better? I wondered whether this situation is without precedent. I note that part of the remit of the administrators is to investigate conduct of the directors. I feel that for their money that the people in charge are required to sort out the problems that are difficult otherwise we could do it all with office staff on a minimum wage. Hopefully the investigation will find them lacking , and possibly others.
|
|
radar
Member of DD Central
Posts: 106
Likes: 62
|
Post by radar on Jun 30, 2018 6:36:17 GMT
As we now know one of the problems of Collateral's ring-fenced assets is that the records of them may not be available. In olden days when a business went bust it required a deliberate act on the part of someone to shred anything that might embarrass. The law requires records to be retained so their destruction would be illegal. Nowadays simply not paying a few bills appears to result in records being lost. I am no lawyer but it raises in my mind the question that legislation on business records retention may not have kept pace with new technology - perhaps someone knows better? I wondered whether this situation is without precedent. I note that part of the remit of the administrators is to investigate conduct of the directors. I feel that for their money that the people in charge are required to sort out the problems that are difficult otherwise we could do it all with office staff on a minimum wage. Hopefully the investigation will find them lacking , and possibly others. I did not realize that we were paying for the investigation of possible breach of laws, I thought that there were proper authorities to deal with suspected lawbreakers paid for by the state
|
|