Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


311 Excellent

1 Follower

  1. Thanks Andyorch/determindator, I appreciate there is a lot there, the aim of which, is to get everyone thinking about taking a proactive approach to that with which we dislike/disagree That which we don't like, WE can change......
  2. Many are concerned with how British society is changing. Whether our area of concern is governments program of austerity, cuts to disability benefits, the renewal of trident, tax avoidance/evasion, brexit, the annihilation of the NHS as we knew it, with allegations of government plans to privatise our NHS, media bias, climate change, or any other concern, attack, insult, demean, demonise and discredit "the enemy" (those who do not agree with every word we say) seems to be the order of the day. We call ourselves a democratic nation, but a single episode of PM's questions would bring that allegation into question, as our "upstanding pillars of society" MP's, pass their insults, attacks and vile behaviour at fellow "honourable members". The recent in/out referendum brought out the very worst in British politics with insults galore, lies, false claims and promises being order of the day. Our so called "free press", regardless of which side of the argument their paymasters supported were equal in spreading utter fearporn and confusion among the British people. We are quick to point the finger of blame at government, often with good cause, but somehow conveniently forget that it was we collectively whom time and again have elected our politicians to their positions of privilege and power, where we have enabled them to make decisions on our behalf and continue to fail to hold them account for the decisions they make. Somehow, we have as yet failed to recognise that our seemingly preferred approach of attack, insult and discredit "the opposition" achieves nothing useful, nor do the utterly pointless petitions on the .gov website, which even at best, will only achieve a debate in the House of Commons What we continue to fail to consider, is surely the fundamental question of "What kind of society, do we want to live in? If Britain is a democratic nation, surely we the people have a right to consider and express our opinions on this question, without the insults and other vile, degrading and wholly undemocratic tactics?
  3. Many thanks Andy/Honeybee, I suspected as much that RBS can take the money. Difficulty is, next of kin has not yet been granted control of the bank a/c's so we cannot touch any of the money My thoughts are to inform RBS of the DWP overpayment and instruct them to make the refund, or at least freeze that money until next of kin has control of the a/c's Suggestions welcome
  4. Honeybee13, thanks for your prompt reply Yes, the loan is in the sole name of the deceased. A memorial fund has been setup to cover funeral expenses. I have looked and there does not appear to be PPI on the loan
  5. A family member recently passed away suddenly with an outstanding balance on their personal loan a/c of £2,000, £400 in their current a/c and £500 in their savings account DWP have contacted me to inform of an overpayment of pension credit of £200 which of course must be repaid Next of kin has been in touch with RBS bereavement service, whom claim they can take the £900 in the deceased's RBS a/c's against the outstanding balance of the loan 1. Is this true? 2. What happens to the remaining balance of the loan? 3. Should we inform RBS of the DWP overpayment? & 4. Can the DWP overpayment be taken from the £900 in credit? Advice appreciated
  6. dj1971

    HSBC scandal

    Today HSBC are expected to announce an annual profit for 2014 of £13.6billion and from that bonuses for it's top executives of £2.6billion. CEO Stuart Gulliver wrote a "sincere apology" for it's failings in many of the national papers last Sunday, before going on to apparently justify it by saying that was nearly 10 years ago and we have changed. Mr Gulliver who earns a £1.2million annual salary, plus £1.7million in "fixed pay allowance" paid every 3 months in shares, is expected to collect £7.5million from the bonus pot. Although born and raised in Britain, Mr Gulliver is considered non'dom in the UK for tax purposes, meaning he does not pay UK tax on earnings from outside Britain. That combined with his employment contract at HSBC which is with HSBC's Dutch arm, could potentially mean that he pays no tax in UK. Now. That considered, have a read of this: http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/feb/22/swiss-account-secret-of-hsbc-chief-stuart-gulliver-revealed and this: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/listen-tories-plot-bankers-dodge-5211052 Sorry my "insert link" tab does not appear to be working. DJ
  7. dj1971

    HSBC scandal

    No I hadn't Thanks. Anyone got anymore?
  8. dj1971

    HSBC scandal

    For the purposes of clarification the 1,100 individuals identified by HMRC related to tax evasion (il-legal non payment of tax due) not tax avoidance which has been discussed extensively in the press & media lately. The Liechtenstein disclosure facility I referred to in the second paragraph of 11th February is an agreement set up by then chancellor Alistair Darling and the Liechtenstein government to facilitate the disclosure of financial assets held by British nationals in Liechtenstein. Under the agreement anyone who voluntarily disclosed their financial assets to HMRC including immunity from criminal prosecution in the majority of cases and a fixed penalty of 20-30% rather than the up to 200% of tax owed available to HMRC in cases settled outside the agreement. There are a number of important conditions that must be met for a case to be settled under these more favourable terms including the disclosure must be information that HMRC were not already aware of and must be made voluntarily i.e. without HMRC intervention. Therefore it follows that as HMRC already had the relevant information and the disclosures were not made without HMRC intervention, the Liechtenstein disclosure facility with it's favourable terms of settlement was not applicable to these 1,100 cases that HMRC allowed to be settled in that way. As a result, the £135million collected in unpaid taxes and fines could have been much more and potentially have lead to more criminal prosecutions. Which surely begs the question why did HMRC allow and indeed actively persuade those involved in some of these 1,100 cases to be settled under the more favourable terms and who authorised it?
  9. dj1971

    HSBC scandal

    Fair enough. I'll start the ball rolling with an overview of what's been happening. In May 2006 Stephen Green was appointed chairman of HSBC. December 2008: Herve Falciani who had been employed at HSBC;s Swiss private bank as an IT expert was arrested by Swiss police and escaped to France with data containing information on 30,000 accounts at the private bank having been released on bail. Herve claims he contacted HMRC informing them that he had information relating to British nationals evading tax. There was no response from HMRC, so Herve claims he called them but again no action was taken. January 2009: Swiss authorities issue an arrest warrant for Herve and he was arrested by French police. Upon seizing his computer and finding the leaked data, French authorities refuse to extradite Herve and proceed to investigate the data themselves. HSBC take the French authorities to court in an attempt to prevent them passing the data to other tax authorities. Early 2010: French finance minister Christiane Legarde (currently head of the IMF) passed on data to tax authorities in a number of EU countries including our very own HMRC. HMRC start analysing the data and of the 6,000 accounts it contained decide that these relate to 3,600 individuals of which 1,100 have been participating in tax evasion. (the il-legal non payment of taxes due) September 2010: Mr Cameron appoints Stephen Green as trade minister and gives him a peerage. Lord Green takes up his post as trade minister in January 2011. September 2011: David Hartnett told the treasury select committee "I think the whole nation probably knows that our department has a disc from the Swiss - from the Geneva branch of a major UK bank, with 6,000 names all ripe for investigation". July 2012: Property developer Michael Shanly pleaded guilty to tax evasion of £430,000 and was ordered by the court to pay a further £469,444 in fines and costs. To date Mr Shanly is the only British national to have been prosecuted from data received in the leaked files. December 2012: HSBC pays £1.2billion in fines after admitting that it had processed drug trafficking proceeds through Mexico and transmitted funds from sanctioned countries including Iran. October 2013: Belgian prosecutors carry out raids on the Antwerp homes of a number of diamond dealers in a tax evasion investigation focusing on HSBC. December 2013: Lord Green steps down as minister of state for trade and investment. June 2014: HSBC sells a big chunk of it's Swiss bank to Liechtenstein LGT. November 2014: France. Belgium & Argentina charge HSBC with aiding tax evasion through it's Swiss business. 9th February 2015: BBC program panorama airs it's investigation into the leaked HSBC files and alleged tax evasion. Stoke City director Keith Humphreys threatened legal action after allegations in the panorama program alleged that Mr Humphreys had told his HSBC account manager in Switzerland that his account had not been declared to HMRC. 11th February 2015: HMRC CEO Lyn Homer tells the public accounts committee that of the 6,000 accounts on the leaked files it had found these related to 3,600 individuals. Of these 1,100 were identified as having participated in tax evasion, most of whom had settled their accounts under a little known agreement called the Liechtenstein disclosure facility, 500 of which had done so following active persuasion by HMRC. The total collected in unpaid tax and penalties was £135million. Miss Homer also told mp's of the committee that HMRC could find no record of the email alleged to have been sent by Herve Falciani in 2008, before french newspaper Le Monde published a copy of the email. When asked by the committee's chair why there had been only 1 prosecution from the data received Miss Homer said that French authorities had placed strict conditions on how HMRC could use the data. She also told the committee that HMRC had tried to persuade the French authorities to relax the conditions and that they had none done so. This allegation was later refuted by French finance minister Michel Sapin who said "I have not understood the comments made by the British authorities. The data on HSBC was transmitted to them in 2010, in the framework of the bilateral conventions that bind us. Nothing has been said to them since. These conventions do restrict the use of the information to tax purposes." 14th February 2015: Lord Stephen Green resigns his position at financial services lobby group TheCityUK. 15th February 2015: HSBC CEO Stuart Gulliver takes out a full page ad in some Sunday papers saying "we must show that the societies we serve expect more from us. We therefore offer our sincerest apologies." before going on to criticise "Major UK media" for publishing information from the stolen files. 18th February 2015: Officers from the Swiss prosecutors office raid the offices of HSBC's Swiss bank in Geneva and said they were investigating HSBC private bank and persons unknown for aggressive money laundering. The investigation could also be extended to people suspected of committing or participating in money laundering.
  10. I was shocked to see when I logged into the HSBC forum that no-one was talking about the recently publicised details of the HSBC scandal and HMRC's handling of it. Then I though maybe it is being discussed in here. But no. This is a huge issue that effects us all, is no-one interested? DJ
  11. dj1971

    HSBC scandal

    I am completely shocked to log into the forum and find that no-one has posted a thread or is discussing events now having been made so public around the HSBC scandal. This is a huge issue which effects us all. So why is no-one talking about it? DJ
  12. Details of bankers bonuses at Barclays, Lloyds, HSBC & RBS at an estimated £5billion Lloyds who were fined £226million last July for their part in il-legally rigging international foreign exchange rates are expected to pay out £375million in bonuses to it's top bankers. So we the British taxpayer with a 24.5% shareholding in Lloyds get landed with a share of the £226million fine for il-legal activity due to incompetent management and then are expected to reward their incompetence with £375million in bonuses on top of their already over inflated wages. Their justifications for the bonuses? 1) They need to employ the top bankers 2) The pot is 15% lower than last years With labour and the coalition government having already signed up to an additional £30billion of cuts to public spending, Who feels "we're all in this together"
  13. The next round of bankers annual bonuses have been estimated at £5billion between HSBC, Barclays, Lloyds & RBS. RBS who were fined $1.6million dollars in July 2014 for their part in fixing Australian exchange rates are expected to pay out £500million in bonuses. In December 2014 they were fined £400million by regulators in UK & US for their part in il-legally fixing international foreign exchange rates. A week later there were fined £56million by UK regulators after paying out £70million in compensation to customers for a Systems failure in 2012. That is £527million in compensation and fines due to appalling management in a bank where we hold an 80% shareholding, yet have absolutely no say in the running of it and now we are expected to pay £500million in bonuses to the same incompetent management on top of their already over inflated wages. Their justification for the bonuses? 1) They need to employ the very best 2) It is 15% lower than last years bonus pot. Remember Mr Brown & Mr Cameron's words "there will be no reward for failure" With labour and the coalition having already signed up to an additional £30billion cuts to public spending regardless of who wins the next election, Who agrees "we're all in this together"?
  14. CitizenB, This is exactly the catch 22 situation we find ourselves in. Part of me thinks if we go down the bankruptcy route, the OR might be more open to negotiation if we explain the circumstances and consequences of not allowing us to continue paying MIL's rent. On the other hand by the time an OR gets involved we will already have been made bankrupt and therefore at their mercy. If we try negotiating with our creditors they are obviously not going to accept us paying £300 a month for MIL's rent. Assuming one of them then takes a case against us, my gut feeling is a judge will take the same attitude towards MIL's rent as she does not live in UK. Unfortunately the only bank to accept non discharged bankrupts for their basic bank account are Barclays which is not an option as they are 1 of our creditors. Although I have read on the MSE forum that Co-op will not close a basic bank account after bankruptcy if the account was already active before the bankruptcy order. Another option for bank account is the Credit Union, so I am not really worried about bank accounts just whether we will be allowed to continue paying MIL's rent. DJ
  15. Hi Guys, No I am not entitled to any benefits because of my wife's high salary and I have double checked to confirm this. Unfortunately there is no PPI on the loan. This is all having such a huge effect on my health and I am completely unable to leave the house, though my GP has been absolutely fantastic I am now under the care of the local mental health crisis team and they are about as much use as a chocolate teapot. I am really tempted to go down the route of bankruptcy, but really worried the court makes us bankrupt and then the OR will not allow us to continue paying my mother in laws rent. Please help. DJ
  • Create New...