Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


New Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Dazmondo

  • Rank
    HPC Newbie
  1. "With so many people facing hardship, as the economy unravels, there is a not-unreasonable desire among innocent victims to blame someone. Even those who have been the architects of their own misfortune, by over-borrowing to fund fantasy lifestyles, prefer to look for a demon than in the mirror. And who better to fill that role than the banking big-shot who walked away from the wreckage of RBS with a jewel-encrusted pension?" "If the inappropriately named Goodwin did not exist, the Government's Department of Propaganda would need to invent him. By casting Sir Fred as the pantomime villain – the credit crunch's Dick Dastardly – the unholy trinity of Gordon Brown, Alistair Darling and Lord Mandelson has been able to deflect attention from Labour's calamitous stewardship." "Ironic, isn't it, that having destroyed Britain's private pension system with a tax raid which, grossed up over 12 years, has snatched about £100 billion from personal savings schemes, the Prime Minister is now keen to preach on pensions and justice." "Yes, he ran one proud institution into the ground. But no one died. If he is to be stripped of his pension, what should happen to those of ministers who have driven a whole country into the ditch, while sanctioning a futile adventure in Iraq that has cost the lives of at least 179 British servicemen?" This man is the most common sense piece of writing on this whole debacle I have ever read.
  2. Regardless of whether I think he deserves it or not, it was agreed as part of his severance deal to step down some six months ago. It's a contract that is legally binding and as such, should stand because if it turns out that Brown can simply ride rough shod over any law he pleases, then then what can and will happen should he not only win but also gain public support for his 'ignoring the law' is far more frightning. The man is a power junkie as it is; if the UK population give him carte blache to laugh at the law and make it up as he goes along just because we are a touch peeved at one man's pension deal makes us as pathetic as the man himself. Also, if you were sacked from your job, would you expect to lose pension rights? I think not. Severance pay and all other associated benefits yes but your pension, not a chance. So yes, I think he should keep his pension.
  3. This inept government does not have any rights, legal or 'moral' (as that incompetant idiot Harman would have us believe) to hold back money and pay a completely different amount to what was contractually agreed as a condition of Fred's departure regardless of what you, Vince 'God' Cable or anyone else believes, it's that simple. In Fred's shoes, I would be looking at legal action against the government already for his 'trial by media' and for releasing sensative data into the public domain in order to get him to back down. I would also be looking at releasing some dirty little secrets about Labour and Brown et al. He must have quite a few he could put out into the public domain.
  4. So, let me get this right. Some of you have no problem with Gordon "Robert Mugabe" Brown suing Fred as long as he's using the law??? So you advocate more tax payers money being used to recover tax payers money in an argument that the government can only lose??? I mean, unlikely as it is, even if 'Mugabe' Brown were to win the in the British courts, Fred would rightly take them to the European courts and sue the **** of them, not only for his original 'pension pot' but also for damages, being villified in the media by the government and all his legal expenses from both cases. On top of that, Brown will look even more inept (if that is humanly possible) for going down that route and for retrospectively changing laws, thus allowing Fred to get even more money. Brown and his team of overpaid, inept muppets should shut the hell up and step down as a matter of extreme urgency. They are making this country more of a laughing stock that its idiotic leader with each passing second.
  5. When looking at the current state of the world, one can say hindsight is a wonderful thing however igiven the last ten years of world growth, when everything was going hunky dory, the world was on a roll and all this imaginary money was floating around the system and all you had to do was find a home for it, your morals would have said 'walk away'? You must be a living, breathing embodiment of Jesus Christ, a one of a kind as I would guarantee some 99.9% of the planet's population would have done no such thing.
  6. I'm sure Injin that as morally responsible as you are, you would not walk out on a job paying £2-3 million a year plus bonuses and share options.
  7. So going by that thinking, Daniels should also be sacked for buying the poison challace that is HBOS when he already knew it was toxic. At least Fred was not aware of ABN's problems until after the crunch. Also Brown for making him buy it. They knew what they were doing when they forced HBOS on Lloyds, they knew the bad shape it was in and that it was unsalvagable as a standalone bank. RBS, although in the mire will survive. HBOS could not but Daniels still agreed to the takeover. There are many culprits and contibutors to this whole sorry affair, Fred is but a one however he is the only one being crucified by the media and by this commedy Government. As for the taxpayer and Fred's life of luxury, I really do not think he will be suffering one jot given how successful he's been in the past.
  8. No one made him do it but there was plenty from encouragement shareholders. It was a no win situation, if he failed to give double digit growth he would have been been shown the door for underperforming. He have double digit growth (albeit on paper) and was shown the door for being too reckless.
  9. I fail to see why some of you, who claim to hate Brown and his ilk, are jumping on the bandwagon regarding Fred's pension. Yes, he overpaid for something, namely ABN just prior to the collapse of the entire banking system however he is not responsible for the current mess we are in. He played the system, as did nearly all bank heads and he played it because he was encouraged to do so by shareholders who were demanding ever larger profits and increased market share. You could also say he was encouraged by Brown who has constantly been boasting for the past ten years how London is the financial centre of the world, made so by our (now proven to be complete and utter rubbish) highly successful banking and financial industries, their success built on Brown's light touch regulation. The people who should have been policing the role of senior bankers and the banks themselves did not (and still do not) have a clue how the banks operated and as such, left them to their own devices. Whilst I agree that bank heads are the significant contributers of the current situation, the main culprits are the FSA, the Government and the BoE. The BoE did nothing because they were powerless to do so once Brown had removed all their powers under his so called 'tripartite' agreement. The FSA did nothing because they did not understand what they were supposed to be policing (take the HBOS fiasco and the now fundamentaly flawed KPMG report which they signed off and being correct) when the banks were taking ever larger risks for profit and market share, And finally this inept, nay thoroughly incompetant Goverment did nothing when banks were inflating the housing bubble by lending more than the value of properties and lending ever higher multiples to buy houses and why? So England could bask in the fantasy of being a highly successful and prosperous economy, so Brown could claim to be the most successful Chancellor ever. Labour have identified Fred as a scapegoat for this mess and as such, are hunting him down and villifying him, conducting a 'trial by media' and making him look as bad as they possibly can in order to deflect the blame from themselves and to make them appear to be the party which cares about the 'common people'. Harriet Harmon on the Andrew Marr show this morning has said that whilst Fred's pension is legal in a court of law, it is not in the 'court of public opinion' and as such, Labour will do all they can the claw it back. If Labour value the opinion of the 'court of public opinion' so much, do the polls not suggest that Labour are no longer wanted and as such, Labour should also bow to this court and call a general election immediately? Let Fred keep his pension I say. He fell on his sword and aplogised. He also said what we all know, that to put the blame on him is too simplistic. And finally the man will never work in banking again. Our 'PM' and his band of inept so called politicians on the other hand are still in jobs, as are Hector Sants and Lord Turner who are more to blame in all this mess and I for one cannot see any of them laying themselves at the mercy of the 'court of public opinion' and resigning immediately and foregoing their pension entitlements.
  10. dface, if I am right in that you appear to be some sort of property speculator or BTL landlord, then coming on this site moaning that you cannot get a mortgage for another property and expecting sympathy is just a tad ill advised in my opinion. Most people want affordable mortgages and houses for themselves and others to live in as owner occupiers. According to you, you already have houses (note the plural). Why not live in one of those and be happy as opposed to pricing out some other poor bugger out of the market.
  11. Further to this, why weren't these people asking for interest rate rises to 'stabilise' house prices when they were rising to such ridiculous levels that people were getting themselves into frightning amounts of debt to 'get on the ladder'. Not a word other than "people need to buy now if they can, regardless of the cost as they will miss the boat. House prices only ever go up".
  12. When will these idiots realise that it doesn't matter what the BoE interest rates are? LiBOR is the rate that matters and this is quite a lot higher than the BoE rate. Also, banks aren't willing to revert back to their 'Come one, Come all, no deposit or guarantees required' lending policies of the past 10 years (given the depth of the doo doo they are in now which is a direct result of handing out credit willy nilly). House prices will being to revert back to normal salary multiples which should be a cause for celebration, not for dread and fear. What these people fail to realise is that affordable housing is a benefit to all.
  13. 2:17pm UK, Friday December 05, 2008 Aaron Turner, CEO, look4aproperty.com A two per cent base rate is fine but the Government needs to go the extra mile to have any hope of kick-starting the UK housing market. Firstly, people need to start spending. This rate cut is not going to make that happen. I detect a change of mindset in the past six months. People are terrified about losing their jobs. Any money consumers can claw back through rate cuts is going to be saved for a rainy day - and many of us are expecting a downpour in 2009. People are still not going to start spending because they are worried about losing their jobs. If you are scared of losing your job you are not going to go on a spending spree. Thousands of jobs have been lost in the UK recently. Even government agencies like HMRC are making reundancies. If people get bonuses this year they will be hoarding them away, not spending them and until the job losses slow or stop I can't see that people will want to spend their money. The Government needs to stop pussyfooting around. All these measures are at arm's length and policies need to be more direct. The only way to kick start the housing market is to scrap stamp duty for one year, and to get the banks to start lending. It needs to force the banks to start lending - otherwise what is the point in having bailed them out with taxpayers' money? The Government now holds a controlling share in a number of High Street banks. So why is it appointing itself to non-executive roles? My advice - Get on the board and start making things happen! The Next Steps - what Gordon Brown and his Chancellor should do now: ::Kill stamp duty for at least a year immediately - the housing market will come back to life overnight :: Make things happen with the banks - no more token gestures - start lending to the consumer, small businesses and to each other :: Job security is the overriding need amongst consumers so redeploy people in government agencies rather than make them redundant as this is contributing to the problem even more - people think if even the Government is laying off then things must be really bad. Until confidence returns, the economy will keep sliding - the Government needs to address the fundamentals rather than just tinker.
  14. The British economy turned a corner last night after somebody sold a house. The prime minister said it marked the 'beginning of the end of the beginning' as the FTSE 100 climbed by 12 points and then stayed there for 20 minutes. The sale was completed shortly after midday, but was kept under wraps until Downing Street had been informed. It was finally confirmed in a newsflash from the Press Association at 1.26pm. The soon-to-be-former owner Tom Logan said: "We had given up hope, what with the banks being shits and everything. "But then this couple turned up, had a poke around in the kitchen, fiddled with the central heating, flushed the toilet and then suddenly said, 'we'd like to buy it.' "My wife collapsed, I got a nose bleed and the dog started howling like a coyote." By late afternoon a large and boisterous crowd had gathered outside the detached cottage in the Home Counties village of Minchinhamptonsteadbury as Mr and Mrs Logan gave interviews to Le Monde, CNN and Japan's TV-Osaka. Burger vans and buskers cashed-in on the celebration while quick-witted entrepreneurs sold mugs, baseball hats and souvenir flags immortalising 'The House That Someone Bought'. Mr Logan added: "I've no idea where they got the money from. Maybe they're drug dealers. Good luck to them."
  15. The publisher of the Daily Mail has said that the economic slowdown means its full-year results will be at the low end of expectations. Daily Mail & General Trust said the slowing economy was hitting both its newspaper and property businesses. The firm, which publishes the London Evening Standard, said it expected annual earnings of £257m-£279m. Revenue for the 11 months to August rose 4%, helped by its trade magazine and events management businesses. UK newspapers account for about 60% of Daily Mail group sales. 'Resilience' Group chairman, Viscount Rothermere, said: "Our strategy of creating a diversified international portfolio of market-leading operations across both business and consumer products provides considerable resilience and leaves us well positioned to deliver long-term growth. "Inevitably, the worsening economic conditions are having an impact on our newspaper and property businesses but the business-to-business divisions have continued to perform well. "The recent events experienced by financial markets and institutions will have no material impact on this year's results." On Wednesday the group said second-half trading at its Euromoney Institutional Investor subsidiary, including financial publishing and events, was encouraging. At least we have it in writing why they have been ramping prices for the last few years and why they are now begging for rate cuts etc... Impartial and unbiased indeed. There should be laws against these so called 'newspapers' (and I use the term in the loosest sense of the word) having a vested interest in certain sectors and then using their rag to ramp them up. By the way, the info is taken from the BBC website.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.