Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
bpw

The Real Economy Is A Deceit

Recommended Posts

CAN THE MODERATORS HERE JUSTIFY REMOVING THIS POST..... IT SHOWS HPC IS NO BETTER THAN THE BBC

I lost a lot of money in Equitable Life. It made me realise how pensioners will behave like pigs when faced with the opportunity of feeding off their young. Here is what most of you don't realise:

In a nutshell: life assurance societies wrote policies in the 1970s and 80s that guaranteed annuity rates (GARs) that were unsustainable (16% was not uncommon). These policies matured in the 90s and a small group of pensioners started legal proceedings against Equitable Life in order to force them to pay out the full annuity rate. The snag was that the fund for these GAR policies were deliberately mixed up with non-GARs in the 90s and 2000s. Equitable argued that because the two classes of policy were pooled that the funds should be allocated on the basis of policyholders reasonable expectation (PRE) and not the guarantee. This approach was endorsed by the government and the FSA. As a result the fund with 90,000 GAR was expanded with the savings of 450,000 non-GARs. Can you spot the game?

Two High Court Rulings ruled in favor of the idea that PRE should trump the guarantee. This was also approved by Auditors and the FSA: it allowed Equitable to sell policies to people like me without telling me I was being used as a cash cow if the ruling was reversed. This was always know by the authorities - they did nothing to stop the same practice from being repeated across the Life Assurance industry.

However, a third high court ruled in favor of the GAR action. AT THIS POINT MPs STARTED TO REALISE THERE WAS A RISK OF EQUITABLE LOOSING ITS CASE. This was a major problem for MPs whose pensions we in Equitable Life. Mysteriously, the MP pension fund was moved to another life assurance company. I have a letter from Equitable Life confirming this.

At this point the action group sought to take the case to the House of Lords. It is a matter of record that one Law Lord had a GAR policy at Equitable and the other two refused to say. In law it's it illegal for a judge to preside when there is possibility of bias. And yet this is exactly what happened. The Lords voted for the GAR to trump the PRE. The scene was set for Non-GARs to be forced to pay for GARs grotesque annuity rates.

MPs at this point are out of Equitable Life. Lying pigs?

The snag was that the fund was already paying out excessive bonuses to to pensioners. It couldn't pay the GARS in full, so the GARs voted to rape non-GARs in an attempt to partially fund their grotesque demands.

GUESS WHO ALSO HAD A PENSION FUND AT EQUITABLE LIFE???? THE BBC

John Humphries is a round pink thing flat on the ground..... he repeatedly refused to present the case of non-GARs as did others at the BEEB. MPs LIED too.

Eventually it took the European Court to reveal the scale of the lies by Britain's Politicians and Legal establishment.

This story provides proof of how corrupt Britain is - a nation led by second rate cheats and liars. The proof is all over your press and here is the proof of the points I made above:

EU Court LINK

EU court ruling LINK

Scale and impact of lies LINK

Edited by bpw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting. While I already knew that the UK is extremely corrupt (especially at higher levels and when big money is involved), it is always good to expose examples as widely as possible. People need to know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This story provides proof of how corrupt Britain is - a nation led by second rate cheats and liars. The proof is all over your press and here is the proof of the points I made above:

......if what you say is correct could a good lawyer on a no win no fee basis on your side of the pond take this on and make a good case for you....others in a similar position would no doubt back the cause... :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that's a big nutshell when's the last time you had a hand shandy?

...bit defensive ...are you VI for the status quo or troll....?.... :rolleyes:

Edited by South Lorne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I were a moderator I might feel inclined to disallow a post with a libellous-looking mention of a named (though I suspect misspelled) individual. You haven't even alleged anything remotely specific against him by which a reader could judge whether the name-calling has any merit!

As for the InEquitable story, we know that already. It's all part of the demographically-inevitable collapse of the generous pensions enjoyed by today's old folks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...bit defensive ...are you VI for the status quo or troll....?.... :rolleyes:

i'm no vi.

not to this system and never will be.

(sudden riches coming my way permitting ofc)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In lawpractice it's it illegalnot unusual for a judge to preside when there is possibilitylikelihood of bias. And yet this is exactly what happened.

Corrected for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

..?.... :rolleyes:

of course.

though even with riches i'd like to thing i'd kind of reverse leech on the system, get into it, get known they try and blow the ******ing thing wide open.

that however, is not a given.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I stand corrected and amused.

I'll take John Humphrys name out to avoid the libel action. In truth, he was one of many liars. Ironic that he seems to think all MPs are liars:

LINK

What he doesn't point out in this article is that he had a GAR policy with Equitable Life. He actively promoted the lie that Equitable could pay for the guarantees without stealing from the non-GARs..... that makes him a round pink thing flay on the ground.

Corrected for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The moderators are very angry at this topic title and the allegation that they removed your post.

I found the topic you referred to in the Gold and Precious metals - untouched.

http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=166766

It has a reply answering it - timed and dated. I checked the moderator logs and this topic had not been moved by any of us to that sub forum and had not been set invisible. It has nothing at all to do with Gold so would not have been moved there anyway.

Did you post this topic in another forum by mistake??? (A common enough happening followed by whining posts that the bad moderators had moved a topic or post.)

This topic has not been altered by a moderator according to the logs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It has always been my understanding that EL did not pay out on the GARs. Is this wrong? The last budget announced that some compensation would be paid to policyholders, who have been lobbying for decades.

I've got a GAR, 11%, with Scottish Life, it's not worth much because they are funding it by giving me zero growth on the fund, and not allowing me to put more money in the fund.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Equitable Life promised their punters the moon.

They really did look:

Unsurprisingly, it didn't work out, so while I'm sorry for the OPs loss, I don't understand why taxpayer money should go to compensate policy holders because the companies 'pie in the sky' promises proved to be just that.

People took a punt and lost.

OP says he knew the promised 16% returns were 'unsustainable'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Equitable Life promised their punters the moon.

They really did look:

Unsurprisingly, it didn't work out, so while I'm sorry for the OPs loss, I don't understand why taxpayer money should go to compensate policy holders because the companies 'pie in the sky' promises proved to be just that.

People took a punt and lost.

OP says he knew the promised 16% returns were 'unsustainable'.

Clearly you didnt read the post or didnt understand it, it has nothing to do with the 16%ers getting shafted, its the 16% ers polluting other policies and shafting them mainly because those deciding on this shafting being allowed to take place were 16%ers themselves who benefitted from it and therefore were completely self motivated and in no way fit to pass judgement. It is fundamentally not about the taxpayer bailing them out, its about the putrid stench of corruption that is govt and Law

Edited by Mary Cassatt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The moral of the story is: If someone promises you something, don't take their word for it....they either can't keep it or won't keep it. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The moral of the story is: If someone promises you something, don't take their word for it....they either can't keep it or won't keep it. ;)

No. I think the moral of this story is that you need to make sure you know the facts about the promises that someone has made to other people because they might be forced (perhaps even by V.I's) to keep those promises using money coming out of your pocket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. I think the moral of this story is that you need to make sure you know the facts about the promises that someone has made to other people because they might be forced (perhaps even by V.I's) to keep those promises using money coming out of your pocket.

....but you can't live your life around what might or maybe aren't they the same as promises? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The moral of the story is: If someone promises you something, don't take their word for it....they either can't keep it or won't keep it. ;)

The £20 note in my pocket says "I promise to pay the bearer on demand the sum of twenty pounds".

Edited by VeryMeanReversion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a sad tale of the world that we live in.

I'd like to think that some good would have come from the the EL disaster but it has only produced yet more corruption and fraud. In fact if you imagine the numbers of people who couldn't trust the financial industry and so chose that they'd put their funds in bricks and mortar the scale of this disaster outstrips the Japanese earthquake.

We should all do more to highlight this where ever and when ever we can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I lost a lot of money in Equitable Life. It made me realise how pensioners will behave like pigs when faced with the opportunity of feeding off their young.

...

Very honest of you if you're describing your own attempts to steal first from the investors in guaranteed annuities and then from our unborn children through scamming government hand-outs.

I do sympathise with you for speculating unwisely, a similar thing happened to me last time I visited the racetrack.

It seems as if the courts made the right decision to enforce binding contracts. Where does the deceit come in?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am pretty sure I didn't post it to the wrong forum. And have never posted on the Gold and Precious metals intentionally. All I can think of is I clicked a link from the main forum, ended up there and didn't realise. If that's the case I apologize. If you want change the subtitle.

Hopefully, HPC share my belief that censorship is that start of fascism. There was nothing untrue in my post.

The moderators are very angry at this topic title and the allegation that they removed your post.

I found the topic you referred to in the Gold and Precious metals - untouched.

http://www.housepric...howtopic=166766

It has a reply answering it - timed and dated. I checked the moderator logs and this topic had not been moved by any of us to that sub forum and had not been set invisible. It has nothing at all to do with Gold so would not have been moved there anyway.

Did you post this topic in another forum by mistake??? (A common enough happening followed by whining posts that the bad moderators had moved a topic or post.)

This topic has not been altered by a moderator according to the logs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 312 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • 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.