Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
A.steve

Sally Dewar, The Fsa's Head Of Wholesale And Institutional Markets

Recommended Posts

http://uk.reuters.com/article/businessNews...WLB883020080319

"We will not tolerate market participants taking advantage of the current market conditions to commit abuse by spreading false rumours and dealing on the back of them."

Now, I'd like to know... is this activity illegal? I wouldn't have thought so.

Where is the line to be drawn?

Am I not allowed to mention my fears if I've taken a position?

If so, aren't these "false rumours" exactly the same thing as bullish speculative talk?

Are they trying to ban people from talking?

Do they really mean to target those who spread the rumours - as opposed to those who originate them?

Is Sally Dewar a plonker? Is she related to the late Donald Dewar ( In May 1999 Donald Dewar became the first minister of the first Scottish Parliament in almost 300 years. Died October 2000.)

If there's a Scottish political link - does she have any direct connection to Blair or Brown or Darling etc?

Edited by A.steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest vicmac64
http://uk.reuters.com/article/businessNews...WLB883020080319

Now, I'd like to know... is this activity illegal? I wouldn't have thought so.

Where is the line to be drawn?

Am I not allowed to mention my fears if I've taken a position?

If so, aren't these "false rumours" exactly the same thing as bullish speculative talk?

Are they trying to ban people from talking?

Do they really mean to target those who spread the rumours - as opposed to those who originate them?

Is Sally Dewar a plonker? Is she related to Donald Dewar ( In May 1999 Donald Dewar became the first minister of the first Scottish Parliament in almost 300 years. Died October 2000.)

This is not illegal activity - the banks themselves are at fault - and the BOE and the FSA for not controlling these greedy self serving pyramid scammers we know as our 'banking system'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://uk.reuters.com/article/businessNews...WLB883020080319

Now, I'd like to know... is this activity illegal? I wouldn't have thought so.

Where is the line to be drawn?

Am I not allowed to mention my fears if I've taken a position?

If so, aren't these "false rumours" exactly the same thing as bullish speculative talk?

Are they trying to ban people from talking?

Do they really mean to target those who spread the rumours - as opposed to those who originate them?

Is Sally Dewar a plonker? Is she related to Donald Dewar ( In May 1999 Donald Dewar became the first minister of the first Scottish Parliament in almost 300 years. Died October 2000.)

It is illegal, yes. It's covered in the market abuse directive of the FSA (which I think was part of an amendment to the Financial Services Act)...

Edited by Extradry Martini

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is illegal, yes. It's covered in the market abuse directive of the FSA (which I think was part of an amendment to the Financial Services Act)...

I think "economic sabotage" is also dealt with in various anti-terra acts....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is illegal, yes. It's covered in the market abuse directive of the FSA (which I think was part of an amendment to the Financial Services Act)...

I say" House prices always rise"

I think Ill put the cuffs on meself thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I say" House prices always rise"

I think Ill put the cuffs on meself thanks

That's when the government would take them off for you. Real estate investment is - amazingly - not covered by the FSA, which is why all those companies offering advice and seminars such as inside track have not been shut down as soon as they open. it's only a matter of time before they are though...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DissipatedYouthIsValuable

I've heard Sally Dewar likes to do midgets in custard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is illegal, yes. It's covered in the market abuse directive of the FSA (which I think was part of an amendment to the Financial Services Act)...

Interesting... can you tell me more, or point me at a relevant document? A date for the act?

It sounds somewhere between awfully difficult and impossible to prosecute.

Where is the line drawn? Is this only when one directly benefits? What happens if the rumour is merely drawing attention to an improbable but possible outcome or event?

Edited by A.steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DissipatedYouthIsValuable

Iran wants to be a peaceful, well developed country selling its oil in the currency of its choice, competing with the Saudi-American axis of Evil in a fair manner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is not illegal activity - the banks themselves are at fault - and the BOE and the FSA for not controlling these greedy self serving pyramid scammers we know as our 'banking system'.

LIAR LOANERS... :lol::P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe if legislation hadn't been passed allowing 'secret' bank bailouts, there would be fewer rumours? Just one more bad bit of legislation leading to the inevitable unintended consequences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Catch 22 though isnt it?

i.e. maybe l heard some rumours on a forum which coincided with some long held fears of my own that funnily enough l had just been discussing on another forum. I then speculate against the stocks in question? What came first?

When a flock of birds change course which one caused it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PS: gold is the alarm bell. The scammers know it. Today they are trying to silence it. They can't.

:D I agree with that statement. I disagree with you about gold per se, but the rise in price of gold is one of the key indicators that convinced me that there is something seriously wrong within the financial system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:D I agree with that statement. I disagree with you about gold per se, but the rise in price of gold is one of the key indicators that convinced me that there is something seriously wrong within the financial system.

9 times earnings and -25% deposit on a house as an investment was my warning bell, the last in a long line since about 2002.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 times earnings and -25% deposit on a house as an investment was my warning bell, the last in a long line since about 2002.

That, on its own, only convinced me that the housing market was bananas.

If the houses were good collateral -- then such risky loans wouldn't be a problem... especially if general inflation was about to take off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"We will not tolerate market participants taking advantage of the current market conditions to commit abuse by spreading false rumours and dealing on the back of them."

Well you bunch of numb nuts, you tolerated years of mortgage fraud without doing anything so why take an interest in regulation now !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That, on its own, only convinced me that the housing market was bananas.

If the houses were good collateral -- then such risky loans wouldn't be a problem... especially if general inflation was about to take off.

so you thought that unaffordable loans on short term teaser rates were a good thing as inflation and rising HPs would cover the banksters?

I couldnt for the life of me work out where the money was coming from.

It was reading moneyweek that started to open my eyes halfway.

It was reading this web site that fully opened them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
so you thought that unaffordable loans on short term teaser rates were a good thing as inflation and rising HPs would cover the banksters?

I couldnt for the life of me work out where the money was coming from.

I was making no comment whatsoever about the morality of the situation.

I mean, in circumstances where an individual has a low salary now - but every expectation that it will rise substantially soon - for example, because they're on an apprenticeship; temporarily working part time with a contract to go full-time after studying - etc. then high loan to income ratios might make sense. It might also make sense if someone needs to move to a more expensive location in order to secure a substantial pay rise associated with an offered job contract.

Teaser rates also make sense if wages are set to rise substantially - since, by the time the teaser runs out... income would already have risen substantially.

A 125% LTV mortgage may well also make sense if the customer is a builder and the house has no roof... or needs other substantial work... where the finished value is likely to be in excess of 200% - for example.

It isn't the existence of the products with these headline descriptions that, in itself, is a problem - it is the circumstances of the people who successfully apply. In the olden days, we should have felt secure that mortgage lenders would vet those to whom they would lend very carefully. I declined the startlingly risky mortgages that were suggested to me by various lenders - as I assumed that (by fluke) my own slightly unusual situation had let me fall between the cracks... and that, in any case, with a large deposit, they'd only likely cash-in if I were to default. I didn't consider who might buy if I were to default - since that was an unacceptable outcome in any case.

On an individual basis - none of these things are a "problem" - the problem only becomes apparent when you adopt a global view and observe the systemic nature of the consequences. Like the vast majority of the public, I'd no interest in the affairs of everyone else as I attempted to make the best of my own life. To my credit, however (I think) the risky offers made me nervous - and I was thus saved from the worst this pleb trap had to offer. The people who will have suffer most are those who lack confidence and assume that they are somehow 'behind' when they don't have the showy trappings of debt that they see others display.

Edited by A.steve

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.

  • 297 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.