Thursday, Oct 15, 2009

Taxpayer to bail out another financial disaster

Equitable Life losers to be compensated: Guardian

So yet another financial company needs the taxpayer to cover their incompetence? A friend is a EL pensioner so good news for him, I am genuinely pleased, but where is all the money supposed to come from? Ohh yes, from me.....

Posted by chrisch @ 05:49 PM (891 views)
Add Comment
Report Article


1. Btlers-r-2hats said...

Apologies everyone as this is off-subject, but can someone please explain why my wife and I are being harassed by the banks to move our savings from e-saving accounts to bonds. Because we are a bit lazy, we have not been chasing the latest best interest rates, so you would think that the banks would be happy to be paying us next to nothing in interest and have access to our funds. We have just been threatened by HSBC that because we have not 'used' our savings account recently it will be closed and the money moved to our current account. "Oh, and by the way, do you want a 5 year bond". We might have to transfer 1p into the account to keep the account active, or transfer the lot to another bank, tough decision, lazyness vs spite.

Thursday, October 15, 2009 08:58PM Report Comment

2. stillthinking said...

This should have been seen as a fore-runner. My father, coincidentally, lost a lot through this.

Thursday, October 15, 2009 10:19PM Report Comment

3. nubbers said...

I might get something back from this (hooray!). I don't particulary think its fair that the taxpayer has to pay for it though.

I blame the the greedy bunch with the guaranteed annuity rate that was designed for 70's inflation rates, not for the low inflation that we had at the time. They just had to go to the House of Lords to insist on their prior claim to the money that I was paying in, thereby cutting their own and everyone else's throats. In case any GARs are reading, I voted NO to the compromise agreement, with a view to taking you all down, so there.

I feel so much better for getting that off my chest.

Friday, October 16, 2009 12:49AM Report Comment

4. letthemfall said...

I'm sure a good many of us - or a member of our families - will be affected by this. The whole EL episode has demonstrated the shambles that characterises pension provision is in this country. The negligence of the regulators and their attempts to wriggle out of their responsibilities has been breathtaking. Then of course there was the 80s ideology that drove the privatisation of pensions, enriching providers at the expense of the policy holders (EL was a notable exception, until it went wrong). We still have a hangover from that in the attacks on "gold-plated" public schemes, which are in reality exemplars of how pension provision should be. Yes it will cost, but that's the price of a more equal society.

Let's hope the EL policyholders who've lost out to date get fair compensation now.

Friday, October 16, 2009 09:41AM Report Comment

5. mark wadsworth said...

Compensation from whom?

After I did my pensions simplification talk at the UKIP conference, a lot of people came up to me with ideas & queries, all most helpful. One lady said that we could get a lot of votes by bailing out insolvent pension schemes, EL pensioners and the like. I told her that no way was that sort of thing going into our policy. I've no objection to a taxpayer funded universal Citizen's Pension of £X for ever legal resident over the age of Y years (choose your own variables) which will cost the taxpayer £Z but promising to splurge additional large amounts of taxpayers' finest to buy votes from narrow interest groups is not even being considered.

One bloke was even more radical, he said seeing as the total cost/value of tax breaks for pension saving (which are all swallowed up by the "pensions industry" of course) were approx. equal to the total cost of the basic state pensions, why didn't we just scrap the tax breaks and double the state pension. I must say, this idea is not entirely without merit but a tad radical for a mainstream political party.

Friday, October 16, 2009 10:49AM Report Comment

6. letthemfall said...

That's the question, and the problem of failure of state-employed regulators. There was of course the auditors, who wormed their way out of the picture (they in theory are culpable and should contribute). The financial services industry? They have much to answer for. A levy should not be out of the question. But, yes, in the end compensation often comes from the taxpayer. In the end, the real problem is the inadequacy and inequity of the tax system, on which we both have views.

Friday, October 16, 2009 02:29PM Report Comment

Add comment

  • If you do not have an admin password leave the password field blank.
  • If you would like to request a password allowing you to add comments and blog news articles without needing each one approved manually, send an e-mail to the webmaster.
  • Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
  • Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user's views and not the views of
  • Please adhere to the Guidelines
Admin Password
Email Address

Main Blog | Archive | Add Article | Blog Policies