The reality of all this was splendidly spelt out by The Telegraph this morning whose investigative journalism - on this occasion - is impeccable (though I read The Times). 'PINKY 1980' set it out earlier. The onle reason the Rock is in this position is because it is not an EU registered bank. Not even its Dublin Brancj qualified it. So when LIBOR 'fell out of bed' pure incompetence as panic seized large banks with sub prime rot in thew basement (none in the Rock) every one of the 1676 banks registered with the ECB were given privacy as they circumvented britains non funtional money markets and borrowed hugely to cover real problems the Rock didn't have until it went into the market as usual only to find panic and no money. Unable to go to the ECB it had to go the gthe Bank of England. And Oh Deary me - whilst the ECB quietly rescued our high street Banks as it lent over £200Bn the dear old Bank of England craeted a disaster - it is entirely artificial and were \i on the Rock's Board I'd not hesitate to sue for negligence and failure in its duties of care and breaches oof condfidentiality. And I would seek Agravated Damages for the extraordinarily crass, insensitive and infalamatory and siagreeable conduct in agravating the situation it had created for the rock by then charging penal rates. It is a disgrace and the Bank of England needs to sack those responsible. With those idiots in trhe Treasury no less to blame. They have made a laughing stock of this country in frankfurt and moeny markets the world over. Hugely damaging.

It is the duty of an injured party to mitigate damage.
1. NRK go get registered in the ECB (via lichtenstein - cost a few quid)
2. Get out from under trhe Bank of England and refuse to toleratye pressure.
3. Credit the overcharge penal rates to the account.
4. Sue the Bank, the FSA and the Treasury.

Iniciado por << 49 >>

¿Y todo esto no se podría evitar si acudir al banco central fuera más "normal" y no tuviera ese estigma que tiene ahora mismo? Se trata de préstamos a un día de plazo. Estoy empezando a explicarme por qué la Fed bajó inicialmente el tipo de descuento sin cambiar el tipo principal.

To say it is because 'no-one else was prepared to lend them money is rubbish.

As PE52 says 'how do you know are you on the Board?

Read todays Telegraph. It is correct. Had the Rock been one of the 1650 odd ECB registered Banks it would have joined an orderely and private queue (when the London LIBOR market went into choas because no 'interbank' trusted any other 'interbank' because they all suspected each other to be in the same sub prime mess.) But, not being ECB registered Bank the Rock had no-where to go to borrow except London where LIBOR, its usual source had collapsed. None of this has anything to do with Rock whatsoever but everything to do with gross mismanagement by the Bank of England who panicked.

Instead of discretely dealing with Rocks needs until LOBOR recovered (as the ECB was doing to the tune of over £200Bn for the rest of the ECB Reghistered banks)- it turned a mild hicup into a disaster. But for that actionable mismanagement the Rock would still be at its £9-10 mark. Which is where - today - it should be on the fundamentals.

The most extra-ordinary thing is the Bank of England took the opportunity to wholly gratuitously damage the Rock by charging penal rates when the \ecb was bailing out uk ECB registerde high street banks at usual rates - how stupid and petty and vindictive is that. One supposes the Bank of England was 'irritated' by the Rocks failure to have arranged to get an ECB registered acquisition! fBut for thst the LIBOR chaos might have passed more or less unnoticed.

Buy and hold 250,000 small shareholders much less the Rock (or Newcastles 4000 jobs) deserved to be shafted. I would think sense will prevail even over the stupidity, and prejuduce which fathered this disaster. Much better than heads rolling down Threadneedle Street or Whitehall !

Iniciado por tochopolilla

A mi me parece mejor como funciona el banco central en UK.

Veo normal que si pido un préstamo me pidan nómina,relación de bienes, avales, etc. y se quieran asegurar la vuelta del capital, pero de la misma manera NO debería de ser información privilegiada los expedientes de iregularidades abiertos por los bancos centrales a las entidades o si necesitan inyecciones. Yo quisiera saber si el banco en el que tengo mis ahorros tiene fiebre, y si es así que no se hubiese despelotado tanto.

Creo que muchos nos estamos dando cuenta de que si no se fian entre ellos cómo nos podemos fiar nosotros.

En resumen: se ha llegado a esta situación por la falta de transparencia y mangarrufas que han hecho.