One thing I saw was that, contrary to what Fisy has said elsewhere, the term deposit amounts were not significant. Most of it was instant access: total retail deposits ~£2.7b, of which IA ~£2b.

Also, confirmation of the existence of a run on KSF.

I think it is impossible to say at this stage whether KSFIOM would have been better off in hf than UK.
This needs a transparent inquiry in relation to KSFIOM and KSFUK.
The UK government will not do it – and the IOM non-public enquiry has whitewash/ cover-up written all over it.
The IOM depositors have been treated disgracefully falling between various goverments with different agendas – all of which have an interest in sweeping ksfiom under the carpet.
I personally suspect some political pressure was applied in putting the ksfiom monies in ksfuk – it doesn’t make sense otherwise.

Hopefully the Icelandic government secured that loan on something that held value (not that I know whether it would have been legally possible to do so).

Hi Steve. I understand that the preferred solution would have been to keep the money in the IoM or to diversify the deposits outside the group.

But, forgetting that for the moment, has anyone worked out whether KSFIOM would have been better off with the money in K.hf or KSFUK?

The other thing that occurred to me is that maybe K.hf wasn’t prepared to allow the funds to sit in the IoM? From this judicial review, it seems that when they transferred money from K.hf to KSFUK, they then transferred most of it back out again to try to plug gaps in other countries.