And so they must muddy waters and sling as much dirt around as possible between now and the result from the UK High Court will come.

And now we know from out come of judicial review that UK FSA and Treasury did not actually have any good reason for it actions at all in making this administration order as it did.

From the UK High Court:

Finally, it has not been contended that the actual decision to make the Transfer Order was an unreasonable one on the information available to the Treasury, and any such argument would be plainly doomed to failure. For my part, I have difficulty in seeing what other decision the Treasury could reasonably have taken in the circumstances.
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2009/2542.html

Fisy’s postings in the High Court thread:

HTTP Error 404 Not found

Just kidding, you can see them here:
http://www.icenews.is/index.php/2009/10/21/kaupthing-loses-claim-against-british-government/

Why do you always try to misdirect conversations in threads when facts start getting umconftable for UK govenrment side ?

Getting real inflation adjust returns of more than 5% per year is not possible to do risk free.

If you want more returns then you are going to be taking risks.

It does not matter if it is a bank deposit or not.

What matters about the difference is that in the time since the middle of 2008 ( after the idea of the US Federal government in 1930s ) in Europe the misguided idea that there should be blanket guarantees for all deposits did suddnely become the policy of EU govenrments in Europe.

After the actions of the Irish.

Before that the deposit schemes from 1994 was just to exist and be funded from the banks them selves.

This regulation was just horrible and has now led to this horrible IceSave mess.

It is so easy just to make this ad hominems attack on bankers without thinking things through.

Without false sense of security of Directive 94/19/EC IceSave would never have become big as it did because UK investor would have been very much more careful in doing they DD.

If you read boards of investment money forums etc at time this was the main thing was used as reason to put money in.

The deposit insurance.

Without it IceSave and other foreign banks would have made little traction into UK market which is the market that did cause all the trouble and ongoing bad feelings between governments.

That name less EU burecrats did decide that this deposit insurance was a good thing and EU parliament who did rubber stamp it have made a monster that in the end the EU memberstate governments decided in panic that they had to suddelny give state backing of deposito insurances, one at time after Ireland did it.

If there was not this deposit insrances there IceSave would not now be the burden on the shoulders of the icelandic tax payers it now is.

( I do not absolve lending of Landsbanki if it is as reckless as some sources do say but in fair ness none of the details of it loan book has come out+ so I cant tell if reckless or simply that assets are now imparied for coming years becauise of they sectors. )

+Not like the delibarabate leaking of the Kautphing loan book from UK.
http://www.icenews.is/index.php/2009/10/15/uk-sfo-iceland-trip-bearing-fruit/#comment-96439
http://www.icenews.is/index.php/2009/11/23/kaupthing-employee-accused-of-stealing-millions/#comment-102924

Factor that in and you will apreciate more what I am saying.”

Of course, anything else your like to factor into your wacky “banks are not banks” scheme?

?? Who is this Mike UK nordic analyst?
Fisy, it’s me! Cousin Gummi! Don’t you remember?
Have you been drinking again?

Afram!
Gummi

:-%

Usually you humor posts are very well observed even if unfair.

But as I mention before you mischaracterise the situation, and rhis latest one is little misplaced.

http://www.icenews.is/index.php/2009/12/28/icelandic-family-home-vandalised-in-uk/#comment-107980

A moral obligation exists on behalf of Icelander to pay they debts, but we want it that an impartial 3rd party does rule on it. Despite the amusing but unfair characterising postings of Mike UK Nordic analyst in his humor mode, we dont want to define ‘debt’, define ‘pay’, define ‘our’, and of course define ‘always’ etc etc. :

http://www.icenews.is/index.php/2009/07/13/the-icelandic-government-is-not-responsible-for-icesave/#comment-85522

..we want impartial thirds party to decide on that. This is the basis of coming to a political settlement that will be agreed by Icelandic people.

As the UK and Holland did not want to fix the basic stuff of Ragnar Hall issue+, despite this flaoting exchange rate offer, it is a shame because this was a real opportunity.

Our government seat idiots going off crying to the US about this was just embarrasing. They are just desperate to save they skins. It is without dignity.

+http://www.slideshare.net/hjalli/the-icesave-dispute-priorities-and-division-of-claims

http://bjarnimax.blog.is/blog/bjarnimax/entry/1003708/?t=1263146351

usual good explanations of how we got to here from Novembmer 2008, Bjarni post :
http://www.icenews.is/index.php/2010/02/24/iceland-waits-to-hear-next-icesave-step/#comment-119951

Dont be silly. I am of course talking about real rate of return Inflation adjusted.

Factor that in and you will apreciate more what I am saying.

Hear hear! Well said Fisy! It pays to remind ignorant foreigners that we Icelanders always pay our debts!

We may need another year or two to define the word ‘debt’, the word ‘we’, the word ‘pay, and the word ‘always’. And while we’re at it we may as well define the word ‘depositor’, the word ‘money’, the word ‘bank’, the word ‘forgive’, the word ‘sovereign’, and the word ‘guarantee.’ That should satisy the bullies.

Afram!
Gummi

Well, according to your bizarre definitive, depositing in virtually every bank in the UK was not a bank deposit but actually an investment, for over twenty years.

http://www.omegaaccountancy.co.uk/bank-of-england/base-rates.html

Average interest rates in the UK were between 9.77% and 5% between 1977 and 1998. They went back above up to 5% in 2004.

You are very odd. You yourself say this in the post you linked to.

“But there is no doubt that this IceSave was deposits in a bank account.”

The rest of your argument is ridiculous; anything over 5% is no longer a deposit but an investment…. No it isn’t.