Bradford & Bingley Share Discussion Threads

[pvb] 25/7/2021 19:11

...A rave from the grave!

"Footnote: our campaign has been a long haul but I still feel there may be light at the end of the tunnel. Will every one please send this communication together with any personal views to your MP requesting an independent inquiry regardless of whether you have done this before. If he/she responds with the past white wash response justifying B&B’s destruction I would appreciate details in order to pursue this matter on your behalf.

Irene and I wish you well and will continue to campaign on your behalf until we achieve success or the Westminster Bubble’s lack of integrity prevails.
Yours Sincerely
David Blundell
BBAG Chairman"

Be interesting to know if Mr & Mrs Blundell voted for, or against, the original demutualisation of B&B.

[birchin] 25/7/2021 18:26

https://www.bbactiongroup.org/BBAG_Update_034.pdf

[loganair] 01/3/2021 15:38

A part from all the falsehoods and untruths the B&B CEO said at the time to get the rights issue away, then afterwards saying that B&B had the second highest tier 1 ratio and had sufficient funds to last at least the next two years, then just 6 weeks later going bust - being taken over by Santander for just £1.


I understand that B&B made £150mln profit for Santander in the first full year of their ownership, then even more in subsequent years. In total B&B has made well over £1billion in profit for Santander since they took B&B over.

[knowing] 26/2/2021 14:28

Just saw this and bought back some memories

[pvb] 30/1/2019 22:39

Nothing has changed. If it really was the thriving business at the time, as described in the above article, then why the rights issue? Why was it seeking help? How come there was no rush to buy it up?



Now, if it had remained a Building Society, who knows?

[jsd71] 29/1/2019 20:43

ForbesJan 14, 2019,3:58 pmDid The European Commission Authorize B&B's Bank 'Destruction' With £22B State Aid?https://www.forbes.com/sites/rogeraitken/2019/01/14/did-the-european-commission-authorize-bbs-bank-destruction-with-22b-state-aid/#79b8d11d3d29

[beckyjah] 03/1/2019 20:01

HI there. Can anyone let me have an update on the situation of trying to get our shares back. Im new to it all and have just found old B and B shares paperwork and I dont know if its worth chasing?

[loganair] 15/5/2017 10:08

If RBS share holders have been offered some settlement over their Rights Issue, how about us B&B share holders???

B&B share holders were also mislead when it came to B&B´s Rights Issue saying that after gone through that B&B will have the second highest Tier 1 Capital Ratio and sufficent funding to cover the next 18 months. With in a month B&B had been either been sold off to Santander or other parts Nationalized.

It seems overal that the government are going to make a good profit out of B&B and seems to me that this profit is going to cover some of the losses that it has made by being in RBS.




Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) has held last-ditch legal talks with former investors ahead of a trial expected to see Fred Goodwin giving his first account of the lender's collapse into a decade of state ownership.

Lawyers for RBS last week met representatives of the final remaining shareholder action group suing it over the bank's £12bn rights issue in 2008.

Sources familiar with the meeting, which took place last Tuesday, say that it concluded with little prospect of a settlement.

There are now just eight days to go until the trial is due to begin.

RBS is not thought to have used the meeting to raise its settlement offer above the 43.5p-per-share deal it agreed to pay some members of the action group last month.

Thousands of small investors, as well as some institutions, are pressing ahead with their claim despite having instigated last week's meeting, according to people close to the talks.

"They are miles apart in terms of agreeing a deal, and time is running out," one insider said this weekend.

Some members of the RBoS Shareholder Action Group are willing to settle but are said to have been holding out for a deal worth at least 92p-per-share, just under half of what investors paid in the ill-fated rights issue.

Others, however, are determined to see Mr Goodwin and his former senior colleagues give a public account of their actions.

Mr Goodwin, who forfeited his knighthood following the implosion of RBS, has never spoken publicly about the events leading up to its £45.5bn taxpayer bailout, but is due to take the stands next month.

RBS has already reached settlements with four other claimant groups in recent months, and had set aside up to £800m to bring an end to all of the shareholder legal claims.

The investors allege that RBS, under Mr Goodwin's leadership, misled them about the state of the bank's finances when it raised billions of pounds from them just months before it had to be rescued.

Mr Goodwin, along with Sir Tom McKillop, the former RBS chairman, are named alongside the state-backed bank as defendants in the case.

The Government continues to own more than 70% of the bank, and there is little prospect of it ever recouping the money it paid to avert its outright collapse.

Most of the 27,000 members who were originally part of the RBoS Shareholder Action Group were ordinary retail investors who lost money after subscribing to the new RBS shares.

To date, more than £100m has been spent by the bank defending the claims, a bill which includes the legal costs of Mr Goodwin and other former directors.

Those legal fees have drawn criticism from investors and politicians, but were defended by Sir Howard Davies, RBS's chairman, at its annual meeting last week.

Sir Vince Cable, who was Business Secretary in the 2010-15 Coalition Government, said last week that the legal bill was "obscene".

"The Treasury, as majority shareholder, should have intervened," he wrote in an opinion piece for City AM.

"Chancellor Philip Hammond and [RBS chief executive Ross] McEwan must both now wonder whether that money would have been better invested in a settlement.

"The claimants are seeking £700m, including interest, and have understandably turned their noses up at offers amounting to barely 20 per cent of this claim."

[loganair] 03/4/2017 08:34

Government sells B&B loans for ‘excellent value’ £12bn:

The Treasury will net £11.8 billion from the agreed sale of Bradford & Bingley loans it bought during the financial crisis.

UK Asset Resolution (UKAR), the body established to oversee the government’s stakes in bailed-out banks, has struck a deal to sell the portfolios to Prudential and assorted Blackstone funds.

The body described the price as ‘at the upper end of expectations’ and ‘excellent value’. A second tranche of loans will be sold later with a view to repaying the remainder of the loan by March 2018.

Chancellor Philip Hammond said: ‘The sale of these Bradford & Bingley assets for £11.8 billion marks another major milestone in our plan to get taxpayers' money back following the financial crisis.'

Today’s sale is the first in the programme. The programme of sales is expected to conclude in full before the end of 2017-18.

UKAR has also been significantly reducing its stake in Lloyds, which is now below 3%, but problems at RBS, which announced an eighth consecutive year of losses earlier in 2017, have meant its stake in the Scottish bank remains above 70%.



In my good opinion the profit the Government is making from the sale(s) of the B&B loan book are being used to pay for the losses made from the virtual take over of RBS which the Government are sitting on huge losses with instead of being returned to us, the B&B shareholders.

In otherwords it seems to me that the B&B shareholders are paying for the mistakes made by the BOD of RBS and the Government taking it over as being ´Too Big to fail.´

If I had been in the Government shoes I would have wrapped up the good parts of RBS into NatWest and given RBS shareholders 1 new NatWest share for every RBS share held and to let the rest of RBS go bankrupt would in my opinion have been the good and right thing to do.

The Governemnt is expect to break even when it comes to Lloyds.

[loganair] 31/3/2017 10:37

PVB - The analogy I would use is from the wilds of Scotland I drive 500 miles in my car. The speed limit is 60mph which I keep too all the way. However I suddenly get stopped by the police who said I broke the speed limit in the last mile. I said that the sign says the speed limit is 60mph, the police say they do not care what the sign says and that the spped limit for the last mile is actually 50mph.

[loganair] 30/3/2017 09:36

pvb - In the first Santander final financial report after they took over the B&B deposit book and retail outlets they reported the B&B part separately and the bad bank also reports the B&B mortgage books separately and both reported as beingly highly profitable.

In my good opinion your analogy of comparing B&B to a car breaking the speed limit for 1 mile is just plainly unintlligent and not well thought out.

Most if not all companies have made an odd year of losses. In B&B´s case the year before they were highly porfitable and the year after they were also highly profitable.

The police act on behalf of the powers to be, to keep them in power therefore no point in going to them.

As for the courts, the way the rails are laid is the way the train will go and it was the Government who laid the tracks for the direction the courts must see what happened when it comes to B&B.

[pvb] 30/3/2017 09:14

As far as I am concerned what happen at B%B was quite simply Fraud and therefore Illegal.

OK. Then report the "fraud" to the police, who will take action accordingly. But this has already been through the courts, hasn't it? So...

Except for the one year where B%B was liquidated, both the morgatage book and the retail and deposits have been well into profit by the tune of £100´s of millions.

Let's use a (very) rough analogy. From the wilds of Scotland you drive 500 miles home in your car. You keep to all speed limits for the first 499 miles. In the last mile to your home you break the speed limit and get a ticket. Should you (a) Have got a speeding ticket? OR (b) Not have got a speeding ticket because you did not break the speed limits in the preceding 499 miles?

[monkeymonkey] 30/3/2017 08:43

mr hangman, yes you can have it back use your cash back button, you might lose a little but not the lot lol

[loganair] 30/3/2017 08:39

As far as I am concerned what happen at B%B was quite simply Fraud and therefore Illegal.

Except for the one year where B%B was liquidated, both the morgatage book and the retail and deposits have been well into profit by the tune of £100´s of millions.

[daytraders] 29/3/2017 13:04

But this was not lost, was taken from us, big difference.

[mr hangman] 29/3/2017 12:50

I've lost some money in the bookmakers this morning, can i have it back ?

[daytraders] 29/3/2017 12:37

Yup, we were stitched up, obvious to anyone, and anyone who says otherwise, knows nothing about what went on, before and after B&B was nationalised.

[loganair] 29/3/2017 08:44

Day - I agree. Mr Pym was a senior director of Santander. He became CEO of A&L which he sold on the cheap to Santander. He then immediately became CEO of B&B where he signed off on the Rights Issue, stating that B&B had the second highest tier 1 capital ratio and sufficent money to pay for 18 months worth of mortages going forward, then a month later he put B&B into liquidation selling of its deposit book and retail outlets to guees who??? Santander. The B&B mortgage book was rolled up into the so called bad bank and guess who became the CEO of the bad bank, none other then Mr Pym.

I am sorry to say in my opinion the whole thing Stinks to high heaven.

[mr hangman] 27/3/2017 15:09

I'm going to burst out crying in a minute

[daytraders] 27/3/2017 14:17

Course there a risk, but these shares were taken from us, when all the other banks got saved, and they were in a worse state then us.

[mr hangman] 27/3/2017 12:44

Spot on pvb

[pvb] 27/3/2017 10:42

Equities are a risk investment folks. Get used to it! Move on, FFS!

If you can't accept this my advice is: Don't invest in shares.

[loganair] 27/3/2017 10:35

When it comes to the health service I was astounded to see how many immigrants go to the doctors because doctors are professionals asking them for immigration advice or other non-medical related advise.

Around 75% of all health related visits to the doctors are due to stress, giving the pensioners £100mln for their B&B shares will reduce their stress and therefore reduce the number of visits to the helath serivce - a Win/Win situation.

[mr hangman] 27/3/2017 10:03

With a health service on it's final legs, the goverment really has not got a better home for £100m then making shareholders in banks happy LMAO