Lloyds Banking Share Discussion Threads

[minerve 2] 15/7/2020 11:28

mm2

What would take you half-a-day to write takes me less than a minute.

[mikemichael2] 15/7/2020 11:23

You don't need a mask Min, just talk the virus to death!!

[xxxxxy] 15/7/2020 11:00

P J Honey 15 Jul 2020 10:51AMWhen are the hospitals going to reopen for other treatments now that only 200 people are on ventilators and 2000 people in hospital with the virus?3LikeReplyPaul Isherwood 15 Jul 2020 10:53AMThe NHS has abandoned the sick. AND THEY CLAP THEM!

[maxk] 15/7/2020 10:55

Who is corby3 other than a self appointed arbiter of truth?

[minerve 2] 15/7/2020 10:43

Plenty of my neighbours are NHS Drs/consultants/directors and I generally find that although they are no doubt experts in their narrow field of expertise they are complete ignorant dunce brains when it comes to everything else in the world. There was one exception who was a brain surgeon and strangely enough he was only one of a few around here who didn't think mundane tasks were below him and would mow his own lawn. I think plenty of Drs become experts in their field without being taught the best lesson you can ever have which is always to be eager to learn and to be inquisitive. They become Drs or whatever in their profession and gain early financial security which breeds apathy and having a sense of feeling they have 'made it' the learning and inquisitiveness outside of their narrow professional domain stops right there - a few years after leaving university.

[minerve 2] 15/7/2020 10:34

Yeah probably the thread's resident dunce of a tree surgeon - Utricky.

[minerve 2] 15/7/2020 10:32

Perhaps 'Doc' needs to stop thinking he is the greatest because he can use the title 'Dr' and start reading the top scientific reports by the experts - which is NOT him!

I've been using an FFP3 mask since the beginning and not touched it once when wearing it. FFP3 masks are better filters than those of N95s and can stop virus sized particles like COVID.

It is NOT about reducing viral intake completely it is about viral load size. If someone sneezes in a mask the projectile will be different in size and direction than it otherwise would be and MAY give the atmosphere sufficient time to evaporate the protective shell around the virus and hence kill it. Sneezing without masks splurges large blobs of your crud everywhere. People who take in the virus may not become infectious all because they have had virus. If the virus load is small the immune system is likely to kill it before infection takes hold. I say all this having read the scientific reports from the experts and not being a dunce like this Dr.

Also, people are wondering why masks should be worn at shops and not at the pubs because it seems hypocritical. It actually isn't. The whole thing is to reduce the infection rate to below zero. If people can socialise without masks it gives them space to 'take a break' and perhaps then they are more likely to conform all follow other guidance for longer. This includes a lot of behavioural science I don't tend to follow unless it is about investing.

[corby3] 15/7/2020 10:29

maxk...And who is Doc Graham, he certainly didn't get a degree to study Medicine with Grammar and English like someone from Primary school. Is he a Tree Surgeon?

What is difficult about wearing a mask to protect others as well as yourself.

Hey Doc Graham, why not do away with handkerchiefs and tampons, let us all get back to the days of the Black Death, the Plague.

maxk..why would you re-tweet that nonsense on to this Lloyds thread, you have too much spare time on your hands and you need to stop spreading reckless nonsense.

[maxk] 15/7/2020 10:07

Robbed from the JTC thread..h/t to mrs british

[freddie01] 15/7/2020 10:03

MPs call on SRA to investigate City firm over bank scandal


City giant Herbert Smith Freehills (HSF) either compromised its independence or provided incompetent advice in its work for Lloyds Banking Group on the Reading scandal, a group of MPs and peers has claimed.

In an unprecedented 21-page submission to the Solicitors Regulation Authority, the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Fair Business Banking (APPG) said it was concerned that HSF consistently fell on the wrong side of the boundary between legitimate action in the commercial interests of a client, and “unethical conduct and a failure in professional independence”.

HSF has acted for Lloyds – which took over HBOS in 2008 – on the fall-out from a £245m loan scam perpetrated at HBOS’s Reading branch.

Six people were jailed in 2017 for pushing business customers into distress or failure between 2003 and 2007 by referring clients to a turnaround consultancy, which led to them being saddled with unmanageable debt.

The APPG said its view was that HSF has “exhibited, over time, conduct that: a. Appears to exhibit a lack of professional independence; b. Suggests that HSF has routinely subordinated higher duties it owed as officers of the court to the immediate short-term commercial objectives of its client; c. Appears to be unethical (though as will appear, incompetence may provide an alternative explanation)”.

The report focused on two particular issues. HSF was retained by Lloyds to help with a review of compensation for victims of the fraud undertaken by Professor Russel Griggs. It does not specify exactly what HSF’s role was.

However, an assurance review by former High Court judge Professor Sir Ross Cranston said that, while there was much about Griggs “for which the bank is to be commended”, there were also “serious shortcomings”.

He wrote: “For example, Professor Griggs was placed in an impossible position and his appearance of independence was undermined by the way the process was structured.

“The most serious shortcoming, however, concerned the bank’s approach when it came to the assessment of direct and consequential loss caused by the fraud.”

It is now being re-run under a different chair, former High Court judge Sir David Foskett.

Lloyds did pay the reasonable fees of customers who took independent legal advice to participate in the Griggs review.

The APPG said the “unreasonableness and unfairness” of the Griggs review found by Sir Ross was either intentional or caused by incompetence. “It will be immediately apparent that there is no obviously available ‘third way’.”

The APPG argued that there was “a strong public interest in the SRA being assured” that HSF was either not responsible for what happened with the Griggs review, or if it was that it was due to incompetence.

The second issue was HSF’s involvement “in what might be termed a ‘culture of denial’” at Lloyds.

A key feature of the scandal was a report produced by a senior HBOS risk manager, Sally Masterton, who found that what was then the Bank of Scotland knew about what was happening at Reading well before 2006.

She was sacked the following year (the APPG said it believed Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer acted for Lloyds on that), and eventually settled claims she made against the bank.

For several years Lloyds denied that it had commissioned her report, before eventually admitting it had.

The APPG said it did not know at what point HSF became involved in Lloyd’s response to the scandal, but said that, on 30 July 2014, the firm wrote to the Crown Prosecution Service with that denial.

The APPG said it understood a similar statement was made to the Financial Conduct Authority, and demanded to know whether HSF took steps to correct and apologise for making it.

“In the APPG’s view it would be surprising if certain consequences did not flow/professional obligations did not arise from HSF making false statements on behalf its client to a public authority after that fact comes to its attention.

“What those specific obligations are, in the particular circumstances, the APPG considers to be a matter for the SRA.

“One concern, that is immediately apparent, is that (if knowledge is disavowed) HSF’s ability to provide to its client objective advice was itself undermined/compromised by LBG’s misleading statement, for example, to the CPS.”

The Masterton report included reference to a 2009 note from Lloyds’ then solicitors, what is now Dentons, that mentioned “the Reading incident”.

The APPG said: “It would be a surprise if these circumstances were known to Denton Wilde Sapte, but not known subsequently to HSF. Accordingly, what was known to HSF about the ‘Reading incident’, and when, appear to the APPG to be very important questions.”

The group also highlighted that, while the bank’s knowledge of what happened was subject to a private inquiry by the former High Court judge Dame Linda Dobbs, “there is no similar investigation, so far as is known”, into its legal advisers knew.

“Given the circumstances… there appears to be a strong argument in favour of such an inquiry. The SRA is able to undertake it.”

HSF had no comment.

[diku] 15/7/2020 09:50

One is just lining up fund managers pocket and their lifestyle...the huge influx of migrants from around the World that have come to UK in the last say 10 years...how many of them are clued up with pension pots?...

[geckotheglorious] 15/7/2020 09:46

Better to sort your own pension with an ISA.
Tax free.
Flexibility a pension doesnt have.

Or BTL property. Now less fashionable given the changing risk/reward dynamics.

[uppompeii] 15/7/2020 09:44

Why would I forego a 45% uplift on my contribution? I can also manage it myself.

[portside1] 15/7/2020 09:41

Unless you work for gov pensions are a rip off Never put good earned money into a pension fund It's worthless , invest in antiques. Or shares Fund managers are no more than thieves

[aljm] 15/7/2020 09:39

diku, totally agree, the amount of young people that have no pension is massive, they live for today and take it for granted that the 'state' will pay for them when they need it.good luck with that, maybe Gates and his vaccines are a part of the plan afterall, gotta remember Gate's famous statement, " with careful use of his vaccines, we can reduce the world population by 10-15%" have a think on that line, if vaccines are supposed to save lives, how does that statement work ?

[diku] 15/7/2020 09:34

The youngsters of today are not interested in pension pots...and the middle age have seen what goes on with their pension pots recently with their investments in the casino markets...every few years stock markets crashes...even the house hold names are the biggest under performers...the likes of Scottish Widows was popular once upon a time in the 70,s 80's and 90,s...

[portside1] 15/7/2020 09:30

300million more shares added in10 weeks It's fraudulent but their pals in remuneration are the criminals So that they get good free bonuses ,The bank run by crooks ,

[chavitravi2] 15/7/2020 09:28

There are good companies out there that will sort the tax side out for you and re invest but what is left after you are gone stays with your estate and family not lost to the pension Co.

[chavitravi2] 15/7/2020 09:23

Never leave your pension IN when you retire, take it all out and pay the tax on the 3/4's that's not tax free. Seems odd I know but you will do better re investing it and have the peace of mind that when you kick the bucket what's left goes to you family and not kept by the pension company. True they may pay your wife part of the pension you were getting but when she goes so does your money that's left.

[gabble ratchet] 15/7/2020 09:18

Thanks for that

[gabble ratchet] 15/7/2020 09:10

Well, my straw poll of friends and work colleagues suggests that the majority will be less likely to visit a shop if they have to wear a mask and will continue to shop online. Not good for the high street but good for ASOS, Amazon etc I guess.