Where's CyberSmug today?

[sasguru]

Now that I signed in to post here, I realise I can't read your tulipe as you're on my ignore list. Enjoy the judgement, loser

[Cyberman]

From the article:

"At the time of nationalisation the government said that any subsequent valuation for compensation purposes should be based on the assumption that the Northern Rock had not been a going concern."

Any bank that needs a bailout is not a going concern IMO and the subsequent rescuer is entitled to value it as it thinks fit. If the banks don't like it, how about running themselves as proper banks and not overleveraged gambling machines. Then they wouldn't need a bailout, eh?

Face it Cyber Cretin, it's a fair judgement and you lost because you have no clue about your investments.
Now will you stop boring us with your absolute gobtulip, you cretin?

Any company that has funding withdrawn will not be a going concern. This does not give a bank the right for instance to withdraw my mortgage and claim ALL of the equity in my house. There is a break-up value and NRK shareholders are even being denied this, but NRK is clearly not bust and has repaid 14 Billion in loans.

[Cyberman]

Now that I signed in to post here, I realise I can't read your tulipe as you're on my ignore list. Enjoy the judgement, loser

This is just the first step. He who laughs last.......

[Drewster]

He who laughs last.......

......... didn't get the joke!!

[ratewhore]

er, whats this got to do with human rights?

[Cyberman]

er, whats this got to do with human rights?

It's to do with confiscation of property (ie shares, houses or any other assets of the individual) without proper compensation. That is deemed against human rights and there are precedents that have already been set with ECOHR.

[ratewhore]

It's to do with confiscation of property (ie shares, houses or any other assets of the individual) without proper compensation. That is deemed against human rights and there are precedents that have already been set with ECOHR.

hmmm, that's why I disagree with the ECHR, it's mostly flannel. I can see that if someone walks into your house, puts a gun to your head and then tells you to scarper, that's confiscation of property without proper compensation. But this, I'm not convinced it's a breach of human rights, maybe other laws sure, but not human rights. It's like using terrorist legislation to freeze international bank accounts in a recession...


...oh hang on!

[Bagpuss]

Oh dear

[BrilloPad]

From the article:

"At the time of nationalisation the government said that any subsequent valuation for compensation purposes should be based on the assumption that the Northern Rock had not been a going concern."

Any bank that needs a bailout is not a going concern IMO and the subsequent rescuer is entitled to value it as it thinks fit. If the banks don't like it, how about running themselves as proper banks and not overleveraged gambling machines. Then they wouldn't need a bailout, eh?

Face it Cyber Cretin, it's a fair judgement and you lost because you have no clue about your investments.
Now will you stop boring us with your absolute gobtulip, you cretin?

Godd to see that relaxation mode you were in after your holiday has ended and you are back to normal.

[FSM with Cheddar]

It's to do with confiscation of property (ie shares, houses or any other assets of the individual) without proper compensation. That is deemed against human rights and there are precedents that have already been set with ECOHR.

CyberHypocrite you are no better than the BNP.

Once minute you are complaining about the human rights act.
Next minute you are trying to use it to support your own interests.