Important inter-party correspondence, in date order. The third and fourth parts of this correspondence are attached pdf files.

Important inter-party correspondence, in date order. The third and fourth parts of this correspondence are attached pdf files.

Important inter-party correspondence, in date order. The third and fourth parts of this correspondence are attached pdf files.

(1)

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: KSFIoM [EDWIN COE LLP-MAIN.FID211622]
Date: Wed, 13 May 2009 15:09:53 +0100
From: David Greene
To: mike.simps​on

Dear Mr Simpson

A number of points in advance of the meeting next Tuesday.

  1. I am arranging for someone to be in Douglas tomorrow with proxies. In the main these proxies appoint Stuart Roberts to be the proxy with discretion as to the vote. Charlie White from here will come to your offices at some point. He is only dropping the proxies off so I presume that no appointment is necessary, but let me know if there is some convenient time. We have ordered the proxies in particular ways and he could of course explain that and give you some idea of quantification for the different proxies.

    1. I do not know what arrangements you are making for Tuesday about counting.  I’m not sure whether you are proposing to conduct the count on Tuesday or simply take the votes away to add them up.  If indeed you are proposing to count them subsequently, could you let me know the timing of that.  We would clearly want the result as early as possible so that we may prepare for the sanction hearing. 
      
    2. You directed me to paragraph 12.5 in relation to the quantification of creditors’ claims.  This says that they will be quantified for value as at 9 October.  From that I am unclear what is intended with those persons who have been paid under the Early Payment Scheme.  As at 9 October they had a debt that was due to them and therefore, for the purposes of paragraph 12.5, are a creditor with a vote.  On the other hand, the EPS payment has discharged that liability and, as I understand it, assigned their claim entirely to the Isle of Man Treasury.  I believe that the number of votes (numerosity as it is put in the Scheme) would be substantial.  The IoM Treasury has said to the court that it will not exercise that vote.  Could you let me know what the position is?
      
    3. The composition of the Creditors Committee is explained.  It refers to an unprotected depositor.  Is that a typographical error or is there a group of those persons? 
      

I am writing to you direct. I hope that this is acceptable, bearing in mind that you have lawyers on the record. I apologise if I should address myself to Mr Caine.

Regards

David Greene
Partner
For Edwin Coe LLP

(2)

From: Mike Simpson
Sent: 14 May 2009 17:54
To: David Greene
Subject: KSF

Dear Mr Greene,

KSFIOM

Thank you for your e-mail dated 13th May 2009. I have no objection to you
writing to me direct, although I would be grateful if you would copy your
letters to Seth Caine.

Dealing with the points raised in your e-mail, I would respond as follows,
using your paragraph numbering for ease of reference:-

  1. I have now received the proxies. Thank you.

  2. I am still making arrangements for the counting of the votes on Tuesday. It is my intention to release the results of the votes as quickly as
    possible following the Scheme Meetings, however it is very unlikely that the
    results of the votes will be announced at the meeting.

  3. We are informed that the Treasury intends to abstain from voting at the scheme meetings.

  4. I am checking the position in this regard, and will revert to you
    further on this point

Regards

Mike
Mike Simpson | Partner | PwC| Sixty Circular Road, Douglas, Isle of Man, IM1 1SA

IMPORTANT

Please note that the content of this site is no longer regularly updated, and much of it may be outdated.

See this page for alternative sites.

Main Menu