The IoM had already been--

advised. The PAG, the official alternative voice on the Island of Man had already specified new requirements for the Depositor Compemsation Scheme. Their suggestion was cavalierly disregarded by the IoM government. The IoMG, in my opinion, is not interested in protecting the depositors. it is interested in protecting the banks. The conflict of interest is clear. To put it bluntly: If you're going to invest on the IoM be aware that depositor protection is still a joke. Kaupthing IoM failed because of FSC regualtory incompetence, and the IoMG just washed its hand. Be smart, don't risk it.

Posted by: follow_the_tao

Foot...

...according to those who have had the pleasure of his company, has always put the boot in the IFA camp, the IFAs who as he says refuse to give in. In the eyes if those who know him of old he is the last person who should be reviewing anything in financial services. But I don't know him and if I do meet him I hope they are wrong. What worries me is that he and Ms Sergeant are 'advising' the Tories on regulation!! God help us..

Posted by: Evan Owen

Foot without boots

Foot said nothing that we didn't know already. In acknowledging the role played by the Crown dependencies in attracting money from across the world & funneling it into the City he could only make recommendations that would make that activity conform more transparently to international standards. However, reading between the lines Foot made observations that would make a wise & prudent person think twice before being lured into depositing in places like the IoM. Not until the Crown dependencies have a credible compensation scheme in place that delivers quickly what it promises can depositing offshore be considered safe & secure. Jim for Justice http://ksfiom-blog.blogspot.com

Posted by: Jim for Justice