Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Was No Puter' No train tickets, OT Stansted cashpoints AND Gatwick Cashpoints
Ian Jelf wrote:
In message , Al writes Nor do I expect them to. Nor did any normal soul expect BCCI to go bust, given that the BoE had licenced them. I think you'll find that the bank of England had *not* licensed them as a Bank and had refused to do so on at least one occasion. They were a "Licensed Deposit Taker" (I think that's the right phrase). That in itself would have sent alarm bells wringing with me, not sure about the rest of you. You are, of course, right about the nature of BCCIs licence, but one wonders whether the man in the street is worried about the difference when the B is BCCI was for 'Bank', even though they weren't licenced as such. Not that it matters: the BCCIs books were repeatedly certified as 'true and fair' by Price Waterhouse having obtained assurance from the BoE that such certification was appropriate (this according to testimony to the US Congress.) Why should such certification be any more meaningful to Lloyds' customers than BCCI's? Why is the FDIC needed in the US if regulatory certification is 100% good? And, I put it to you that BCCI being an LDT would not have set alarm bells ringing with you, because you did not then know that status. Nor do you know now which banks are similarly licensed today, though I dare say it won't take you long to find out. This is all very long a convoluted but it comes down to my original assertion: while it is unlikely that XYZ bank will go bust, it is not impossible and therefore is a risk. -- Al |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
A RIGHT ROYAL GIVEAWAY: RYANAIR TO HAND OUT FREE FLIGHTS TO LONDONERS! | London Transport | |||
Save 50-75% on Flights and Hotels Using Special | London Transport |