Basis of payment of Kaupthing S & F funds to Dave Whelan

Ian Davison made this Freedom of Information request to Her Majesty’s Treasury

The request was partially successful.

From: Ian Davison

7 April 2009

Dear Sir or Madam,

Deposits (non retail) in Kaupthing Singer & Friedlander UK have
been frozen.

I would like to have precise details of the basis upon which Dave
Whelan was refunded his considerable deposit with KSF UK. If a
claim was made for compensation and payment was made through the
FSCS, on what basis precisely.

Yours faithfully,

Ian Davison

Link to this

From: Enquiries, CEU
Her Majesty’s Treasury

9 April 2009

Dear Mr Davison,

Thank you for your Freedom of Information request. I write to confirm receipt of your request and to let you know that it is receiving attention. If you have any enquiries regarding your request do not hesitate to contact us.

Darren Creamer
Correspondence and Enquiry Unit

show quoted sections

Link to this

From: Ian Davison

9 May 2009

Dear Enquiries, CEU,

I refer to my Freedom of Information request made on 9 April 2009.

Your response is overdue, please forward a comprehensive and
factual response by return.

May I remind you that by law the deadline for your response was no
later than 8 May 2009. I suggest you escalate this to senior HM
Treasury staff as appropriate.

Yours sincerely,

Ian Davison

Link to this

From: Jenkins, Kate
Her Majesty’s Treasury

11 May 2009


Attachment 9 312 REPLY.pdf
23K Download View as HTML


Dear Mr Davison,

Please find enclosed our response to your request.

<<9 312 - REPLY.pdf>>

Information Rights Unit
For HM Treasury

show quoted sections

Link to this

From: Ian Davison

11 May 2009

Dear Jenkins, Kate,

FOI Request - your reference IRU/9/312

I refer to your reply dated 11/05/09.

The fact that Mr Whelan had funds held in Kaupthing Singer &
Friedlander UK (KSF UK)released was widely reported in the UK press
(see link:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f45d2280-17fa-...
- various others available if of interest).

I assure you that contrary to what you suggest, I have absolutely
no interest in knowing more about Mr Whelan´s or anybody else's
personal affairs.

My question related to the basis of release of funds from KSF UK
that was widely reported by the mainstream and regional UK press.

1) In respect of retail or non retail deposits in KSF UK, would you
please confirm whether or not there have been any exceptions of
whatsoever nature made to the defined published rules for release
of funds / compensation. Whether by way of release of funds by KSF
UK, payments through FSCS, or compensation / advances of any nature
paid by the Government to any company or individual due to their
deposits with KSF UK.

2) Have any special arrangements been made outside the scope of the
defined published rules regarding release of funds, compensation or
advances of funds to any individual or company that had deposits
with KSF UK.

3) If there have been exceptions or special arrangements please
fully detail the reasons and basis for the exception(s). (Note that
I have no interest in knowing the name of the individual or company
involved).

Direct answers to these questions are requested.

I note that ´By law public authorities must respond "promptly", and
in any event not later than 20 working days after receiving your
request´. Perhaps this time I could request you, in the spirit of
the act, respond to this simple matter with some facts `promptly´.
It is after all a very simple matter.

Please confirm that the above is clear and if there is a need to do
a formal appeal please advise by return.

Yours sincerely,

Ian Davison

Link to this

From: Ian Davison

13 May 2009

Dear Jenkins, Kate,

FOI Request - your reference IRU/9/312

Further to my response on 11th May, please confirm that the matter
is receiving attention.

I look forward to receiving direct answers shortly.

Yours sincerely,

Ian Davison

Link to this

From: responses, FOI
Her Majesty’s Treasury

13 May 2009

Dear Mr Davison,

We acknowledge receipt of your e-mail of 11 May which we are treating as a revised request.

We will provide a substative response as soon as possible.

Information Rights Unit
HM Treasury

show quoted sections

Link to this

From: Ian Davison

28 May 2009

Dear Sirs,

FOI Request - your reference IRU/9/312

Please advise when I can expect a response to my FOI request above.
I note that you unilaterally determined to treat it as revised
request, but please note that the act actually stipulates responses
must be sent ' promptly' and within a maximum of 20 working days.

I appreciate that you may well have to escalate the issue, as HMT
do seem to be rather unwilling to release any information
concerning Government involvement and position concerning the KSF
IOM debacle.

I would, notwithstanding the above, request an honest and
comprehensive response as soon as possible.

Yours sincerely,

Ian Davison

Link to this

From: Ian Davison

9 June 2009

Dear Sir or Madam,

FOI Request - your reference IRU/9/312

Please note that I am still awaiting a response to the FOI request
above. Your response is overdue under the terms of the act.

Yours sincerely,

Ian Davison

Link to this

From: responses, FOI
Her Majesty’s Treasury

10 June 2009


Attachment 9 426 REPLY.pdf
25K Download View as HTML


Dear Mr Davison,

Please find enclosed our response to your request of 12 May.

<<9 426 - REPLY.pdf>>
I understand that you have chased for a response today, suggesting that we have exceeded the statutory deadline for responding.

We have addressed your concerns about the response time in the attached reply.

Regards,

Information Rights Unit
for HM Treasury

show quoted sections

Link to this

From: Ian Davison

15 June 2009

Dear responses, FOI

Your ref: IRU/9/426

I refer to your response dated 10 June 2009.

Your response is entirely inadequate.

You state that you do not hold information that answers the
specific questions I raised, however then state that the FSCS
cannot make exceptions to the published rules. That being the case,
if no exceptions have been made by HMG, why the reluctance to
respond to my questions. Please review my questions again and
address this in a serious manner.

The history of my request makes it abundantly clear what
clarification I am seeking. Various national newspapers reported
that at least one exception had been made as a result of
intervention by HMG, were these reports correct?

Yours sincerely,

Ian Davison

Link to this

From: Ian Davison

19 June 2009

Dear Sir or Madam,

Your ref: IRU/9/426

Please acknowledge receipt of my note of 15 June regarding the
above, and advise when I can expect to receive an informative
response.

Yours sincerely,

Ian Davison

Link to this

From: Ian Davison

24 June 2009

Dear Sir or Madam,

Repeating my previous chaser on this below. Please acknowledge.

Your ref: IRU/9/426

Please acknowledge receipt of my note of 15 June regarding the
above, and advise when I can expect to receive an informative
response.

Yours sincerely,

Ian Davison

Link to this

From: Ian Davison

24 June 2009

Dear Sir or Madam,

Repeating my previous chaser on this below. Please acknowledge.

Your ref: IRU/9/426

Please acknowledge receipt of my note of 15 June regarding the
above, and advise when I can expect to receive an informative
response.

Yours sincerely,

Ian Davison

Link to this

From: Ian Davison

30 July 2009

Dear Sir or Madam,

Please note that I am still awaiting a response regarding my
request (Your ref: IRU/9/426)

Yours faithfully,

Ian Davison

Link to this

From: responses, FOI
Her Majesty’s Treasury

31 July 2009


Attachment 713C602.tif
64K Download View as HTML


Dear Mr Davison,

Please find enclosed our response to your message of 15 June.

Regards,

Rosemary Banner
Information Rights Unit
HM Treasury

<<713C602.tif>>

show quoted sections

Link to this

Things to do with this request

Anyone:
Her Majesty’s Treasury only: