* Prices may differ from that shown
Royal Bank of Scotland - Bank- Investment - Platinum Fund
Titled: Run By Scoobydoo
Yikes!!! Yes quite, this last year has been a bit too ghoulish for RBS, as they scarper away from their banking responsibilities into the sympathetic hands of Westminster, scared out of their skins; just like Scooby Doo. - This is where the similarities end, as usually Scooby gulps a Scooby snack and gets incredibly brave and 'saves' the day. Ironically, the head of the gang was called 'Fred' who was the sensible logical one and yet again this is where the similarities end.
Platinum Fund - Platinum is a creator of quality investment funds. Platinum funds share certain characteristics which are capable of
providing superior risk-adjusted results in both rising & falling markets.
The main reason why any investor would go to this funding scheme in a means to invest sums of cash is mainly due to the protection that comes with it. RBS actually swears an oath to it. Going Platinum was supposedly a reward scheme for the Mr. Big in finance circles it is a ploy, which allows huge cash sums to be deposited in return for even bigger rewards, RBS then would reap the rewards themselves in an ultimately weird employer target scheme that they say will never fail. Platinum Funding along with other investment opportunities did collapse as the government had to help with the shortfall. Now we all have a piece of the Platinum Funding except for the fact it is worth absolutely zero.
What so many of us don't know is that RBS had reportedly got experts in risk management. The best one got his marching orders in late 2007 due to being careful and a little bit switched-on which annoyed Chief Executive Sir Fred Goodwin, and this is why he got the nick name 'Fred the shred'. He continued his reckless spending sprees on décor on a whim, fanciful gentleman club parties for the influentially aware. Money was no object when it came to lavish business dealings when it came to showing-off his golden smile and plentiful office that had an open account at a refurbishing company. Money and black-holes seemed to make Fred tick. The bigger the gamble the more lavish his lifestyle was, with Gordon Brown in his right breast pocket and on his Christmas list there was no such thing as losing, even to this day.
No financial regulatory systems in-place gave a license to pure cash squander much bigger than Enron in the 1990's whereby I note all the CEO's are in US state cells. Please take a note that shareholders, were passed by in effect dismissed without care in December 2007 as notifications of Shareholders meetings in Aberdeen were posted too late and arrived on the doorstep on the actual day of the meeting. Alarm bells would of rang-out for many leading up to the first quarter of 2008, though the trusted big guns hanged in there even today the illusion lives on that just maybe they may get their cash back, on their tinplated Platinum Funds.
Now the wind has changed within financial regulatory authorities, the main cause of action is to investigate prior knowledge of any systematic collapse that may have been evident at ground level and this is what the FSA have decided to painstakingly do, so don't hold your breathe, unless your name is Sir Fred Goodwin. Non Executors potentially could shoulder the blame still while the real rodent is sitting pretty on a 703,000 per annum pension watching Japanese girls DVD's at the taxpayer's expense.
While the investigation takes shape Lord Foulkes who is a Scottish Parliamentarian claimed the executives will be prosecuted if their was any discrepancies, not that there will be of course, and all out of the taxpayers pockets lets not forget, as I'm not sure why he has asked for an inquiry and not the PM. Silly thought I know but for those people who actually know the protocols and have a brain the answers not in why; but RBS 'is' run by Scoobydoo!!!
RBS have been drawn into a farcical culture whereby it proves to be that non executives are not given the correct tools and are being succumbed to pure aggressive sales regimes and management that makes it via impossible to challenge, without the prospects of losing your job. This is still very much apparent. The FSA have progressed with a investigation but they also still do not have the powers of changing protocols that could possibly make it a just financial system. I no doubt RBS will be unlikely to want to stop creating funding concepts such as the Platinum, as it wasn't the actual funding mechanisms that made the RBS 70.3% taxpayer dependant. It was the ultimate failures of the whole banking mechanism that RBS went to town on in all points from short selling to gambling on the stock exchange with other peoples' money. Greed was the cause; it's the epitome of Scooby with his Scooby snacks.
The whole Platform of the Platinum Funding scheme has fallen big time and failed miserably. Promise after promise; have been broken when it comes to financial portfolios'. Proof is all to see broadcasted in many PDF formatted briefings giving minuscule detail on how Platinum Funds would be protected; in their own words they state that 'constant portfolio monitoring for Platinum's proprietary risk management system is paramount.' - The whole RBS monetary system is a victim of pure monetary flaws that smells nasty now we have the powers of hindsight. Should RBS still have this culture within their corporation to allow this to happen? - I think Professor Chris Wright would love to answer that question on News-night some-day, but are we ready for the answer. - Our censorship laws would be in-question as Jeremy Paxman however would be reaching for the Kleenex wiping his tears from laughter; it could break all records of YouTube downloads.
What the FSA truly will divulge is whether any knowingly false statements were made or prospectuses issued that could have led potential investors or depositors to believe the position was more favorable than the board knew it to be. Which the answer in my opinion's language is as blue as a MP's husbands DVD collection. I feared that there were many cover-up cases in regards to Northern Rock, but comparing it to RBS there are more huge blemishes than even Max Factor could handle. I shall stick my neck-out for a change and say that Lord Turner the FSA Chief may do a Hutton on the Hutton report. The pressure is on him as to not find any discrepancies as potentially his own knighthood could be stripped if the investigation deems to show negligence on FSA part, which I will categorically state, there is; due to complete de-regulation. The FSA just cross the 'T's and dot the 'I's. They can only advise but never demand. However, seeing that there has not been a proper 'Fall Guy' as yet, why not it being Lord Turner? He allowed the whole fiasco to take command and showed no responsible initiative as the financial chief regulator. It's worth watching this space, that's for sure.
Sir Fred Goodwin's role in bulldozing his greedy hand into the pot to buy AMRN in 2007 which deemed to be a master-stroke for an outrageous fee beating Barclays at the last hour was pure toxic. Shear arrogance driven mentally that exploded out of control, other chief Sir Tom Killock knew of the potentially massive blunder that would cost the taxpayer billions, before the deal was sealed. Alarm bells shill out as both knighted bankers knew their own pension pot 'full to the brim' was secure. They also stopped any data that 28 Billion was going to be a reported loss; that alone is scandalous without all the other extra scandalous revelations.
Gordon Brown reportedly did make a personal demand for Goodwin to hand back some of his £16m pension and pledged to take "all the legal action necessary" if he did not comply. This is now proved to be just a 'sound bite'; another weak headline that is just for the outraged public to feel that justice will be done; again in reality it won't happen, so don't hold your breathe, unless your Sir Fred Goodwin.
For those of you consumers who want to take command and look into Platinum Funding in regards to RBS's share price, you can view it at the URL: http://www.investors.rbs.com/our_performance/stockchart.cfm. Have a look at the graph that compares RBS share performance over the last three years to the FTSE100, it shows the true scale of RBS demise.
Retail Park Culture
In reality there have been over 9,500 jobs lost since early 2009, as the down-turn takes a real plummeting at RBS. It puts matters in prospective as RBS owned NatWest who have been rather quiet at present will inevitably be cutting costs, to try to balance the books coming to the end of 2009. The retail park culture puts a massive amount of stress from the boiler-room and upwards, branches and managers are given targets which means they are suppose to align accounts up with crazy volumes of business each week; unrealistic? Well, most Managers would say so; therefore you have to bend the terms. The value of each product such as the Platinum Funding Scheme has a point system logged, that in return is embodied into a football league table. No wonder credit is as toxic as it is; a huge 26% of RBS's worth now actually consist of unpaid toxic credit, which they're trying to sell globally in small sized 'Scooby snack' financial packages; not very clever while during a mega deep recession.
All this now is on the taxpayers purse strings; Gordon Brown has systematically saved a rogue business model and in return saved RBS customers heart-ache in the short-term. The long-term spells out capitalism's demise, the UK public have already been held out for ransom at 59% GDP which is set to increase to 78% in 2011.
I feel it is long before time now that Scoobydoo is put on a leash, given a hardcore muzzle when out for a walk, except when greeted by Sir Fred Goodwin, allowed no Scooby snacks as it all is going Scrappydoo; and that's putting it lightly.
Thank you for reading 'Run By Scoobydoo', I hope it all was of some interest.
Copyright - 04 2009 - 1st2thebar
I changed banks from Natwest to Royal Bank of Scotland whilst I was a student. This part is kinda of ironic because a few years ago Royal Bank of Scotland took over Natwest.
I changed on the recommendation of 2 people who were having the same difficulties I was Natwest and we changed banks within 2 weeks of each other.
The staff at the branch I changed to were extremely friendly and actually treated me like a person which was a shock to my system.
At one time I went in to one of their branches with my nephews who were aged 2 and 4 at the time, and I suddenly realised they had gone silent. I turned round and discovered they were happily sitting their playing with the activity table they put in the majority of branches for children.
I have not had a problem changing my address with them and normally ensure that my mail is sent to the new address within 2 weeks of receiving the change. Due to banking with my previous bank I learnt that I had to write a formal letter to them stating I had changed my address and it would take up to 8 weeks before they actually acted on the change.
I did have a problem one year where a new card had been put on order, I got pick pocketed for my old card, I cancelled my old card and the person in the bank cancelled both the old card and the new card on order which was still on their system as not being sent out and had not been sent out. The guy actually apologised when I got irate on the phone. This was around Christmas and had to buy all by Christmas presents on my credit card even though I had money in my bank account, and it made it difficult to go out as I had to make sure I always had cash on me.
However the majority of the staff seem to have some commonsense as problems like this have not occured since.
I also for years have had a bank card which has my picture on. This has lead to less questioning in shops particularly as some shop assistants seem to take offence when I buy products in their shops. Due to my picture on my card I have been able to turn around to say to them things like well if that picture doesn't look like me who else does it look like? I am currently one of the last set of customers who will be updated to a Chip and Pin card because of this.
I am aware that people have had problems with changing to certain types of bank accounts ie a royalites account to a normal current account but they have threatened them that they ensure that their family and friends who bank with them are aware of the problems they are having. As they are aware that lots of their reputation relies on word of mouth this quickly gets them to act better.
The only downside for me banking with Royal Bank of Scotland and living in London is that their are not as many branches around where I live as I use to have when I was a student. However I make use of their internet and telephone banking.
I have banked with 3 different banks in my life and this is the one I have banked the longest with so far. The only place who I think would offer me a better service would be my building society.
Customer Service is a strange thing isn?t it. The thing is, we expect excellent customer service and therefore usually don?t even think twice when we receive it. In the case of a credit card, if you don?t have to ever contact them, then that must be a sign that all is going right. I have worked in contact Centre Management for a long time, in insurance, TV and Telephone sectors and you can generally expect that when you get an increase of calls into the call centre, something has gone very wrong. I am passionate about customer service and I just cannot stand it when mindless bureaucracy gets in the way of simple common sense service. I have always instilled in my teams that supervisors and managers should always be ready and able to take over a telephone call when a customer requests it, there is no demand on them which is more important. That?s why I thought I would share my little experience of the Royal Bank of Scotland MasterCard service, which came to its crescendo last week. Now I have had the Royal Bank of Scotland card for years and years. Eight or nine I guess. Customer service in all that time has been fine. It must have been because I cannot remember anything to tell you. My statements arrived on time; I never had any issues with missing payments, strange debits, the call centre, or the ever increasing card limit which I was rewarded with along the way. I had one little issue in 2001. I opened a more competitive card and I accidentally ?transferred? a couple of hundred pounds more debt to my new card (Goldfish), than I actually owed the Royal Bank of Scotland. This left me £200 in credit with RBS. I phoned and asked for a refund on at least three or four occasions over several weeks before this was resolved. It was especially frustrating as I had just taken redundancy and was trying to balance my income and expenses. Anyway, my latest customer service experience with the RBS has left me no longer a customer at the Ro
yal Bank of Scotland. I moved house you see. So, I painstakingly compiled a Word merge file of all the various people I needed to write to, informing them of my new address. There were 100 in total. Most of them received a letter from me. However my mistake with the RBS was to simply scribble my new address on to my statement and sent this to the bank with my payment that month. Unfortunately the statements I receive do not have the nice little section on the back for notifying them of these types of changes. Anyway, all was well. The bank received my letter two weeks before I moved, and wrote to me immediately at the New Address (which I wasn?t in yet), asking me to sign my correspondence. I signed it as soon as I received this correspondence and then sent it back. Three weeks later, I get another letter, to the Old address this time (and I had moved by this time). This letter said they could not read my writing! Strange, as they had already written to me at the new address once! I was frustrated, as this was one of the few organisations that I corresponded with that had not confirmed this change. Furthermore, my statements were still going to the old address. I decided to phone the Contact Centre and clarify exactly what the address was. Easy. I navigated my way through the IVR (Interactive Voice Response), and found my way to a person. I explained what I wanted to do and she advised she would have to ask me some more security questions. Fine. Only I failed the first one because I could not remember what mobile number they had on file. Well I did take this card out eight years ago, when mobile phones were the size of a house brick, and I have probably had four or five mobile numbers since then. I failed the second question, simply because I did not have a statement in front of me to confirm some specific reference or other. Now I am not advocating that banks shouldn?t ask these types of questions, indeed they should. However I
asked to speak to a supervisor, because my simple brain told me that they had a piece of paper, with my signature on it, in their possession, and they were having a little bit of difficulty translating my scrawl (which can be bad at time, but they had interpreted it and written to me once!!!). As a manager in this field of business, I thought this would have been a simple problem to resolve. However the supervisor refused to come to the phone, she told the operator to tell me if I can use a computer, I could type a letter, sign that and send it in. How patronising is that, I thought! I asked the operator if I could cancel my card based on the security questions I had answered so far. She said yes, so I paid off my balance by switch and she cancelled my card. She told me that there would be a residual interest balance which would show up on my next statement (which I am not going to receive as I don?t live at that house anymore!!). Anyway, I penned a letter to their complaints departments expressing my real frustration was that they were prepared to cancel a customer rather than have a supervisor come to the telephone when requested. I waited a week, and received a typical letter back. It apologised profusely for me having to communicate with them on four occasions for a simple change of address, thanked me for my valued custom, assured me that the matter would be investigated, and their records were now updated with my New Address. And the punch line ? THEY SENT THE LETTER TO THE WRONG ADDRESS!! So to summarise, in general my customer service experiences have been neutral over a sustained period, and this unfortunate incident which caused them to lose a customer seems like a simple case of bungled bureaucracy, which unfortunately is where all organisations let themselves down at some stage. Note, I haven?t gone into APR details and the like, as this is a general category. Hope this makes sense. I have also left a pretty
fair rating, based on the eight years of using this product. Helen Bradshaw February 2003