The end of the East Coast Mutual Yacht Insurance Association Limited.

pvb

Well-known member
Joined
16 May 2001
Messages
45,605
Location
UK East Coast
Visit site
That is spectacularly out of order. It is, in fact, not only at odds with the facts, but defamatory.

More defamation . Maybe you should consider your position?

The fact is that the Secretary was made redundant by the Committee as soon as possible in order NOT to increase the cost to the Members and the affairs of the Association are in the hands of the liquidators as a solvent liquidation.

You're responding to posts I made months ago, and they are not defamatory.

Your claim that the Secretary was made redundant is at odds with the Association's filings at Companies House, where she is still listed as the Secretary.
 

RobWatt

New member
Joined
5 Apr 2021
Messages
17
Visit site
I read some of the comments above . Whilst I appreciate the frustration there is a matter of law and financial regulation which must be complied with . All of this could have been avoided by way of some communication. Following my communication. With the FCA I wrote to the chair and secretary asking to establish communication with members . By failing to communicate they’ve been in contravention of financial regulation but one letter / e mail etc would solve this . They have failed to respond . It is not a monetary response that’s required it plain old communication . Any monetary response may just pay for an insurance survey but by failure to communicate they left themselves wide open . I do hope someone on the committee is made aware . And yes I do know the field of financial regulation and law before anyone asks .
 
  • Like
Reactions: pvb

Kukri

Well-known member
Joined
23 Jul 2008
Messages
15,568
Location
East coast UK. Mostly. Sometimes the Philippines
Visit site
What exactly needs to be said? There was an EGM to which all members were invited. Everyone was aware of the decision to wind up the Association and the reasons for it. There is a statement on the Association’s website.

Why do you want to know any more? A letter from the lawyers or the insolvency practitioners would cost a lot and eat into the modest fund to be distributed.

As has been explained here, winding up an insurer is not as simple as winding up other businesses, and although the ECMYIA was a small and simple insurer it was subject to all the regulations that apply to the largest insurers.

We all know what is happening and anyone with any sense knows that things get delayed because of Covid. In my day job I’ve just had that rare thing, a grovelling apology from a Big Four accountancy firm, to a multinational client, blaming delays, on a project where the fees are more than the total funds of the ECMYIA, on Covid.

I am just a policyholder like others here but I do find the whingeing going on in this thread very tiresome.
 
Last edited:

RobWatt

New member
Joined
5 Apr 2021
Messages
17
Visit site
I was fully aware of EGM and I am also fully aware of the process . First this is a mutual society proving insurance and therefore is not regulated under the same provisions as a straightforward insurer. We were promised to he kept informed of the progress and this has not happened . There is a requirement to keep members informed when a mutual society is being wound up . The cost of one e mail to all members is not a cost burden and can be delivered by any committee member . What is required by regulation is an indication of dates and milestones of the process . Yes this is not a large multi million society but regulations still apply . During the lockdown and subsequent difficulties the courts both criminal civil have been operating on a virtual basis which I know as a fact because of my profession . So covid delays may have slightly elongated the process but this cannot be blamed . I do not consider my representations as whinging but a straightforward request for disclosure .
 

Kukri

Well-known member
Joined
23 Jul 2008
Messages
15,568
Location
East coast UK. Mostly. Sometimes the Philippines
Visit site
I think the odds are rather good that I know more about the regulation of marine mutual insurance than most people here do, and the husband of the ex-Secretary certainly does, as he is an underwriter for one of the largest P&I Clubs.

Still, I am sure that Mr Watt knows more than anybody.

What I don’t understand is what he wants to know, and why?
 

RobWatt

New member
Joined
5 Apr 2021
Messages
17
Visit site
Whilst I have been perfectly civil here the tone of this reply is not at all what I would have expected but then again maybe I should . It seems apparent that the person posting the above is closely connected but still declined to give any updates . There is little point in continuing this conversation . The matter now rests with the FCA .
 

Kukri

Well-known member
Joined
23 Jul 2008
Messages
15,568
Location
East coast UK. Mostly. Sometimes the Philippines
Visit site
Whilst I have been perfectly civil here the tone of this reply is not at all what I would have expected but then again maybe I should . It seems apparent that the person posting the above is closely connected but still declined to give any updates . There is little point in continuing this conversation . The matter now rests with the FCA .

I’m not “closely connected”.

I’m just an ordinary member of the ECMYIA. Not a Director, and I don’t know any of the Board members.

As some others here know, I work in merchant shipping. I know the former Secretary’s husband in that connection, but in the interest of full disclosure, he also sails, and is a member of the same club as I am. Since he races National Twelves, and I do not, I haven’t seen him at the club since before the decision to wind up the ECMYIA was taken. I have met the former Secretary once, at that club, some years ago, when she was still in good health.

Mr Watt’s sole interest in the ybw Forum seems to be limited to this thread, and even he might have noticed that I started it. Which would be an odd way of “declining to give any updates”.

If Mr Watt’s complaints have the effect of increasing the costs of the solvent liquidation, and thereby diminishing the fund available for distribution, we will all know who to ask for the shortfall.
 
Last edited:

Poecheng

Well-known member
Joined
16 Aug 2013
Messages
2,175
Location
East Coast
Visit site
I was fully aware of EGM and I am also fully aware of the process . First this is a mutual society proving insurance and therefore is not regulated under the same provisions as a straightforward insurer. We were promised to he kept informed of the progress and this has not happened . There is a requirement to keep members informed when a mutual society is being wound up . The cost of one e mail to all members is not a cost burden and can be delivered by any committee member . What is required by regulation is an indication of dates and milestones of the process . Yes this is not a large multi million society but regulations still apply . During the lockdown and subsequent difficulties the courts both criminal civil have been operating on a virtual basis which I know as a fact because of my profession . So covid delays may have slightly elongated the process but this cannot be blamed . I do not consider my representations as whinging but a straightforward request for disclosure .
I am not sure any of those ten sentences can sensibly be disputed.
Equally, this cannot be a cost issue since, as a voluntary liquidation (ie with the same officers in place rather than a liquidator being appointed) It is the existing officers on whom the responsibility for communication rests.
In any liquidation occurrence, the creditors have to be kept updated.
I do not see why they cannot be kept updated, as was seemingly agreed at the EGM. Neither cost nor COVID are excuses even if they applied.
 

pvb

Well-known member
Joined
16 May 2001
Messages
45,605
Location
UK East Coast
Visit site
There's something not right about this whole process. A million quid of members' money is floating around, looking for a home. If I were a member. I'd be incensed by the total lack of communication. And, if I were a member, I'd do something about it. As I said in post 73, "If members are unhappy about the failure of the secretary to respond to enquiries, they can write to the secretary requesting an Extraordinary Meeting to discuss the matter. At least 5 members need to send this requisition. If the secretary declines to call an Extraordinary Meeting within 21 days, any 5 members can jointly convene an Extraordinary Meeting." I'd be calling an Extraordinary Meeting pronto, and removing the committee.
 

Poecheng

Well-known member
Joined
16 Aug 2013
Messages
2,175
Location
East Coast
Visit site
Looking at this thread and the publicly-available documents, it is interesting.

There are no liquidators appointed as far as I can see - it is intended* to carry out a members' voluntary liquidation in the future and, if a liquidator is appointed that is done by resolution in a general meeting. There have been no general meetings in 2020 (see website cancelling it) and the one due and required in March 2021 (see Article 6 of the Articles of Association of 20.2.2020) has presumably not been held and there is no announcement on the website about it. They may be taking the advice of Insolvency Practitioners but reference in earlier threads to the appointment of a Liquidator appear misconceived.

There are currently NINE directors, one of whom is also the Secretary.

* Chairman's report 27 Feb 2020 within the last filed accounts states that voluntary liquidation is complex (!) particularly for an insurance company. Then that they "hope to enter into arrangements with a third party to accept any outstanding risks on their insurance books during the course of 2020 so that we can start the liquidation process in 2021.'

It is difficult to see why the transfer of insured risk cannot have been achieved by now. The latent risk must surely be small , readily identifiable and could therefore be arranged without much difficulty.

It is true that latent liabilities make insurance companies difficult to wind down but this surely is one of the easiest imaginable - they know the claims received prior to ceasing underwriting (it is very small level of claims indeed) and those must long be resolved by now (unless there are personal injuries involved, which is itself unlikely).

In any event, surely the progress on the Chairman's statement should be notified to members as it is surely the only block to the commencement of liquidation itself. As set out above, liquidation was due to commence in 2021 and plainly has not, so far.
 

Kukri

Well-known member
Joined
23 Jul 2008
Messages
15,568
Location
East coast UK. Mostly. Sometimes the Philippines
Visit site
There's something not right about this whole process. A million quid of members' money is floating around, looking for a home. If I were a member. I'd be incensed by the total lack of communication. And, if I were a member, I'd do something about it. As I said in post 73, "If members are unhappy about the failure of the secretary to respond to enquiries, they can write to the secretary requesting an Extraordinary Meeting to discuss the matter. At least 5 members need to send this requisition. If the secretary declines to call an Extraordinary Meeting within 21 days, any 5 members can jointly convene an Extraordinary Meeting." I'd be calling an Extraordinary Meeting pronto, and removing the committee.

So, you are not a member?
 

RobWatt

New member
Joined
5 Apr 2021
Messages
17
Visit site
As per my post of the 2nd of September this matter is now with the supervisory and compliance section of the financial conduct authority . After my initial referral I wrote once more as had been advised to director and chair but received no reply . The FCA were informed of the lack of response as had been requested . Had there been a response or update they would have returned to compliance . It is a matter of statute that the responsibility for failure is a personal one for the listed directors and any levy or other penalty “cannot and must not in any way impinge apon or in any way gave any detrimental effect on the monies or assets available “ all of this can still be rectified and returned to compliance by communication . If anyone at all reading this retains contact with the board please urge them to comply . For the avoidance of any doubt it is not the financial settlement that is question but a matter of veracity and transparency .
 

Poecheng

Well-known member
Joined
16 Aug 2013
Messages
2,175
Location
East Coast
Visit site

My point remains good:

According to CH, no liquidators have been appointed and the company is not in liquidation. It may be taking advice on (future) liquidation but that is entirely different.

The above notice itself is contradictory. It refers to the company taking advice on liquidation and, at the end, refers to 'the liquidators' - those two statements cannot stand together in my view.

Further, the notice gives an address which is not the registered or trading address for the company. It directs enquiries to a third party whereas members are entitled to communicate with the company itself.

No doubt RobWatt and PVB will be along shortly
 
Top