Member Info for Durham

462 million

I pinched these numbers from advfn.

The post contained errors and has now been removed.

Sorry.

Our claim is €656.5 million (let's call that £500 million)

Let's say we receive £n million !

At the time of the "A1 Preference Shares Issue" the company had 271 million shares

(so that's 271 million A1 Preference Shares)

(49% of the Winnings - so that's £"n / 2" million to be distributed)

(so that's a "n / 500"p distribution per share)

At the time of the "A2 Preference Shares Issue" the company had 462 million shares

(so that's 462 million A2 Preference Shares)

(41% of the Winnings - so that's £"n / 2" million to be distributed)

(so that's a "n / 1,000"p distribution per share)

So if we get £n million :-

there will be a £ "n / 10" pay out to current shareholders

(i.e. "n / 810" p per share)

and

there will be a "(3 * n) / 500" p distribution per share to all shareholders who hold the two preference shares

(a smaller distribution per share for those who hold one preference share)

International Arbitration (ICC) will want an upfront payment (£200,000) when proceedings start - that'll concentrate Slovenian's minds.

Slovenia might allow us to hydraulically stimulate soon.
We are currently producing a maximum of 15,000 cubic metres of natural gas per day !

Here's some historical numbers to consider :-

INA (Croatia) Contract Minimum Per Day 63,031 cubic metres => £7,300
(12p per unrefined CM)
INA (Croatia) Contract Maximum Per Day 82,425 cubic metres => £10,000
(12p per unrefined CM)

Theoretical Maximum PG-10 Per Day 240,000 cubic metres
Theoretical Maximum PG-11A Per Day 60,000 cubic metres

"Water consumption for an average house is 14 cubic metres per month" - i.e. 200 cubic metres annually !
So "low-volume hydraulic stimulation" involves using less water than the annual consumption for FIVE average houses !
(the chemical additives chosen don't have to harm the environment)

The so called remaining "dirty" water would be cleaned in Croatia so that should not cause a problem for Slovenia !

We need another RNS at 7am tomorrow.
There are so many outstanding questions.

I do think we will win any arbitration which could be completed by January 2022.

Do I have to accept ASOS's offer?
Genuine question.

So how did Miss G get on ?
"Amigo must put things right in this case by:
? refunding all the interest and charges Miss G paid as a result of having been
provided with her loans;
? adding interest at 8% per year simple on the above interest payments from the date
they were paid by Miss G to the date of settlement
? removing any adverse information recorded on Miss G’s credit file as a result of loans
one and two
? removing all reference to loans three to five from Miss G’s credit file"

All the complaints are online.
Here's one :-
"Amigo provided Miss G with a total of five guarantor loans. On three occasions, Miss G was
given further funds (“top-ups”) while she still had an outstanding balance. As Amigo doesn’t
allow borrowers to have more than one outstanding loan at a time, Miss G entered into
completely new loan agreements where the new loan included a sum to clear the
outstanding balance on the previous one, as well as the additional funds Amigo agreed to
provide....."
https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/files/238841/DRN2108651.pdf

Complaining about affordability does not effect Credit History.
That's fair enough but....
....Complainants are going to have a terrible time trying to get a loan for e.g. Christmas.

Has this been explained to them ?

That, in my book, would be called a fraudulent claim.

If you believe you are unable to work because of a disability then the government will do their utmost to show you are a liar....
....but government department FOS will readily believe you if you tell them, on the phone, you were vulnerable when you took out an Amigo loan several years ago.

I've concluded it's not looking good for Amigo because....
....the affordability ruling can be applied retrospectively.

It's the same as if an Alcohol Agency saying bartenders should not serve a customer more than 3 pints because it'll make the customer drunk.
That would be acceptable if it was implemented from today but not if it was implemented retrospectively.

Imaging the claims !

Found them !

Couldn't find the twit !

I have been reading the "Debt Camel" discussion board.
Even when Amigo make a reasonable offer and the borrower is happy with it, "Debt Camel" was urging the borrower to get more from Amigo !
But if the borrower does take this extra advice, they won't be able to borrow again - certainly not from Amigo !
Why ?
Because they are claiming any loan would be UNAFFORDABLE for them !

We are aware that there were 9,000 Complainants recently and that could have expanded to, let's say, 20,000 now....
.....but even if the current crop cost Amigo £100 million (£5,000 each) to deal with.....
.....they'll be able to make that sum up easily.....
.....because their Annual Revenue is £300 million.

Aren't they sells?

There were fifty earlier successful trials.

Even if we get a favourable court judgement there will be environmental protests at the site.
Not looking good.