Member Info for picsmaister

I have just received notification from AJ Bell of the next DCU payment. It is £0.00756 for each DCU. Is this about what we were expecting?

Nice post Sense!!!

I am afraid my expectations about future dividends is low. The lack of transparency and absence of trust is defining.

"I expect 0.3p this week per DCU"

Why only 0.3p??

"Senseman wasted hours and hours on fighting the takeover deal. He also made numerous wasted visits to London. He did not do a great job at all"

Kever - you are Grade A stupid. Sense and others did so much for small shareholders. I see you are strangely silent on DCU payments - I thought you were in the know....!!!

"I would like to see from CA’s next holdings report how many dcu’s they are holding."

Me too. I am deeply suspicious of the deal CA managed to secure.

"DCU's can't be held in an ISA"

Who says??!!!

AJ Bell are pretty good

Excellent post Senseman, and good account of proceedings. It was interesting acting as a Barrister for a couple of hours. There were periods during the hearing, when the judge was giving them a stiff cross examination, that the HUR team looked distinctly uneasy, even worried. But at then of the day we didn't have enough prepared ammunition to unpick their figures (as CA managed to do in 2021). I hope they deliver in on the DCUs but am not confident.

Apparently they are going to use one of the established matched bargain facilities. But you will have to wait until you have them - there is also a Crest related certified vs uncertified issue (which i dont understand) if you hold your shares in a nominee account that could lead to delay. The complexity of this scheme is a complete joke!!

Or indeed Senseman's!!!

I would urge everyone that is concerned about this deal to email along the lines of Dflynch's post!!

Spot on Dflynch and Oldman

This is a travesty and I intend to email the court this afternoon expressing my severe misgivings with this so-called deal !!

"Actually it was the shareholders that agreed the deal. The BoD just passed on the best deal they had received to the shareholders to decide if they wish to proceed, as is their legal duty and obligation under the Companies Act. It was up to the shareholders the route they wish to take by common vote. As it was many chose to accept the deal, some didn't and many chose not to vote at all. You appear to be putting the responsibility for the sale on the board of directors and forget they are just employees of the company and that the deal proceeds at the direction of the shareholders. There were more than enough private investors holding shares capable of voting the deal down had they so wished that to be the direction they wished to take"

ASI - the Board recommended the deal (rather than just pass it on). - so the BoD do bear some responsibility. And I am not sure that all non-execs were that happy with the deal.

Kever - you are talking utter rubbish (again)

I specifically asked Chaffe about this after the General Meeting and he said that they were still awaiting guidance from HMRC on both the issue of SIPPs and ISAs. HMRC are the arbiter and will decide tax treatment of the DCUs.

Please vote NO NO NO NO. Its a bum deal!!!! I have

Kever - what planet are you on?

I have voted NO through AJ Bell - its easy there a voting buttons sent via secure messages to all those with holdings in HUR

"I have it in writing from HL that DCU payments are free of tax in a SIPP. That is good enough for me."

Not worth the paper its written on until HRMC have opined!!!

Johns - I still live in hope that some of the smaller institutional holdings will see through this hopeless deal and help vote it down. But the chances are slim and I agree with you that the court (ie a fair minded judge) is our best way of killing off this half -baked deal or forcing a better one.

Although I have no background in corporate legal affairs, I am happy to help with putting together the case against the deal and doing the drafting including putting together a witness statement (if that is the legal route for objections). We have a helpful precedent in this BoD trying to pursue a course action that was objectionable to the courts, and clearly contrary to the interests of the shareholders.

nor have AJ Bell shown any corporate action for HUR

Great stuff chaps. I will be at the GM on the 4th!!