Lloyds Shareholders Action Group

[johnny37]

I have been contacted by the UK Shareholders Association with a view to joing the Lloyds Shareholders Action Group, which was set up to gain redress for the alleged mismanagement by the board and even collusion by the government to avoid HBOS going bust.

I have always had confidence in the Lloyds board but they got it spectacluarly wrong with the acquisition of HBOS. They may well turn it round in the next couple of years.

Is their anything to be gained by joining the action group? It will cost me �200, related to my shareholding.

[edjones]

I suppose, if you have a lot of shares, it might be worth joining.

I've more or less written off my shares, at least for a few years.

I notice the acronym for the ShareHolders Action Group, and wonder if that is about right...

[dzug]

It depends on whether you think the group will help or hinder recovery. If you think they will help, then maybe. If you think they will be obstructive then steer clear

[WhiteBears]

the shares have been going up and down all day today.(we get real time updates from the financial market team) i think it would be worth it in the long run. it does sounds like a good idea, and eventually lloyds Banking group will no longer be part owned by tax-payers/governments money!

[johnny37]

As far as I can see in my simple analysis there are two issues. (1) did the board act illegally by not doing due diligence. (2) did the government act illegally by actively encouraging Lloyds to buy HBOS.contrary to the competition laws. What the action group are seeking to do is to seek compensation to put the small shareholders back in the postion they would have been without the takeover. If any other similar claims are to go by this would take years and there would be a cap on compensation anyway. By which time, hopefully, the bank will have recovered. The Chairman and the Chief Exec are desperate to restore their reputation.

[buildersmate]

One of the issues with Government behaviour in these situations seems to be the extent to which they make the rules up as it goes along. I am sure you are aware of the Equitable Life situation where, even after the independent outcome of the review of what happened, Government are only paying compensation to those pensioners in dire straits (i.e. those without other resources). That sounds like a means-tested compensation scheme to me.
History is only one indicator of future Government behaviour, but these days morals don't seem to come into it, only the potential for lost votes.
Surely you will get the benefit of any positive outcome even if you don't join? Why not let the major shareholders (pension-funds) do the funding of it?