Kim here, we have a story ticker alert. Our ticker will always sound when our Global for me users send us story ideas.
Remember, if GFM receives enough user interest as well as donation pledges, we can ring up one of our worldwide correspondents to pick up the story for you.
It’s all about connecting to the reporter behind that news desk.
Enough ado. Here’s what GFM received from Ivor Sutton:
To: Global for me
Sent: 29 June 2009 19:54
Banking Abuse of Governments ‘Loan Guarantee Scheme‘
Story Pitch (full text)
The Governments SFLGS (Small Firms Loan Guarantee Scheme) was produced with the objective of giving ‘the many’ an opportunity to start-up their business ideas. The banks were given the incentive of a government 75% guarantee to implement this ‘scheme’ and the sole task of confirming the ‘viability’ of a business plan and thus providing the necessary funding. Over the last 5-years or so there has been strong evidence that some High Street Banks have ‘Abused the SFLGS’ through banking Maladministration combined with a total lack of ‘customer care’ during the banks funding procedure. IBAS (Independent Advisory Service) has a whole web page devoted to this rather appalling issues that failed to be addressed by politicians, particularly those who were part of a government who were in bed with the bankers throughout this period. Goto: www.ibas.co.uk/SFLGS.htm (for details). In 2004 my business start-up was confirmed ‘viable’ by a Bank and then the basis or product that enabled the opportunity for funding (SFLGS) was ‘Abused’ by this particular bank. Delays at the start, eventually lead to extreme delays. A funding procedure that was meant to take only 5-weeks – took 5-months to complete – and thus proved financially detrimental to the viability of my business. My business manager resigned his post and my business partner and I were left with the ‘burdon of high delay cost’ created by the bank, and the stress and frustration of what ACTUALLy happened. The bank FAILED in the way in which it presented its ‘procedures’ and its ‘customer’ care’ – this in itself was an intolerable failing! My viable business was no longer ‘viable’ as the ‘high cost of delays’ created by this bank created many issues that prevented trading. Everything had in fact ‘changed!’ The financial forecast that was once successful and in full agreement with this bank, was no longer a ‘passage of opportunity’ – instead, it was a ‘root for failure’. And, as a result of this ‘Banking Abuse’, I lost my ‘viable’ business – and eventually my Home. The Financial Ombudsman Service seemingly did all it could to uphold this banking culture. As one of their Adjudicator’s was responsible for dealing with my case – and later I found out that this same Adjudicator was responsible for dealing with similar cases from individuals I did not know at this particular moment in time. It was therefore very strange that this Adjudicator should conclude in all 3 cases that ‘the bank did nothing wrong!” Investigative Journalism is not as active as it should be. Its decline does more to deny the ‘rights’ of redress for many individuals in our communities. In fact, its decline does little to uphold our Democracy – enabling Unfairness and Injustice to grow and thus minimising the Trust and Confidence that is needed in order to strengthen the connection between Politics and the Public, and to weaken the disconnection and dissillusionment that can lead to crime. The aim for me and the others who have suffered a similar fate as me, is to have the support of an Invetsigative Journalist. It is with this type of Journalism that could provide the answers of ‘quantification’ based on the amount of similar cases that the FOS has on record. As you are aware, the Financial Ombudsman Service is not bound by the ‘freedom of Information Act’. Yes, this is a Disgrace! Especially given that their relationship with bankers are also part of this appalling ‘culture’. I am sure you will agree, that the fate that was placed at those who resided from disadvantaged backgrounds is an appalling level of injustice that cannot go unmeasured and untreated. The banks remain arrogant and dismissive while many try to keep the roof over their heads. the fight should have been with political support on our side. However, though their was a brief debate at Westminister Hall in May 2009, it also failed to address these issues in its entirety. Finally, as I, and my contacts, remain strong with full knowledge and evidence of the actual events that took place in our cases, we remain confident that Investigative Journalism will get to the heart of the matter and provide the opening for Truth and Justice to teh many who have been failed by this appalling banking culture.
Thank you, Ivor. If this story is to become reality, there is a laundry list of things to do.
To Ivor, as well as our other GFMers, what do you think?
- Are there others interested in an investigative story into the British Parliament’s Small Firms Loan Guarantee Scheme, or SFLGS?
- What format would you like a story like this produced in?
Don’t hold back. E-mail us you ideas or simply comment below.
And as a quick note…
Note our ticker format: story suggestions are posted as is, unedited – and personal contact information is withheld unless otherwise specifed. This is to maintain the integrity of the journalism process, as well as not spread personal e-mail addresses around!
Again, many thanks to Ivor. Expect future updates should this story move forward…!
E-mail your story ideas to
GFM would like to thank Flickr user casey.marshall for the stopwatch graphic used in this post. Retrieved and adapted under the Creative Commons license, 1 July 2009.
Requested attribution to the work:
Thank you for your comment! Stay tuned for more story opportunities. The news is always busy.
Nice blog! Keep up the good work.
Thanks for coming, Luke. Stay tuned.