³ÉÈËÂÛ̳

« Previous | Main | Next »

The Church and the Mutual Society

Post categories:

William Crawley | 00:09 UK time, Monday, 17 November 2008

7.jpgOn this week's Sunday Sequence, Dr Donald Watts (pictured), General Secretary of the Presbyterian Church, acknowledged that some members of his church may have been confused about the relationship between the church and the Presbyterian Mutual Society, which are two separate legal identities. Dr Watts suggested that measures would be taken to more clearly differentiate the two organisations in the mind of the public.

At present, membership of the Mutual Society is limited to members of the Presbyterian Church, the with the Presbyterian Church and uses a church e-mail address, and the Mutual Society "is managed by the who undertake this responsibility for the mutual benefit of all its Presbyterian investors".

In June, the Presbyterian General Assembly passed encouraging "congregations and individuals to avail themselves of [the Mutual Society's] services". The Assembly has never given such an endorsement of any other financial services provider.

Some questions arise from this close association:

1. If and when the Mutual Society's financial situation is stabilised, should the organisation be encouraged to remove the word "Presbyterian" from its official title to avoid any misunderstanding?

2. Is it time to recommend that the Mutual Society establish its own online presence and remove the Society's pages from the Presbyterian Church website? Similarly, of the Mutual Society is not to be seen as an agency of the Presbyterian Church, shouldn't the Society establish its own separate e-mail address?

3. In future, should the General Assembly avoid giving commercial plugs or endorsements of any financial service providers, including the Mutual Society, and refrain from advising church members to "avail themselves" of the services of any particular organisation?

4. At present, the Presbyterian Mutual Society submits an annual report to the Presbyterian General Assembly, which is published in the official Reports under the Board of Mission in Ireland. My understanding is that the Society has no legal or ecclesiastical obligation to do so, but provides a report as a courtesy to the Assembly. Should the Assembly end this custom in order to make clear that the Society is not an agency of the Church?

5. Since some members of the Mutual Society appear to have invested on the advice of the church, and in some cases having misunderstood the nature of the church's relationship with the Mutual Society, should the Presbyterian Church consider setting up a hardship fund to assist some of those who are now most vulnerable? The Church clearly has no legal duty to create such a fund, but some might argue that there is a compelling moral case for doing so.

Update: Dr Donald Watts has added to comments he made on yesterday's Sunday Sequence, clarifying the nature of the resolution passed at the last General Assembly. "I don't think the Church saw itself as giving advice in the particular circumstances of any individual, but was really intending to draw attention to the mutual society as an option," he said. "The Church is certainly in support of the principle of mutuality, where one shareholder supports another. Certainly it would have been better if this statement had never been made. But the resolution is reflective of the trust and respect the General Assembly holds the Presbyterian Mutual Society in, which has sadly been overtaken by events beyond the control of either."

Further Update: One Monday 17 November, the Presbyterian Mutual Society announced that it has placed itself under administration. The Administrator, appointed at the request of the PMS directors, is Arthur Boyd, a much-respected senior accountant (who is also a Presbyterian elder). Arthur Boyd's statement is below.


Statement from Administrator

Arthur Boyd of Arthur Boyd & Company, the Belfast-based chartered accountants and business recovery specialists, has today been appointed Administrator of the Presbyterian Mutual Society.

The appointment of an Administrator follows a period of severe pressure on the Society's liquid assets.

Mr Boyd said: "It is apparent that the credit crunch has had a severe effect on the Society. A number of members have moved funds from the Society to other financial institutions that enjoy protection under the Government's financial guarantee scheme, leading effectively to an unprecedented run on the Society's cash which it could not sustain.

"My appointment as Administrator at the request of the Directors of the Society will provide protection for its assets.

"Administration is not the same as liquidation, bankruptcy or a winding-up. Administration is designed to protect a company faced with liquidity problems. The Administrator's role is to act in the best interests of everyone who is owed money.

"My aim is to see if the Society can be rescued or, if this is not possible, to ensure that the Society is wound down in an orderly manner to maximise the return of money to members.

"I cannot at this stage say whether members' funds can be returned to them in full or what proportion of their funds can be returned. The Society has considerable assets but if those assets were sold now it might not produce the best return for members.

"The Administrative process is likely to take some time. My immediate priority is to work with the Directors and staff of the Society to make a full examination of the Society's financial position and assess the next steps.

"Members are not required to take any action at present. I will write to members to inform them of my appointment. As required of an Administrator, I will endeavour to make my initial proposals to the members within eight weeks.

"I am aware that in some cases lack of access to funds will cause hardship to members of the Society. However, the role of the Administrator is to act on behalf of all members and develop a plan which will ultimately be put to those members for their consideration and decision.

"The decision by the Directors to place the Society in Administration was made possible through the making of subordinate legislation by the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment on Friday. The Directors of the Society have expressed their gratitude to Arlene Foster MLA, the Enterprise Minister, and her Department, for expediting the measure.

"The Presbyterian Mutual Society has total assets exceeding £300m of which more than £180m is in loans to members and £130m is in fixed and other assets, including commercial property which is held in order to produce a rental income which contributed to the dividend distributed to members.

"The Administrator is currently not in a position to make repayments to members whether they have already applied for withdrawals or not.

"The Society has five full-time and two part-time employees who will remain in place to assist with the Administration."

Arthur Boyd FCA, FABRP, BSc (Econ), is managing partner of Arthur Boyd & Company.
He is a chartered accountant and a licensed insolvency practitioner, a member of R3, the Association of Business Recovery Professionals, and a member of the NI Insolvency Rules Advisory Committee. Mr Boyd worked with Price Waterhouse and Spicer & Pegler in London before returning to Northern Ireland as a Partner in Atkinson & Boyd and its successor firm Deloitte & Touche prior to founding Arthur Boyd & Company in 1995.

Comments

  • Comment number 1.


    Okay. I'm going to make two statements of my own for consideration, in light of the above questions.

    (1) I'd be very surprised if anybody invested their money in the PMS because they thought it was the same thing legally as the Presbyterian Church in Ireland.

    (2) If anybody DID invest their money in the PMS because they thought it was the PCI then they made an imbecilic decision regardless of the way it turned out that was in no way the fault of the PCI!


  • Comment number 2.

    I don't think that in the light of the above facts you can say that no one could think that...it was for sure so wrapped up in PCI that those who are a part of it thought that it was an entity belonging to the Presbyterian Church in Ireland..otherwise why oh why would there be all the ties mentioned above...for goodness sake how could it not be ''Presbyterian'' for presbyterians and branded accross all PCI...there is NO getting away from that...

  • Comment number 3.

    I found it embarrasing, but not entirely surprising, to listen to Donald Watts ducking and diving the issue yesterday morning. This seems to be the Presbyterian policy for dealing with problems. From personal experience having faced serious problems as a member of the Presbyterian Church I was actually told by Presbytery that the interests of the Church would come first. Needless to say I am no longer a member of the Presbyterian Church, although at least that meant that, thankfully, I withdrew my savings from PMS as its only open to Presbyterian members.

    I know there are many great Presbyterian ministers, but there are also a number at its core in positions of authority who see it as their role to protect the legal institution of the Presbyterian Church at all costs, including those of compassion, justice and integrity. Whilst their actions may, for now, succeed in legally protecting the institution they are causing untold harm to the unity of the church and leaving many hurt and struggling people in their wake and this situation is just another example.

    Listening to Donald Watts was like listening to a politician as he protected his position by not answering the questions very reasonably put to him by William Crawley. He became very defensive and displayed a total disregard for the reality of the financial difficulties now faced by many PMS savers. PCI needs to wake up to what is happening at its core. They stated in black and white in the Annual Report of the General Assembly that they resolved to encourage members of the Church to avail of PMS services, in doing so they agreed to promote financial services which, as far as I'm aware, they are not qualified or licensed to do. Its therefore hard to see how they can now sidestep any responsibility by hiding behind the separate legal entity copout.

  • Comment number 4.

    The minister is due to make a statement on this this evening.

  • Comment number 5.


    southernR-

    I think you missed my point: my point isn't that nobody thought that the PCI and the PMS were the same organisation, but that nobody invested for that reason. (And if they did, they're stupid, because that's a ridiculous reason to invest.)


  • Comment number 6.

    John it doesn't help to call some of these people idiots, imbeciles and ridiculous. The fact is that SOME people DID invest in PMS because they thought they were investing in their own church. They clearly made a mistake when they thought that PMS was part of the Presbyterian Church, but that was a mistake that was quite understandable. Some invested in PMS thinking they were helping out other presbyterians and their church. Until recently, the PMS offices were inside Presbyterian Church House headquarters, right next to the church's Financial offices. All the other connections listed above added to this fact would certainly have misled an elderly person who had a little money and also wanted to help out their church a bit. That's understandable, I think. The Mutual Society is not simply a financial services organisation, it is a way in which presbyterians have been able to assist one another particularly, so it's not ridiculous to invest some money in this body as a sign of commitment to ones church.

  • Comment number 7.


    Augustine-


    "Some invested in PMS thinking they were helping out other presbyterians and their church."

    They were. But that doesn't exempt the organisation from the risks that are associated with any investments.


    "All the other connections listed above added to this fact would certainly have misled an elderly person who had a little money and also wanted to help out their church a bit. That's understandable, I think."

    Don't they read? I don't want to sound harsh, here, but of course they're helping their churches - they were right about that - the PMS lends to congregations with that money. I wasn't right to use the word 'stupid'; certainly some people could just have had their guard down because they don't associate 'church' with 'risk'.

    I guess hindsight is 20/20.


  • Comment number 8.

    Will thanks for the update on Donald Watts' comments. Watts is rowing back very fast, but nothing he says can change the fact that the Presbyterian Assembly, under his direction as Clerk of the Assembly, passed a resolution in June 'encouraging' members of the church to 'avail of the services' of the Presbyterian Mutual Society. He may think this falls short of advising people how to invest their money, but in making that argument he sounds like Humpty Dumpty speaking to Alice in Through the Looking Glass: "When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in a rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less."


  • Comment number 9.


    On the previous thread on this matter I suggested that the action of those investors who protected their own interests by withdrawing their savings without regard to the fate of the deposits of those coming behind them was sinful.

    No one has taken up this point which interests me greatly. There are no end of Presbyterians willing to condemn the recreational use of drugs and alcohol, sexual licence, even certain types of music and dance. Where are they now? Why are their voices not raised in condemnation? I would like to be able to assume their reticence is not because of the constituency they would be addressing: is there something wrong with telling nice, respectable, middle-class, church-going Presbyterians that their greed and self-interest are deeply, deeply sinful?

  • Comment number 10.

    Clearly many Presbyterians are confused concerning the link or otherwise between PResbyterian Church in Ireland and Presbyterian Mutual society. They are of course two completely seperate entities,however the 9,000 investors with PMS I would suggest make up a substancial number of committed people who year on year give sacrificially to support the work of the church at home and overseas. It is very disappointing that the clerk of PCI sought to put "Clear blue water" between the mutual society. As a society PMS has assisted and continues to assist in the building and maintainance of many church building projects (400) at present. PMS has a charitable fund which has assisted many projects over the years. A previous comment made by a former Presbyterian suggests that it may be sinnful for members to withdraw money at the expense of others. He speaks the truth, mutuallity is about sharing. Some by their actions in withdrawing their investments have left the burden or otherwise to be shared by others. Under God this organisation has been a great help to God's work through PCI, it is my solemn prayer it will continue to do so.

  • Comment number 11.

    I was astounded to hear Dr Watts admit that he wasn't aware that the PMS shared PCI's website. Surely a man as senior as he in the church should be more than aware of what is on his own denomination's website? (Although given the mess which is the PCI website, that's not entirely surprising. For how long have they been promising an updated site now?)

    Likewise with the email address. If Dr Watts reads the Herald (or is it ReachOut? can't remember...), surely he must have seen the large glossy ads for the PMS every month?

  • Comment number 12.


    Tony - agree with your comments - I fear, however, I am not and never have been a Presbyterian...

    I simply felt emboldened to contribute to this debate by the many informed and thoughtful comments made by members of other denominations when the Lambeth conference was the focus of the blog's attention...

  • Comment number 13.

    Has the time now come that individual Presbyterians and Congregations get together and help those who may be suffering financial hardship because Presbyterian Mutual society is in administration? If all members show patience and confidence these matters will be resolved. In the meantime a call to God's people in PCI. Help those in need. Come together and offer pastoral care and back that care up with solid cash.
    PCI members are faced with a real crisis, make no mistake about that, but in the midst of that crisis actions will speak much louder than words. Many members do not need their investment paid back today, however there are those in financial difficuties, let Presbyterians show what the love of Jesus reallly means to them and support their brothers and sisters in need.

  • Comment number 14.


    Tonyhately

    That is exactly what should happen, and if this means congregations putting on hold planned expenditure in order to act as the community we should be then so be it. The message should go out loudly and clearly that people are more important than property or programmes. Maybe then this could be followed up by a further years suspension of spending on property while a corresponding amount of money is raised and put to charitable use.

    These actions may go some way to answering portwyne's call for repentance.



  • Comment number 15.

    In an attempt to seek clarity and some transparency, i would urgently request the PMS through the Administators to convene an extraordinary general meeting to facilitate the Members of the Society.

  • Comment number 16.

    Yes, I agree with pmsnew. I think that there is an utter feeling of helplessness for anyone involved. I have been thinking about what the best way of getting everyone together is.
    I think that everyone should hold their nerve and yes, it will be difficult. I can identify with this as we are a family who need money for our builder.
    There are certainly emergency situations and there really should be some sort of fund that will pay out something to help these people.
    I have calmed down considerably over the last few days and know that there is really nothing we can do until the administrater gives his assessment which could take up to 8 weeks.
    I only hope that the church does not have to deal with any tragedies because of this situation. I am finding it difficult to come to terms with the church's attitude and don't know if I will ever quite regain my sincere devotion to the presbyterian church.
    Although I know that it is important to remember that it is 'In God we trust' not man. Let us pray for divine wisdom in the undertaking of this administration task and that the situation will be resolved to everyone's approval and satisfaction.

  • Comment number 17.


    I am finding it difficult to come to terms with the church's attitude and don't know if I will ever quite regain my sincere devotion to the presbyterian church."

    See, this is the sort of statement encouraged by blaming the PCI/PMS. Do you realise how many mutual funds and financial organisations and individuals are in this same position? This is not the fault of the PMS. You have no legitimate rage against them. William's post above - as I understand it - is about ensuring that people (primarily older people) understand exactly what they're investing in, not about justifying blame for the PMS in this financial crisis.


  • Comment number 18.

    There is one thing for sure no matter the outcome, the PCI will be hit very very hard.

    The way the church has totally left the members of the PMS out in the cold is shocking.

    Only recently the church had something to say to the media regarding the 11+ etc, yet it has nothing to say on this issue except distance itself from it.

    There have already been groups set up that will not be paying another penny to PCI.

    And how ministers who are maybe on 40k a year can really pastor a pensioner who has thier life savings in teh PMS and depend on it for their food and heat is beyond me.

  • Comment number 19.

    The recent debacle that was caused by the worldwide credit crunch, within the Presbyterian Church, when confusion and disarray was caused to members of the Presbyterian Mutual Society who are all members of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland, poses serious questions to the ordinary members and the hierarchy of the PCI.

    What is the mission of the Presbyterian Church, is it to provide for the financial needs of its members or is it to cater for the spiritual needs of its members, is it to look after the lusts of the flesh in the polluted world of banking or is it to feed their sheep with the milk and the meat of God’s Holy Word.

    Causing the life of the believer to be polluted and defiled by becoming caught up with the cares of this world does not lead to a life in the Spirit because the sorrows of this world lead to death, as believers and followers of Christ we are commanded that even though we are in this world we are instructed not to be part of it. Those that follow a path of greed in this world drain life from their bodies and cast trouble upon their house.

    Trouble has been brought upon the houses of those PMS members who have been caught unaware that their savings and investments would be frozen draining life from their bodies with anxiety and worry about the future of their money, the Lord Jesus Christ tells us, For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also, today where are the hearts of those PMS members who are perplexed by the future of their savings.

    The dogs have a mighty appetite; they never have enough. But they are shepherds who have no understanding; they have all turned to their own way, each to his own gain, one and all.

  • Comment number 20.

    groovyjon
    How can I get in touch with one of those groups?
    Do you know of any groundswell of opinion of PMS members. I am west of the Bann, and am hearing nothing at all.
    I would like to join an email group if there is one going, just to get information, because there is nothing coming from the PMS.
    Thanks

  • Comment number 21.

    The wider membership of Presbyterian Church in Ireland and members of PMS should be aware that there are those people within PCI, Ministers Elders Committee mebers, many from professional backgrounds in Law, Finance and accountancy working hard to keep PMS. The society has been very successful in the past and can be in the future. members should know that many people have offered substancial sums of money to ease individual crisis situations.
    God's people are working hard outwith the PMS and official structures of PCI to put emergency funding in place. PMS is solvent, but not if members force a sell off of very valuable assetts. There are very generous people who genuinely want to help and will help if asked. One draw back is that PMS cannot accept deposits, despite the fact that people have been seeking to make lodgements

  • Comment number 22.

    groovyjon. Sorry to hear that groups are forming to withold money from the Lord's work (Many ministers work on minimum stipend of Approx £21k). Please understand one fundamental fact, the PMS was built by Presbyterians, by their actions in withdrawing money at such an alarming Presbyterians and Presbyterians alone cause this problem. Yes PM's £50,000 deposit guarantee paid a very big part but ultimately every member who withdrew there money did it for themselves, not for PMS, Not for PCI not for God's Glory, for themselves. This run should never have happened PMS was healthy and solvent, there was no need for a run or panic. If the directors had said in mid september like Corporal Jones "Don't panic" then everyone would have paniced.

  • Comment number 23.

    With hindsight, it is a pity that there was no communication at all from PMS in the lead up to the run.
    Yet they must have been aware of the members building anxiety because of the global financial situation.
    I phoned about 2 months ago to ask about the safety of my savings and was assured by the secretary that everything was ok.
    He also told me that he was getting a lot of phone calls from members.
    That being so, it would have been sensible to send out a letter to all members answering all those questions, and also to have set in place an emergency fund in the event of a run.
    Also the 21 day rule should have been invoked from the start.

  • Comment number 24.

    To goodbyepci. You have a very valid point. My daugther invested a substancial five figure sum in August. There was no hint of any trouble then. RBS HBOS and others were in same situation. It is my understanding that action was taken within two days of the run becoming an issue.
    We need to keep focused though on a few very important points.
    PMS is not bankrupt, is not in insolvency, has assetts worth in access of £300m, does not owe money to any individual or institution.
    We are all wise after the event, no one in the country could have foreseen the financial turmoil of past six weeks. While this is little comfort to us as investors in PMS, unlike large institutions there are no nasty bad debts to be uncovered , no large bonuses (All directors of PMS are voluntary) and above all our investments are sound

  • Comment number 25.


    Tony Hately-

    Don't you know? It's all PCI's fault! They forced people to invest through deception! They pulled people in so they could trap their funds in some conspiracy! They are complicit in some evil deeds indeed, like helping their congregations by starting a mutual fund!

    In fact, if you look closely enough Tony, the Presbyterian Church in Ireland is responsible for the entire global financial crisis. Do your homework and you'll see for yourself!

    Goodbye, PCI!!!!


  • Comment number 26.

    Tonyhately
    As long as the assets of PMS exceed the liabilities we will be fine, and I realise that a "fire sale" would be a disaster for the situation.

    Mr. Micawber, in Charles Dickens' David Copperfield, summed it up by saying:

    "Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery"

    But the PCI and PMS really do need to improve their communication.
    Searching the internet and media interviews are not the ideal method.
    Donald Patton said he wrote to all Pres ministers regarding the situation, but nothing was read out on Sunday in our church.
    There has been no official word from the PCI and 2 letters from PMS.
    Not a great comfort or source of information to people who are anxious about their savings.
    Spotlight tonight should be interesting, but again it is trial by media.

Ìý

³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ iD

³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ navigation

³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ © 2014 The ³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.