01-Dec-2006
Motley Fool calls for "FarePak" legislation
Those of you that read my earlier posts will know that I got quite angry over a BBC Breakfast News article on TV whereby a representative (David Kuo) from The Motley Fool implied that the victims had only themselves to blame even although it would appear that FarePak has stolen their money away to shore up their parent company.
As someone not connected to the scandal, but very saddened by its impact, what appalled me during the BBC Breakfast News segment was David’s apparently dispassionate approach suggesting that these consumers had a myriad of choices and had only themselves to blame, yet he failed to recognise that the very alluring attraction of the FarePak product was precisely the fact that it tied up the money in such a way that there could be no temptation to get at it until Christmas came round. For the majority of these consumers, a bank account was still not a suitable product even if they had access to open one.
I found it an offensive suggestion that the consumers were effectively “stupid” in giving money to FarePak (the company has been around for ~40 years for goodness sake) and I do not think that David’s comments and approach would have won many supporters for Motley Fool…..I do think that this was bad PR for Motley Fool and that had more attention been given to the reasons why those poor people used schemes such as FarePak and the need for Government legislation to protect them, then the news item could have been much more sensitive and constructive.
Clearly, someone from The Motley Fool was aware of my blog and I received an email from the PR Manager drawing my attention to a new article on their site entitled "Farepak: A Disaster Waiting To Happen!". I wholeheartedly support all that is now said there, especially given that it now properly appreciates that the customers were the victims.
I am very happy now to see Motley Fool recognise that consumers were the victims – This is not unlike Enron, but affecting people typically at the opposite end of the financial spectrum to those that would be buying shares for investment returns and for the most part knew that they were having a gamble. The US brought in Sarbanes-Oxley to deal with Corporate scandals such as that and I agree with Motley Fool that the UK needs to look much wider into the need to legislate around other financial arrangements.
For the other savings schemes out there operating in that same space (e.g. Park Hampers, Tesco, Sainsbury etc.. savings stamps schemes), perhaps it is time that at a minimum and in time for next Christmas that a voluntary code of conduct is put in place to ringfence an appropriate proportion of customers deposits to provide some form of guarantee.
Thanks to the Motley Fool for taking the time to find and contact me directly outside of the blog. I endorse everything that David now says in his new article, especially now that the consumers are appreciated to be the victims and I am now happy to regard the statements during the BBC report to be an unfortunate set of statements from a company that I have always held in high regard for the advice that they offer.
As someone not connected to the scandal, but very saddened by its impact, what appalled me during the BBC Breakfast News segment was David’s apparently dispassionate approach suggesting that these consumers had a myriad of choices and had only themselves to blame, yet he failed to recognise that the very alluring attraction of the FarePak product was precisely the fact that it tied up the money in such a way that there could be no temptation to get at it until Christmas came round. For the majority of these consumers, a bank account was still not a suitable product even if they had access to open one.
I found it an offensive suggestion that the consumers were effectively “stupid” in giving money to FarePak (the company has been around for ~40 years for goodness sake) and I do not think that David’s comments and approach would have won many supporters for Motley Fool…..I do think that this was bad PR for Motley Fool and that had more attention been given to the reasons why those poor people used schemes such as FarePak and the need for Government legislation to protect them, then the news item could have been much more sensitive and constructive.
Clearly, someone from The Motley Fool was aware of my blog and I received an email from the PR Manager drawing my attention to a new article on their site entitled "Farepak: A Disaster Waiting To Happen!". I wholeheartedly support all that is now said there, especially given that it now properly appreciates that the customers were the victims.
I am very happy now to see Motley Fool recognise that consumers were the victims – This is not unlike Enron, but affecting people typically at the opposite end of the financial spectrum to those that would be buying shares for investment returns and for the most part knew that they were having a gamble. The US brought in Sarbanes-Oxley to deal with Corporate scandals such as that and I agree with Motley Fool that the UK needs to look much wider into the need to legislate around other financial arrangements.
For the other savings schemes out there operating in that same space (e.g. Park Hampers, Tesco, Sainsbury etc.. savings stamps schemes), perhaps it is time that at a minimum and in time for next Christmas that a voluntary code of conduct is put in place to ringfence an appropriate proportion of customers deposits to provide some form of guarantee.
Thanks to the Motley Fool for taking the time to find and contact me directly outside of the blog. I endorse everything that David now says in his new article, especially now that the consumers are appreciated to be the victims and I am now happy to regard the statements during the BBC report to be an unfortunate set of statements from a company that I have always held in high regard for the advice that they offer.
Labels: Christmas, FarePak, legislation, Motley Fool, saving, victim
30-Nov-2006
FarePak Thanks
I have no way of knowing how many people donated thanks to this blog.
In any event, I would like to thank anyone who contributed to the fund before the charitable fund closed to donations this evening.
In any event, I would like to thank anyone who contributed to the fund before the charitable fund closed to donations this evening.
Labels: charity, donations, FarePak
28-Nov-2006
FarePak Victims Charity Fund closing 29 November
Per earlier blog entries, I have just heard that the fund will close to donations at 6pm GMT on 29th November.
If you can donate something to help these families enjoy the Christmas that they have already paid for, then that would great......but get your skates on!!
If you can donate something to help these families enjoy the Christmas that they have already paid for, then that would great......but get your skates on!!
25-Nov-2006
FarePak - a kick in the teeth
One of the saddest stories to blog in the run up to Christmas must have been the story of FarePak going into administration with customers only likely to have received ~4p/£ in compensation following the collapse of the company.
FarePak attracted customers that would typically not be able to or not wish to place their money in traditional financial products. These customers were typically in the most financially disadvantaged group, but wiselt decided not to build additional debt and instead chose to invest for a great Christmas in a product that ought to have ring-fenced their cash and avoided them withdrawing in advance of Christmas.
The Daily Mail is reporting here that to add insult to injury, complainants are actually being charged 30p of FarePak's debt/minute to lodge a claim.....in other words they are writing off ~£7 of FarePaks liabilities with every minute that they spend on the phone trying to claim a 4p/£ compensation.
I don't know how many people saw it, but I was absolutely disgusted by a representative of Motley Fool on BBC News this morning. That correspondent showed a complete disregard to the circumstances of the FarePak customers and the circumstances which led them to FarePak's door, implying that it was an easy choice for them to choose another Financial product.
Whilst most of us take Christmas and all its treats for granted, it seems clear that the majority of FarePak's customers do not. Being able to make weekly or monthly deposits on account without the ability to withdraw the cash in advance of Christmas and protecting that investment was an important draw to these customers.. much like Tesco or Sainsbury saving stamps.
I will not denigrate companies that have not contributed to the 'fighting fund'; however I do applaud those that have unequivocally decided to make a contribution to the fund, helping some of the poorest in UK society that did not have a great choice in preparing for an extremely commercial Christmas.
Motley Fool..... I am ashamed of your representative on BBC News today. He showed absolutely no compassion or even an understanding of the circumstances of the vast majority of FarePak customers and was no way an ambassador for your company; instead he came across as arrogant and ignorant.
Shame on you Motley Fool - I have always held your site in the highest regard, but no more......!!
FarePak attracted customers that would typically not be able to or not wish to place their money in traditional financial products. These customers were typically in the most financially disadvantaged group, but wiselt decided not to build additional debt and instead chose to invest for a great Christmas in a product that ought to have ring-fenced their cash and avoided them withdrawing in advance of Christmas.
The Daily Mail is reporting here that to add insult to injury, complainants are actually being charged 30p of FarePak's debt/minute to lodge a claim.....in other words they are writing off ~£7 of FarePaks liabilities with every minute that they spend on the phone trying to claim a 4p/£ compensation.
I don't know how many people saw it, but I was absolutely disgusted by a representative of Motley Fool on BBC News this morning. That correspondent showed a complete disregard to the circumstances of the FarePak customers and the circumstances which led them to FarePak's door, implying that it was an easy choice for them to choose another Financial product.
Whilst most of us take Christmas and all its treats for granted, it seems clear that the majority of FarePak's customers do not. Being able to make weekly or monthly deposits on account without the ability to withdraw the cash in advance of Christmas and protecting that investment was an important draw to these customers.. much like Tesco or Sainsbury saving stamps.
I will not denigrate companies that have not contributed to the 'fighting fund'; however I do applaud those that have unequivocally decided to make a contribution to the fund, helping some of the poorest in UK society that did not have a great choice in preparing for an extremely commercial Christmas.
Motley Fool..... I am ashamed of your representative on BBC News today. He showed absolutely no compassion or even an understanding of the circumstances of the vast majority of FarePak customers and was no way an ambassador for your company; instead he came across as arrogant and ignorant.
Shame on you Motley Fool - I have always held your site in the highest regard, but no more......!!
Labels: administration, FarePak, Motley Fool
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]