Four expropriated investors SNS explain refuses to accept the decision
Four expropriated investors SNS explain refuses to accept the decision of the State Council and are now trying through a lawsuit against the Dutch Central Bank nationalization of SNS to challenge.
According to a statement, the central bank "the main culprit for the expropriation of investors''.
"DNB has the rules for capital supervision not applied. The SNS is an impossible assignment," says Jeroen Wendelgelst lawyer. He will conduct the case on behalf of these investors.
It is the decision of 27 January which DNB SNS Bank mandates that within four days over 1.8 billion euros in new capital to pick. Failure to follow these "impossible'' command is the main reason for the nationalization on 1 February, the statement said. Later from leaked documents suggest that DNB been on expropriation has managed, to investors. DNB They want this accountable.
Lawyer Wendelsgelst: "DNB had actually only additional capital may be obtained from SNS, if there really is no other measures are possible therein. And then you have a reasonable time limit and not four days. This measure was a bridge too far. '
Accountability
According investors remained DNB State Council wrongly outside shot, which through their objection still hope to rectify. After this, if necessary, even in court proceedings.
"The stainless steel has explicitly not address the role of DNB. Which is actually a big problem, because the DNB protagonist in this case. Excluding the decision of DNB, the expropriation did not occur, at least not all on 1 February, "says Wendelsgelst.
"The role of DNB is not reviewed. The stainless steel is in its statement of the decision of DNB as it is. Nevertheless, the decision of DNB itself must be assessed by the court."
Financial information
, investors find that DNB wrongly departed from the statutory rules for the supervision of banks. According to the investors ignore DNB in its decision of 27 January virtually the financial information that SNS Bank itself has provided. This is incorrect, because the assessment of capital requirements according to the law should be based on the bank itself to provide information and not the information of third parties, the report said.
Fees
Should it appear that DNB not acted correctly, according to the complainants, other investors right to compensation. The lawyer of the four investors consult with colleagues and advocates or possibly together can be increased.
Gedupeerden SNS richten pijlen op DNB
