old summary explanation, page-31

Pulling the plug is all very well but there are rules about how this is supposed to occur, and these rules are being tested.

Some judges, as in Bell, would appear to warming to the concept (read law) that Banks need to wait in the queue with all other creditors if they fiddle with their security at or around the time of collapse.

I have noticed one poster attempting the spin that the "shaft everyone" policies of the banks is somehow attributing to the solidity of our banking system.

Even if it was true it is not a good enough reason, and will only deeply annoy all who have been affected and not lend any credibility to their onerous tactics.

This post is only referring to the preferential security matter. The M+D, BO matter will be independently tested, with different evidence and is also likely to get up.