View Single Post
Old 11-04-2014, 11:59 AM   #34
Mike L
Wizard
Mike L ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Mike L ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Mike L ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Mike L ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Mike L ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Mike L ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Mike L ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Mike L ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Mike L ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Mike L ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Mike L ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Mike L's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,479
Karma: 3846231
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
Device: Kindle 3, Samsung Galaxy
An excellent summary, Latepaul. Thank you.

You say you pay a fee at the time of the application. The source you quoted says "The cost of getting a licence includes an application fee and a licence fee" (my italics). That suggests that the "application fee" is for the administrative cost, and the licence fee goes into a fund from which the IPO will pay the claims. Assuming that only a small proportion of rights holders will come forward (as you originally suggested), that in turn suggests that the fee that the applicant pays will be a lot less than the amount received by the rights holder. So you were right in saying there will be no net cost to the taxpayer.

Mike
Mike L is offline   Reply With Quote