http://www.allheadlinenews.com/brief...20in%20Britain

Brucey bonus, there is the UK's mortgage debt for this year paid off...lets hope some other insane lunatics get overthrown who have their money "safely" stashed in blighty.

I guess if all the dictators get overthrown and their assets confesicated, that will be a big help to the global Financial crisis.

Hmmm... makes sense, makes a lot of sense.

And I believe that Switzerland have already taken this move too? And that the amounts involved have gone down from several billion to just 670 million ...

I guess it's unlikely Libya will want the money back.

A 10 billion quid mansion in London? You sure that's right?

Maybe he's filled it with rare racing camels?

Apparently he was under the influence of Hallucinogens and O.B.Laden when he forked out the cash.

Or gold bars. I don't believe there's any residence in london beyond 150million, although that Saudi Embassy building in Mayfair's probably worth a few bob.

As unlikely as legal procedures etc. If the funds were held in individuals name from his individual business proceeds (even if unlawful) then it would be a very complicated legal case to identify a beneficiary.

Funds held by dictators, drug lords other high profile criminals, where do you think they go when they get assasinated?

That's how banks get very rich. Particularly if it's a numbered account.

Maybe he owns Buckingham Palace (with the Queen in it)?

Well there'll be some wastage, but generally, if a country feels another country has taken money that should belong to them, they don't quietly bow down and keep quiet about it. While it may be a complex legal issue, it's not one that's likely to be dropped.

Was just wondering what did happen, switzerland confiscated a load of money from some nigerian dictator, but eventually gave it back to nigeria on the condition it was used for humanitarian projects, much of it went missing once it got to Nigeria.

In the case of criminals, native crims just have their funds consficated, international criminals would also have governments interested.

What do you think happens to the money?

Like I said, if the funds were held by an individual as proceeds from his individual business ventures (even if he took advantage of his political office or authority), it would be very difficult to designate the State or the Country as the Benefeciary.

It is more likely to happen in cases when a Head of the State fraudently diverts proceeds from National Interests to his private Bank account.

Yes, funds can be ofcourse be very well used for Humanatarian Projects directed by Halliburton adn IMF

Do you think any bank would want to admit that it accepted funds of unlawful nature i.e. helping with money laundering etc?

Money stays where it is i.e. being managed by Banks Fund Managers and helping them issue more credit on the backing of such funds on top and many more creative uses. Its just a number on a system, dont think there is enough Cash in the Financial System to match the total sum of Money in circulation.

Then those funds would have to be unconfiscated and returned to the dictator if no crime can be shown, banks still have a reputation to keep.

Not always the case, but of course, all humanitarian projects have their conditions attached.

Of course not, it doesn't mean they don't do it, doesn't mean they don't get caught doing it, deny knowledge of doing it, then hand the money back to shut up the participants.

I'm sure banks will take advantage of the situation.

...because apparently he withdrew much of it during the quarrel around his son's arrest.

There is now a new law in place concerning "Heads of state and high public officials (politically exposed persons, PEPs) who illegally enrich themselves through state funds deprive their state of capital and hinder the development of their country".
This seems to be a step in the right direction, but as the article points out it only applies to failing states, and the problems to prevent the money from coming in in the first place remains, as the article further states that only a fraction of suspicious transactions is being reported today.

sorry back to the uk

This is the sort of thing that happened after the 2nd world war, banks who were holding accounts worth hundreds of millions started shredding the records of the people who deposited them, which most of them where killed in the camps..so dont try and pretend as if the swiss banks play all clean when it comes to making some extra cash..

Are you, in any way suggestiong, that banks handed in their own lists of people to be taken to the camps for processing?

Jews have always been commercial minded and materially well off, just saying.

Thats not at all what i was trying to say, but instead of trying to do the right thing or even the basic banks customer service and try to track down the rest of the fam who should of inherited the money or maybe even help the war survivers with it the banks felt thy should shred the records and keep it for themselfs...

I was not only talking about jews, there where many more people then just jews who died in the war.

And for every wealthy jew or well off as you call it that there is in the world theres probs 50 with no food to feed the kids

Asset Freezing is nothing more than an alternative term to legalized stealing. Those of you with knowledge of how bureaucratic it is to release any of these funds can vouch the underlying principle in my statement.

I'm actually disappointed that a whole lot of your guys are endorsing it; implied or explicitly...

I guess it depends on who's getting the windfall?

Just hold on a second there with the mouse clicker...1...2..OK, you may groan me now.

Wait ...hang on, are you saying Gadaffi was a legit businessman and he did nothing illegal to amass that amount of money in the first place?

I say open that big bank vault and lets all dive into that sweet sweet money (made from the sweat of Libyan's)
Got to be able to buy back a few libraries with 30billion.