Hi, Paul.

PE> PE> Not that I've seen.  I'll see if I can dredge up some older ones.

PE> FM> Let me know if you do. It shouldn't make any difference for CHESS

PE> I found the CHESS statements for when I converted the BT stuff, but there
PE> was no PDP.  This is probably my first PDP CHESS statement.

Hmmm, presumably they have only just got around to putting you on CHESS,
and when you sold that 1800 they just grabbed the first cert >= that.

PE> FM> reason that I can find out. An accompanying message said "ask your
PE> FM> broker" - who do *I* ask? :-)

PE> Yeah, I know that feeling.

There is actually a CHESS "help" line (for brokers). It doesn't help.
:-)

PE> PE> I was selling those PDP around the same time as getting transferred to
PE> PE> Chess.  Maybe that screwed them up?  BFN.  Paul.

PE> FM> Almost certainly that's what caused the 400.

PE> Well, it's a very strange thing, BT sending in a stupid certificate when
PE> they had one exactly the right size.  In addition, the BT holding statement

Think about it. Some clerk has to provide 1800 shares. She has a stack
of certificates. Rather than search the lot (or even, run the knapsack
problem on them (which is NP-hard)), what she's going to do is grab the
first one >= the number wanted.

PE> makes it look like they sent in the RIGHT one.  So it's very strange that

Your holding statement would not differentiate between CHESS and
non-CHESS, at least the ones I've seen (another client who uses BT)
don't.

PE> 400 should appear out of nowhere.  BTW, if the end result is that I've got
PE> 400 shares for free, I'm not particularly interested in reporting the
PE> problem.  That's their job to not stuff that up.

You may well have got 400 shares for free if I hadn't raised the problem
with them. Wendy (see yesterday's message) certainly believed that they
were holding 2200 certificated. But that would be dishonest. :-)

PE> FM> I'll get back on to this next week. Oh, do you have a client reference
PE> FM> number for BT? I may have it at work, but just to be sure. Something
PE> FM> like EDWARP 12345 6

PE> Sent in netmail.  BTW, you said somewhere to send in the 400 shares to get

Got it. But I didn't need it anyway as it turned out. They may well have
my name on their computer as a contact person re your account, certainly
they have for another client on whose behalf I have to talk to them a
lot. But he wrote a letter to them to tell them about me (well, I wrote
it but he signed it).

PE> them CHESSed, but I will actually be sending them to BT to get them CHESSed

Yes, that is the correct thing to do.

PE> instead, because it goes onto my margin.  BFN.  Paul.

She was very confused in the end about how that 1800 got issued to
settle that trade. Something about a "free release" which didn't affect
the margin loan. I didn't pursue it, *I* didn't want to become confused.
:-)

Regards, fIM.

 * * That's my story... and I'm sticking to it!
@EOT:

---