natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Pozanimal se je o solventnosti in ravni rezerv, v zvezi s čimer mu je Organ za finančne storitve dejal, da ni razloga za skrb, čeprav bi moral zakonodajalec vedeti za težave.
He asked questions about solvency and reserve levels and claims to have been told by the FSA that there was no reason for concern, when in fact the problems should have been known to the regulator.
Po njegovem mnenju je Organ za finančne storitve zavarovance napačno obveščal.
In his opinion, the FSA have misinformed policyholders.
Zato so ostali pri družbi ELAS dlje, kot bi sicer, in so utrpeli dodatne izgube.
As a result, they stayed with ELAS longer than they would otherwise have done and suffered further losses.
Poznejše pritožbe VINALLA Organu za finančne storitve in Komisarju za pritožbe Združenega kraljestva so bile zavrnjene.
Mr VINALL's subsequent complaints to both the FSA itself and the UK Complaints Commissioner were not upheld.
Organ za finančne storitve je navedel, da ni mogel zagotoviti, da družba ELAS nima težav in da morajo zavarovanci sami sprejemati odločitve glede družbe ELAS (WE 43).
The FSA claimed that it was not in a position to assert that there were no problems at ELAS and that there was an onus on consumers to make their own decisions with regard to ELAS (WE 43).
Prav tako je poudaril, da mora Organ za finančne storitve pri sprejemanju odločitev o določanju omejitev za družbe upoštevati širši vpliv, ki ga lahko te na splošno imajo na trg in potrošnike.
It also pointed out that in making judgements about imposing restrictions on firms, the FSA must take into account the wider impact these may have on the market and on consumers generally.
Komisar za pritožbe je v nadaljevanju poudaril, da je Organ za finančne storitve zelo omejen pri tem, kaj lahko pove in česa ne sme povedati o tretjih strankah, ker ga lahko družba toži, če se informacije izkažejo za nepravilne in škodljive.
The Complaints Commissioner further emphasised that the FSA is tightly constrained as to what it can and cannot say about third parties, since it could be sued by the company if the information turned out to be incorrect and damaging.
Parlamentarna varuhinja človekovih pravic Združenega kraljestva (glej spodaj) zdaj obravnava pritožbe številnih posameznikov, ki trdijo, da „ jim je Organ za finančne storitve zagotovil, da ni razloga za skrb glede solventnosti družbe “ (WE 43).
The UK Parliamentary Ombudsman (see below) is currently considering complaints by many individuals, who allege that they " were assured by the FSA that there was no reason to be alarmed as to the solvency of the Society" (WE 43).
Zavarovanci imajo dve možnosti za pridobitev odškodnine za domnevne napake zakonodajalca.
There are two possible avenues available to policyholders to obtain compensation for alleged failings of the regulator.
Prva možnost, da oškodovani zavarovanci prejmejo odškodnino, so pritožbe parlamentarni varuhinji človekovih pravic Združenega kraljestva.
Complaints to the UK Parliamentary Ombudsman constitute the first possibility for aggrieved policyholders to obtain compensation.
Memorandum parlamentarne varuhinje človekovih pravic Odboru za peticije podrobno določa splošno vlogo varuhinje in njeno posebno vlogo v zvezi z družbo ELAS (WE 12).
A memorandum of the Parliamentary Ombudsman to the Petitions Committee sets out in detail the Ombudsman's role in general and with regard to the ELAS case in particular (WE 12).
Zato je „ vloga varuhinje človekovih pravic obravnavati pritožbe (ki ji jih predloži predstavnik spodnjega doma parlamenta) posameznikov, ki trdijo, da jih je doletela nepopravljiva krivica zaradi nepravilnosti organov, ki spadajo pod njeno pristojnost, pri opravljanju upravnih nalog.
Thus, " the Ombudsman's role is to consider complaints (referred to her by a Member of the House of Commons) from individuals who claim to have suffered an unremedied injustice as a result of maladministration on the parts of the bodies falling within her jurisdiction in the discharge of their administrative function.
Če varuhinja človekovih pravic ugotovi, da so nepravilnosti povzročile (ali prispevale k) nepopravljivi krivici, bo izdala priporočila za odpravo te krivice.
Where the Ombudsman finds that maladministration has caused (or has contributed to) an unremedied injustice, she will make recommendations to remedy such an injustice.
Vendar varuhinja človekovih pravic organa ne more prisiliti, da sprejme priporočila.
However, the Ombudsman has no power to compel a body to accept her recommendations.
Kljub temu so njena priporočila običajno sprejeta in ustrezna pravna sredstva so zagotovljena.
Nevertheless, her recommendations are normally accepted and a suitable remedy provided.
Če se to ne zgodi, lahko varuhinja človekovih pravic na to opozori parlament s posebnim poročilom. “
Where it does not happen, the Ombudsman may bring this to Parliament's attention by means of a special report. "
Akcijska skupina EMAG je v peticiji navedla, da je leta 2001 več kot 600 zavarovancev iz Združenega kraljestva od varuhinje človekovih pravic zahtevalo preiskavo (WE 14
EMAG states in its petition that in 2001, more than 600 UK policyholders demanded an investigation by the Ombudsman (WE 14
Po preiskavi je varuhinja človekovih pravic v poročilu, objavljenem junija 2003, ugotovila, da ni bilo nepravilnosti s strani zakonodajalca za bonitetne zadeve.
Following the investigation, the Ombudsman concluded in her report published in June 2003 that there was no maladministration on the part of the prudential regulator.
Po objavi Penrosovega poročila pa je bila uvedena druga preiskava (kljub nasprotovanju Organa za finančne storitve
However, subsequent to the publication of the Penrose report, a second investigation was launched (despite reported opposition against it from the FSA
Dodatek k peticiji 29/205 z dne 9. novembra 2005 o Organu za finančne storitve in varuhu človekovih pravic za finančne storitve; stran 10. ), ki je zajemala daljše obdobje in je vključevala tudi pooblastila za preiskavo ukrepov vladnega oddelka za zavarovalniško statistiko.
Addendum to petition 29/2005 dated 9 November 2005 concerning FSA and FOS; page 10. ), covering a wider period and with powers to investigate also the actions of the Government's Actuary Department (GAD).
Ta preiskava še ni zaključena.
This investigation is currently ongoing.
Pristojnosti in naloge varuhinje človekovih pravic v preiskavi so „ ugotoviti, ali je posameznike v obdobju pred decembrom 2001 doletela krivica zaradi nepravilnosti s strani javnih organov, odgovornih za bonitetno ureditev družbe Equitable Life Assurance Society in/ali vladnega oddelka za zavarovalniško statistiko; ter priporočila ustrezno odškodnino za kakršno koli storjeno krivico “ (WE 12
The terms of reference for the Ombudsman's investigation are " to determine whether individuals were caused injustice through maladministration in the period prior to December 2001 on the part of the public bodies responsible for the prudential regulation of the Equitable Life Assurance Society and/or the Government's Actuary Department; and to recommend appropriate redress for any injustice so caused " (WE 12
Priloga B. ).
Annex B. ).
Naloga varuhinje človekovih pravic ni preiskati, ali je bila zakonodajna ureditev Združenega kraljestva takrat ustrezno zasnovana in je izpolnjevala zahteve zakonodaje EU, ampak le, ali je bila ustrezno upravljana.
The Ombudsman will not investigate whether the UK regulatory regime at the time was properly conceived or whether it meets the requirements of EU law but only whether it was properly administered.
Opozoriti je treba tudi, da njena preiskava zajema le obdobje do 1. decembra 2001, ker Organ za finančne storitve, ki je bil po tem datumu ustanovljen kot edini zakonodajalec, ne spada pod njeno pristojnost.
It is also important to note that her investigation only covers the period up to 1 December 2001, as the FSA, which was established as the sole regulator from that date, is not a body within her jurisdiction.
Prav tako lahko varuhinja človekovih pravic preiskuje le ukrepe tistih, ki so odgovorni za bonitetno ureditev družbe ELAS; ne more pa obravnavati pritožb glede vprašanj poslovanja ali trženja, ker samoregulativni organi, odgovorni za takšno ureditev, ne spadajo – in niso nikoli spadali – pod pristojnost varuhinje človekovih pravic.
Likewise, the Ombudsman can only inquire into the actions of those charged with the prudential regulation of ELAS; she cannot consider complaints about the conduct of business or marketing issues because the self-regulatory bodies that were responsible for such regulation are not - and have never been - within the Ombudsman's jurisdiction.
Veliko prič je poudarilo pomembnost preiskave varuhinje človekovih pravic.
A number of witnesses pointed out the importance of the Ombudsman's investigation.
Mnenje THOMSONA (H2) je bilo, da je poročilo varuhinje človekovih pravic največje upanje zavarovancev za odškodnino.
Mr THOMSON (H2) took the view that the Ombudsman's report is the policyholders' best hope for compensation.
TERTÁK (H1) je podobno navedel, da „ je [Komisija] vztrajno zagovarjala mnenje, da je drugo poročilo varuhinje človekovih pravic najboljša možnost, da žrtve družbe Equitable Life dobijo odškodnino “.
Likewise, Mr TERTÁK (H1) stated that "[the Commission] have consistently taken the view that the second report of the Ombudsman offers the best chance for victims of Equitable Life to obtain redress ".
Komisar McCREEVY je v H8 potrdil: „ Poročilo zagotavlja najboljšo možnost – mogoče edino možnost – za to, da oškodovani zavarovanci in upokojenci prejmejo odškodnino “.
Commissioner McCREEVY in H8 confirmed this: " The report represents the best chance – perhaps the only chance – for aggrieved policyholders and pensioners to receive compensation ".
Zavarovanci so se strinjali o pomembnosti poročila varuhinje človekovih pravic in so od odbora zahtevali, da počaka na njegovo objavo in šele potem pripravi svoje mnenje.
Policyholders seem to agree on the significance of the Ombudsman's report and urged the committee to wait for it to be published before making its own final report.
Vendar so opozorili tudi na omejen obseg preiskave varuhinje človekovih pravic: „ Pristojnost varuhinje človekovih pravic ni široka: izključuje Organ za finančne storitve, polovico zakonodajne ureditve trženja in poslovanja, ter samo družbo Equitable “ (WE 44).
However, they also pointed out the limited coverage of the Ombudsman's investigations: " The Parliamentary Ombudsman's remit is not broad: it excludes the FSA; it excludes half of the regulatory regime concerned with marketing and the conduct of business and it excludes Equitable itself " (WE 44).
Poleg tega so izrazili zaskrbljenost, ali bo vlada Združenega kraljestva izvajala shemo, ki uveljavlja mogoča priporočila varuhinje človekovih pravic za plačilo odškodnine.
Furthermore, they expressed concern as to whether the UK Government would implement a scheme giving effect to possible recommendations by the Ombudsman to pay compensation.
V zvezi s tem so se sklicevali na nedaven primer o poklicnih pokojninah, v katerem je 125 000 ljudi izgubilo velik del poklicnih pokojnin z vnaprej določenimi prispevki, ko so se te sheme med aprilom 1997 in marcem 2004 zaključile brez zadostnih sredstev za plačilo obljubljenih prejemkov.
In this context, they referred to a recent case on occupational pensions, where as many as 125,000 people lost significant parts of their defined benefit occupational pensions when such schemes wound up between April 1997 and March 2004 without sufficient funds to pay the benefits promised.
Parlamentarna varuhinja je marca 2006 objavila poročilo „ Zaupanje v pokojninsko obljubo “, v katerem je ugotovila, da je bila nepravilnost vlade ta, da se tisti, ki so utrpeli izgubo, niso zavedali tveganja in niso imeli možnosti za zmanjšanje tega tveganja.
In March 2006, the Parliamentary Ombudsman published a report, ' Trusting in the pensions promise ', which found that Government maladministration had meant that those who suffered loss had not realised the risks they ran and had been denied the opportunity to reduce them.
Vladi je priporočila, da razmisli, ali naj poskrbi za obnovitev temeljne pokojnine in netemeljnih prejemkov oškodovancev.
She recommended that the Government should consider whether it should make arrangements for the restoration of the core pension and non-core benefits of those affected.
Vlada Združenega kraljestva je zavrnila ugotovitev parlamentarne varuhinje človekovih pravic glede nepravilnosti in njeno priporočilo.
The UK Government rejected both the Parliamentary Ombudsman's finding of maladministration and her recommendation.
Parlamentarni preiskovalni odbor za javno upravo v Združenem kraljestvu je bil zelo kritičen do stališča vlade glede tega vprašanja in je izrazil zaskrbljenost v zvezi s posledicami, ki jih lahko ima za ustavno vlogo varuhinje človekovih pravic: „Strinjamo se z varuhinjo človekovih pravic, da je prišlo do nepravilnosti.
The UK Parliament's Select Committee on Public Administration was highly critical of the government's position on this issue and expressed concern about the implications it may have for the Ombudsman's constitutional role: We agree with the Ombudsman that maladministration occurred.
Vladne informacije o pokojninah so bile pomanjkljive in ljudje so bili zavedeni.
Government information about pensions was deficient and reasonable people would have been misled.
Poleg tega bi morala vlada ustrezno upoštevati priporočila varuhinje človekovih pravic, namesto da je takoj sklepala, da bodo močno obremenila javni proračun.
Moreover, the Government should have considered the Ombudsman's recommendations properly, rather than immediately assuming that they would place large burdens on the public purse.
To je že drugi primer v manj kot 12 mesecih, da je varuhinja človekovih pravic parlamentu poročala, da je odkrila krivice, ki niso bile ali ne bodo popravljene.
This is the second time in less than 12 months that the Ombudsman has reported to Parliament that she has found injustice that has not been, or will not be, remedied.
Takšnih poročil je le 4.
Only four such reports have ever been made.
Sistem, vzpostavljen z Zakonom o parlamentarnem komisarju iz leta 1967, bo deloval le ob enotnem stališču varuhinje človekovih pravic, parlamenta in vlade glede opredelitve nepravilnosti in glede tega, kdo je pristojen za opredeljevanje nepravilnosti.
The system established by the Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967 will only work if there is a common understanding between the Ombudsman, Parliament and Government as to what constitutes maladministration, and who has authority in identifying it.
Vlada je veliko prehitro zavrnila ugotovitve varuhinje človekovih pravic o nepravilnostih.
The Government has been far too ready to dismiss the Ombudsman's findings of maladministration.
Naše preiskave so pokazale, da so bile te ugotovitve pravilne.
Our investigations have shown that these findings were sound.
Bilo bi zelo neprimerno, če bi se vlada navadila, da preprosto zavrne ugotovitve o nepravilnostih, zlasti če je preiskava pokazala, da obstajajo.
It would be extremely unfortunate if Government became accustomed simply to reject findings of maladministration, especially if an investigation on this Committee proved there was indeed a case to answer.
V jedru vsake nepravilnosti je nekdo, ki ga je doletela krivica.
At the heart of every case of maladministration is someone who has suffered injustice.
Z osredotočanjem prizadevanj na zavračanje ugotovitev o nepravilnostih, namesto na to, katera pravna sredstva bi bila praktična in sorazmerna, je vlada dodatno vznemirila zavarovance.
By concentrating its energy on denying findings of maladministration, rather than on considering what remedies might be practical and proportionate, the Government has caused further distress to complainants.
S tem je odložila kakršno koli rešitev njihovih težav.“
It has delayed any resolution of their problems ."
Preiskovalni odbor za javno upravo: „Zadevna varuhinja človekovih pravic: poročilo varuhinje človekovih pravic o pokojninah in njegove ustavne posledice“; šesto poročilo zasedanja 2005–06; po naročilu spodnjega doma, natisnjeno 20. julija 2006.
Public Administration Select Committee: "The Ombudsman in Question: the Ombudsman’s report on pensions and its constitutional implications"; Sixth Report of Session 2005–06; Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 20 July 2006.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmselect/cmpubadm/1081/108102.htm Kot odziv na sklepe in priporočila iz poročila Preiskovalnega odbora
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmselect/cmpubadm/1081/108102.htm The government maintained its position in its response to the conclusions and recommendations in the Select Committee’s report.
Odziv vlade na šesto poročilo zasedanja 2005–2006 Preiskovalnega odbora za javno upravo: zadevna varuhinja človekovih pravic: poročilo varuhinje človekovih pravic o pokojninah in njegove ustavne posledice [HC 108]. je vlada ohranila stališče.
The Government Response to the Public Administration Select Committee’s Sixth Report of Session 2005–06 The Ombudsman in Question: the Ombudsman’s report on pensions and its constitutional implications [HC 1081].
Kot je BRAITHWAITE (H11) obvestil odbor, so nekateri oškodovanci zahtevali sodni pregled odločitve o zavrnitvi ugotovitev in priporočil varuhinje človekovih pravic pri glavnem civilnem sodišču.
As Mr BRAITHWAITE (H11) informed the committee, some of the victims sought a judicial review of the decision to reject the Ombudsman's findings and her recommendation before the High Court.
V sodbi z dne 21. februarja 2007 (glej WE-FILE 30
In its judgement of 21 February 2007 (see WE-FILE 30
Veliko zavarovancev je izrazilo globoko zaskrbljenost: „ Glede na ta precedens ni gotovo, ali bo ugotovitvi varuhinje človekovih pravic Združenega kraljestva o nepravilnostih sledila odškodnina “, je dejal LAKE (H1).
A number of policyholders expressed deep concern: " Given this precedent, it must be uncertain whether compensation will follow a finding of maladministration by the UK Parliamentary Ombudsman ", said Mr LAKE (H1).
KWANTESOVA (H7) je izrazila podobno skrb: „ Skrbi me, da bo vlada ravnala enako, ko bo parlamentarna varuhinja človekovih pravic poročala o družbi Equitable Life. ...
Ms KWANTES (H7) struck a similar note: " My concern is that the Government can very easily do the same thing when the Parliamentary Ombudsman reports on Equitable Life, and that is a real concern. ...
Če lahko vlada enostavno prezre priporočila, ne da bi bila kaznovana, je to po mojem mnenju popoln posmeh sistemu varuha človekovih pravic.
My feeling is that, if a government can just ignore what is recommended with such impunity, it makes a total mockery of the ombudsman system. "
“ SCAWEN je v WE 23/2
Mr SCAWEN states in WE 23/2
Stran 6. navedel, da „ zadnje izkušnje ne spodbujajo zaupanja “.
Page 6. that " recent experience does not encourage confidence ".
Dodal je še, da „ nam ni v nobeno pomoč, da so bile ugotovljene nepravilnosti, če se vlada kljub temu ne zmeni za poročilo in ne poskrbi za odškodnino žrtvam njene nesposobnosti “ (WE 23/2
He added that " it is no help to us if there has been maladministration if at the end of the day, the Government takes no notice of the report and takes no action to compensate victims of its incompetence " (WE 23/2
Podobne skrbi je v WE-CONF 19 izrazil NEWMAN.
Similar concerns are expressed in WE-CONF 19 by Mr NEWMAN.
SEYMOUR (H7) je omenil citat THOMSONA iz časopisnega članka, ki je očitno dejal, da ni preveč upal, da bo poročilo parlamentarne varuhinje človekovih pravic vodilo k odškodnini.
Mr SEYMOUR (H7) referred to a newspaper article quoting Mr THOMSON who apparently said that he was 'not overly hopeful' that the Parliamentary Ombudsman's report would lead to compensation.
V H8 je THOMSON pojasnil svojo izjavo: „ Za plačilo odškodnine od vlade obstajata dva pogoja, ki izhajata iz poročila parlamentarne varuhinje človekovih pravic: prvi je ta, da varuhinja človekovih pravic odkrije nepravilnosti, ki so povzročile krivico zavarovancem; drugi pa je ta, da vlada sprejme te ugotovitve in priporočilo za odškodnino.
In H8 Mr THOMSON explained his statement: " There are two preconditions to the payment of government compensation arising from the Parliamentary Ombudsman’s report: firstly that the Ombudsman should find maladministration leading to injustice to policyholders; and secondly that the Government accepts those findings and the recommendation for compensation.
Moja pripomba je izražala, da drugo ni samodejna posledica prvega .“
My comment reflected that the second does not automatically follow from the first ."
Objava poročila varuhinje človekovih pravic je bila prvotno predvidena za pomlad 2006 (glej WE 12).
The publication of the Ombudsman's report was originally foreseen for spring 2006 (see WE 12).
Pozneje je bila objava poročila preložena na konec leta 2006.
Subsequently, publication of the report was postponed until the end of 2006.
V pismu z dne 16. oktobra 2006 je parlamentarna varuhinja človekovih pravic sporočila dodatno zamudo, in sicer je navedla, da poročilo ne bo objavljeno pred majem 2007 (glej WE-FILE 19).
By letter of 16 October 2006, the Parliamentary Ombudsman announced a further delay, announcing that the report will not be published before May 2007 (see WE-FILE 19).
Sodni – postopki pred sodiščem
Judicial - proceedings before the court
Oškodovani zavarovanci bi lahko vložili tožbo pred sodiščem Združenega kraljestva tudi proti zakonodajalcu.
Aggrieved policyholders could also take legal action against the regulator before the UK courts.
To je zelo velika ovira “ (SEYMOUR, H7).
It is a major hurdle to get over " (Mr SEYMOUR, H7).
Poleg tega je LAKE (H1) poudaril, da bi tožba proti zakonodajalcu povzročila bistveno finančno tveganje za oškodovane zavarovance, podobno, kot je navedeno zgoraj v zvezi z možnimi sodnimi postopki proti družbi.
In addition, Mr LAKE (H1) stressed that court action against the regulator would entail a considerable financial risk for aggrieved policyholders, similar to what has been noted above in relation to possible court proceedings against the Society.
Akcijska skupina EMAG je v WE 44 v zvezi s tem navedla: „ Na britansko vlado se je mogoče zanesti, da bo čim bolj povečala pravne stroške in izkoristila vsak razpoložljiv pritožbeni postopek – pri čemer obstaja zastrašujoče tveganje, da bodo vladni pravni stroški naloženi pritožnikom.
WE 44 by EMAG makes the following observation in this regard: " The British Government can be relied upon both to maximise its legal costs and to use every available appeal process - with the intimidating risk of the Government’s legal costs being awarded against complainants.
Za tožbo proti vladi Združenega kraljestva bi bilo potrebnih na milijone eurov, kar dokazuje zadeva BCCI proti Bank of England
Tens of millions of euros would be needed to sue the UK Government and this is evidenced by the cases of BCCI against the Bank of England
Ob upoštevanju nasveta, ki je bil odboru predložen v WE 71, se je odločila, da takšnih zahtevkov ne bo vložila.
Following the advice, which was made available to the committee in WE 71, it decided not to pursue such claims.
V WE 71 so navedene opredelitve številnih možnih zahtevkov proti zakonodajalcem za bonitetne zadeve
WE 71 identified a number of potential claims against the prudential regulators
V zadevnem času sta bila zakonodajalca za bonitetne zadeve ministrstvo za trgovino in industrijo, ki je deloval prek Ministrstva za trgovino in industrijo (do 5. januarja 1998), in zatem Ministrstvo za gospodarstvo in finančne zadeve, katerega pomembne naloge so bile dodeljene Organu za finančne storitve. in ocena verjetnosti njihove uspešnosti:
Prudential regulators at the relevant time were the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry acting through the Department of Trade and Industry (up to 5th January 1998) and thereafter HM Treasury, the relevant functions of which were contracted out to the Financial Services Authority (FSA). and assessed the likelihood that these could be successful: