On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 08:18, Elliott Hird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 6 Nov 2008, at 15:11, Roger Hicks wrote: > > I believe it is the conflict of the PBA's exactness-requirements and the > RBoA's > looseness. Perhaps the RBoA policy could change to require exactness for > cases like > these? IMO, it's a more reasonable policy... but I'm open to discussion. > I'm fine with handling PBA related transactions in whatever manner you dictate as PBA recordkeepor for all future transactions*. However, we have to have a clear policy in place and a "starting point" where we are both in agreement as to asset holdings and rates.
* = This is my reasoning behind changing the RBOA to stop direct bank-to-bank transactions. My intention is to create a third party intermediary to handle these transactions thus allowing both banks to preserve their respective policies while still allowing for inter-bank fun. BobTHJ
