Talk:Trustee Investments Act 1961/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Malleus Fatuorum (talk · contribs) 19:15, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Background
 * "As a result, while the income from a trust set up twenty years ago may be the same as it originally was, the things that income will buy is much reduced." The tense there implies that the Act is still in force. Is it?


 * "... where it was much scrutinised by solicitors and lawyers (particularly at the Committee stage) owing to its complexity." Aren't solicitors lawyers?


 * Act
 * "The Act replaces the old Statutory Lists system of investments ...". Again, why "replaces" rather than "replaced", if it's been repealed?


 * "... with a two sets of "narrow range" investments and a set of "wide range" investments". Should that be "two sets of narrow range investments"?


 * "The first set of "narrow range" investments include Defence Bonds, National Savings Certificates and similar "small" investments, which may be bought at the Post Office and do not require the trustee to seek advice before investing." The tense problem again. Can you still buy Defence Bonds at a Post Office?


 * "The quarter is to be invested in "wide range" investments ...". Again, this reads like the Act is still in force.


 * Aftermath
 * "The Trustee Act 2000 repealed most of the 1961 Act and now acts as the principal piece of guidance on trustee investments." Can we do anything about that "Act ... acts"? Perhaps "serves as the principal ...".
 * All fixed; much obliged, as always. Ironholds (talk) 16:25, 11 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Bibliography
 * What's going on with the Leolin citation? It doesn't seem to be used in the article anyway.
 * Leolin Price? It's used as Price (year) p.page. Ironholds (talk) 18:33, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Looks OK now. There was a problem with the cite journal template that's just been fixed. Malleus Fatuorum 18:46, 11 October 2011 (UTC)