MECHANISM NEEDED Equitable's troubles show what an unsuitable means is a mutual for long-term insurance.

The House of Lords decision about guaranteed annuity rates means that there are now several discrete groups of policy holders having conflicting interests.

Equitable has no open, accepted mechanism to provide skilled advocacy to ensure that each group receives its fair share of the diminishing assets.

It is in an impossible position.

If the lack of such a mechanism is not quickly repaired, there will need to be further litigation to get a fair scheme imposed.

The High Court judges who could do this are understood all to be Equitable members, and may be disqualified by Hoffman/ Pinochet.

If one were to hear the application, he or she would fall over backwards to avoid favouring his or her own interests, and might disadvantage other members of his or her own group of policy holders.

Should a judge of the European Court be appointed, an English Deputy High Court judge to ensure complete independence? Who would hear any appeals?NR Oglethorpe, Norwich