ICICI Bank disingenuousness

ICICI is parading the fact that Moody's is rating its UK subsidiary at Baa1.
Two things strike me; a) it's Moody's, the same outfit that had Kaupthing at Baa3 until as recently as October 8th and b) the rating is higher than Moody's FC rating for the Indian parent.
So it looks like the Baa1 rating includes some support from a higher rated entity - presumably the UK government. But did anyone see ICICI UK Ltd on HMG's "chosen few" list of 7 banks and 1 building society?
And the other rating agencies - both have ICICI India at BBB-/stable, with an A3 short-term rating. Furthermore, bank strength ratings are in the order of C and C-; these are weak for a bank.
So thanks to Moody's JDA (joint default assessment) scheme, which gives the UK branch a better rating (neither Fitch or S&P rate the UK entity and why would ICICI buy an extra rating if it's lower?), the management are trying to imply that all is well. For some reason, ICICI Ltd in Singapore does not get any uplift and is Baa2 according to Moody's but that is probably down to the Moody's JDA black box expectation of support from MAS.
The move to seek reaffirmations of the ICICI ratings from Moody's and S&P over the weekend is an unusual move and almost certainly requested by the company. The hurriedness is reflected in the S&P statement referring to "Bakerie" rather than the Bakrie group.
In conclusion, things may be well with ICICI India but there is no guarantee for the UK subsidiary. Things may well be well for the UK subsidiary too, although it does seem to have been more exposed to the shenanigans of international derivatives than the Parent in India.
What is not so good is management's apparent misunderstanding of ratings and structural sub-ordination and the implications this has for the advice management is giving to the world at large about its relative credit standing.