LEXLAW Solicitors & Barristers
Clydesdale and Yorkshire Banks have now begun a review of past sales of fixed rate loans often sold as Tailored Business Loans (TBLs). These are Fixed Rate Loan wrapper products with embedded derivatives.
HMRC has issued tax advice leaflets for banks to hand to customers receiving redress from mis-sold Interest Rate Hedging Products (IRHP), urging correct tax return reporting. Affected banks must review sales since 2001 under FCA supervision, leading to customer compensation. Redress payments, consisting of basic redress, 8% compensatory interest, and consequential losses, are generally taxable income or subject to capital gains tax. Individuals should account for tax deducted from interest. HMRC recommends consulting an accountant for complex scenarios.
The Royal Bank of Scotland’s “Bad Bank” known as Capital Resolution (RCR) manages GRG, IRHP, and West Register portfolios involving distressed SMEs and mis-sold interest rate hedging products. RCR’s role is to isolate risky and non-performing assets, including businesses pushed into distress by GRG to facilitate asset acquisition at discounted rates. The unit has been criticised for poor treatment of SMEs, lack of transparency, and aggressive recovery tactics.
The High Court dismissed Barclays’ attempt to strike out a swaps mis-selling claim as time-barred under the six-year limitation period. The claimant relied on section 14A of the Limitation Act 1980, which extends the limitation period by three years from when the claimant knew or ought to have known the relevant facts. The court held there was a real prospect that the claimant did not know enough to investigate the claim until later, rejecting Barclays’ argument that earlier interest payments triggered the limitation clock. This ruling supports claimants in overcoming time-bar defences in swaps cases.
In Catling v. Catling, the 2007 will of Mrs Catling was declared invalid due to her lack of mental capacity caused by dementia. The court found the 2007 will was a radical departure from her earlier wills and that she did not understand the changes. Medical evidence was pivotal highlighting necessity of mental capacity for a valid will, per Banks v Goodfellow (1870).
RBS Clifford Chance report on swaps mis-selling is a “whitewash” attempt to downplay the bank’s wrongdoing and avoid accountability. The report is lacks independence and fails to address the full scale of RBS mis-selling. It has fueled calls for stronger action into bank misconduct.
The Supreme Court in Marley v Rawlings (2014) ruled that a wrongly executed will can be rectified under section 20 of the Administration of Justice Act 1982 to reflect the testator’s true intentions. Despite formal defects under section 9 of the Wills Act 1837, a “clerical error” like signing the wrong will does not prevent rectification. This decision supports prioritising the testator’s intent over strict formalities in probate disputes.
A former RBS GRG Bank Manager at revealed they deliberately destroyed viable businesses to save the bank during the credit crisis. GRG charged excessive fees, intercepted payments, and stripped firms of assets, which were then sold through another RBS unit, West Register. The investigation featured a couple forced into bankruptcy by unjust fees, highlighting GRG’s hostile tactics.
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) announced a review into allegations against RBS’s Global Restructuring Group (GRG), following claims of unfair treatment of businesses during the credit crisis. The review focuses on whether GRG used aggressive tactics that led to unnecessary fees, the stripping of assets, and forced bankruptcies. This follows whistleblower revelations and reports highlighting GRG’s controversial practices.
Malta introduced a citizenship-by-investment programme offering EU citizenship for a €650,000 investment, granting work, residency, and voting rights across the EU. This follows similar schemes in other countries like the UK, Portugal, Ireland, Cyprus, and Spain. Maltese citizenship allows visa-free travel to Schengen countries and the USA, with dual citizenship permitted. The policy has faced local criticism, raising concerns about comparisons to offshore tax havens.