LEXLAW Solicitors & Barristers
LEXLAW’s Financial Services Litigation team provides expert legal support for high-value claims and complaints against Metro Bank Plc. The team has experience in prominent High Court cases against Metro Bank and all other major UK banks. Clients can access specialist London-based solicitors and barristers to protect their rights and manage complex bank litigation efficiently.
The Court of Appeal is set to consider whether to grant permission for Property Alliance Group Ltd (PAG) to appeal a High Court ruling that dismissed its claims against RBS. The case involves allegations of interest rate swap mis-selling, LIBOR manipulation, and mistreatment by RBS’s Global Restructuring Group (GRG). The High Court had found PAG to be a sophisticated client with financial expertise and ruled against claims based on lack of specific false statements and exclusion clauses. The appeal will test key issues in sales duties, advisory roles, and the impact of GRG’s conduct on businesses.
LEXLAW has launched an online petition urging the government to establish a Financial Services Tribunal to resolve disputes over financial product mis-selling. The petition highlights the limitations of costly court processes, the inadequate Financial Ombudsman Service, and the FCA’s lack of dispute resolution powers. The tribunal would provide fairness, judicial scrutiny, and deter misconduct by major banks and financial institutions. The campaign follows parliamentary support for a commercial financial dispute resolution platform and aims to give customers better protection and access to justice
RBS’s Global Restructuring Group (GRG) has faced allegations of destroying small businesses. LexLaw has sued RBS on behalf of many businesses including Bowlplex, a family-owned bowling business, claiming excessive fees, increased interest rates, and forced equity transfer. Despite a viable business, Bowlplex was transferred to GRG and ultimately sold on by RBS for a £9m profit and a £50m loss for the owners.
The Court of Appeal has allowed WW Property Investments Ltd to appeal against NatWest over mis-sold interest rate derivatives and the negligent conduct of the IRHP review. This landmark decision challenges banks’ redress offers and recognition of consequential losses, encouraging affected customers and SME victims to seek legal advice for potential claims. The ruling could impact limitation periods and existing non-advisory defenses employed by banks, with major implications for financial services litigation and previous IRHP Review outcomes.
Dentons and RBS face High Court allegations of deliberate non-disclosure of critical documents related to the controversial Global Restructuring Group (GRG), disrupting fair trial processes. This follows leaked “Dash for Cash” documents exposing RBS’s serious breaches of disclosure duties in Wall v RBS litigation, where RBS allegedly forced Opal Property Group into financial distress. Previous cases have also highlighted RBS’s poor disclosure practices and lack of candour, raising ongoing concerns about RBS’s litigation culture and compliance with court orders.
RBS announces a New Complaints Process and Complex Fee Refunds for SMEs in their GRG division between 2008 to 2013. This process has serious flaws.
RBS, with FCA agreement, has introduced a new complaints process for SME customers transferred to its Global Restructuring Group (GRG) between 2008 and 2013, overseen by independent third party Sir William Blackburne. The bank also announced automatic refunds of complex fees charged to these customers, aiming to address past failings in communication, complaint handling, and service. SMEs are urged to seek urgent legal advice to protect rights from limitation.
The FCA’s review of RBS’s Global Restructuring Group (GRG) found no widespread evidence that RBS deliberately engineered transfers of viable businesses to GRG or acted as a “shadow director.” However, the review revealed systemic failings including poor communication, inadequate turnaround support, undue focus on pricing and debt reduction, poor valuations, conflicts of interest linked to West Register, and unfair complaint handling. Over a third of SMEs transferred to GRG faced insolvency regardless, but many also suffered inappropriate treatment.
Unlawful means conspiracy is a civil tort where two or more individuals collude to harm another using illegal methods. Victims of such misconduct may find this tort useful in seeking compensation for acts that might not be actionable independently. By understanding unlawful means conspiracy, individuals can assess their legal options and protect their rights against potential wrongdoing.