Category: IRHP Reviews

Financial Conduct Authority FCA UK Logo - LEXLAW Litigation Law Firm in London

Letter from the FCA to the Treasury Select Committee detailing FCA powers and regulatory perimeter (30 January 2018)

The FCA regulates authorised firms under the Financial Services and Markets Act (FSMA) 2000, overseeing conduct and prudential standards. It authorises firms, supervises compliance, investigates breaches, and enforces rules via fines, bans, and public censure. The FCA’s remit focuses on “regulated activities,” but it also monitors firms’ overall behaviour, including some unregulated actions linked to regulated firms. It holds senior managers accountable under the Senior Managers and Certification Regime (SMCR). The FCA aims to protect consumers, uphold market integrity, and promote competition, balancing its powers with statutory limits set by Parliament and Government.

rbs grg claim solicitors financial mis selling irhps

HM Parliament Condemns RBS GRG’s Parasitic Treatment of SMEs

UK Parliament unanimously condemned RBS’s Global Restructuring Group (GRG) for its systemic mistreatment of SMEs, describing it as a parasitic unit engaged in asset stripping and aggressive litigation tactics. MPs highlighted GRG’s role in artificially distressing viable businesses, undervaluing assets, and employing harsh recovery strategies during 2008-2013, leading to widespread financial harm. The FCA’s delayed and redacted report faced heavy criticism, with calls for transparent accountability, a Financial Services Tribunal, whistleblower protections, and full release of investigations.

GRG RBS WESTREGISTER

RBS’ GRG ‘Just Hit Budget’ Memo: ‘let customers hang themselves’

The leaked 2009 internal memo from RBS’s Global Restructuring Group (GRG), titled “Just Hit Budget!”, reveals aggressive tactics aimed at extracting maximum profit from struggling SME customers. The memo outlines a systematic approach to pressure businesses, including leveraging fees, forcing deal signings, and deliberately letting customers fail – referred to chillingly as “let customers hang themselves.” This memo exemplifies the toxic culture within GRG that led to severe financial distress for many SMEs.

lexlaw litigation solicitors barristers london no win no fee bank financial mis selling claims bbrs pag rbs case professional negligence mis selling disclosure application cpr pre action protocol settlement

The Lawyer: ‘Charity gains ground in RBS and NatWest mis-selling claim’

Our client, the charity Wenta has gained ground in its claim against NatWest/RBS over the mis-selling of a derivative (IRHP). Wenta alleges the banks breached contractual, tortious, statutory, and fiduciary duties, causing financial loss. The case involves disputes over suitability, disclosure, and a flawed and unfair review process by the banks. Disclosure battles have forced the banks to reveal key sales training manuals and review materials. Litigation continues with trial or secret settlement expected soon.

RBS Natwest bank litigation Lawyers uk

Court of Appeal to consider permission to appeal in PAG v RBS

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 litigation solicitors in london lawyers professional negligence

The Times: Lawyers launch petition for financial mis-selling tribunal

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

Petition: Establish a Financial Services Tribunal to resolve customer disputes.

Petition for establishing a Financial Services Tribunal to resolve complex disputes between banks and customers. Courts are costly, the Financial Ombudsman Service is limited to low-value claims, and the FCA lacks dispute resolution powers. The Tribunal would provide judicial scrutiny, fairness, and public censure, helping SMEs and consumers secure justice and deter misconduct in the financial services industry. Supporters can register their backing on the UK Government site.

Litigation Solicitors London

GRG WestRegister took 80% Equity in Bowlplex – Cost Owners £50m; while RBS Profited £9m

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.

Consumer Rights Act / Unfair terms / Contractual relationships / Expert Legal Advice / Litigation Lawyers / Barristers

Court of Appeal grant permission to appeal based on LIBOR and Negligent IRHP Review arguments

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.