LEXLAW Solicitors & Barristers
The Court of Appeal ruled unanimously that RBS procured a previous judgment by fraud, deliberately withholding key documents and misleading their client, lawyers, and the court. The case involved a “sham auction” of loans to create a notional £1.44 billion profit. The judgment raises serious concerns about RBS’s corporate culture and litigation conduct.
The Times Newspaper reports that banks are secretly settling swaps mis-selling cases with small businesses, often on the eve of court proceedings. These settlements are kept confidential, and the banks often make public statements denying wrongdoing. The number of claims is increasing as businesses become aware of the issue. Businesses argue that the swaps were too complex and that banks failed to explain the risks involved.
The FSA’s definition of sophistication for swaps mis-selling reviews is complex and has caused confusion. The original test deems a business sophisticated if it meets two of three criteria: turnover above £6.5m, balance sheet over £3.26m, or more than 50 employees. A new £10 million test modifies this excluding them from the FSA review.
The FSA’s pilot review of swaps mis-selling reveals over 90% of sales did not meet regulatory standards, highlighting inadequate risk explanation, undisclosed break costs, and over-hedging. Banks prioritised commissions over clients’ interests. The proposed review process raises concerns about reviewer independence and incomplete redress. Lexlaw advises court action before limitation periods expire.
Warren Buffett famously referred to derivatives as “financial weapons of mass destruction.” Lexlaw highlights the risks associated with derivatives and the importance of legal support for those affected by derivative mis-selling. If you have concerns about derivatives sold to you, contact Lexlaw for expert advice and assistance on protecting your interests.
A Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) decision does not prevent claimants from pursuing further court action for additional compensation beyond the FOS award. In Clark v In Focus, the High Court ruled that the Ombudsman’s ruling is not legally binding and does not merge causes of action. This is important for bank swaps mis-selling victims who accepted FOS awards but seek further claims. Contact Lexlaw for expert advice on continuing litigation beyond FOS resolutions.
This judgment shows the complexity and fact-sensitive nature of swap mis-selling claims. The claimants were found to be experienced businessmen dealing with a straightforward swap, unlike many cases where claimants are less sophisticated and products are more complex. Key points include the importance of early document disclosure and careful handling of limitation periods. Specialist legal advice is essential to assess and manage swap mis-selling claims effectively. Contact Lexlaw for expert guidance and representation.
Green & Rowley v Royal Bank of Scotland plc EWHC 3661 (QB) is a High Court case involving claims by John Green and Paul Rowley against RBS. The case deals with disputes related to financial transactions and banking practices. For detailed legal insights and advice regarding this case or similar banking disputes, contact Lexlaw Solicitors for expert guidance and representation.