LEXLAW Solicitors & Barristers
The door has been opened by the Court of Appeal in PAG v RBS [2018] for misrepresentation claims to be brought by a counter-party to a derivative which…
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.
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.
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 High Court ruled that fraud allegations against RBS concerning LIBOR manipulation in a derivatives mis-selling claim were “properly arguable,” affecting SMEs sold IRHPs by major banks. LIBOR, a crucial interest rate benchmark, had been rigged by banks including RBS, resulting in hefty fines. RBS admitted misconduct in its LIBOR submissions. Property Alliance Group’s (PAG) case against RBS may set a precedent for extending time limits on claims, emphasizing the importance of seeking legal advice on mis-selling claims affected by LIBOR fraud.
The High Court in Suremime Ltd v Barclays ruled it is arguable that banks owe a duty of care to SMEs to conduct the FCA IRHP Review fairly, as agreed with the FCA. Suremime challenged Barclays’ limited redress offer, arguing the bank breached its duty by not properly following the IRHP Review agreements from 2012 and 2013. The court granted permission to add claims that Barclays owed and breached this duty, enabling affected SMEs to seek legal remedies beyond flawed review outcomes. This decision supports SME rights in swaps mis-selling disputes and helps overcome limitation barriers.
The High Court permitted a judicial review of the FCA’s Interest Rate Hedging Product (IRHP) swaps mis-selling review scheme. The case challenges the fairness and adequacy of the FCA’s redress process, arguing it fails to provide proper compensation and independent oversight. This decision marks a significant step for affected SMEs seeking accountability and more effective remedies for mis-sold swaps under the FCA scheme.
RBS is reviewing past sales of 1,800 Enterprise Finance Guarantee (EFG) loans amid concerns that SMEs in financial distress were not properly informed of the risks. Many borrowers did not realise they remained liable for 100% of the loan despite the government’s 75% guarantee. Banks also often sought inappropriate personal guarantees and charges on primary homes.
The Treasury Committee report criticises conduct in SME lending, focusing on four key areas: FCA’s IRHP mis-selling review, Tailored Business Loans (TBLs), hidden swaps embedded in loans, and RBS’s Global Restructuring Group (GRG). The report finds systemic failings, lack of transparency, and inadequate customer protections. It calls for stronger regulatory oversight, better redress schemes, and reforms to prevent banks exploiting SMEs through complex financial products and aggressive recovery tactics.
The FCA’s confidential agreement with major banks set up the Interest Rate Hedging Product (IRHP) Review to address mis-selling claims. The Treasury Select Committee criticized the scheme for potentially allowing banks to avoid meaningful redress for SMEs, favouring banks over customers. The agreement details the redress process, but concerns remain about fairness and effectiveness. The Committee continues to scrutinize the review and its impact on SME lending.