LEXLAW Solicitors & Barristers
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has said that business owners who were mis-sold tax-payer backed Enterprise Finance Guarantees (EFGs) by the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) may be…
Ali Akram and Jaron Dosanjh attended Parliament on LEXLAW’s behalf at the New City Agenda Event, Tuesday 10th July 2018, Committee Room 14, House of Commons
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 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 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.
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 Sunday Times reports the largest ever publicly disclosed settlement in interest rate swaps mis-selling, where Lloyds Bank paid £4.6m to a care home business after refusing compensation via the FCA IRHP Review. Thousands of businesses were excluded from compensation due to a controversial ‘sophistication test,’ leaving many short-changed. The case highlights banks’ efforts to avoid accountability and the ongoing struggle for fair redress, with expert legal advice offering hope for mis-sold swap victims.
Lloyds Bank has been forced into a significant litigation settlement regarding the mis-selling of interest rate hedging products (IRHPs) to The Coin Group, a care home operator. The case highlights the potential for banks to mis-sell complex financial derivatives to businesses, leading to significant financial losses. The Coin Group, represented by LEXLAW Solicitors & Barristers, successfully argued that Lloyds Bank failed to disclose the risks and potential liabilities associated with the IRHPs, resulting in a settlement of £4.6 million.
Lloyds Bank, a leading UK financial institution, has been involved in a significant litigation settlement regarding the mis-selling of interest rate hedging products (IRHPs) to The Coin Group, a care home operator. The case highlights the potential for banks to mis-sell complex financial derivatives to businesses, leading to significant financial losses. The Coin Group, represented by LEXLAW Solicitors & Barristers, successfully argued that Lloyds Bank failed to disclose the risks and potential liabilities associated with the IRHPs, resulting in a settlement of £4.6 million. The case underscores the importance of obtaining the best legal representation when fighting major banks.