RBS Accused of Using “Flawed and Inaccurate” Documents in Mis-Selling Reviews

Meet the team:

Share this post: linkedin Twitter facebookshare Email
Posted in:Banking and Finance|November 5, 2015 | Join the mailing list

It was reported in The Times yesterday that RBS has been “accused of using secret, flawed documents that could have influenced some compensation payments to victims of the interest rate swaps mis-selling scandal”. 
According to The Times these alleged documents provided by the bank to “independent reviewers” included

A “record” of a sales call that allegedly never took place; 

Potentially misleading bank sales literature and allegedly bogus email;

The bank producing records of meetings that customers claim never took place.

To compound matters victims of mis-selling were not allowed to see the documents the bank passed to reviewers.  We have already commented in relation to the flawed review process in our
2015 Banking Report; lifting the lid off lending.

As reported in Reuters, RBS has stated that “We categorically deny falsifying customer records to influence the outcome of the review process”.  The RBS has said that there had been “minor and non-consequential
discrepancies” in historical records but the issues raised did not determine the findings of the review.

As commented by our Managing Partner Alison Loveday “The very fact that there are discrepancies in the documentation, no matter how
minor and inconsequential (in the Bank’s view), is surely enough evidence to ensure the FCA take on board the advice of the Treasury Select Committee and formally review the redress process immediately. This is not the first time the RBS has been alleged to
fabricate key documentation, but must be the last time the FCA choose not to act. The fact that the contentious documents did not, according to RBS, ‘determine the findings or outcomes of the review’ is irrelevant.  It further emphasises the breakdown in trust
we face with the bank.

“The Treasury Select Committee has directly advised the FCA to get on with reviewing the IRHP Review process and we therefore do not understand why the FCA is still not acting accordingly. To delay the investigation
until the current litigation has been concluded would simply further deny access to justice to thousands of business owners."

Join our mailing list

More from berg



The ‘energetic’ and ‘efficient’ team at berg includes team head Damian Carter, who is ‘a good tactician and goes the extra mile for his clients'.

Legal 500 2016, Dispute resolution – Commercial litigation