STANDARD Life Aberdeen has launched a challenge against Lloyds Banking Group’s decision to end a £109 billion contract with the asset manager, claiming it does not have “the right” to do so.
Standard Life Aberdeen (SLA) said it “does not agree” it should lose the lucrative Scottish Widows contract and is disputing claims that competition issues were created by the merger of Aberdeen and Standard Life last year.
The pair are now “engaging with each other” to resolve the dispute.
It comes after Lloyds dealt a blow to the asset management giant in February, when it announced it was ending the contract – SLA’s largest single client – citing a material competitor clause. But SLA said it “does not agree that, following the merger of Aberdeen Asset Management plc and Standard Life plc, SLA was in material competition in the UK with Lloyds and that, therefore, SLA does not consider that Lloyds Banking Group, Scottish Widows or their respective affiliates has the right to terminate the IMAs [investment management arrangements]”.
Lloyds said it was “disappointed” by SLA’s move.
A spokesman for Lloyds added: “Standard Life Aberdeen is a clear and material competitor of Scottish Widows and Lloyds Banking Group in the UK and to suggest otherwise is not credible.”
He added: “We are confident of our legal position and that our actions are in the best interests of our customers, and we are therefore surprised at the course of action pursued by Standard Life Aberdeen.”
The investment management deal is currently set to end after a 12-month notice period, as required under the original agreement between Aberdeen Asset Management and Lloyds.
Aberdeen took on the deal to manage the £109 billion of assets when it bought Scottish Life Investment Partnership from Lloyds in 2014.
But there was a clause allowing Lloyds to end the mandate if Aberdeen merged with a competitor and this was triggered by last summer’s £11 billion tie-up between Standard Life and Aberdeen Asset Management, creating the UK’s biggest fund manager.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here