ROYAL Bank of Scotland has said it paid a “heavy price” for past mistakes as it agreed a £4.2 billion US settlement over claims it mis-sold toxic mortgage bonds in the run-up to the financial crisis.
The taxpayer-backed lender struck the deal with the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) to resolve one of two major US investigations into mis-selling allegations.
It has yet to reach a settlement with the Department of Justice (DoJ), which is expected later in the year.
Ross McEwan, chief executive of the bank, said it was “an important step forward in resolving one of the most significant legacy matters facing RBS”.
“This settlement is a stark reminder of what happened to this bank before the financial crisis, and the heavy price paid for its pursuit of global ambitions,” he added.
While the bank will pay $5.5bn (£4.2bn) in total to the FHFA, $754m (£581m) will be repaid to RBS by other parties under a so-called indemnification agreement. RBS said the net £3.65bn cost of the settlement with the FHFA would be largely covered by funds set aside.
But it will take a £151m charge in its second-quarter results for the deal. RBS had already put aside £6.6bn to cover US mis-selling claims.
The expected US settlements have weighed heavily on the bank amid fears over the size of the deals, with other banks having forked out mammoth sums.
RBS is one of the last to settle with US regulators, following rivals such as Deutsche Bank, which agreed to pay $7.2bn (£5.6bn).
It has also been a major hurdle to the bank’s return to private hands, with the Government having said the US mis-selling claims must to be resolved before it can start to sell its shares in the lender.
RBS finance chief Ewen Stevenson said the FHFA settlement was “in the region of what we’d been anticipating”, but analysts said it was higher than forecast in the City.
RBS said it had not yet started discussions with the DoJ.
McEwan cautioned that the bank may need to set aside more cash to settle outstanding claims. “We have always been very open about the fact there could be further provisions,”
he said.
Analyst Joseph Dickerson, from Jefferies, said the US mis-selling settlement was around £776m higher than he had expected.
He predicts RBS will need to set aside another £1.9bn for the DoJ deal in the fourth quarter.
Dickerson said: “This settlement clears a major hurdle for the bank, though there remain further signif- icant RMBS [mortgage-backed sec- urity] related costs, such as the DoJ.”
McEwan is seeking to draw a line under legacy issues for RBS, which is still 71 per cent owned by the Government following its £45.5bn bailout at the height of the financial crisis.
RBS last month reached a deal with thousands of UK investors to avoid a high-profile court trial.
Investors were planning to take RBS to court amid claims they were left nursing hefty losses following a £12bn cash-call, with the lender’s shares collapsing soon afterwards as a result of its part-nationalisation.
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