TELEVISION personality Noel Edmonds has said that publication of a Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) report into a controversial takeover division once run by Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) would be enough to sink the bank.
Edmonds told a meeting of the SME Alliance that he had a copy of the FCA’s report into RBS’s disgraced Global Restructuring Group (GRG), which the City regulator has refused to make public, despite calls from the Treasury Select Committee and major political parties.
The Alliance said many of its members have been victims of banking malpractice in various forms.
Edmonds quoted figures he said had come from Lawrence Tomlinson, whose report on the scandal was published four years ago, which he said showed that claims against RBS could amount to £100 billion.
“The claims that RBS would receive would be in excess of £100bn,” said Edmonds. “The bank is worth a quarter of that. It would be the end of RBS.
“The publication of the report is very much in the public interest of the victims and as a victim of Lloyds, I would love to see them get justice.”
Edmonds has been waging war against HBOS – which is owned by Lloyds Banking Group (LBG) – in a £300 million claim for damages, relating to his experiences with the HBOS branch in Reading, Berkshire.
Some employees at the branch deliberately ran businesses into the ground.
Earlier this year two former HBOS bankers were among six people jailed over the scheme.
Edmonds said that the FCA had written to him, notifying him that publishing the RBS report would be a criminal offence.
So far, the FCA has refused to publish the report, claiming it would not be in the public interest to reveal its details in full.
It previously published a summary of it.
Daniel Fallows, director of Seneca Banking Consultants, a claims management company specialising in GRG, told The National: “Noel Edmonds claimed in a meeting held by SME Alliance that after viewing the RBS GRG report, he believes that the taxpayer-backed bank could be on the receiving end of claims in excess of £100bn.
“We have supported businesses which were once piled with extortionate fees and stripped of their assets, and because of this, we are not surprised by Edmonds’ claim.
“The unit which was supposed to help ailing businesses deliberately weighed them down.
“We believe that the report should be published immediately, as campaigned by Nicky Morgan of the Treasury Select Committee, George Kerevan and the SNP.”
RBS refused to comment on Edmonds’ remarks.
A spokesperson for the FCA said it was not something they would comment on. Instead, they referred us to the letter FCA chief executive Andrew Bailey previously wrote to Nicky Morgan, chair of the Treasury Select Committee.
In the letter, Bailey said: “I recognise the public interest in the outcome of the GRG review but I do not believe it is best served by us publishing the full report.
“Section 166 reports are an important supervisory tool for the FCA. They are conducted on the basis that there is no intention to publish, and it is our view that this greatly facilitates the efficiency of the process.”
Bailey added that he recognised “there is public interest” in publishing material that was relevant to customers’ complaints and that the FCA, therefore, intended to publish a “detailed summary” of the report.
A spokesperson for LBG said: “Although HBOS was aware of allegations regarding HBOS Reading, investigations undertaken at the time could only consider information directly held by the bank, which was shared with regulators.
“While concerns regarding the misconduct of certain HBOS individuals were identified, there was not sufficient evidence to establish criminal behaviour.”
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel