Legal challenge to Bank's treatment of Consequential Loss in the FCA review

Whilst a large number of bank customers have received a relatively satisfactory outcome interms of basic redress, the same cannot be said in respect of the compensation being offered by the banks for consequential losses suffered as a result of the mis-selling

The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) review process into the mis-selling of IRHPs (Interest Rate Hedging Products) is now in its final stages.

Whilst a large number of bank customers have received a relatively satisfactory outcome in terms of basic redress, the same cannot be said in respect of the compensation being offered by the banks for consequential losses suffered as a result of the mis-selling (this seems to be particularly so in larger and more complex cases).

Andrew Tyrie of the Treasury Select Committee commented in 2015 that “Firms feel that they have been doubly let down: first by mis-selling and now by the redress process. They may have a point.”

Statistics to September 2016 from the FCA:

 Stats2

These figures serve to underline the reason that very many businesses are dissatisfied with the Consequential loss assessment that the bank has undertaken and the manner in which the FCA review has been conducted.  In most cases the banks reject any consequential loss above the standard offer of 8% per annum.

With banks refusing to renew standstill agreements, the review process coming to an end and offers on the table are soon to be withdrawn, a route to fair redress is required that is within reach of all.

Mishcon de Reya believes that this fair route can only be achieved by taking the assessment process away from the banks via court action. The proposition below is based on the premise that the banks had a clear obligation to undertake the review of the Consequential Loss claims submitted under the Redress Scheme in a fair and reasonable manner in accordance with established legal principles. It is our belief that they have failed to meet that obligation.

For strategic reasons, action will be taken on a bank-by-bank basis, and Mishcon de Reya have been able to secure funding in principle for action against the first of those banks.

HOW IT WORKS

The summary of the proposition is as follows:

1.    Registration is the beginning of the process where the claimant will give Mishcon de Reya the information they require:

Registration can be done at the following site http://www.conlossclaims.com/s/FCAreviewRegistration/

The claimant will instruct Mishcon de Reya to evaluate their participation in the proposed action. This is at no cost to the claimant, and will not conflict with any existing retainer with any other solicitor already engaged.

Information will be requested from the claimant which will be quite extensive and will require uploading information to the site, in particular:

-       Background information such as the bank concerned, size of loss, together with the type of business etc.

-       Details of the FCA review process that you have been through

-       Full details of the Consequential loss claim submitted and the banks responses.

2.    Mishcon de Reya, will screen members to verify that:

There is no better legal strategy for them as individual cases.

The sale of an IRHP to them has been reviewed by their bank under the Scheme, and they have accepted the bank’s offer of Basic Redress;

They have submitted a claim for Consequential Loss and have received an offer which is inadequate; and that they have not accepted that offer of Consequential Loss.

3.    From this information, there will be an initial assessment (at no cost to the member) to determine the strength and size of the claim and, assuming the claim is credible, at what stage the claimant will participate in the legal strategy.

COnference

The proposition is simple and will be explained in more detail at the free Conference we have arranged for this purpose on 13th March 2017 at Central Hall, Westminster, London where you will be able to ask any questions of the Expert Panel.

The conference will begin at 10:30 with Tea and coffee followed by a review of what has gone wrong with the FCA review, given by Adrian Maurice, Chief Executive of Pragmaticum Ltd. This will be followed by James Oldnall, Partner, Mishcon de Reya speaking on how we are going to take action, the strategy, funding and how it works, and what are our prospects of success compared to those that have gone before.

For more information please email. This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. giving your business name and number of people expecting to attend.

EXPECTED COSTS AND GETTING STARTED

Following the initial assessment, there will be no direct cost to the Claimant. The cost of the case and funding will be taken from the settlement won. Cost per claimant will change as further claimants sign up to the action. Clearly everyone will wish that the percentage of the net settlement figure is as high as possible and to achieve this, we want as many people as possible to register.

(Click http://www.conlossclaims.com/s/FCAreviewRegistration/)

SUMMARY

Court action is invariably a costly and risky proposition particularly if taking on an organisation as large as a bank. The FCA review process has failed the larger and more complex cases and many customers are left with significant legitimate claims that are unresolved.

This proposition has been pulled together by credible organisations whose backgrounds and reputations are founded in helping claimants. This is not the preferred route for anyone but going to court is now the only one remaining for those dissatisfied with the review process.

If you have accepted your basic redress off but have not agreed to the Consequential loss offered by the bank, it is important that you take action now so as not to limit options that might be available to you.

We believe this is likely to be the last throw of the dice but if a group action is successful then further options may cascade from it.

Pragmaticum Limited is Authorised and Regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Ref: 501527