Jump to content

Another investigation into a bank


CliveH

Recommended Posts

FCA confirms Co-op Bank investigation

 

Tuesday, January 07, 2014

 

Published by AMY LODDINGTON

 

Regulation & Compliance | 0 Comments

 

The FCA has confirmed it will be undertaking enforcement investigations into events at the Co-operative Bank.

 

It was reported yesterday that both the FCA and the Prudential Regulation Authority would be launching investigations into the bank into the circumstances which led it to a £1.5bn capital shortfall.

 

The investigation will look at the decisions and events up to June 2013, and could lead to further substantial penalties for the bank.

 

The Bank's former chairman Reverend Paul Flowers is also currently under investigation by the police over allegations of Class A drug use.

 

The FCA statement said:

 

"The independent review announced by the Chancellor will commence once it is clear that it will not prejudice any actions that the regulators may take. This sequencing is necessary to ensure that the outcomes of the enforcement work are not prejudiced and follows the approach taken for both the RBS and HBOS reports."

 

.....................................

 

Once again - for all the wonderful words in the HoC yesterday - we have the regulator's (there are now two) investigating by themselves why an organisation regulated by them got itself into such a capital shortfall. :-|

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will this criminality never end. It's fecking unbelievable. It seems the higher you get the more corruption there is.

Guess who picks up the tab.

The man in the street that's who.

In China these scum would be summarily executed and a bloody good job too. >:-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sadly I think you are right Peter. We have long been saying that had your average IFA done half the things that seem routine behaviour in the banks they would have been struck off.

 

But some of the barstewards that have seriously broken the law are still employed in the banks and still have "Controlled Functions" which means their authorisation has not been affected.

 

Maybe it is because the Regulator has such costs that it has to borrow from those it regulates :-S

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/banks-lend-163200m-to-cashstrapped-fsa-1766006.html

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My youngest son is a consultant IT system architect specialising in designing and install computer systems for big banks. The difficulty in getting agreement on what they want done from the management due to ingnorance, lack of internal communication, indecision, procrastination and internal politics drives him mad and consumes a great deal of his (fortunately chargeable) time. Maters are made worse with banks that have an international presence where he has to engineer international agreement. Problem for him is that whilst he gets a good rate for doing this he does not make the realy big money untill he has a firm contract and a team in implementing it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He should work for government departments, they'll buy any old duff software. As is often evidenced by the expensive cockups that frequently occur. :D
Link to comment
Share on other sites

peter - 2014-01-07 5:53 PM

 

Will this criminality never end. It's fecking unbelievable. It seems the higher you get the more corruption there is.

Guess who picks up the tab.

The man in the street that's who.

In China these scum would be summarily executed and a bloody good job too. >:-)

Thrown to hungry dogs in north Korea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I missed this yesterday - but I find it both incredible that a regulator could be so lax - but would say that this sort of thing is typical.

 

......................

 

Flowers approved as Co-op chair on basis of 1.5 hour interview

 

The disgraced former chairman of the Co-operative Bank was approved by the FSA on the basis of one meeting with a senior regulator and no background checks, Clive Adamson has admitted.

 

By Kevin White | Published Jan 07, 2014 |

 

 

Giving evidence today (7 November) to the Treasury select committee, Mr Adamson, the former director of the FSA’s major retail groups division, said he approved Rev Paul Flowers as chairman of the Co-op with no additional research into his background, references, or whether the Co-op had made any background checks.

 

 

When asked by committee chairman Andrew Tyrie MP about what area of Mr Flowers’s expertise made him think he could run the Co-op Bank board, Mr Adamson said: "His conduct in the interview with me.”

 

An incredulous Mr Tyrie responded: “I have to say, in the whole history of applying for jobs at any level, that is unprecedented.”

 

He added that the decision to appoint Rev Flowers seemed like a “negligent and poor decision”.

 

It emerged that Rev Flowers was asked about his past regulatory history, and criminal record at the regulatory interview, in addition to how he related with the bank’s chief executive and board, and key financial issues.

 

However, Mr Adamson had to admit to MPs that he was not aware of a drink-driving conviction handed out to Rev Flowers in 1990, while he deemed a spent 1981 conviction for gross indecency as “not relevant to his capacity for the role”.

 

Rev Flowers left the Co-operative Bank in June 2013, and later became embroiled in a sex a nd drugs scandal, while the bank plunged into an almost catastrophic financial crisis.

 

Mr Adamson, who is now the director of supervision at the FCA, said that Rev Flowers had been been interviewed by two “relatively junior” members of FSA staff when he became a non-executive director of the bank in 2009.

 

After his approval as chairman, Rev Flowers did not receive any ongoing supervision in his role, despite his obvious lack of banking expertise, with Mr Adamson explaining that the FSA “did not formally supervise individuals at the time”, and was instead concentrating on supervising firms.

 

Mr Adamson defended his decision to approve Rev Flowers, and said he stood by his decision “with the information I had at the time”, adding that he believed Rev Flowers had the competence for the role of a non-executive chairman, which “doesn’t run the bank, he runs the board”.

 

He added that Rev Flowers was “on top of the concept, but not the detail”, and said “no alarm bells rang in my head” regarding the chairman’s lack of technical banking and financial services experience.

 

...........................

 

Given the huge budget the then FSA had (and now to the FCA et al) - it beggars belief that such a decision could effectively go through vi a "nod and a wink".

 

>:-(

 

It frankly calls into question the suitability of Clive Adamson in his current role at the FCA - it being "Director of Supervision" 8-)

 

Are the lunatics running this particular asylum?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

peter - 2014-01-07 8:05 PM

 

He should work for government departments, they'll buy any old duff software. As is often evidenced by the expensive cockups that frequently occur. :D

 

He has done work for the MOD in the dim and distance past which was well specified and as a result was a success.

 

There was an attempt to get him to work on the NH project but he turned it down knowing it was most likely due to be a failure. He has to be careful in his line. One bad project could ruin the hard won reputation he has and cost him greatly in the long term. Particularly in banking where systems simply have to work. The problems RBS had simply amazed him. Who ever designed and implemented some of their systems simply broke all the normall rules that a competent system architect would normally apply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Colin Leake - 2014-01-08 7:10 PM

 

peter - 2014-01-07 8:05 PM

 

He should work for government departments, they'll buy any old duff software. As is often evidenced by the expensive cockups that frequently occur. :D

 

He has done work for the MOD in the dim and distance past which was well specified and as a result was a success.

 

There was an attempt to get him to work on the NH project but he turned it down knowing it was most likely due to be a failure. He has to be careful in his line. One bad project could ruin the hard won reputation he has and cost him greatly in the long term. Particularly in banking where systems simply have to work. The problems RBS had simply amazed him. Who ever designed and implemented some of their systems simply broke all the normall rules that a competent system architect would normally apply.

 

 

Not quite sure I agree with your comments re RBS. While I accept that the bank went bust the reasons for this are still 'lost in the mists' so to speak. Evidently they had dodgy loans, but no one has ever been told who these loans were with and for how much. Even a bad loan would be expected to recoup some payback, but nothing is ever said. Only a general total sum has been bandied about, The money invested by the government has been repaid in part already. Also the retail side of RBS was always profitable, and still is. The cruncher was them trying to buy ABN/AMRO. This was sold as a pup, and the Dutch knew full well how bad it was, but hid it all. No mention of any retribution there I note. I bet if RBS had been a US bank then the US Government would have demanded all sorts of payback. Similarly Barclays had also decided to go for it in a big way and one could suggest that RBS could have said that Barclays will have done the due diligence and therefore it will be fine. Both banks were duped by the Dutch.

 

I make no excuse for the bonus culture and the dodgy rate fixing activities but these had nothing to do with the failure of RBS, and before we Scots get all the blame again remember this was all done in London. I also agree the authoritites supposedly watching all this were either too scared, or being 'bought' to stay quiet. After all the Coop scandal was under the Labour watch and Flowers was a good buddie of Balls etc. Plus cheap loans to the Party must have had some effect mustn't they?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave225 - 2014-01-08 7:38 PM

 

Colin Leake - 2014-01-08 7:10 PM

 

peter - 2014-01-07 8:05 PM

 

He should work for government departments, they'll buy any old duff software. As is often evidenced by the expensive cockups that frequently occur. :D

 

He has done work for the MOD in the dim and distance past which was well specified and as a result was a success.

 

There was an attempt to get him to work on the NH project but he turned it down knowing it was most likely due to be a failure. He has to be careful in his line. One bad project could ruin the hard won reputation he has and cost him greatly in the long term. Particularly in banking where systems simply have to work. The problems RBS had simply amazed him. Who ever designed and implemented some of their systems simply broke all the normall rules that a competent system architect would normally apply.

 

 

Not quite sure I agree with your comments re RBS. While I accept that the bank went bust the reasons for this are still 'lost in the mists' so to speak. Evidently they had dodgy loans, but no one has ever been told who these loans were with and for how much. Even a bad loan would be expected to recoup some payback, but nothing is ever said. Only a general total sum has been bandied about, The money invested by the government has been repaid in part already. Also the retail side of RBS was always profitable, and still is. The cruncher was them trying to buy ABN/AMRO. This was sold as a pup, and the Dutch knew full well how bad it was, but hid it all. No mention of any retribution there I note. I bet if RBS had been a US bank then the US Government would have demanded all sorts of payback. Similarly Barclays had also decided to go for it in a big way and one could suggest that RBS could have said that Barclays will have done the due diligence and therefore it will be fine. Both banks were duped by the Dutch.

 

I make no excuse for the bonus culture and the dodgy rate fixing activities but these had nothing to do with the failure of RBS, and before we Scots get all the blame again remember this was all done in London. I also agree the authoritites supposedly watching all this were either too scared, or being 'bought' to stay quiet. After all the Coop scandal was under the Labour watch and Flowers was a good buddie of Balls etc. Plus cheap loans to the Party must have had some effect mustn't they?

 

Sorry I was only referring to the computer problems they have had rather than the problems in general. These simply should not have happend in a banking environment where systems need to be virtually and indeed usually are bullet proof.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest pelmetman
Colin Leake - 2014-01-09 7:17 PM

 

Sorry I was only referring to the computer problems they have had rather than the problems in general. These simply should not have happend in a banking environment where systems need to be virtually and indeed usually are bullet proof.

 

IT seems to be money for old dopes *-)............

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25731027

Link to comment
Share on other sites

pelmetman - 2014-01-14 5:59 PM

 

Colin Leake - 2014-01-09 7:17 PM

 

Sorry I was only referring to the computer problems they have had rather than the problems in general. These simply should not have happend in a banking environment where systems need to be virtually and indeed usually are bullet proof.

 

IT seems to be money for old dopes *-)............

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25731027

 

If you think that why not have a go yourself?

 

My youngest does I'll admit earn a fortune now but he had to study long and hard taking a degree in mathematics at the same time as taking one in computing with a double first in both. Then he started work as a consultant with a firm of American consultants and worked to establish his personal reputation specializing in work for banks working long and hard to achieve that. Now the amount he earns depends on the contracts he can obtain and the size of them. Some take over a year to obtain with none of the work being chargeable. When we stay with him or,he comes to use he is available and controlling multiple contracts 24-7. I have been there when he has set his alarm clock to go off every two hours to keep a check on contracts when they are going live. He needs to stash some of the cash away because one can never be certain of oif or when the next contract may come on line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest pelmetman
Colin Leake - 2014-01-14 7:22 PM

 

pelmetman - 2014-01-14 5:59 PM

 

Colin Leake - 2014-01-09 7:17 PM

 

Sorry I was only referring to the computer problems they have had rather than the problems in general. These simply should not have happend in a banking environment where systems need to be virtually and indeed usually are bullet proof.

 

IT seems to be money for old dopes *-)............

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25731027

 

If you think that why not have a go yourself?

 

My youngest does I'll admit earn a fortune now but he had to study long and hard taking a degree in mathematics at the same time as taking one in computing with a double first in both. Then he started work as a consultant with a firm of American consultants and worked to establish his personal reputation specializing in work for banks working long and hard to achieve that. Now the amount he earns depends on the contracts he can obtain and the size of them. Some take over a year to obtain with none of the work being chargeable. When we stay with him or,he comes to use he is available and controlling multiple contracts 24-7. I have been there when he has set his alarm clock to go off every two hours to keep a check on contracts when they are going live. He needs to stash some of the cash away because one can never be certain of oif or when the next contract may come on line.

 

Which is my point Colin ;-)................they can expect to be paid a fortune whether they deliver or not *-)............I guess it all depends on the charlatan employed by the taxpayer who signs the open taxpayer cheque ;-)..................I sometimes wonder if your a little naive Colin, in the ways of government and meal tickets :-|

Link to comment
Share on other sites

pelmetman - 2014-01-14 7:35 PM

 

Colin Leake - 2014-01-14 7:22 PM

 

pelmetman - 2014-01-14 5:59 PM

 

Colin Leake - 2014-01-09 7:17 PM

 

Sorry I was only referring to the computer problems they have had rather than the problems in general. These simply should not have happend in a banking environment where systems need to be virtually and indeed usually are bullet proof.

 

IT seems to be money for old dopes *-)............

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25731027

 

If you think that why not have a go yourself?

 

My youngest does I'll admit earn a fortune now but he had to study long and hard taking a degree in mathematics at the same time as taking one in computing with a double first in both. Then he started work as a consultant with a firm of American consultants and worked to establish his personal reputation specializing in work for banks working long and hard to achieve that. Now the amount he earns depends on the contracts he can obtain and the size of them. Some take over a year to obtain with none of the work being chargeable. When we stay with him or,he comes to use he is available and controlling multiple contracts 24-7. I have been there when he has set his alarm clock to go off every two hours to keep a check on contracts when they are going live. He needs to stash some of the cash away because one can never be certain of oif or when the next contract may come on line.

 

Which is my point Colin ;-)................they can expect to be paid a fortune whether they deliver or not *-)............I guess it all depends on the charlatan employed by the taxpayer who signs the open taxpayer cheque ;-)..................I sometimes wonder if your a little naive Colin, in the ways of government and meal tickets :-|

 

Get it wrong once and your reputation is ruined so you may do well once but never again. My son has turned down a lot of work because for various reasons usually conected with the client. An attempt was mad to get him to work on the NH system. No way he worked out it was never going to work! He has never worked on government contracts with the exception of one for the MOD simply because they are usually so badly specified. The banks in which he specialises may have specs that run to thousands of pages but they normally know exactly what they want and specify it clearly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

pelmetman - 2014-01-14 7:35 PM

 

Colin Leake - 2014-01-14 7:22 PM

 

pelmetman - 2014-01-14 5:59 PM

 

Colin Leake - 2014-01-09 7:17 PM

 

Sorry I was only referring to the computer problems they have had rather than the problems in general. These simply should not have happend in a banking environment where systems need to be virtually and indeed usually are bullet proof.

 

IT seems to be money for old dopes *-)............

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25731027

 

If you think that why not have a go yourself?

 

My youngest does I'll admit earn a fortune now but he had to study long and hard taking a degree in mathematics at the same time as taking one in computing with a double first in both. Then he started work as a consultant with a firm of American consultants and worked to establish his personal reputation specializing in work for banks working long and hard to achieve that. Now the amount he earns depends on the contracts he can obtain and the size of them. Some take over a year to obtain with none of the work being chargeable. When we stay with him or,he comes to use he is available and controlling multiple contracts 24-7. I have been there when he has set his alarm clock to go off every two hours to keep a check on contracts when they are going live. He needs to stash some of the cash away because one can never be certain of oif or when the next contract may come on line.

 

Which is my point Colin ;-)................they can expect to be paid a fortune whether they deliver or not *-)............I guess it all depends on the charlatan employed by the taxpayer who signs the open taxpayer cheque ;-)..................I sometimes wonder if your a little naive Colin, in the ways of government and meal tickets :-|

 

Get it wrong once and your reputation is ruined so you may do well once but never again. My son has turned down a lot of work because for various reasons usually conected with the client. An attempt was mad to get him to work on the NH system. No way he worked out it was never going to work! He has never worked on government contracts with the exception of one for the MOD simply because they are usually so badly specified. The banks in which he specialises may have specs that run to thousands of pages but they normally know exactly what they want and specify it clearly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...