|
Steffan
Original Poster
6,201 posts
97 months
|
Barclays Bank have been fined £59.5 Million pounds for wrongful trading in the last tear by the FSA. See: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18612279The Directors have agreed to forego their bonuses. But will remain in charge of the Bank and therefore receive million pound salaries and continue with their gold plated pensions and remuneration packages. To my mind this is madness. If a firm is fined for wrongful trading an amount of some £60 Million then the Directors should, at the very least, be prosecuted and banned from being Directors of any UK company. Clearly the real seriousness of a case producing a £60 Million fine is of no consequence to either the FSA or Barclays. I think this could reflect the reasons why we are staring another Banking crisis in the face. I think that a judicial review on the FSA decision would force far more serious penalties upon both the Bank and the FSA who is really about as much use as a chocolate teapot. Do others Agree?
|
|
|
Wyvern971
1,181 posts
77 months
|
The FSA fine was £59.5M they were also fined in the states, total in fines £290M.
In the overall stakes £290M isn't that much to Barclays is it?
From what they are being accused of they are getting off relatively lightly, those responsible should (quite rightly) be looking at jail time in my opinion.
|
|
|
ringram
12,213 posts
117 months
|
Maybe the fraud charges are coming soon..
haha..
|
|
|
Mermaid
12,497 posts
40 months
|
ringram said: Maybe the fraud charges are coming soon..
haha.. No, they are Bankers - members of the Untouchables group.
|
|
|
crankedup
9,240 posts
112 months
|
Will it deter others from similar wrong doings? Will it act to sharpen up Management practices? Will it throw shareholders into meltdown? I think not.
It comes across as a little bit of embarrassment for the bank, that's it. No real culpability at all for any single employee or group. But then culpability is currently out of fashion it seems.
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Digga
10,898 posts
152 months
|
crankedup said: Will it deter others from similar wrong doings? The fine alone may not, but the further legal ramifications will. crankedup said: But then culpability is currently out of fashion it seems. One of the things Nu Labour were keen to dispense with IIRC, war crimes etc. considered.
|
|
|
Ozzie Osmond
12,130 posts
115 months
|
Mermaid said: No, they are Bankers - members of the Untouchables group. ^^^^ This ^^^^ This ^^^^ This ^^^^ This^^^^ This ^^^^
|
|
|
eccles
7,718 posts
91 months
|
Digga said: crankedup said: Will it deter others from similar wrong doings? The fine alone may not, but the further legal ramifications will. crankedup said: But then culpability is currently out of fashion it seems. One of the things Nu Labour were keen to dispense with IIRC, war crimes etc. considered. I wondered how long it would be before Labour were blamed for it.  I'm surprised you didn't say it wasn't their fault and it was Labours for not regulating them enough.
|
|
|
Bluebarge
2,125 posts
47 months
|
ringram said: Maybe the fraud charges are coming soon..
haha.. And the mahoosive class action by anyone whose borrowings are pegged to LIBOR. Glad I don't own Barclays shares.
|
|
|
crankedup
9,240 posts
112 months
|
Digga said: crankedup said: Will it deter others from similar wrong doings? The fine alone may not, but the further legal ramifications will. crankedup said: But then culpability is currently out of fashion it seems. One of the things Nu Labour were keen to dispense with IIRC, war crimes etc. considered. What other legal ramifications are on the way, a tightening of practices wrapped into a 'code of conduct'.? Do you agree that Commercial and public service senior management should be held to some form of culpability.?
|
|
|
ringram
12,213 posts
117 months
|
Bluebarge said: ringram said: Maybe the fraud charges are coming soon..
haha.. And the mahoosive class action by anyone whose borrowings are pegged to LIBOR. Glad I don't own Barclays shares. Indeed, I did a little google after I saw it and found that Charles Schwab has already lodged a civil suit a few years back. Being guilty is going to open the flood gates. US ARM mortgages are all libor etc. Justice would be an Arthur Andersen Enron type erasure of Barclays. Sadly this will not happen. Though given enough civil claims you never know.
|
|
|
NorthernBoy
6,025 posts
126 months
|
What they did was wrong, and there are legal charges pending, which could well see individuals jailed.
It's possibly worth putting the numbers into context, though. Moving the bank's fix by a basis point, (as the reports suggest was the result of the request) would move the overall fix by one eighth, at most. That's one eighth of one hundredth of one percent for three months, on a rate that moves tens of times that per day.
I'll say again, it's wrong to do this, but don't anyone assume that they were knocking a couple of percent off the fair rate.
|
|
|
ChrisRS6
463 posts
52 months
|
So.....these massive fines???...where does the money go when they pay the fine?...who too??
It seems modern banking is just about masssive amounts of money that no one ever sees or even knows exsists??....its just all in computers and on spread sheets!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Jasandjules
45,463 posts
98 months
|
Ozzie Osmond said: Mermaid said: No, they are Bankers - members of the Untouchables group. ^^^^ This ^^^^ This ^^^^ This ^^^^ This^^^^ This ^^^^ Seems that way doesn't it. Write to your MP and demand that these kinds of people face jail for this kind of s**t.
|
|
|
Mermaid
12,497 posts
40 months
|
Jasandjules said: Ozzie Osmond said: Mermaid said: No, they are Bankers - members of the Untouchables group. ^^^^ This ^^^^ This ^^^^ This ^^^^ This^^^^ This ^^^^ Seems that way doesn't it. Write to your MP and demand that these kinds of people face jail for this kind of s**t. You may find they are the same kind of people, with a few exceptions.
|
|
|
Jasandjules
45,463 posts
98 months
|
Mermaid said: You may find they are the same kind of people, with a few exceptions. True. But the only thing they respond to is public opinion, so if we show that they won't get elected, they might actually do something (I know, not much chance BUT I think we have to try)
|
|
|
Mermaid
12,497 posts
40 months
|
Jasandjules said: Mermaid said: You may find they are the same kind of people, with a few exceptions. True. But the only thing they respond to is public opinion, so if we show that they won't get elected, they might actually do something (I know, not much chance BUT I think we have to try) I agree - a million man march would be nice, but even then doubt anyone will listen to us. We need a parliamentary candidate to stand against bank misfeasance, expenses abuse etc.
|
|
|
K12beano
14,393 posts
144 months
|
Apparently there's more to follow - it wasn't just Barclays.
What would be a travesty is if either of the part-tax-payer-owned banks are caught up and get fined. It's all very well for Barclays bosses to not get bonuses and the shareholders to get a mild slap, but if we get into a round of fining the public it will just get too silly!
|
|
|
Ozzie Osmond
12,130 posts
115 months
|
Mermaid said: You may find they are the same kind of people, with a few exceptions. Agreed. The unholy alliance of politicians and bankers.
|
|
|
Randy Winkman
1,990 posts
58 months
|
NorthernBoy said: What they did was wrong, and there are legal charges pending, which could well see individuals jailed.
It's possibly worth putting the numbers into context, though. Moving the bank's fix by a basis point, (as the reports suggest was the result of the request) would move the overall fix by one eighth, at most. That's one eighth of one hundredth of one percent for three months, on a rate that moves tens of times that per day.
I'll say again, it's wrong to do this, but don't anyone assume that they were knocking a couple of percent off the fair rate. What was the point of it then?
|
|
