McHale & Co. Solicitors Blog

Interest Rate Swaps-the latest

I think it's worth bullet pointing our current experience of the cases that we are working on:

  • We have issued a number of cases where clients have run out of primary limitation because they have been following the FSA advice that they don't need any help. We have issued and are confident that the Court will allow the cases to proceed. The banks are clearly not prejudiced but if we delayed any further I am sure that they would claim they were. I am rather annoyed that the FSA did not foresee that they could cause damage to businesses by effectively advising them to not to take immediate independent legal advice!
  • It is very dangerous for clients to rely on the FSA advice and trust the banks to come to them. First of all the review only deals with certain types of products and one of the problems here is that clients don't know what product they have! Limitation is a very real danger for these clients.3. In relation to caps, a review will only be carried out if a complaint is made by (or on behalf of) a non-sophisticated customer during the review. Caps will not automatically be included within the FSA review. Some of our clients who clearly fit the criteria for the redress scheme are hearing nothing from their banks. Delay seems to be a deliberate tactic from the banks.
  • The redress meetings and all that is said in both them and any fact finding that goes before are clearly NOT "without prejudice". Clients really need to be careful what they say to the banks. Their responses could be used against them at a later date.
  • The way that banks are dealing with our requests for documentation that they should readily have at hand, further backs up my belief that they are determined to delay matters. I would be surprised if significant numbers of clients are compensated in the next few months.
  • Being fully prepared is going to be the key whether for litigation or the redress process.
  • I am concerned by the prospect of a Judicial Review concerning the redress criteria. I wholeheartedly agree that the rules of the game have been badly drafted but fear that a JR is exactly what the banks want-it will take time and delay matters further.
  • I am heartened by talking to other solicitors firms, that there are a number of us willing to share information and can see that this is in clients best interests. As I keep saying, the banks lawyers will surely be comparing notes too.

Leave a comment

Leave a Reply

(Your email will not be publicly displayed.)