LIBOR - SFO Enquiry

TheRedAdmiral

Genuine Question this. I work within the legal field but not within this area of law.... (Personal Injury is my field).

Here is the Question.....

If a Bank has been found guilty of fixing the LIBOR Rates, possibly by the SFO, is there then the possibility that each LIBOR Rate mortgage (with that bank) could be construed as Unenforceable - as it was "Tainted By Fraud?"

Opens up a "Can of Worms" but if it were the other way - the banks would be quick to pounce!

bigadaj

No ambulances to chAse on a. Weekend then.

Consensus of opinion in the media is that libor was manipulated both up and down so people relying on libor would probably have benefited at some point and lost out at others.

It would be virtually impossible to prove the actual effect on individuals, what should happen is the guys who did it should go to jail, and all their assets should be seized under proceeds of crime legislation, but I'm not holding my breath.

Thrugelmir

LIBOR is not set by an individual bank. As yet there is no suggestion of any collusion.

Barclays would appear to have been using its declared figures (that may have been used to set LIBOR) to give the impression of far better financial health. Than was actually the case.

Barclays declined assistance from the UK Government and sought capital funding in the Middle East. The question is now. Did this cover up something else.

TheRedAdmiral

bigadaj wrote: »

No ambulances to chAse on a. Weekend then.

Consensus of opinion in the media is that libor was manipulated both up and down so people relying on libor would probably have benefited at some point and lost out at others.

It would be virtually impossible to prove the actual effect on individuals, what should happen is the guys who did it should go to jail, and all their assets should be seized under proceeds of crime legislation, but I'm not holding my breath.

LOL. Actually I was in work today putting in a bit of overtime. Ive worked on both the Defendant and Claimant side and can honestly say that it is Insurers who increase premiums not Solicitors. - Thats for another thread though!

Thanks for your reply re LIBOR though

Mrs_Optimist

^^^^ totally agree with the above concerning insurers ^^^^

Morgage_Confused

I wonder why insurers increase their premiums?

TheRedAdmiral

Ok I know this was a thread about LIBOR but seeing as a few people have raised concerns about Insurers I will comments as to why most of the increased premiums are Insurers faults.

Hyperthetical situation.
A 10 month Diagnosed Whiplash is worth £2000 and according to Predictive Fees this would be worth £1200 to a solicitor - Pre Issue (Format=£800 +20%)

So a Solicitor sends the Medical Report to the Insurer and requests a reasonable settlement - which must be made within the required 21 days.

In most instances insurers will make a totally pathetic offer and solicitors are duty bound (acting in clients best interests) to reject the offer.

In many instances insurers (despite their millions) do not have the staff to respond within 21 days and therefore the insurers issue proceedings.

I had a case similar to the above where 2 weeks after issue the insurer settled the claim for £2000. Only now I was entitled to standard costs (based on an hourly rate) as opposed to a fixed fee. The costs were £4300.

Purely, as a result of an insurer not responding on time (and it was a big insurer), it cost an extra £3100 worth of costs.

Who pays for that - Policyholders Of Course!

Dont be fooled by all the arguments in the newspapers. Ive worked on both sides