RBS braced for hefty Libor fines...

BertieUK · 10 January 2013 at 2:41PM

This certainly gives investors like myself with RBS a lot of confidence in their performance and as they comment the bonuses should be clawed back, or is that unreasonable to assume that they sould give the bonuses back?

It is understood that the FSA is arguing that some bonuses earned by executives and investment bankers should be repaid or clawed back.

But, says Robert Peston, this can only happen in relation to bonuses that were deferred.

"So at risk are those who were promised bonuses in 2009 and 2010, but haven't yet received all their entitlement," he added.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20973130

Generali · 10 January 2013 at 2:48PM

BertieUK wrote: »

This certainly gives investors like myself with RBS a lot of confidence in their performance and as they comment the bonuses should be clawed back, or is that unreasonable to assume that they sould give the bonuses back?

It is understood that the FSA is arguing that some bonuses earned by executives and investment bankers should be repaid or clawed back.

But, says Robert Peston, this can only happen in relation to bonuses that were deferred.

"So at risk are those who were promised bonuses in 2009 and 2010, but haven't yet received all their entitlement," he added.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20973130

I would hope that anyone shown to have earned a bonus through criminal activity, for example by manipulating LIBOR to suit their book, would be sued by the bank so that it was returned if the bank suffered a loss as a result. IANAL but I would imagine that there's a case to be answered.

An analogy would be how Mutu was ordered to pay the best part of £15,000,000 to Chelsea for taking drugs.

grizzly1911 · 10 January 2013 at 3:41PM

Generali wrote: »

I would hope that anyone shown to have earned a bonus through criminal activity, for example by manipulating LIBOR to suit their book, would be sued by the bank so that it was returned if the bank suffered a loss as a result. IANAL but I would imagine that there's a case to be answered.

An analogy would be how Mutu was ordered to pay the best part of £15,000,000 to Chelsea for taking drugs.

It also brings into question how far that clawback should go. We have those directly involved, but also those culpable by "allowing" it to happen.

BertieUK · 10 January 2013 at 7:31PM

grizzly1911 wrote: »

It also brings into question how far that clawback should go. We have those directly involved, but also those culpable by "allowing" it to happen.

I have a feeling that there will be heads rolling before too long, and they could be prominent figures who have disgraced their position. They may have thought that while eyes were looking the opposite way, this was their chance to make a buck.

As always the innocent suffers but this just maybe their day of reckoning is nye. I don't pin much hope that they will be proven guilty of any wrongdoings as some of these will be very clever people and are innocent until proven otherwise.