In today’s guest post, Jake Richardson discusses the potential future of the British rail network, both in advance of the changes that Brexit may bring, and also based upon the historical trends within the industry. The British railway system has indeed been through some massive restructuring exercises throughout its history. Post-World War One and the Victorian era of Britain’s steam railway revolution, all private companies were rationalised into the ‘Big Four’ predominant companies under The Railways Act 1921, which included Great Western Railway (GWR), London, Midland and Scottish Railways (LMS), London and North Eastern Railway (LNER) and Southern Railway (SR). However, post-World War Two, the railways were once again run into the ground, meaning post-war nationalisation was inevitable and the British Railways, latterly known as British Rail, came into action through the enactment of The Transport Act 1947. For nearly fifty years the nationalised railway system, which was o

Previously in Financial Regulation Matters we have discussed the issue of whistleblowing, mostly in relation to the case of Barclay’s CEO Jes Staley ( here and here ). We know that the FCA faced criticism for not suspending Staley in that case, so today’s news that the regulator are looking into the conduct of Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) has brought the issue to the forefront once more. In today’s post we will review this news and look at what whistleblowing actually means, and its ‘function’ in a much broader sense. The case with RBC has accelerated after a former trader recently won his case against the bank for unfair dismissal. The claim, relating to the trader’s revelations regarding the ‘box-ticking’ culture that was/is prevalent within the firm , concluded with the judge describing the bank’s conduct as ‘egregious’ and that, ultimately, ‘employers should take better care of whistleblowers even if they find them somewhat enervating’. Whilst the FCA has not confirmed the

We have reviewed the collapse of BHS here in Financial Regulation Matters , whilst we have also reviewed the performance of the Financial Reporting Council (FRC) here . We also looked at a number of investigations that the FRC were undertaking with regards to the audit sector, with the regulator’s record fine against PwC for its auditing of BHS being one of the more recent actions taken. However, what looks like a victory for the regulator, at first glance, is quickly becoming anything but, and in today’s post we shall look at the sentiment of the regulators actions in this case. When the announcement was made that PwC would be fined, and one of its partners involved in the audit banned for life, it was suggested by the regulator that they would be releasing an extensive report into what went wrong . However, Sir Philip Green initiated legal proceedings to amend, and essentially delay the report from being published on the grounds that it would negatively affect members of h

We know here in Financial Regulation Matters that there were a number of initiatives set up in the wake of the Financial Crisis, with all of them theoretically designed to guard against a crisis of similar, or even worse proportions. Some have been somewhat of a success, and others less so, but recently the Trump administration took aim at an agency which is purposely designed to guard against another crisis by providing cutting-edge research to regulators. In this post we will examine the Office of Financial Research (OFR) and the news that the agency will soon be experiencing even more job cuts, alongside a further depletion of its resources. The question will be whether this constitutes just the latest in a string of events which suggest the onset of ‘ regulatory amnesia ’, or the culling of an agency that sounds good in theory, but could never have been effectual in the real world. As part of the many reforms brought forward by the Dodd Franck Act of 2010, the Office of Fin

House of Fraser, the massive department store that began in 1849, in Glasgow, has been making the business headlines for quite some time. After the collapse of BHS, House of Fraser stands on the brink of being the next massive feature of the British High Street to fold. In this post, we will look at the latest developments as the company battles to stay in existence and survive the hostile environment facing High Street retailers, whilst we will also look at the what these developments many mean for the future of British retailers as we continue to move through the economic cycles. The news of House of Fraser’s troubles broke earlier in the summer , which came on the back of negative financial results last year which detailed that the company had made a net loss of £37 million, with a £53 million drop in revenue . Those financial troubles led to the need to develop a rescue plan to protect the company from the hostile environment within which they operate, and in June of this ye

In Financial Regulation Matters we have covered the story of the disgraced GRG unit within RBS from the moment that the scandal was publicised, and recently that case has taken a particularly disappointing turn. In other news from the Banking sector, Lloyds have been forced to set aside even more money to cover PPI claims made against them, bring the prospective to total to more than £19 billion. In this post, we will assess these stories and examine what they may mean for the continuing lack of trust that the public have in the Banking sector. Starting with RBS, the bank have been in the midst of a number of legal claims regarding the conduct of its infamous GRG unit, which was set up to ‘help’ Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs). Last month the bank managed to fend off a claim from a Real Estate group regarding the mis-selling of interest rate swaps and manipulated interest rate benchmarks, and a couple of days ago managed to fend off a claim in the High Court from an SME