The case that the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) brought against a number of Barclays bankers for the deal reached with Qatar at the height of the Crisis has been reviewed before here in Financial Regulation Matters and across the financial press. However, now that case has concluded with the three bankers who were prosecuted being acquitted by the courts, one of those bankers – Richard Boath – has decided to speak out about his experience and is arguing that the SFO should have its powers seriously reviewed. In this post we will look at these arguments and look at some of the consequences of taking action in this regard, and of continuing the course. The high-profile fraud case dominated the financial press once the SFO brought charges against the three bankers – Richard Boath, Roger Jenkins, and Tom Kalaris. The five-month trial concluded with the jury returning after five hours to find all the defendants not guilty on all counts . The SFO had begun to experience criticism from...

We discussed recently here in Financial Regulation Matters that Edward Bramson, the activist investor attempting to change the direction within the British bank Barclays, was attempting to have his fellow shareholders approve his ascension to the Board of the Bank on account of wanting to stem the continued development of the investment arm of the bank. In this post, we will look at what happened and assess the latest news which shines a light on his reasoning. As was widely expected, Bramson lost his bid to join the Board . Only 13% of the votes cast were for Bramson’s resolution although, as stated above, this was widely expected. Whilst there was an unexpected development in the AGM – 30% of shareholders voted against its remuneration report – the focus on Bramson is important. The Guardian reports how opinion was split concerning Bramson’s motives, with some investors agreeing that there was a need to ‘ wake this board of directors up ’, but others stating that ‘bear in m...

We have examined the potential reconfiguration at Barclays before in Financial Regulation Matters , and in today’s post we will pick up on some comments made in today’s business media ahead of Barclays’ AGM on Thursday. The focus and speculation surrounds that of Edward Bramson, a so-called activist investor who many believe is aiming to cause substantial change within the massive bank. In this post we will look at Bramson more closely, and then discuss a concept that is being advanced as a ‘norm’ but which calls into question the very nature of the marketplace. Edward Bramson has held many positions as one might expect of a serious investor, but it is through his investment vehicle Sherborne and Company that he is making headlines at the moment. Through that vehicle he has amassed a 5.5% stake in the bank and it is being reported across the business media that, tomorrow (Thursday), he will ask shareholders to elect him to the Board of the bank. His stated reason for this is ...

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 ...

Owing to the dynamics of the academic year, there has been somewhat of a lull recently here in Financial Regulation Matters , so to get up to speed a round-up of developments within the banking sector seems like a good place to start. There have been a number of developments since the last post, so today we will work our way through them as efficiently as possible; the underlying sentiment is that the developments portray a sector that is consistently changing since the Crisis, with a number of aspects of that said Crisis continuing to play out (rather unsurprisingly). We start with our old friends RBS, who have taken up a large amount of space in Financial Regulation Matters , mostly on account of their remarkable development since the Crisis. Past posts have focused on the unique relationship that continues between the bank and the government (on account of its ownership of the bank), its terrible performance (alongside the FCA) in relation to its treatment of SMEs , and also...

We have looked at Barclays on quite a few occasions here in Financial Regulation Matters , and today’s post continues with that theme. Following on from developments surrounding financial penalties for the firm , and also the scandal involving Jes Staley and his attempts to uncover a whistleblower , recent news regarding the potential future for the Bank deserve to be discussed as it continues to attempt to redevelop itself within the post-Crisis era. Earlier this month, the Bank made the headlines for successfully ‘ring-fencing’ their consumer-focused element of the company, which the Bank described as ‘ the biggest banking start-up ever ’. In responding to the British Government’s insistence that ‘ the largest UK banks must separate core retail banking from investment banking ’, the bank successfully completed the transfer of more than 24 million customer accounts, which equated to more than £250 billion worth of assets. In addition, which is extremely topical, the ring-fencin...

In the second post today, we will take a brief look at the latest development from a regulator (loosely termed) that we have looked at many occasions – the Serious Fraud Office (SFO). In responding to actions taken in the midst of the Crisis, news today confirms that the Office has charged Barclays for loans the bank made to Qatar at the same time investors from the Country provided the necessary lifeline which allowed the bank to survive the Crisis without governmental support. The impact of the prospective action could be far-reaching, so in this post the details of the allegations will be examined, as will the potential fallout. During the Crisis, the British-based bank tapped investors for nearly £21 billion, with almost £4.5 billion coming from Qatar Holding – part of the State’s Sovereign Wealth Fund – and Challenger Universal, the investment vehicle of the former Qatari Prime Minister . Furthermore, the bank acquired more than £7 billion more from the two vehicles, along ...

In today’s post the focus will be on the banking sector and, by focusing on three current issues, provides an overview of recent developments within this particular sector. By looking at the issues surrounding Barclays, HSBC, Standard Chartered, Lloyds, and RBS, a picture will be painted that details the need to ask much deeper questions about the role the banking sector plays within society and, perhaps more introspectively, the relationship between big business and humanity. Going through the issues in no particular order, the first stop in today’s journey takes us to Barclays, with the news emerging that Red Kite Management, the world’s largest metals hedge fund, is suing the British Bank for ‘ alleged market abuse in the copper market ’, which it claims has cost the company at least £650 million between 2010 and 2013. The company’s claim, according to documents filed with the High Court, is that the Bank allowed some of its staff to share confidential information with the Ba...

Here in  Financial Regulation Matters we have looked at the potential landscape for British finance post-Brexit on a number of occasions. Firstly, we looked at the battle for the marquee names in the wake of the U.K.’s secession from the Union between France and Germany. Then, in a later post, we discussed the strength of one of the frontrunners in the battle for post-Brexit business – Dublin. So, in today’s post, we will look at how this issue is developing – as it will no doubt continue to – and how the City of London is being put under increased pressure. Yet, in keeping with the underlying sentiment of Financial Regulation Matters , we will conclude by looking at what effect these pressures may have upon the wider society, particularly in Britain but in Europe also. Earlier this week, it was announced that Barclays are in talks with Irish regulators about substantially increasing its presence in the Country after Brexit, with the company noting that Ireland represents...

Here in Financial Regulation Matters , we have discussed the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) on a number of occasions. Whilst this author has discussed the viability of the Office within a different regulatory framework, the most recent focus on the Office is arguably the most important issue with regards to the SFO. On the 18 th of May we looked at the Conservative Party’s pledge to dissolve the SFO and merge it into the National Crime Agency, something which was suggested represented the culmination of Theresa May’s incessant quest to quash the SFO stemming from her time as Home Secretary. Whilst the general election result puts the Conservative Party’s pledges up in the air, somewhat, yesterday’s announcement – one which was eagerly awaited – shows that the SFO, and its Director David Green , will not be going down with a whimper… far from it. Yesterday morning, the SFO announced that it has charged Barclays and four individuals associated with the Bank – John Varley (former CEO), ...

Today’s post looks at the developing story of Barclays’ CEO Jes Staley, who is currently facing hundreds of the company’s shareholders in their AGM. Staley, only in the position for two years, is facing calls for his resignation because he, self-admittedly, attempted on two separate occasions to uncover the identity of an internal whistle-blower who had made allegations against a newly hired executive in the U.S. This shortened post will briefly look at this unfolding story, including some other elements that are not helping Mr Staley’s reputation, and then ask what the result of this AGM may mean for the socially important role of the whistle blower. In 2016, Tim Main, a close friend of new Barclays CEO Jes Staley from their time together at JP Morgan , was hired for a senior position within Barclays’ American operations. Shortly afterwards, two complaints were brought forward against Mr Main and, in response, Mr Staley approached the Internal Head of Security to uncover the i...

Today’s post looks at the recent headlines garnered by the (relatively) massive fines being given to serious corporate players by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) in the U.K. This marks a drastic change in approach, as we shall see, and that may be down to the adoption of an American creation known as a ‘Deferred Prosecution Agreement’ (hereafter DPA), which has already been discussed in Financial Regulation Matters . The focus of the post is to show how the SFO is becoming a genuinely powerful and influential regulator for the financial sector and, ultimately, that it must be supported in its endeavours, because of its capabilities to reduce transgressions via the only (unfortunately) palatable form of correction. The SFO has been in the business headlines recently because of a number of high-profile agreements that have been reached under the possibilities afforded by the adoption of the DPA. A DPA became a tool for the SFO in the U.K. in 2014, and was introduced to the arsenal ...