Today’s short post reacts to the news that the majority of shareholders pursuing legal action against the former CEO of RBS, Fred Goodwin, as well as the Bank itself for representing a false picture of their health before a £12 billion cash call in 2008, have apparently decided to accept a settlement offer from RBS at 82p per share, 10p less than they had hoped. For this post, the details of why this is happening are of importance, as is the fact that the country will presumably miss out on a chance to witness a group of individuals who partook in the pilfering of society be examined in a court of Law. We have only recently discussed this case here in Financial Regulation Matters , so there is little need to go into any great detail on the case itself. Essentially, in 2008 RBS had painted a picture of its health before a £12 billion cash-call that was simply not true, with those who had met the call losing serious amounts of money shortly afterwards. A group of 9,000 investors ...

Today’s short post looks at the news that former RBS Chief Executive Fred Goodwin ( formerly Sir Fred Goodwin ) will, unless there is a last-minute settlement, be forced into the public limelight nearly 10 years after exiting stage-right under a cloud of controversy. On the same day as the General Election in the U.K., Fred Goodwin is scheduled to appear before the High Court in London to answer for his actions during the Financial Crisis within a civil action brought by thousands of RBS shareholders who, citing three former board members as well as Goodwin, allege that they were misled regarding the health of the bank when they took part in a £12 billion cash call in April 2008 . For this post the focus will be upon the case itself, but also the potential ramifications for RBS if their former Chief Executive’s business is aired in such a public and potentially hostile arena – as one commentator noted: Goodwin is being ‘ cross-examined by a Barrister, not a politician, and a judge w...