The chairman of state-backed Royal Bank of Scotland has apologised after admitting it provided incorrect evidence to MPs investigating claims that it mistreated small business customers.
Sir Philip Hampton said that executives giving evidence to the Treasury Select Committee had made an "honest mistake" when being asked about the activities of the lender's controversial Global Restructuring Group (GRG).
RBS - which is 80% owned by the taxpayer - was facing claims that it pushed small firms towards collapse so it could buy back their assets at rock-bottom prices.
Committee chairman Andrew Tyrie said earlier this year that the bank had appeared "wilfully obtuse" after it challenged the description of GRG in a report as a "profit centre" - following evidence from two executives, Chris Sullivan and Derek Sach.
Sir Philip responded in a letter in August, published over the weekend.
He said: "The matter you raised - whether or not RBS executives misled the committee - is of course a very serious one.
"The evidence the bank's representatives provided was not correct in answering the question as to whether GRG was a profit centre.
"This lack of clarity on an important point is very disappointing to the committee as it is to me and I apologise for it."
Sir Philip agreed that the definition of GRG as a profit centre in a report by Sir Andrew Large into the affair was "reasonable and correct".
Mr Tyrie said: "Anybody can make a simple mistake in their evidence. But this was more than that - it was materially incorrect on a crucial point and unacceptable. RBS has done the right thing and apologised."
Royal Bank of Scotland said earlier this year that a review by law firm Clifford Chance had found no evidence that it set out to defraud small business customers.
It is the latest embarrassment for RBS after last week admitting it had got its sums wrong over a stress test by European regulators to see if lenders could withstand another major financial crisis.
That came just a day after RBS was fined £56 million by UK regulators over an IT meltdown in 2012 and a week after being hit with penalties of £399 million over its role in manipulating foreign exchange markets.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article