A SCOTS businessman spearheading a potential multi-billion pound damages case against RBS has warned the scale of the scandal could tip the bank into a second bailout.
Neil Mitchell launched the RBS GRG Business Action Group yesterday to bring together hundreds of British businesses who believe they were wrongly forced into administration by the taxpayer-funded bank so it could profit from their assets.
The claims, which relate to the bank's controversial Global Restructuring Group (GRG), are already the focus of an investigation by the Serious Fraud Office and the police.
Now the group is preparing to pursue tens of billions of pounds in compensation in a legal case led by QCs Andrew Hunter and Lord Pannick, who has previously acted for the Queen and Max Mosley in press privacy lawsuits.
The lawyers have up to 120 days to compile enough evidence to pursue RBS for damages in a conspiracy to defraud case on behalf of all businesses allegedly damaged or destroyed by being pushed into GRG, which has been dubbed a "butcher's shop".
About 400 firms, from small and medium businesses to high street names such as HMV, are being represented by the group, with Mr Mitchell urging anyone else who became involved with GRG to get in touch.
The UK's Department For Business, Innovation & Skills estimated last August the value of compensation claims for SMEs could total £5 billion to £20bn, but it has since emerged the claim could also include large companies.
RBS chairman Sir Philip Hampton recently confirmed GRG at its peak was handling tens of thousands of British businesses with assets worth £91bn.
Mr Mitchell, a former chief executive at AIM-listed software company Torex Retail, said: "This is not just equally scandalous (to the credit crunch) but there are whispers around Gogarburn they could need another bailout on the back of this.
"That was supposed to be a last resort to turn the industry around, but here we are six years later and things are even worse. I know this case is being watched with great interest by those at the top of government.
"My hope is we can get recompense for the hundreds of businessmen and women who lost their livelihoods because businesses were improperly moved into GRG and forced into administration.
"It should also be recognition for the tens and tens of thousands who have lost their jobs as a result of RBS cuts or businesses going bust on the back of RBS decisions."
Last November, Lawrence Tomlinson, the "entrepreneur in residence" at the UK Department For Business, Innovation & Skills, accused RBS of routinely moving stable, creditworthy businesses into GRG for profiteering purposes, and of deliberately engineering defaults among SMEs and corporate borrowers by, for example, withholding critical payments.
The strategy is said to have arisen in the aftermath of the £850bn bailout in 2008 when there was pressure for the bank to return to the private sector at a profit within three to five years. This reportedly led them to pursue on short-term financial gains at the behest of the UK Government and UK Financial Investments, the vehicle for holding taxpayers' stakes in RBS and Lloyds.
An RBS spokeswoman said: "These are serious allegations that have done damage to RBS's reputation. The independent review by Clifford Chance we have commissioned will examine these.
"The most serious allegation made is RBS conducted a 'systematic' effort to profit on the back of our customers when they were in financial distress. We do not believe this is the case and no evidence has been provided for that allegation to the bank."
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