Clydesdale Bank has for some time looked like the bank where time stood still.

While other banks, under duress or otherwise, have moved to demonstrate some changes in culture from the bad old pre-crash days, the Glasgow-based bank's reputation has taken one bashing after another.

In 2012 evidence began to emerge that the bank's abrupt withdrawal from property financing was impacting over-harshly on many Scottish companies which were unable to refinance, many of them non-property businesses.

That went alongside the bank's unusual profile in the small business loan mis-selling scandal, which saw the Clydesdale and Yorkshire banks escape regulation over their most widely sold, and often mis-sold, complex loans.

In September 2013 the banks were fined £8.9million for miscalculating 42,500 mortgages and then hiking customers' monthly repayments to help plug the shortfall.

Two weeks later The Herald revealed how the Clydesdale was claiming a data protection principle as an excuse not to produce customer records more than seven years old for PPI claims. Within months, the bank was admitting that it did have some historic records. Former bank insiders insisted that most records could be produced, from computer or microfiche sources, if banks wanted to find them.

Last autumn the bank's former chief executive David Thorburn admitted it was heading for FCA enforcement, and that the bank had mounted a major programme of reviewing tens of thousands of PPI claims. The doubling of its provisions for PPI redress in the space of two months, to over £800m, was serious enough to prompt a profit warning at parent National Australia Bank in Melbourne.

Meanwhile Mr Thorburn had been summoned before the Treasury Committee to explain why so relatively few of the bank's complex small business loans had been included in any mis-selling review. The MPs' verdict was that the loans had been designed, over a decade ago, specifically to escape regulation, and the committee urged an overhaul of procedures.

Mr Thorburn stepped down in January ahead of the intended flotation of the banks by NAB.

Now the PPI fiasco has resulted in yesterday's £21m fine, and an unusually severe reprimand from the Financial Conduct Authority over the falsifying of information.

The bank says the doctoring occurred in a tiny number of cases, and was unknown to any management. It also observes that most other banks sold the same type of unregulated fixed rate loans. It insists that a PPI clean-up has been under way for some time, and of course that it is sorry.

But Clydesdale has never admitted to any endemic problems of culture. While the mortgage malpractice related to 2005 to 2009, yesterday's whopping fine stems from a policy devised in mid-2011, just as Mr Thorburn took over.

The two banks' estimated mis-selling compensation for complex loans and PPI is now £1.2billion, over five times last year's £203m profits. Its provisions are about the same as those of Santander, which made a £1.4 billion profit last year, and almost five times the £173m bill for compensation at Nationwide, whose profits also topped £1bn.

Culture at the Clydesdale would appear to be long overdue for change.