header-logo header-logo

18 October 2007
Issue: 7293 / Categories: Legal News , Banking , Competition
printer mail-detail

Chancellor fails to reassure sceptics

News

A more “certain and protectionist” banking system is needed to minimise the chances of another Northern Rock fiasco, lawyers claim.
The comments follow the government’s decision to increase guaranteed bank saving deposits from £2,000 to £35,000.

Tom Morrison of Rollits Solicitors says it will take more than “calming words” from the chancellor to reassure sceptics.
“While the horse may have bolted somewhat for Northern Rock, there is a need for a more certain and protectionist scheme to be put in place to minimise the chances of a bank run happening on that scale again,” he says. “The scheme needs to be set in stone to communicate with the public in unequivocal terms and must guarantee the savings of the majority using a clear andswift mechanism.”

Meanwhile, the Association of British Insurers (ABI) wants the government to ensure that the fully guaranteed limit remains at £35,000 and to focus on enabling faster payouts from the Financial Services Compensation Scheme in the event of bank failure.

The ABI’s director general, Stephen Haddrill, says the government should not risk distorting the savings market by attempting to protect bank deposits when there are more aspects to consider. He adds that the new limit of £35,000 introduced will protect 98% of savers.

Issue: 7293 / Categories: Legal News , Banking , Competition
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll