header-logo header-logo

12 May 2011
Issue: 7465 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Customer satisfaction

Banks drop fight over payment protection insurance

The banks have conceded defeat in the legal fight over mis-sold payment protection insurance (PPI).

Tens of thousands of customers claim to have been fraudulently sold PPI after finding they were ineligible to claim and the insurance was useless or had been sold to them without their knowledge.

In April, the British Bankers Association (BBA) lost a judicial review against the Financial Services Authority (FSA) and Financial Ombudsman Service over its handling of PPI (BBA v FSA & Anor [2011] EWHC 999 (Admin)). It confirmed earlier this week that it will not be appealing the ruling, stating: “We continue to believe that there are matters of important principle which we will be taking forward in other ways with the authorities.”

Lloyds Banking Group has set aside £3.2bn to pay the claims. Barclays has said it will earmark £1bn, and RBS has said it will set aside £850m.

Richard Caird, partner at SNR Denton, who acted for the FSA, said: “The FSA has rightly welcomed the resolution of the BBA’s judicial review. The decision of Mr Justice Ousely will, of course, bring significant challenges for banks and other sellers of PPI as they bring their complaints handling processes into line with the FSA’s requirements. The decision also brings, however, welcome clarity to the obligations of firms considering whether to pay redress to consumers, particularly the obligation to take breaches of the FSA’s Principles for Business into account in those considerations.”
 

Issue: 7465 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Kennedys—Milan Devani

Kennedys—Milan Devani

Chief information officer appointment strengthens technology leadership

Maguire Family Law—Hannah Barlow & Sophie Hughes

Maguire Family Law—Hannah Barlow & Sophie Hughes

Firm strengthens Wilmslow team with two solicitor appointments

DWF—Ian Plumley

DWF—Ian Plumley

Londoninsurance and reinsurance practice announces partner appointment

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll