header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
25 November 2016 / Simon Duncan
Issue: 7724 / Categories: Features , Banking
printer mail-detail

Setting off for insolvency

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
nlj_7724_duncan

Swap mis-selling & insolvent claimants: Simon Duncan examines the Global Restructuring Group & insolvency set-off
  • More claims centred on GRG’s alleged activities are likely.
  • Insolvency set-off protects the banks’ position.

The banking crisis in 2008 has led to many claims being pursued against banks for the “mis-selling” of interest rate hedging products, frequently interest rate swaps. The claimants are companies that were persuaded to enter into these transactions. Frequently, having swapped a floating rate of interest for a high fixed rate of interest, those companies have been forced into liquidation. They could not afford to maintain the payments to the bank as interest rates have plummeted and remain at very low levels. A redress scheme was introduced under the auspices of the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) in 2013 to compensate those found to have been “mis-sold” an interest rate hedging product. The FCA estimates that there are 2,000 insolvent estates with “mis-selling” claims.

RBS Plc & the GRG

Some companies complain of having seen their banking relationship transferred to the Global Restructuring Group

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Birketts—Nathan Evans

Birketts—Nathan Evans

Commercial and technology team in Cambridge strengthened by partner hire

Andrew & Andrew Solicitors—Shikha Datta

Andrew & Andrew Solicitors—Shikha Datta

Hampshire firm appoints head of new family department

Latham & Watkins—Sarah Lightdale

Latham & Watkins—Sarah Lightdale

Firm strengthens securities practice with partner return

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Mazur and more—inside the litigation frontline

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

NLJ this week: Social media bans for children spark legal dilemmas
Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
NLJ this week: Leasehold reform risks creating ‘forgotten freeholders’
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
NLJ this week: Court of Appeal clarifies when a claim truly begins
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
NLJ this week: Split FDRs could ease pressure—and boost settlements
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll