No Ifs No Buts- Give up the Bonus, RBS

In February the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS), which received £20 billion of taxpayers' money, tried to £1b of it out in bonuses to bankers and traders. We believed this was morally and economically outrageous and had to be stopped. Thanks to 30,000 people signing this petition, RBS reduced the payout from £1b to £175m. Now RBS reportedly wants to pay a total of £1.5bn in bonuses to investment banking staff, and the board has threatened to quit if the government blocks the move. As the majority shareholder in RBS(the UK taxpayer) we believe the Government should make it clear to the board that they must put national interest ahead of personal interest and give up the bonus. If not, the RBS board should resign. N.B. Once you sign the petition your name will appear on the petition. You do not need to make a donation to iPetitions.

Sponsor

This campaign is apolitical but has been organised by Go Fourth - the Campaign for a Labour Fourth Term. However, we encourage everyone, regardless of political views, to join us in signing this petition so we can keep the pressure on RBS.

Links

www.gofourth.co.uk

Discussion

  • Mike Tomlinson Why should we pay thick retards, for making a total COCKUP ???

  • Violet Oruwari-McCabe My immediate concern is that I am still named on the firm's business accounts, Office (*** **** ) and Client (*** **** ) with RBS. This is despite taking the relevant steps to procure my removal from the account after my role as managing partner terminated on 31st July 2014. As far as I was aware and understood from the assurance of the RBS bank manager of Camden Town branch, and the promises of the business accounts manager of the Romford branch that the Add/Removal form for RBS business accounts would be processed as of 16th August 2014.

    However, I have been held to ransom by RBS and *** **** , the other signatory partner on the account (for the Add/Removal form for RBS business accounts), on the basis of RBS extremely unclear processes, and totally unnecessary because I have a clear mandate to add and remove parties from the relevant accounts. This is apart from the fact that once my position was terminated on 31st July 2013 *** **** Solicitors and the principals were not, and still are not, authorised to practice as a partnership firm (requires at least 2 partner). The only partners were not qualified to supervise; nor did they have my consent to continue to use my details after I left. In fact on the contrary I made this very clear in all my communication with *** **** , and relevant parties on my exit from the firm and since then.

    As soon as my role with the firm was confirmed as terminated I notified all relevant creditors that I was aware of; notified yourselves by phone and then up dated My SRA; notified the Professional Indemnity Insurers; as well as taking the necessary steps to be removed from the account. All that could be addressed by me was, but the business accounts manager of the Romford branch, confirmed my removal could only be completed by both signatory partners signing the relevant form - (even though I had the bank mandate to be a sole signatory). The business accounts manager confirmed he would arrange a meeting for me to sign the form at a branch local to me, after he had obtained the other signature; as he appreciated that it would not be feasible for both partners (*** **** and I) to attend the same meeting.

    Following this arrangement being agreed, I then spent 2 to 4 weeks chasing the business accounts manager of the Romford branch, who would simply not call me back or acknowledge my texts - (I saved texts as evidence). He finally (just about twice) made further promises to arrange my meeting for the following week. Once I realised that the delay could end up being dragged out indefinitely, I called RBS telephone businesses services to report his conduct and the unnecessary delay, in order to process my request as soon as possible. After they had tried to contact the business accounts manager of the Romford branch with no success, the RBS telephone businesses services advised me to go into the Camden Town branch, where I went on Thursday 15th August 2013 to progress the matter.

    Unfortunately the bank manager of the Camden Town branch was more concerned about highlighting his friendship with the business accounts manager of the Romford branch; and clearly did not take the matter seriously until I expressed my anger and frustration - (I have witnesses for this). In fact he did not take it seriously until I requested the details of his supervisor; he then explained he would call the business accounts manager of the Romford branch to confirm what was required to process my removal from the accounts. When he returned from making the call, he explained that the signed Removal form would be faxed over to the Camden Town branch in order for me to sign the next day, Friday 16th August 2013.

    I returned to the Camden Town branch to sign the form the next day, Friday 16th August 2013, to find an Add/Removal form completed with the other signatory partner's (*** **** ) signature, and for another partner (*** **** ) to be added onto the accounts, but the entries for my Removal had not been addressed. When I questioned this, the bank manager of the Camden Town branch insisted that it would definitely be completed in order for me to removed from the accounts. I therefore insisted on having a copy of the signed paperwork and bank statements of the account up to the date of my anticipated removal; which had no overdraft, deficit, nor outstanding charges. I have again recently requested a further copy of that form as it was supposed to be completed for my removal, to see if they had in fact kept to their word of adding my details in the Removal section.

    I had no further communication with RBS, until 15th January 2014 after the firm W&J Solicitors had been closed down following SRA'a intervention; as I looked through my paperwork with copies of the Add/Removal form for RBS business accounts. I called RBS telephone businesses services to report the firm had been closed and check all was in order. They confirmed they could only speak to me about the accounts if I was still on the accounts as a named signatory, and they then confirmed I was. I requested for my details to be removed from the accounts with immediate effect; but they explained that the accounts were now in deficit, so I could not be removed from them. I asked to make a formal complaint, requesting an investigation into all the parties involved, and for confirmation of why I still had not been removed from the accounts.

    The complaint matter was finally escalated to the RBS control team (21.01.2014), who contacted me to confirm the case had been handed over to a designated complaints handler, and that they were in process of locating the paperwork in order to have me removed from the accounts. When the paperwork was located by RBS, it was explained that this was an incomplete process for several reasons, which are still not clear. It was then arranged for me to go into the Camden Town branch a third time on Wednesday 5th February 2014, to sign the Add/Removal form for RBS business accounts again.

    Since then till last Monday 31st March 2014, RBS has been trying to get the other signatory partner's (*** **** ) signature, who has made himself totally unavailable with one excuse after another. RBS have tried to arrange for *** **** to go into a branch; for the business accounts manager of the Romford branch to go to meet *** **** , then to go to meet him unannounced, then finally arranged an appointment to meet him last Thursday 27th March 2014. It is still not even clear if the right paperwork was completed after all, as the business accounts manager had still not reverted to the RBS designated complaints handler, as requested and agreed by them. I have also been advised today that 2 forms were required, and I recall only completing and signing one form on both occasions when I went into the Camden Town branch to completing and sign the relevant forms.

    I am a paying complaint member of the profession, who has worked up from an extremely working class background (black female from council estate and state school/mother on benefits or low paid jobs/ last of the Uni grant recipients - fighting the stereotypical barriers - ignoring such issues comes across as extremely deceptive and ignorant). I am now making an application for a company with an qualified individual for authorisation to become a recognised body, which has been now been delayed in order to address this association with a firm that has been intervened (*** **** Solicitors). I am already in a position of exposure to potential liabilities; and where I must declare this connection in every application I make from now on (must declare in Risk part of Firm application, with approach to control); but I cannot afford a bad credit rating or to be implicated with accounts that need to be investigated.

    Despite the fact I notified all the relevant parties I was aware of my no longer being a partner with *** **** Solicitors, including the indemnity insurance, which led to the firm being deemed not to be fit to continue, it is clear that *** **** is still relying on keeping my name on the account. Please note that about a month after I had left the firm I had to email a written request *** **** for my name to be removed from correspondence, and I have reason to suggest it would be prudent of the SRA should investigate that he is not still conducting business in reliance of some innocent people's ignorance.

    I am still waiting for the copy of that original Add/Removal form (that I signed on Friday 16th August 2013); the a copy of the recent copy of that original Add/Removal from (that I signed on on Wednesday 5th February 2014); and copies of the statements of the 2 relevant accounts to date, along with a comfort letter. This is to confirm the circumstances in order to submit with our application for authorisation to become a recognised body, i.e. the law firm Progressive Stages Limited. I have received no correspondence or information in writing whatsoever; so have been relying completely on the copies I forced them to provide me with on both occasions when I went into the Camden Town branch to completing and sign the relevant forms, and the notes I have made on the forms.

    It would appear that *** **** cannot be managed by SRA'a regulatory steps, and the fact he is implicating and destroying other professionals careers (marginalised ethnic minority lawyers); clients and client confidence in the profession; and constantly operating at the very edge of serious grave risks under SRA's Risk Framework - (I have evidence and witnesses for this). I am trying to develop a firm that meets at least 6 of the 8 main objectives of Legal Services Act 2007, not to mention the work we are doing in enabling, supporting, educating through peer mentoring, and encouraging local community groups, small businesses, as well as individuals.

    All of this goes to the heart of Outcomes Focused Regulation and encouraging ethical disenfranchised vulnerable minority group entering and trusting the profession, as well as banking systems.

    THIS MESSAGE IS JUST to LET YOU KNOW THEY ARE STILL TAKING ADVANTAGE of Individuals

    Violet Oruwari-McCabe of Progressive Stages Ltd

  • Steve Bell Moralless, greedy, inept and not worthy of a high salary never mind a huge bonus.

    These people are truly abhorrent and are giving themselves bonuses with the UK taxpayers' money for doing nothing.

    This culture needs to be stopped. NOW!

join the discussion

Recent signatures

  • username

    Mike Tomlinson

    2 months ago
  • username

    Violet Oruwari-McCabe

    4 months ago
  • username

    Steve Bell

    4 months ago
See more

Petition highlights

There are no highlights yet.