RBS was fined £28.6m for having discussed the commercial pricing levels with Barclay's in what was declared a breach of competition. The Office of Fair Trading sought to remedy the unfair practice of fixing charges for the professional services companies inclusive of solicitors, estate agents and accountants.What was both a shock and an insult by the Office of (un)Fair Trading was that the occurrence was prior to the bailout by force of the government upon a people. Why do I state this is unfair? We have seen so many examples of privatised gains and nationalised debts. This is yet another case whereby the public, to whom was not owner at the time of the practices mentioned, will be the ones to bare the brunt of the £28.6m to be recovered! RBS effectively have been rewarded AGAIN for falling foul leaving taxpayers picking up the mess. This noted discussions were during the reign of Mr. Goodwin, which some will recall left with a hefty thank you package.
Government agencies that act to address wrongs by supposedly imposing actions which, in turn, create further wronging of the people must be stopped. This action directly violates the people by perpetuating the practice of privatised gain with nationalised debt. Readers should keep in mind that the original bailout of RBS was some £37 billion. This is like a 7% interest charge being imposed on te public on top of the original bailout!
First Appeared on LPUK Scotland
4 comments:
Hang on though - where does the £28.6m go to?
What CiaranG said.
The State wins.
Does not alter the underlying crime of RBS bailout.
BTW, LloydsTSB employee I met last night near distraction with all the HBOS compliance issues they are encountering whilst being told to "move along, nothing to see" by Management (who are younger, de-educated drones).
And all this while Barclays and HSBC have to suffer the same interference as State owned banks. And some people think nationalisation was "unavoidable"? Maybe in terms of saving political skins or furthering the Fabian agenda.
Do you honestly think we, the taxpayers of this nation, will see one penny of that funding returned? Government is looking to draw in any and every penny to remove the threat of poor credit rating so it can perpetuate borrowing for these bloated programs and policies. If it was going to be returned to us then why are we having to fund it? So lets get this straight... RBS, which we DID NOT own at the time, will be fined and that fine comes to us, which, according to the aforementioned comments will come back to us??? Do not delude yourself that this is any form of justice being served but rather the slap on the wrist and the shuffling of money. What repayments thus far can be accounted for? I agree that this does not alter the underlying crime of the RBS bailout.
I only say that the State gets 100% of £28.6m in fines and indirectly pays <100% of it.
No justice is being served at all.
Post a Comment