Royal Bank Of Scotland Share Discussion Threads

[polar fox] 15/1/2018 07:12

Compulsory liquidation for Carillion. Bad debts and general chaos to follow, no doubt.

[leedskier] 15/1/2018 06:35

David Buik‏
@truemagic68

EUROPEAN OPENING CALLS UPDATE courtesy of CMC MARKETS - FTSE100 is expected to open 15 points higher at 7,793, DAX is expected to open 38 points higher at 13,283, CAC40 is expected to open 10 points higher at 5,527 at 6.03am

[maxk] 14/1/2018 23:12

Wobbles in the morning re: CLLN?

[m1k3y1] 14/1/2018 16:22

Well they weren't subs as I understand it.
They were only ever requested donations.
There was no fee agreement, or ongoing fee requirement etc just constant requests for donations .

[chinese investor] 14/1/2018 16:17

I wonder if the Action Group are currently chasing members for unpaid subs !

We'll soon find out all of the facts !

[m1k3y1] 14/1/2018 16:08

Good point but let's see whether the courts rule that claimants are liable for this, or whether the RBoS AG Company should be held responsible for it .
No doubt Signature will be arguing the claimants should not be held responsible .

I have to ask though, how are the AG Company paying for this , if the only money they ever had was donations from claimants ?

[chinese investor] 14/1/2018 15:42

"Vannin Capital PCC v. John Greenwood & others"

That's us shareholders !

[m1k3y1] 14/1/2018 15:16

I understand that no claims have , as yet , been brought against the claimants and that these proceedings are against the AG only ?

[m1k3y1] 14/1/2018 15:09

Good research CI.
I can't see how an investigation can be avoided under these circumstances to be honest.

Keep the research coming please.

[chinese investor] 14/1/2018 14:59

Litigation funder Vannin Capital has sued for nearly £15 million plus damages and interest from the shareholders who won a £200 million settlement from Royal Bank of Scotland over its 2008 rights issue.

The litigation funder, in a mid-December lawsuit that recently became publicly available, said it had signed a pair of agreements with the action group and its former counsel in 2013 that entitled it to £14 million in premiums and interest from the settlement.

Vannin also maintains that it is owed £750,000 it paid for insurance linked to the funding arrangement.

But Vannin says the law firm now handling the case, Signature Litigation LLP, hasn't acknowledged its right of first call over the settlement funds.

The funder also argues that the shareholders breached one of the funding agreements by failing to maintain insurance to cover any adverse costs that might have come down in the case.

"Notwithstanding the foregoing, Signature has refused to acknowledge ... that it holds ... the settlement monies on trust and subject to Vannin's equitable interest therein and has refused to confirm that it will abide by Vannin's right of first call," the claim says.

Vannin claims that it agreed to two litigation funding agreements for £1.5 and £2 million with the RBS claimants and their then-counsel at Bird & Bird LLP to cover adverse costs should the shareholder group lose.

To support the agreements, Vannin said it obtained a deed of indemnity for up to £1.5 million from Elite Insurance Co. Ltd.

But the suit maintains that the action group failed to maintain an adverse cost funding facility as it had promised.

The action group's lawyers originally said they had obtained after the event insurance from Gable Insurance AG, Barbican Insurance Group and Aim Point Re.

But the law firm later said that Aim Point had withdrawn its participation and failed to demonstrate that the action group had maintained those policies, according to Vannin's suit.

As a result, Vannin said it terminated the smaller funding agreement but left the other one in place.

Now that the RBS shareholders have settled the claims, Vannin says either the action group or an alternative list of claimants benefiting from the 2017 deal known as the SG group claimants owe it funding premiums totaling £14 million and the £750,000 premium Vannin paid for the deed of indemnity under the agreements.

Alternatively, Vannin maintains that the action group's failure to maintain the adverse cost policies amounted to a breach of the smaller funding agreement that cost the funder the opportunity to earn £6 million and to recover the deed of indemnity premium.

Under that scenario, Vannin said it is seeking £6.75 million from either the SG group or the action group for breaching that funding agreement.

The case is Vannin Capital PCC v. John Greenwood & others, case number BL-2017-000561, in the Chancery Division of the High Court of Justice of England and Wales.

[chinese investor] 14/1/2018 14:47

A consultancy that recruited Royal Bank of Scotland PLC shareholders to join a class action lawsuit against the bank over its 2008 rights issue has sued the investors for a slice of the £200 million settlement they won from the lender in 2017.

Vange Consulting Ltd. said in court documents seen by Law360 on Monday that it is owed around £1 million in fees from the RBS shareholder action group.

The group accepted an 82-pence-a-share deal in June, averting a trial over allegations that the bank had misled investors in its £12 billion rights issue shortly before a government bailout wiped out RBS' share price.

The firm, which is bringing the claim on behalf of Newman Bell Ltd. — also a consultancy, which recruited RBS shareholders into the class action — said it is entitled to £944,000 in commissions from the settlement.

It also says it is owed around £100,000 in payments linked to commissions due on membership fees paid by shareholders who joined the action.

Under a consultancy agreement with the RBS action group, which represented thousands of RBS shareholders, Newman Bell recruited institutional investors holding around 160 million RBS shares to join the class action.

The firm is owed a percentage of membership fees paid to the action group by the shareholders, Vange alleged in a High Court lawsuit filed in November that only recently became publicly available.

Newman Bell assigned its rights over the fees to Vange in a deal in which Vange will pay the firm 50 percent of the membership fee commissions it claws back from the action group and five percent of the settlement payment.

According to the suit NBL was to be paid a commission of 7.5 percent of the fees payable by each RBS shareholder holding at least 50,000 RBS shares, and is due one percent of the settlement.

Vange says the recruited shareholders — excluding three institutional investors — obtained litigation funding from Vannin Capital PCC Ltd. to pay their membership fees, but maintains the action group has so far refused to pay these commissions.

“If the action group alleges that the membership fees … have still not been paid, it is averred that it was agreed that those fees would be paid by Vannin, or by the alternative funder,” the claim says.

“Vange is entitled to payment of settlement commission in respect of the settlement of recruited shareholders’ claims against RBS. In breach of the consultancy agreement, the action group has failed to pay that sum,” it adds.

The RBS action group, which represented thousands of RBS investors, was the last of five sets of shareholders still pursuing claims that RBS directors made recklessly optimistic statements that gave a grossly misleading impression of the bank’s underlying strength to support the financial crisis-era rights issue.

The case had been set to go to trial at the High Court in London in May. But it was repeatedly postponed amid the settlement negotiations.

Since the case was settled, however, the deal has prompted disputes and litigation among the claimants and their advisers, including a suit brought by Vannin Capital.

The litigation funder said in a mid-December claim that it had signed a pair of agreements with the action group and its former counsel in 2013 that entitled it to £14 million in premiums and interest from the settlement.

The RBS action group had not responded to request for comment at the time of publication.

Vange is represented by Simon Davenport QC and Alexander Halban of 3 Hare Court, instructed by Bates Wells Braithwaite LLP.

The case is Vange Consulting Ltd. v. RBoS Shareholders Action Group Ltd., claim number BL-2017-000400 in the Business and Property Courts in the High Court of Justice of England and Wales.

[m1k3y1] 14/1/2018 13:35

I will write also CI.

Disappointing to read though that "Mr Neill wants to ensure that such action groups are regulated in the future".

I would be more interested in him thoroughly investigating the AG now, with a view to helping claimants , if any wrongdoing is discovered.

[chinese investor] 14/1/2018 13:30

m,
The Parliamentary interest is great news !

I am lead to believe Trevor Hemmings (Manx) is not seeking a "Success Fee" !

I'm sending a letter to Signature in the morning !

[chinese investor] 14/1/2018 13:27

It would be nice for Signature to let me know if I am an eligible shareholder !

[m1k3y1] 14/1/2018 13:27

Interesting wish list CI but I am afraid it won't happen.
Time for a criminal investigation ?

[chinese investor] 14/1/2018 13:22

Let the Action Group pay for Bird & Bird, their Expenses and Third Party "Success" Fees out of the Subs !

Chinese Investor (RBS) 27 Oct '17 - 12:10
This is what I would like :-

1) Manx and Signature to organise the Settlement exclusively (TICK)
2) "The Action Group" to do no more work and be paid for their time, travel and office expenditure (£1 million at most)
3) The early Funders to receive no money - if they're not happy with that then they can sue the "Action Group"
4) The Corporate Claimants to give us the money they owe us
5) Total Costs to be Signature (£20 million), Bird & Bird (£6 million) and the "Action Group" (£1 million)

[m1k3y1] 14/1/2018 13:17

The questions is, why wasn't this flagged up by the Law Firms who were representing the claimants before Signature Litigation .

[chinese investor] 14/1/2018 13:16

It looks like this is going to happen !

Chinese Investor (RBS) 22 Oct '17 - 07:34
"Class Actions" are fairly new to the UK and the rules have yet to be drawn up.
Any group of people can call themselves "An Action Group" and they don't have to be Claimants or indeed they don't have to have any expertise at all.
And, on the face of it, it could be a great money earner.
After this Pantomime I hope the authorities have a close look at how "Class Actions" in the UK should be conducted !

[m1k3y1] 14/1/2018 13:15

Found it .

[m1k3y1] 14/1/2018 13:03

CI, do you have a link to the DM article please.

[m1k3y1] 14/1/2018 13:02

"The Action Group can pay the third parties out of the Subs !"

Unfortunately CI, this isn't likely to be the end result.

[m1k3y1] 14/1/2018 12:59

CI. The problem here is that regardless of how much the 'Pot' is, it would appear from this article that both the Action group and the Lawyers are , by their actions, eating into any 'settlement' figure that has been agreed.

Of course this is no surprise. It is what Lawyers do and I am sure there were also others who have long held concerns about the management of the AG.

It is disappointing though to see, once again, that claimants in a legal case are being left high and dry by the interests of others.

[chinese investor] 14/1/2018 12:59

I have 3,960 eligible shares so I expect to receive £4,973 minus costs.
The costs should be around £20 million so that is £4,206.

The Action Group can pay the third parties out of the Subs !

[chinese investor] 14/1/2018 12:53

The Settlement Pot was £200 million.
We got 82p per share before costs.
i.e. we were expected to own 244,000,000 shares.

Now we are told there could be 75,000,000 shares less.
i.e. 169,000,000 genuine shares.

So if the £200 million remains on the table then that is a settlement of 118p per share (44% more)...

...before costs !

[chinese investor] 14/1/2018 12:52

Will RBS fork out £200 million regardless ?