CLICK HERE TO SEE THE FULL VIDEO Click here for a full transcript of the entire interview DRAFTS OF CLIFFORD CHANCE REPORT DENIED BEING SEEN BY DEREK SACH OR CHRIS SULLIVAN - OH HOLD ON - YES I REMEMBER NOW - ONE DRAFT WAS SEEN / KNOWN ABOUT BY DEREK SACH AND HE REVIEWED THE FIGURES FOR ERRORS!
- 11:36:35 Question: “Which brings us to the Clifford Chance review, you’ve described that as Independent. Doesn’t Clifford Chance do business for RBS?”
- Answer Derek Sach “Yes we do business with all of the large corporate lawyers, um you have to choose somebody of stature. In the case of Clifford Chance, they provided a partner with relevant experience who has never done any work for RBS. Um you have to assume that people such as that do have integrity. Having seen the report I have no reason to believe that they did not exercise complete independence.”
- 11:37:26 Question John Mann MP “Drafts of the report were submitted to you?”
- 11:37:31 Answer Derek Sach “I have no idea because I had no part of being the subject of the report.
- 11:37:40 Answer Chris Sullivan “I have no idea either, I never saw a single draft.”
- 11:37:56 Question Chairman “Are you confident that drafts were not seen?”
- 11:37:46 Answer Derek Sach “Drafts were certainly back checked by the organisation, because obviously when you prepare a lengthy document, there are going to be errors of fact that need to be corrected.”
- 11:38:00 Question John Mann “How do you know that?”
- Answer DS “I was asked to check some figures used here and there in the report.”
- 11:38:14 Q JM: “So there were drafts that were seen?”
- Answer DS “Well there was certainly one, but whether there were more I don’t know.”
- Q JM: “And was anything altered in the draft in process?”
- A DS “So far as I am aware, only errors of fact”
So Derek Sach is not acting with integrity himself. He disingenuously denies that he had not seen a draft report, but then is forced to admit (because he is in a corner) that there was at least one draft report, that he had checked some figures on!
Can we / the public believe anything that comes after this point from Derek Sach, Head of RBS Global Restructuring Group (GRG)?
GRG LOSS MAKING ENTERPRISE!
- 11:38:37 Q John Mann MP: “You have been with GRG a long time Mr Sach, how much has it contributed to the bank’s profits?”
- A DS “It doesn’t contribute to the banks profits at all. Our main aim is to restore our customers to health and strength.”
- QJM “So you’re saying that GRG makes no money for the bank?”
- A DS “In total if you look at what GRG achieved over the 5 year period in question, the customers we looked after in this particular area, the SME area, lost £2.1 Billion for the bank.
- QJM “My question is what does GRG make in terms of profits for the bank?”
- A DS “It doesn’t make a profit for the bank it has income in the form of fees, um, it sometimes has equity realisations if it has taken an equity stake in the past in something. But against that you have the cost of running it. But also these conections, there are the impairmants.”
- Q JM: “So GRG runs at a loss is what you are saying for the bank?”
- A DS: “If you look at the portfolio we look at, yes it runs at a loss.
GRG HIGHLY PRAISED BY ITS CUSTOMERS!
- 11:50:28 Question “If we were to poll, with respect to the confidentiality of the replies these 10,000 customers, is it your view that the majority would be expressing gratitude for their contact with GRG?”
- Answer Derek Sach “……………our people have a lot more time to spend with the customer and are very thoroughly trained in their restructuring skills……”
- Question “So is the answer that they would be expressing gratitude?”
- Answer “Yes I would hope so although we don’t actually ask them that question, but that are asked are they satisfied with what we do, are we delivering what we promise etc, then yes they would do, the majority would.”
NO DECISIONS TAKEN ON INTERNAL GRG VALUATONS!
- 11:58:30 “It is often very useful for someone internally to say, I would estimate that property is worth X, but no significant decision is ever taken on that sort of valuation, it is an informal part of the internal process.” Mmm as Steve would say!
- 11:59:00 “If we want to take action and the customer is disagreeing, then we would have a formal valuation done by a third party, which the customer would instruct in nearly all circumstances and the reason we do it internally sometimes is because it saves the customer money.” Mmmmmmmm Steve would say!
- 11:59:53 Question What about the underlying business practice of threatening to remove a business overdraft in order to get more leverage in negotiations about equity, I know you have changed the wording of the [training] manual but what about that practice?” Answer D Sach “ the reality is not so either –ummm!” Question “You deny that just ever took place?” Answer “Yes and I have found no examples of it. Clifford Chance asked me about that in my interview with them and it would be something that concerned me, I and thay can find no evidence of that happening.”
Presumably if there is anyone that can show that an internal valuation was used to take a significant decision, or was not given the opportunity to instruct a formal valuation, or was threatened with overdraft cuts during equity negotiations, they would all have bona fide complaints and require requisite compensation! RBS cannot have it all ways!