Co-op unlikely to claw back cash over £1.5bn black hole

The Co-operative Group is unlikely to be able to claw back any money from the former chief executive, Peter Marks, or the former bank head, Neville Richardson, despite the revelation that the bank had a £1.5bn capital shortfall and bondholders would have to take a loss.

Senior sources have indicated that because of the mutual’s complicated structure, it is highly unlikely that either man will be affected by the investigation into possible clawbacks the Co-op is undertaking.

s-i-a: "The Co-operative Group is unlikely to be able to claw back any money from the former chief executive, Peter Marks, or the former bank head, Neville Richardson…" Funnily enough a similar thing happened to me recently. I gave my dog a bone before I realized he had done his business in the kitchen. As much as I tried I couldn't claw back the bone. I think there is a lesson to be learnt here.

sfieldfare: If bonds can be "bailed in" why not pay offs on resignation be "paid in" ?  The article is not very clear on what the contractual arrangements were. Unless there is more to come, the Co-op difficulties would seem to some extent artificial in that the goal posts over capital holdings have been moved.  Surely a more common sense way forward would be for the Treasury to relax the timescale for accruing the additional capital.  That way, damage to the bonds may be minimised by stopping dividends and extending their maturity.

simoncawkswill: There is a very capable gent who has set up an action group here He fought against bank of Ireland and won  , so has form so to speak , would urge anyone with a holding to join

mistermurry: Another case of 'I was visiting my aunt that week.' Or 'I was off sick that day' The standard excuse book has been getting a hammering lately in  'Good old Unaccountable Britain.'  Slither and Slide boys…

Franklin_Delano_Roosevelt: Bankers are the biggest fraudsters on the planet.

torpenhow: I take it that this is the considered opinion of the :' brain of the universe.' get back on your moped, there are pizzas to deliver. Drip!

dave15: "Surely a more common sense way forward would be for the Treasury to relax the etc . "This written by "sfield fare" Good thinking -- however no Gov. banking,  politician, MP, NHS etc etc etc people will ever think using common sense. They were not brought up to recognise other people and to apply common sense.

bob228: More excuses, The situation with the Co-Op bank is not complicated. The bank is not a mutual it is a PLC the same as most other banks. The directors are directors of the plc bank not the Co-op group. It just so happens the Co-Op group is the only shreholder of the bank that though does not change anything

dismalscientist: How about calling in the £3.8m overdraft extended to the Labour Party? No? Thought not…

torpenhow: Now that is a very good idea.

bob228: The Co-op Bank structure is not complicated at all. It is not a mutual it is a PLC a 100% owned by the Co-op group It is only complicated as thats what the Co-Op group are saying as they do not want to pick up the bill for the bank preferring to pass it on to their customers I would suggest in the light of this if you are a Co-OP bank should you stay with them?

simon_coulter: As you can see, when they 'take the money and run' it isn't even in the bank to steal back…  Why weren't they given Bonds?

simoncawkswill: Never mind this idiots bonus , we want the co op group to explain why it should retain seventy five per cent of the bank when its truly ethical stance ensures pensioners suffer losses on their investments .

beartownrat: Co-op Bank ethical?  They've proved that was, shall we say, a misconception. "The Co-op" also has an energy supplier offshoot "Co-operative Energy".  Their prices look reasonable, but they can't run a whelk stall.  Incompetence, lies (sorry, allegations founded on guesswork and wishful thinking).  Glad to be shot of them, still trying to get my money back.

aiki18: You have to be a failure to make it in Britain


paulweighell: So is your salary reclaimable or would you argue that it is not?

Andrew Crisp: And heres a reason why RBS shouldn't be split into smaller banks a well run large bank can do more for the economy than a bunch of smaller banks. These big banks offer more services than what the regionals will ever offer.

paulweighell: Nothing wrong with companies of all sizes as variety is the best way for evolution to progress. Smaller banks will cost customers more to use but that surely is their choice not a matter for central government interference.

seminoleabc: Shouldn't the Labour Party pay back its long overdue loan from the Coop before pensioners are raided?

bemusedofherts: I think the spokesman misspoke when he said clawback was for the remuneration committee…they are only a subcommittee and are responsible to the board. The Board should be taking the lead on this one, having fallen asleep for a year or three since the merger with Britannia. Now they need to get a grip and not just take the easy option of bail-in of bondholders.

CC: Co op group owns a huge amount of farms,  funeral business, etc etc all worth a lot more than what bondholders have got to cough up.   Bondholders could also start an action group and through the small claims court sue Marks and Richardson,  should they win the first couple of cases all bondholders could sue one by one.

bob228: Let the bank go into administration. The Co-op group would be the biggest loser as they own a 100% of the share capital of the bank. The shares would become worthless

CC: That could also hurt customers who have more than the amount the government guarantees in their accounts when a bank or building society goes bust. I did read once Co-op were the biggest farm owner in Great Britain…