Co-op Bank to be probed and probed

co-op bank Will the probes have a bearing on the value of the bank?

The announcement by the prime minister that there will be an inquiry, into the near collapse of Co-op Bank and the appointment of Paul Flowers as chairman, feels like quite a big moment.

It would be an independent inquiry, arranged by the Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA), and ordered by the Chancellor, under powers George Osborne obtained in the 2012 Financial Services Act.

And of course, as and when it happens, it would involve the participation of the Financial Conduct Authority.

Nor would this be the only probe.

There is the police investigation of Paul Flowers' conduct.

And I also understand that the Financial Conduct Authority is evaluating whether to launch a formal "enforcement" investigation of events at Co-op Bank - to assess whether in the last few years, as it careered down a path to near ruin, it broke the financial rules.


None of this is designed to cheer up those working for Co-op Bank or its owner, Co-op Group.

It could be a bit destabilising (ahem) for the current fevered attempts to rescue Co-op Bank.

As you will recall. Co-op Bank is in the last stage of this recovery plan.

It involves holders of £1.3bn of Co-op Banks' bonds and preference shares putting around £1bn of new loss-absorbing equity capital into the bank, by converting their current investments into ordinary shares and new bonds.

Perhaps most importantly in all of this, it involves a group of hedge funds putting in £125m of extra cash for additional ordinary shares.

Here is the point.

It is very difficult to know what the three probable official probes would uncover about wrongdoing at and by the bank.

There could be fines. There could be abuses that made the bank vulnerable to civil prosecution.

Or to put it another way, the investigation could have a bearing on the value of the bank.

Change clause

So if you are a hedge fund that has agreed to invest £125m in the bank, you may feel a little bit queasy - because the shares you would be buying may not be worth as much as you thought they were worth, before the prime minister announced there would be a formal investigation.

The hedge funds may therefore be thinking that they would like to renegotiate the terms of that £125m investment.

Now my sources tell me that the hedge funds can't do that. I am told the hedge funds have given irrevocable undertakings to do the deal, and that what David Cameron said in the House of Commons would not trigger a material adverse change clause.

So perhaps Co-op Bank will continue to bump along towards its phoenix-like rebirth, which the PRA has said must be completed by 31 December. As I understand it, Co-op Group thinks that is what will happen.


The alternative, you will remember, is takeover by the Bank of England, in a process called resolution, which would protect depositors savings, keep the bank's essential functions running smoothly and heap losses on the bond holders.

Whatever happens to the ownership of the bank, it will be under the cloud of investigation for many months.

That independent investigation that the chancellor will order would be very lengthy. And, under the law, it cannot start until the police and FCA enforcement probes decide whether the law and City rules have been breached.

PS: Here is an interesting dilemma for Co-op Bank and City regulators.

On the Co-op Bank board as a non-executive director is a former executive of Royal Bank of Scotland and Abbey National called Graeme Hardie.

He is that rare thing therefore on that board: a proper banker.

Now Hardie was appointed to the board in February 2013, when Flowers was still chairman of the board.

But Hardie has a bit of history with Mr Flowers and with Co-op Bank - because he was an advisor to the Financial Services Authority, the now defunct regulator, and he was involved in interviewing Flowers in 2010, when the Co-op Bank wanted to promote Flowers from non-executive director to chairman.

He was, in the words of sources, involved in the process of the FSA approving the appointment of Mr Flowers.

So knowing what we now know about Mr Flowers, some would say it is a bit odd that Hardie sits on Co-op Bank's board.

I am told, however, that the regulators like him being there, because he knows about banking, even though he was one of those in 2010 who failed to prevent the promotion of Flowers.

UPDATE 16:10

I know a bit more about the hedge funds' material adverse change clause in the Co-op Bank rescue deal.

Apparently, they can only refuse to put the additional £125m of cash into Co-op Bank if creditors fail to vote for conversion of Co-op Bank's £1.3bn of bonds and prefs into shares and new bonds.

So they don't have a lot of leverage to improve the terms of the deal.

As for scuppering the rescue altogether, that doesn't look altogether rational - because hedge funds' significant investment in Co-op Bank bonds might well be wiped out in those circumstances (though it would not necessarily be wiped out altogether; they might still be able to convert their bonds into shares, I am told).

Robert Peston Article written by Robert Peston Robert Peston Economics editor

Britain's soggy future?

The Bank of England's chief economist, Andy Haldane, tells the BBC that there's a risk that long term growth in the UK, and other developed economies, will be "soggier than it has been in the past"

Read full article

More on This Story


This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
  • rate this

    Comment number 400.

    It appears that the people getting chosen for non-exec positions at the Coop were a bunch of cronies. Unite and the Labour Party are in much the same position. They are all membership organisations but not very many members get actively involved. This gives the space for the cronies to get in and take over. I am sure that they mean well when they start - but Stalin also meant well at the start

  • rate this

    Comment number 399.

    Flowers did not run the Coop Bank. He was a non-executive chairman. He was a methodist minister. That was his job and he was a town councillor. He did not run the bank. He was just a figurehead, a non executive director. A comparison is with a University Chancellor, who is just a figurehead, and is rarely at the University. The University is run by the Vice Chancellor which is full time job.

  • rate this

    Comment number 398.

    the delicious irony of the Co-Ops demise (and it will not recover) is the unabashed schadenfreude it engaged in towards its troubled competitors back in 2008
    "Good with money" say the in branch signs...........clearly not
    Stones ,.....,glass houses and all that
    Good riddance to the Co-op bank you smug, self important, hypocrite of an institution

  • rate this

    Comment number 397.

    I understand that the Movement's turnover after 170 years is still less than 1.25% of the UK GDP and will remain at that pathetic level until such time that it grows up and ceases being a "Political Poodle Lapdog".

  • rate this

    Comment number 396.

    In sham-democracy, Co-op wrongly presumed 'healthy enough'. No Coalition credit in 'deficit-cut': NOT by real employment & tax-take but by 'stitches saved' that 'made in time' would have 'saved nine', costing productivity & morale, piling problems for future, lucky in long-debt from Labour prudence & 'lucky' in market-preference created by the 2010 electioneering panic that trashed EU more than UK

  • rate this

    Comment number 395.


    It's getting a bit cringeworthy watching you mould figures to your opinion, I gave you top level data, the hard facts, and you change your tune. I certainly gave you the evidence you asked for.

  • rate this

    Comment number 394.

    We are the progeny of their misogyny
    Misandrists, raging and righteous we become
    Misandry meets misogyny
    That is banking, politics and mankind summed up in short.....
    Well I never!
    Was there ever
    A Cat so clever
    As Magical Mr. Mistoffelees!”

  • Comment number 393.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 392.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • rate this

    Comment number 391.

    Please spare a thought for the thousands who work for the co-op bank. I know how hard these 'ordinary' people work, how the ethics of the co-op were so important to them. Now they are terrified of losing their jobs. These workers didn't create the problems, but are suffering terribly because of them. What can they do? I'll tell you - get up, go to work and hope against hope for a positive change.

  • rate this

    Comment number 390.

    "It's good that the defecit is reducing, doesn't mean I trust the tories any more than I trusted Labour, which wasn't an awful lot"

    Thats funny I thought we were still running a massive deficit and the debt was spiralling out of control.

    Which is what the actual figures show.

    Still. George can always go back to folding towels at Selfridge's and his other long term interests.

  • rate this

    Comment number 389.

    The leaked memo from inside Labour which said that Ed Balls was a nightmare is absolutely correct. He was an education minister not an economist and it shows and what's more rather than admit that he got it wrong on the economy he closes his eyes and repeats 'there is no recovery' ad nauseum. So of course he won't change tack and their image will get even worse.

  • rate this

    Comment number 388.

    "Labour have done nothing but smear people, that's what they do, the Tories have no need to smear people they are much better behaved than the left."

    Better behaved !!!!!!!! I'm guessing you are about 16 if you believe that or, by the amount of time you have spent posting, work in Tory Central Office. This government alone has smeared profession after profession and whole groups of people.

  • rate this

    Comment number 387.

    Fact 1. Co-op and labour Transparent about party funding, no wrongs there.Fact 2. Co-op trying it's best to run an ethical bank, even with this "Smear" is probably more ethical than All the main banks in UK.
    Fact 3. This is about one person doing a Coke deal, as if the Billions of damage the none ethical banks have conned out of people (PPI etc) is OK? Fact 4. Party Politics nothing to do with it

  • rate this

    Comment number 386.


    Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander - true.

    But list the actual prosecutions and the discussion gets quieter.

    People are angry because Cameron DIDN'T go after any of his paymasters, who plunged us into absolute chaos and had to be bailed out to the point of possibly causing national extinction. Still might cause it.

    But he might well go after the Co-op.


  • rate this

    Comment number 385.

    383 toast Labour have done nothing but smear people, that's what they do, the Tories have no need to smear people they are much better behaved than the left.

    The left always behave as if they are squeaky clean but the truth will always 'out

  • rate this

    Comment number 384.

    Labour were very close to the Co-op Bank and Ed Balls and Ed Milliband very close, anyone says they didn't know what was going on is ridiculous and the Labour Party have done nothing but smear people since they came into office. They are a bunch of pathetic hypocrites and to see Ed Milliband looking like a schoolboy caught pinching the biscuits is adding insult to injury along with the BBC.

  • rate this

    Comment number 383.

    "382 Hi covo
    What's Andy Coulson got to do with Ed Milliband's dodgy dealing with the Co-op"

    It is to show people on here that the Tories are just as bad if not worse. You want me to name some other dodgy blokes the Tories have had dealings with over the last few years? They don't get any worse than this Coulson character!

    There has to be a balanced view, get over it!

  • rate this

    Comment number 382.

    380 Hi toast,

    What's Andy Coulson got to do with Ed Milliband's dodgy dealing with the Co-op. The Labour has a list of people it has smeared, Lord McAlpine being the worst and Andrew Mitchell also sleazy, so great big pots and kettles

  • rate this

    Comment number 381.

    From prior experience, the material adverse change clause is not triggered by having an enquiry. It may be however if the enquiry were to find that the health of the bank is far lower than that assumed, for example if asset quality were materially overstated. So far there is no indication of this. Soft loans to the Labour Party are embarrassing, and not arms length transactions.


Page 1 of 20



BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.