Lloyds' HBOS compensation scheme faces scrutiny under new review

The new review will effectively scrutinise the Griggs Review, which was established in February 2017 after the criminal convictions of six individuals in connection to the HBOS Reading fraud.

Since the Griggs Review was established, the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Fair Business Banking says it has spoken to several individuals who said the Review is not delivering fair compensation and is "simply not fit for purpose".

The APPG says it has received complaints that the bank refuses to disclose any documentation or discuss the methodology and basis of decisions, is reliant on documentation that has been in the hands of proven fraudsters, and does not offer any appeal mechanism other than the courts.

Furthermore, the APPG says the bank has reneged on their promise to “cover reasonable fees for professional advice” by refusing to pay for forensic accountants' reports and not even waiting for their reports in some cases.

Additionally, a report produced by Jonathan Laidlaw QC found that the scheme was “defective”, based on a “flawed” methodology and “partial” to the bank’s interests.

Kevin Hollinrake MP, co-chair of the APPG on Fair Business Banking, said: “Sir Ross has good credentials and clearly possesses the legal ability and experience to conduct this review thoroughly. Whatever the outcome of this review, we must see all those individuals already considered by the Griggs Review to have access to the new Dispute Resolution Service. Justice must finally be done and be seen to be done for these individuals who have fallen victim to this fraud.

“The Terms of Reference must be strengthened for this to have any credibility. The parameters give no attention to whether the bank has disclosed adequate information to the actual victims of the fraud. This goes to the heart of the concerns raised about the Griggs Review: that Lloyds did not disclose to the victims the basis of decisions and the evidence used to reach a settlement.”