INVITATION TO SETTLE

This letter is an invitation to settle all outstanding claims against BoS Group.

Ian Fraser’s article confirms that you are an LBG shareholder with aspirations to replace Eric Daniels — or ‘In Denials” as some now call him, due to his ability to “turn a deaf ear” to what you’ll find admirably covered elsewhere on Ian Fraser’s website. Also the debate into BoS Reading in Hansard, summarized in track number 3.

In this context, I’ll assume that you’re still in the dark about the many and various scandals by which Bank of Scotland stitched up its former customers. What you should know, however, is that unless “In Denials” has ordered the claims against BoS/LBG to be settled by the time you take his place, it will almost certaintly be one of the first tasks you face when you step into his shoes. Unless the matter is properly addressed, you’re going to be struggling to move the business forward!

It’s always a good time to clear the rubbish/settle claims incurred by a predecessor who you can blame. However, there’s a timing problem. Unless settlement is made before the public inquiry then you’ll have missed the opportunity to do it quietly won’t you?

Here’s a couple of things you really ought to be aware of:

1. The profile/history/nature of some of your, now, colleagues. The top news story this Christmas has been the failed bomb attack on the plane from Schiphol to Detroit and the need for better profiling of passengers. Are you profiling your managers? Could some now be “ticking-time bombs” for LBG?

2. The extent to which the current investigations into past wrongdoing by BoS and the associated negativity could tarnish your CV, especially if you do take over from “In Denials”.

Certainly, while you revisit the question of whether you really want to become chief executive, I suggest you regularly refer to Mr Fraser’s site, as he is one of the very few journalists to show any awareness or interest in wrongdoing by past and present BoS managers.

A version of this letter is being included in the submission for the public inquiry, hence the repetition of certain issues. This is so there can be no doubt that you have been invited to settle, rather than wasting time and further public money on an inquiry.

At the very least, your target of £1.5bn p.a. savings will surely have to take account of the “ticking-time bombs” to which I refer above, and currently also being posted here. I assume that “In Denials” has kept you in the loop about these. And if he hasn’t, your really need to find out why not.

I would contend that, in the end of the day, the long-term reputations both of yourself and of LBG will depend on whether you are prepared to offer commensurate compensation as a matter of urgency. You should be looking at this as a “win, win” situation, given that what you would save on legal fees would go straight to LBG’s bottom line and that, with a clean ship to sail, you’ll once again be free to move on as a respectable institution ….

You know it makes sense! It’s going to mean less management time wasted on “history” and that “your new tomorrow” can begin the day after “settlement day”!

A prosperous New Year to all who see the sense in this way of ending a near 20-year nightmare for the earliest casualties of bad regulation [“The Baker’s Dozen”].

If you need further evidence, or a positive discussion about any of this, please feel free to email me, in the first instance at cbrhq@hotmail.com.

Yours sincerely,

Alan Edwards