David Winch
Bartfields Forensic Accountants Ltd
Share this content

LIBOR and the integrity of the City of London

LIBOR and the integrity of the City of London

Isn't the main issue from the LIBOR furore that senior people at Barclays (whom one would expect to know what they are talking about) believed that over a lengthy period other banks - perhaps the majority of other banks - were submitting LIBOR figures which were misleading and did not represent genuine transaction rates of those banks.

In effect Barclays are saying they believed the generally quoted LIBOR rates were fiction.

What does that say for the integrity of the City of London?



Please login or register to join the discussion.

By bobhurn
05th Jul 2012 10:30

Fit & Proper


What about the assessment of the bank being fit & proper in respect of AML?  Is this an on-going assessment?  If so one would anticipate them having problems retaining registration.

Thanks (0)
05th Jul 2012 10:36

Not a lot!

I'm just disgusted. This will knock our recovery back, yet again.

Have we got to the situation where London is 'the place to be' for all tax dodgers and dodgy dealers?

Thanks (1)
05th Jul 2012 11:35

the whole thing is a nonsense

and as for the MPs on the select committee what a lot of self agrandising panjandrums - totally useless. surely there is a better choice between a judge led enquiry and this lot of fools. maybe the much maligned members of the upper house can bring some wisdom to this matter thro an all parliamentary committee. a judge led enquiry is to be resisted, they are encroaching on the legislature and not upto the job either - we need a new official body with a revolving membership to deal with fiascos such as these

Thanks (1)
05th Jul 2012 11:36

Politicians in awe of the money men ...

Basically once politicians begin grovelling to those in the city it is the start of an invidious culture that essentially will never be fixed

Of course these issues could be sorted out but not whilst the politicians are part of the problem rather than the part of the solution - after all a great many of them are looking for future jobs

A good start would be to implement a 5+ year ban on any politician working for business after their term of office - after all they are only being employed for their inside knowledge & lobbying ability rather than bringing anything constructive to the party

Once there is nothing in it for them then perhaps there will be no conflict of interest & they can address the fundamental issues rather than constantly prevaricating

In any event there would probably be a great deal of merit in clearing out all the politicians & starting again with a clean sheet

Thanks (1)
05th Jul 2012 11:47

@JC that really wont work and is unfair

back to the drawing board im afraid

Thanks (0)
05th Jul 2012 12:15

Lots of things are unfair in life ...


However, is it any more unfair than stealing from the electorate (expenses) and getting away with it.

Or penalising savers in favour of the feckless, or hitting pensioners with 20% income drop because of changed GAD rates and artificially fixed interest rates coupled with BOE encouraged inflation

But the point is transparency and if they know precisely what the rules are before being elected then it is their choice - if they don't like then don't stand for election - very simple

Which is an infinately better choice than given to pensioners who have had the rules changed after saving for 30/40 years

Oh - and I see politicians want to elect themselves a 4 day week as well as the summer recess - mmm .....?

Thanks (1)
05th Jul 2012 12:29

oh that old canard about their working hours

its a load of complete tosh, i am in favour of paying them more - i have absolutely no vested interest

i do agree that lifes unfair , and we have to get over it

i dont see why savers should earn a lot of interest of their savings

if a ban on future emplyment was in place the standard of MPs would be even less than 

it is now, an totally appalling thought




Thanks (0)
05th Jul 2012 13:43

explain ...

@carnmores - '.. old canard ..' - please explain

'.. i am in favour of paying them more  ..' - good idea - stuff pensioners & savers & pay MP's more - excellent, should go down a storm with the public

'.. lot of interest ..' - no; just a fair amount

Failing - Ban on future employment -

Encourages conflict of interest - why legislate against future employer (i.e. bank) Guess this is being advocated as yet another 'hidden' perk of the job along with expenses

Finally, just watch out because it's not just savings that the government is after - what about annual mansion tax and filtering it down to apply 4% to all houses irrespective of value. Would raise approx £40 bn pa, after all if savings are fair game then why not other assets such as houses & pensions - both potential cash cows!

Go the way of Argentina & Hungary & nationalise all private pensions - presumably this is a good idea as well?

Thanks (0)
05th Jul 2012 14:15

@jc...mansion tax is not a bad idea....

given that it is the economy and those working within it that has effectively funded the growth it seems only fair that those who have most benefited from it should pay something.  Afterall it is not because they have 'saved' hard to afford the house....it has been the property bubble that has made their house so valuable.


Unfortunately in the real world things have to be paid for and whilst you may feel that the remuneration package paid to MPs is obscene that is not in itself justification to pay state pension at a record beyond which we can afford ....there ain't enough money.





Thanks (0)
05th Jul 2012 14:20


It's not fair to say LIBOR rates were/are fiction.  They are just manipulated.  That's been the case for years and will probably be the case for many years to come.  It doesn't mean that LIBOR isn't fit for purpose.

Thanks (0)
06th Jul 2012 17:12

SFO investigation

The Serious Fraud Office have issued a statement saying:

"The SFO Director David Green QC has today decided formally to accept the Libor matter for investigation."

They don't say whether their investigation is limited to Barclays Bank.


Thanks (1)