laughing all the way from the bank....

Fred soddin' Goodwin. The final nail in coffin for the myth rammed down our throats for years...... "To attract the top high flyers in management you have to pay the going rate". He leaves the bank with record losses and gets £650k p.a. pension aged 50 after the taxpayer saved the bank.

On the same day RBS announce billions of losses and the fact they will have to sack loads of staff he sticks two fingers up to everyone by stating he is not prepared to give a penny back. So much for the 'apology' to the select commitee a couple of weeks ago.

I ain't no left wing loon but the man has no morals whatsoever and he now joins the very short personal list of scumbag 'low lifes' who I will not feel in the least bit sorry for should they meet an untimely demise.

Gorgon and Darling screwed up when the board gave him his full pension 10 years early with no actuarial adjustment (unlike my wife who wants to retire a couple of years early and loses about 15% of her lump sum and pension to do so) because "they thought mistakenly as it turns out there was nothing the Govt could do about it at the time. Now it is probably too late. Nevertheless Goodwin had an ounce of decency he would do the right thing and give most of it back. No chance of that though given he has had his snout in the trough for so long he has become to arrogant to give a f*ck about anyone except himself.

Grrrrrr ( ( ( (

 

its a joke makes, my bloood boil

the same day rbs annouce 20 odd billion loss in one year aswell

 

probably walk into another top post when the dust settles

ought to be stripped of everything he owns, live by the sword, die by the sword.

 

Didn't they rob the money in the first place

remember the bank charges trail case, went through yesterday.</p>

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5gU4nxfhyJoP8nxPUpwHGBg79h_IQ</p>

Looks like the courts are passing the buck over to the officeof fair trading.. S) </p>

 

surley oft will say the charges are unfair ? and banks will after pay it back nt

 

As I have read it..

The board of RBS told the Treasury that they could not get out of the payments as they were a contractual right.

I'd have kept him on and then sacked the fecker for being **** at his job. And then he'd have got nowt...

 

RE: yerbut...

The banks have already said if they have to lower their charges for overdraft letters etc. they will end free banking and go back to monthly charges. So how is that fair? People who manage their money properly and don't go overdrawn without authorisation , don't bounce cheques etc have to subsidise people who regularly do and rack up 'unfair' charges. Bank wins either way - To**ers.

Regulation my ar*se!!

 

but in fact it seems that they were not a contractual right nt

 

Of course they win...it's stacked in their favour

Nationalise the feckers and have one state owned bank that operates as a fair bank, delivering loans mortgages etc.

 

Just dont pay it and let him sue the Govt

and we could all go to court as witnesses that he was a crap banker... if they fit in 6 witnesses a day he should have pegged out before any decisions are handed down

 

Yes, ergo, shock horror..

a group of city tossers lied!

 

RE: As I have read it..

Ah so I can go to work tomorrow, make a complete mess of everything and cost the company millions - watch the share price 'tank' - and then get a handsome payout to leave (rather than the sack without any compo).

Yeah ..... like THAT is going to happen!!

 

and a group of ministers and their lawyers missed it nt

 

RE: Of course they win...it's stacked in their favour

Funnily enough I was going to say that in my post. The other option is to re'mutualise' all those building societies that turned themselves into banks which is more or less the same thing except we have direct 'ownership' without the Govt cocking things up running banks the way they run the country.

 

Oh come off it!

If one man could cause the financial crises then he should have been earning a lot more than Fred Goodwin.

The man has been at RBS for some time and doesn't deserve to lose his pension.

He's just a convenient scape goat for the government and Gordon Brown to cover up that it was their lack of rules that caused the problem in the first place.

 

At the end of the day, that was the deal that was offered to him. He accepted. They now need to pay it.

Same situation; you get a bonus tomorrow of 10 grand, performance related & in your contract. The company then goes into administraion the day after & they give you a bell 'excuse me sir, would you mind giving that 10 grand back?'.

I don't blame him at all, I blame the muppets who offered it him in the first place.

 

Do you think his arrangements are reasonble?

He's been the KEY protagonist is his banks failure.

 

Re: Performance related....goes into administration the day after....

You have answered your own question. If it was performance related and it turns out the 'profits' were not real too true I would want it back. The bank which he headed basically committed 'fraud' by hiding the debts on the books.