This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Find out more here.

Lloyds eyes executive bonus clawback for PPI losses

  • Print
  • Comments (2)

Lloyds Banking Group is considering clawing back a portion of the bonuses paid out to senior executives because of the losses it will incur due to PPI misselling.

In remarks made at its annual shareholder meeting in Glasgow yesterday, chairman Sir Win Bischoff, said the bank was assessing whether the £3.2bn losses incurred by the misselling of  PPI should affect the pay of senior staff.

Bischoff said the bank’s decision to start refunding customers was “in the best interests of the long-term stability of the business”.

He added: “The implications for compensation are being considered by the remuneration committee and will be determined by the Board in due course.”

Senior executives including Eric Daniels, the former chief executive, Helen Weir, former head of retail, and Tim Tookey, finance director, could be among those potentially affected, the Financial Times reports.

No British bank is believed to have reclaimed bonuses since new “clawback” rules were introduced by the FSA last year. These rules stipulate that deferred awards should be reduced if the business suffers a material downturn in performance or fails to manage risk.

Lloyds announced earlier this month it had set aside £3.2 billion to cover the cost of PPI mis-selling compensation. After the British Bankers’ Association lost its High Court challenge to FSA guidelines on compensation, Lloyds said it would not back an appeal against the ruling.

The BBA later conceded defeat and announced it would not appeal.

  • Print
  • Comments (2)

Daily Email Updates
If you enjoyed this article, sign up to receive the latest news and analysis from Money Marketing.

Money Marketing Awards 2015
Put your firm forward as the leading practitioner in your field. Adviser and Advertising categories are open to entries - Enter Now.

Readers' comments (2)

  • If the bonus calculations included the number of complaints the bankers would be in deficit.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • That's fair Evan, as it may well be that their employers are in deficit, or they would not have needed us to bail them out.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your sayEdit my profile/screen name

You must sign in to make a comment

Fund Data

Editor's Pick


Do you see the value in adviser trade bodies?

Job of the week

Latest jobs

View all jobs

Most recent comments

View more comments