Banks: Forgery Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate

Baroness Blower

Main Page: Baroness Blower (Labour - Life peer)
Thursday 30th June 2022

(2 years, 4 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Lord Sharpe of Epsom Portrait Lord Sharpe of Epsom (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, that characterisation of the situation is not entirely fair. The NECC is reviewing the evidence submitted to it by the campaign groups. We cannot comment further at this stage, recognising the NECC’s operational independence. Once it has finished its review, it will communicate its findings. The noble Lord referred to the 26 lever-arch files; these actually contain 10,000 pages of evidence in seven staggered submissions, the last set of which was delivered in March 2021. This was subsequently referred to the various subject-matter experts at the SFO and the FCA. These are complex matters and they take time.

Baroness Blower Portrait Baroness Blower (Lab)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, in the case of Lynch v Cadwallader & Anor in February 2021, the High Court ruled that Aldermore, a bank, cannot enforce a personal guarantee to cover £1.2 million against a businessman because the signature on the document was not his. The court said that it was signed by a “person at the Bank”. Could the Minister explain why this did not trigger any investigation or prosecutions?

Lord Sharpe of Epsom Portrait Lord Sharpe of Epsom (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am afraid that I cannot; I am not familiar with the case. As I said, we maintain that the NECC should have operational independence, so I am afraid that I cannot enlighten the noble Baroness any further. I neglected to answer the noble Lord’s request for a meeting; there have been a number of meetings with Home Office officials, but I would of course be happy to meet him.