Davis v Lloyds Bank Plc

Davis v Lloyds Bank Plc

The Claimant did not make a DISP Complaint as defined by the FCA Handbook, as his communications did not express dissatisfaction about the provision of a financial service causing him loss. Consequently, he did not satisfy the statutory precondition for a claim for breach of statutory duty. Even if a DISP Complaint had been made, the Defendant was not bound by the DISP rules to assess the complaint in accordance with the terms of the Review Agreement, which was a separate, non-statutory, and confidential arrangement between the bank and the FCA, not incorporated into the DISP regime.

Parties
Claimant: Mr Clive Richard Davis; Defendant: Lloyds Bank plc
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Financial Services / Preliminary Issues Determination
Outcome
Claim dismissed at preliminary issue stage; no trial to proceed.
Legal Topics
Breach of Statutory Duty, FCA Handbook DISP Rules, Interest Rate Hedging Products, Customer Redress Schemes
Financial Services Law Banking Law Statutory Interpretation Breach of Statutory Duty FCA Handbook DISP Rules Interest Rate Hedging Products Customer Redress Schemes

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Clive Richard Davis

Claimant

Lloyds Bank plc

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Financial Services / Preliminary Issues Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the Claimant make a complaint for the purposes of the FCA Handbook DISP rules in relation to the sale of the interest rate hedging products?
  2. 2 If so, was the Defendant bound by statutory duties under DISP 1.4.1R to assess the Claimant’s purported complaint in accordance with the terms of the Review Agreement with the FCA?

Ratio Decidendi

The Claimant did not make a DISP Complaint as defined by the FCA Handbook, as his communications did not express dissatisfaction about the provision of a financial service causing him loss. Consequently, he did not satisfy the statutory precondition for a claim for breach of statutory duty. Even if a DISP Complaint had been made, the Defendant was not bound by the DISP rules to assess the complaint in accordance with the terms of the Review Agreement, which was a separate, non-statutory, and confidential arrangement between the bank and the FCA, not incorporated into the DISP regime.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed at preliminary issue stage; no trial to proceed.

Orders

  • Claimant is not entitled to bring the claims set out in the Amended Particulars of Claim.
  • No order for trial; proceedings concluded.