RBS faces at least £125m cost for IT failure

RBS faces at least £125m cost for IT failure

Clifford Chance is carrying out independent review for the bank

Article comments

Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) has revealed in its half year results that it will suffer losses of at least £125 million as a result of the recent IT failure that impacted millions of its customers.

It told investors that the sum will “principally cover customer redress”, such as waiver of interest and charges, but additional costs may arise once all business disruption items are clear. It said that more detail will be provided in its Q3 results.

RBS has also informed Computerworld UK that law firm Clifford Chance is providing “external counsel” on what went wrong and will carry out an independent review.

The results warned of the potential legal challenges it may face going forward.

The bank said: “The incident, the group’s handling of the incident and the systems and controls surrounding the processes affected, are the subject of regulatory enquiries (both from the UK and Ireland) and the group can become a party to litigation.”

“In particular, the group could face legal claims from those whose accounts were affected and could itself have claims against third parties.”

In July, millions of RBS customers couldn’t gain access to funds in their bank accounts after a botched upgrade that was made to batch processing software CA 7 from CA Technologies, which impacted some accounts for more than a month.

It was revealed that it was RBS’ Edinburgh-based IT staff that were responsible for the systems failure, which contradicted earlier media reports that claimed a junior IT worker based in India had made the error.

It has since been said that city regulator the Financial Services Authority (FSA) is preparing to tell UK banks to upgrade their outdated IT systems, but is waiting to hear the full details of what went wrong.

RBS’ chief executive Stephen Hester has said that the banking group may have avoided the major IT glitch if it had focused more on keeping its existing systems up-to-date, rather than developing new systems.

“RBS has seen a big mushrooming in spending on technology. With hindsight maybe a bit more of that increase in spend should have been in the core, taken-for-granted systems that work every day,” said Hester.

“Some of our focus was on the new things people want.”

Share:

Comments

  • AndyJ The article makes a point of highlighting that the human error that caused the failure was perpetrated by UK staff and not offshoreUltimately we dont know the complete circumstances but I think it is worth pointing out that with off shoring typically UK based staff are paired back to the absolute minimum or some might say below what is acceptable The result is the remaining staff typically are covering a wider remit with less time available to take the necessary due diliegence checks that was once a given before the cost cutting and offshoring The rush to cut costs and a general missunderstanding of what is involved in supporting complex systems by managers who have less and less IT technical skills or IT risk awareness lead to more and more catastophic failures The cost of the catastophies and loss of reputation will result in boards requiring more control over their IT departments This in turn will result in a desire for managers with an understanding of IT systems and the concepts of quality and risk rather than managers who are primarily focussed on cost Regulatory and audit processes will no doubt be significantly improved to ensure that outsource and offshoring is better governed This will put up the price of these services and impact the cost model
Advertisement
Send to a friend

Email this article to a friend or colleague:


PLEASE NOTE: Your name is used only to let the recipient know who sent the story, and in case of transmission error. Both your name and the recipient's name and address will not be used for any other purpose.


We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. If you continue to use this site, we'll assume you're happy with this. Alternatively, click here to find out how to manage these cookies

hide cookie message

ComputerworldUK Knowledge Vault

ComputerworldUK
Share
x
Open
* *