Comedy Animation: what good do bankers do?

Banks have been caught laundering money, and rigging Libor and energy markets. These are the acts of criminals, not just a matter of "mis-selling" to us consumers. So will our leaders now decide it's time to regulate them properly? So far they've been fined a fraction of the money they've made. Nobody important has been jailed.

Banks tell us: we pay lots in taxes; we create jobs; we'll leave for Hong Kong if you regulate us; blah blah blah.

You can read our point-by-point demolition of these false arguments in our earlier post: What does banking contribute to UK Plc? 7 myths exposed, and why we must rein them in

...or you can sit back and watch our 3-minute fact-based comedy animation...

Read More

What happened to all the Compassion?

2012 saw a series of coruscating reports on callous nurses in British hospitals. Criticism was heard in Westminster when an MP compared her hospitalised husband’s final days with those of a battery chicken. 

The Chief Nurse weighed in, as senior managers who find themselves in a sticky corner often do, calling for more measuring and targets. She announced that the "Five Cs" of nursing are to increase to "Six Cs", and will be measured. Care; Compassion; Commitment; Communication; Courage; Competence. Snarling nurses to be tamed by more Cs and more targets!

Among all the storm and stress a nurse speaking on a news programme made what is surely the key point: in recent decades compassion has shrivelled in Britain. Caring about the well being of our fellow Britons is not merely out of fashion, it is regarded as a game for mugs. To paraphrase an infamous tax dodger, "Compassion is for the little people".  To be precise, not "for" as in the beneficiaries of compassion, but "for" as the responsibility: it is for the little people to be compassionate.

Compassion is about empathising with the suffering of others. But in Britain, the greatest rewards - knighthoods, peerages, and tax breaks - are reserved for those who profit from the suffering of others. No group is more profitable and more targeted than the poorer Britons. From a vast medley take just three examples: the government cuts benefits for the working poor to pay for top-rate tax cuts; banks impose excessive penalty charges on the unauthorised overdrafts of those who run out of money; energy companies take a poverty premium from gas and electricity meter users too poor to be trusted with a quarterly bill.

Companies actively use incentives to drive compassion out of their staff at all levels. The FSA released a consultation stating that corruption has eaten its way down to junior staff. Martin Wheately, Managing Director of the FSA and CEO designate of the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA, which will take over from the FSA as the new financial services regulator), said in his speech to senior bankers at a Thomson Reuters Newsmaker event

“while public attention has been on the huge rewards on offer to the few, the effect of more modest rewards on the many needs to be dealt with….Incentive schemes on PPI were rotten to the core”

We looked at 22 firms of all sizes, including high street banks, building societies, insurance companies and investment firms.  And what we found is not pretty.  Most of the incentive schemes we looked at were likely to drive people to mis-sell to meet targets and receive a bonus

.. another firm allowed sales staff to earn a bonus of 100% of their basic salary for the sale of loans and PPI, but the bonus was only payable to those who had sold PPI to at least half their customers.”

Company directors and government ministers think their little thefts go unnoticed. Certainly they are less visible than a distressed patient lying on a hospital trolley. And yet they only go unnoticed because we ordinary Britons choose to see and forget, or simply to ignore them.

The impact of these little thefts is actually visible everywhere, not least in the effect on the children of poor families. The Children's Society's "Food for Thought" report from December 2012 states: 

"Currently in England, 1.2 million school age children in poverty are not getting free school meals – 700,000 of them are not even entitled to this key support."

• Nearly three quarters (72%) of teachers surveyed have experienced pupils coming into school with no lunch and no means to pay for one
• Nearly half (44%) of those surveyed found that children are often or very often hungry during the school day
• Two thirds (66%) of the teachers surveyed stated that staff provide pupils with food or money if they come into school hungry.

Teachers, some of the 'little people', are left to show compassion while the government lacks the compassion to pay for free meals. Regulators lack the compassion to take effective action against ripping-off by companies. And companies lack the compassion not to rip off a few pounds from those who can least afford the loss, leaving parents in the predicament of not being able to use those pounds to feed their children.

And so the absence of compassion goes on:

Rip-off energy bills condemn 27,000 people each year to die of cold:

The Hills Report on fuel poverty, published by the Department of Energy and Climate Change in March 2012, stated:

"From a health and well-being perspective: living at low temperatures as a result of fuel poverty is likely to be a significant contributor not just to the excess winter deaths that occur each year (a total of 27,000 each year over the last decade in England and Wales), but to a much larger number of incidents of ill-health and demands on the National Health Service and a wider range of problems of social isolation and poor outcomes for young people."
Final report of the Fuel Poverty Review, Professor John Hills

Retailers charging a poverty premium on the poorest:

The charities Save the Children and Family Action produced reports in 2010 and 2011 detailing how the poor pay more for the same stuff. 

It is a shocking injustice that the poorest families in the UK pay higher prices than better-off families for basic necessities like gas, electricity and banking. The costs that poor families bear in acquiring cash and credit, and in purchasing goods and services, can amount to a ‘poverty premium’ of around £1,000 – 9 per cent of the disposable income of an average-size family.

And lots more:

British companies chased profit at the expense of compassion. Businesses were ruined; drug cartels' money was laundered; doctors were bribed to prescribe dodgy drugs:

• British banks, censured by the FSA, faced paying billions in restitution for scamming businesses into Interest Rate Swaps.
• HSBC was forced to apologise to the US government for laundering drug money, putting profit before probity and the misery of drug abuse.
• GlaxoSmithKline was fined US$3billion for selling dodgy drugs and bribing doctors to prescribe them.

The HSBC case is a sadly common example. The bank was fined over US$1.2 billion for what the US Justice Department described as 

"stunning failures of oversight – and worse – that led the bank to permit narcotics traffickers and others to launder hundreds of millions of dollars through HSBC subsidiaries" ....

“HSBC’s blatant failure to implement proper anti-money laundering controls facilitated the laundering of at least $881 million in drug proceeds through the U.S. financial system."

When their compassion-less behaviour is pointed out, all the firms have the same answer: It happened a long time ago, and we are dealing with it. In relation to the money laundering, HSBC's CEO, Stuart Gulliver, stated 

"The HSBC of today is a fundamentally different organisation from the one that made those mistakes. Over the last two years, under new senior leadership, we have been taking concrete steps to put right what went wrong and to participate actively with government authorities in bringing to light and addressing these matters." 

HSBC's chairman of two years ago is the Reverend Lord Stephen Green (no, really, he actually is an ordained Anglican priest), who at the time of writing this post is a minister in the British government (I know, it is beyond parody. Reality threatens to drive us satirists out of business!).

The perpetrators of these compassion free acts don't go to jail. Fines are paid not by the perpetrators but by the shareholders. There are far more knighthoods and lordships, more Mercedes and Bentleys, more tax breaks, and more raw cash for the perpetrators of these compassion-less acts than among the nursing profession.

When I next find myself in a hospital trolley, I hope the nurses will show me compassion and kindness in spite of my irritable sarcastic nature which will no doubt be exacerbated by the discomfort and inconvenience.

But lack of compassion in hospitals is just a symptom. The core disease is the lack of compassion among the political and corporate leaders of Britain. And that is one disease that shows no sign of going away.

Read More

Former FSA boss Hector Sants joins Barclays as head of compliance

Chris puts KJ and Fee right...

BACKGROUND:
Former FSA boss Hector Sants joins Barclays as head of compliance
The former chief City watchdog is joining Barclays bank in a newly created role to overhaul the bank's compliance procedures following the Libor interest rate-rigging scandal and to rebuild its battered relationship with financial regulators. Stephen Gilchrist, head of City legal firm Saunders Law, said: "Appointing Hector Sants as head of compliance is a bit like Mary Queen of Scots appointing her executioner to represent her best interests. Talk about gamekeeper turned poacher." GUARDIAN

OUR RELATED STORIES:

The FSA's largest retail fine for scandalous mis-selling. The real scandal is the fine is so small compared to the scam

Criminal prosecutions for rigging LIBOR - will bankers finally see jail-time?

Read More

Rip-off News round-up. Our pick of the last week's media (Thu 13th December)

MPs will escape George Osborne’s pensions tax raid
Last week Osborne lowered the tax-free limit on lifetime pension pots to £1.25m. As an example, a male worker in the private sector has to save £1.44m to receive a £43,387 pension. An MP only has to save £867,740, so will not be affected by the change. Experts at Hargreaves Lansdown said the figures show the “historically generous” pensions awarded to MPs. TELEGRAPH
(...And the words “historically generous” show the “historically generous” language used by the experts to describe how our MPs spend eternity with their piggy faces in the trough.)

HSBC 'to pay $1.9bn' in US money laundering settlement 
The UK-based bank, Europe’s biggest, helped launder money belonging to drug cartels and terrorist states. A US Senate investigation found that laundering methods included transporting $7bn in notes from Mexico to the US, and servicing Saudi banks linked to terrorism. HSBC apologised, saying it would claw back pay from any executives involved. “Money laundering” is used to describe when the proceeds of crime are quietly handed to the criminals responsible. BBC NEWS
(...And at HSBC, “salary and bonus” is used to describe when the proceeds of the same crime are handed to HSBC’s executives.)

Rail travellers hit by 10% fares rise
Train operators were accused of deliberately burying this bad news on the day the Government’s handling of the West Coast Main Line franchise was criticised in two reports. The private rail industry relies on an annual £4bn of taxpayer subsidies. TELEGRAPH
(...and a team of sharp spin doctors.)

Which? says bank staff 'still push unsuitable products'
Major mis-selling scandals have failed to change bank behaviour. The Which? survey found 65% of bank sales staff said they were being placed under severe pressure by managers to hit targets. The banks have promised less emphasis on sales commissions that clearly incentivise mis-selling, in favour of better line management. BBC NEWS
("Sales commissions were the carrot. If we're just left with the stick, we're gonna use it." said our bank insider.)

Standard Chartered hit by $300m in Iran fines

Following investigations by US regulators, the UK-based bank has been fined $100m by the US Federal Reserve, and will also pay the US Department of Justice $227m. Standard Chartered moved more than $200m primarily on behalf of Iranian and Sudanese clients by removing information that would have revealed the payments. Once again, the US has successfully exposed as useless the monitoring procedures of a British bank. BBC NEWS

(...and the UK regulators.)

Tax row turns to Microsoft: over £1.7bn of UK online revenues, but zero tax
Microsoft is also accused of dodging $6.5bn in taxes in the US. The OECD said there is a “large and growing gap” between where companies conduct their business and where they record their profits. Low tax jurisdictions exploited by Microsoft include Ireland, Luxembourg, Puerto Rico and Singapore. TELEGRAPH

Buying a property is cheaper than renting in 90% of towns
Servicing an interest-only mortgage on the average property in Britain costs £1,080 less a year than the price of renting. It is more cost effective to 'own' rather than rent in 90% of the top 50 towns in Britain. Fierce tenant competition in 2012 enabled many landlords to raise their asking prices when letting their properties. DAILY MAIL

Read More

Government U-turn: payday loans will be capped

That's Cameron's plan... unless the lobbyists get in the way...

BACKGROUND STORY:
Payday loan firms face cap after government U-turn
Financial Conduct Authority to be given new powers to curb exorbitant interest rates charged on payday loans GUARDIAN



OUR RELATED STORIES:

With predatory companies on all sides, it costs an awful lot of money to be poor

Does giving the 1% greater rewards benefit everyone? Compare data for Britain and France to see this is not true

Read More

Liebrary: Is the UK national debt at a historical high? Actually it's lower than it has been for most of the last 300 years.

In the Autumn Statement of 2012 the chancellor’s idea of ‘more Austerity’ was not much of a surprise. To prove "we are all in it together" Osborne cut benefits for the poor and disabled and also cut pension savings allowances for the rich. 

Osborne hoped that nobody would notice that this takes money away from the poor immediately, but only reduces the incomes of the rich some time in the future when they retire to find their pensions aren't as large as they otherwise may have been. Though by that time the economy would have recovered and other wheezes will doubtless have been dreamed up to once again fatten up those elite pensions. 

Osborne decided that at the time of crisis the poor would have to make immediate sacrifices so that no significant contribution would be required from the rich in the form of higher income tax or a new wealth tax. Far from a making an extra contribution the wealthy have instead been given cuts in income tax and corporation tax. 

But is all this austerity for the 99% really the only option we have? This graph from a McKinsey report in 2010illustrates the lies we are being fed to justify the austerity.

Government debt is at a historical high.

The Treasury stated that in October 2012 government net debt was 67.9% of GDP. The McKinsey graph shows that far from being a high, for most of the last three centuries government debt has been much higher. Debt generally balloons during wars, when elites pour blood and treasure into protecting their own and snatching one another’s assets. Andy Haldane, executive director of the Bank of England, speaking to BBC Radio4 in December 2012 compared the economic impact of the current crisis with that of a world war:

“In terms of the loss of incomes and outputs, this is as bad as a world war….It would be astonishing if people weren’t asking big questions about where finance has gone wrong.” “If we are fortunate, the cost of the crisis will be paid for by our children. More likely it will still be being paid for by our grandchildren. There is every reason why the general public ought to be deeply upset by what has happened – and angry.”

Andy Haldane speaking to BBC Radio4’s The World at One programme, 3rd December 2012

Haldane compares the current situation as economically equivalent to a World War. So why not grow government debt to sort it out? The reason is 'real' wars were about the British elite fighting wars to maintain and grow its own wealth. For this the elite was prepared to spend much blood and treasure, borrowing whatever was needed. On the other hand the Credit Crisis is the result of the wealthy recklessly enriching themselves. Having pocketed the proceeds, they are happy to sit tight and ride out other people's austerity.

It is wrong to leave our debts to our children and grandchildren.

The McKinsey graph shows that as a nation we have always been paying off the debts of our ancestors. And our ancestors were paying off the debts of their ancestors. In any case, the objection to our children paying off our debts is not because they are so sweet and helpless. By the time they get round to coughing up they will be as gnarled and saggy as any other grown-up Briton. The objection is presumably that it isn't fair for them to pay for other peoples' mistakes. But that is already happening. In the words of the Governor of the Bank of England, Mervyn King:

"The price of this financial crisis is being borne by people who absolutely did not cause it…..Now is the period when the cost is being paid, I'm surprised that the degree of public anger has not been greater than it has."

Mervyn King, Governor of the Bank of England, in evidence to the UK Parliament’s Treasury Select Committee, March 2011.

Smokescreens are being thrown up by bankers and their beneficiaries in government claiming the credit crisis is all our faults. They claim that reckless lending by them could only happen if there was reckless borrowing by us. But if a building collapses because the well paid and professionally regulated architects and engineers put it up incompetently is it also the fault of the dead residents because they chose to live in it? If a drunk driver causes a motorway pile-up, is it also the fault of all the victims for choosing to be on the motorway at that time and place? If government regulated bankers, some of the most highly remunerated and therefore presumed competent professionals, say it is just fine to borrow is it our fault if we borrow?

It seems clear that politicians of all stripe, caring more for their paymasters than their constituents, see the crisis as an opportunity not to be wasted. The crisis has provided cover for reducing what is given to the 99% in the form of pay, pensions, benefits, and services including health (NHS) and security (police). It has also provided cover for the ongoing privatisation and outsourcing of services in the name of austerity.

Particularly in the last two decades the top 1% in Britain has taken an ever growing share of national income. They have done this more so than in any other major European nation. Having collected all the wealth, the last thing the wealthy would want to do is have to give any of it back. The second last thing would be to take on more debt to help the poor. 

http://g-mond.parisschoolofeconomics.eu/topincomes/ 

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Pages/news/2012/073.aspx

Referring to the Occupy Movement the above mentioned Andy Haldane, executive director at the Bank of England, commented:

“Occupy has been successful in its efforts to popularise the problems of the global financial system for one very simple reason:  they are right….I do not just mean right in a moral sense……For the hard-headed facts suggest that, at the heart of the global financial crisis, were and are problems of deep and rising inequality”

Andy Haldane’s speech, 29th October 2012

Getting out of the recessionary hole will need money to restart growth in the economy. This should come from a combination of taxes on wealthy individuals and companies, plus some borrowing. Cutting the incomes of ordinary Britons is just an opportunistic attempt at using the current crisis as a smokescreen to rip off the already ripped-off.

Read More

£40bn is held by Brits in Swiss bank accounts, free of UK tax

KJ, Chris and Fee wonder whether we'll ever get our hands on all the tax haven billions...

BACKGROUND: £40bn held in Swiss bank accounts by UK taxpayers
A breakthrough tax agreement with the Swiss government comes into force on 1 January 2013. It is hoped that this will flush out £5.3bn in extra tax over the next six years. The UK government admits it may not be able to pin down who, exactly, owns all the money in Swiss banks. It raises questions as to how much is held in other tax havens. Getting British taxes out of a tax haven that is a foreign country is a major achievement. BBC NEWS

OUR RELATED STORIES:

David Cameron wants to turn the UK into a tax haven

HMRC’s tax gap calculation is a gross underestimate

Read More

Rip-off News round-up. Our pick of the last week's media (Thu 6th December)

David Cameron ordered to stop saying NHS spending is up

David Cameron and Jeremy Hunt have been ordered to stop claiming that NHS spending has increased after the official statistics watchdog found health funds had fallen. The UK Statistics Authority issued the rebuke after upholding a complaint by Labour about statements by the Prime Minister and other senior Tories. TELEGRAPH
(Blimey. If the UK Stats Authority keeps this up, our beloved leaders won’t be able to utter a word ever.)

Osborne bashes benefits: Increases capped at just ONE PER CENT

The Chancellor’s Autumn Statement means working age benefits will no longer rise in line with inflation, with 60% of families affected. Amid grim economic forecasts, Osborne was forced to admit he had failed to meet his own targets for getting a grip on Britain's debt. A wide range of other changes to tax and spending were announced. But he did say that 'Those with the most should contribute the most, and they will.' DAILY MAIL

(Those with the most should contribute the most, eh? We always thought you were a dangerous left-wing subversive, Mr Osborne.)

£40bn held in Swiss bank accounts by UK taxpayers

A breakthrough tax agreement with the Swiss government comes into force on 1 January 2013. It is hoped that this will flush out £5.3bn in extra tax over the next six years. The UK government admits it may not be able to pin down who, exactly, owns all the money in Swiss banks. It raises questions as to how much is held in other tax havens. Getting British taxes out of a tax haven that is a foreign country is a major achievement. BBC NEWS

(...and getting British taxes out of a tax haven that is a British dependency – which most of them are – is nigh on impossible!)

Top 10% of households are 850 times wealthier than the bottom 50%

A report by the Office for National Statistics reveals that the bottom 50% of households in Britain have just £4,400 of cash, property and pensions compared to the £1.2m held by the top 10%. The total wealth of the UK, including pensions, property and savings, is £10.3tn. The bottom 50% of households own less than one tenth of that, and the wealthiest 10% own 43.8%. GUARDIAN

Loss of income caused by banks as bad as a 'world war', says Bank of England
The financial crisis has been as economically devastating as a world war and may still be a burden on “our grandchildren”, said top Bank of England official Andrew Haldane. He added that public anger at the banks was fully justified and that pay in the industry remained too high. Banks remain one of the major impediments to the recovery because they need to own up to their bad debts to restore confidence and get credit flowing again. TELEGRAPH

(“...Yet most bank executives remain in their jobs? Ve had to run away to Argentina!” said one mystery caller with a strong German accent.)

8 supermarkets sign up to "fairer special offers", but Asda says it could make rip-offs easier
Asda pointed to one of the rules: retailers cannot discount a product for longer than it’s been on show for the higher price. While this is meant to prevent "permanently on sale" offers, it actually encourages a better rip-off: you can sneakily establish a price for a couple of days solely to drop it for the weekend. Tesco, Sainsbury's, Waitrose, Morrisons, Marks & Spencer, Aldi, the Co-op and Lidl have agreed to incorporate the new rules. GUARDIAN
(Said the other 8 supermarkets: “We also found the new rules devilishly confusing,.. but signed the moment Asda cleared things up for us!”)

'Delusional and dishonest': Ex-HBOS bank chief accused of “living in cloud cuckoo land” over bank's near collapse

At the hearing of the Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards the former HBOS chairman Lord Stevenson was “evasive, repetitive and unrealistic.” It was also revealed that he had assured the City watchdog that his bank was “as secure” as it could be – just six months before it collapsed. Lord Stevenson of Coddenham said he felt “awful” about the bank’s fall and revealed that he thought about it most days. MIRROR

(...whilst on the other days he counted his millions.)

Read More

Osborne will miss his tax & spend fiscal targets

...and Cameron is not happy...

UK 'could face austerity until 2018'
The chancellor may have to extend the squeeze on public spending until 2018 if the recent deterioration in growth prospects and tax receipts turns out to be permanent.The Institute for Fiscal Studies said George Osborne may then have to find another £11bn from tax rises or spending cuts, or miss one of his fiscal targets for 2015. BBC NEWS

OUR RELATED STORIES:

The policy of giving to the rich and taking from the poor is the cause of the crisis, not the solution

Read why the IMF is calling for an immediate end to austerity programmes

Read More

Supermarket sales tactics may be rip-offs, but they are legal says the Office of Fair Trading

In January 2012 the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) launched an investigation on “Retail food pricing and promotional practices”. The investigation was closed on 30^thNovember 2012, when  the OFT courageously announced

“The OFT has made no finding that the supermarkets have breached the law or were engaging in misleading promotional practices.”

That the supermarkets did not breach the law is not a surprise. British consumer protection law in the form of the “Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations” is a charter for rip-offs. The law explicitly states that deception is perfectly legal so long as it only deceives the less than average consumer. 


Incredibly it is also explicitly legal under this law for a trader to knowingly engage “in a commercial practice which contravenes the requirements of professional diligence” so long as his actions are not “likely to materially distort the economic behaviour of the average consumer with regard to the product under regulation”.  Blimey! 

But while the law only protects the more than average half of Britons, the Office of Fair Trading provides detailed guidance so even the most brutishly stupid retailer will understand how to skirt around consumer protection law if he is so inclined. A kind of 'no retailer left behind' scam tutorial.

To help the dimmer retailers OFT's guidance provides pictures to make sure retailers don't need a moral compass to navigate the law. The law identifies 31 practices that are banned under all circumstance. But apart from those 31, anything goes so long as it only hits the 'less than average'.

Although the above graphic from the OFT's "Guidance on  the Consumer  Protection from Unfair Trading  Regulations  2008" states that it is "Unfair if they cause consumers to take a different decision", the law itself clarifies that this only protects the "average" consumer as stated in these extracts from the legislation: 

• A commercial practice is unfair if…..it materially distorts or is likely to materially distort the economic behaviour of the average consumer with regard to the product. 
• A commercial practice is a misleading action if…. it causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise. 
• A commercial practice is a misleading omission if, in its factual context…. it causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise. 

In short, if only the less than average consumer – amounting to half the targeted customers – is tricked then that is fine.

Further help for the fraudulently inclined is provided in the OFT roadmap below. Our annotations on this OFT roadmap for retailers on how to tell "Is the Practice Unfair" are in RED:

It is rather touching that the OFT can't bring itself to say the practice is "FAIR", only that it is "NOT UNFAIR" and therefore legal.

We have written about this phenomenon in banking, insurance, pensions, energy, transport, mobile phones, and now supermarkets. So back to the Supermarkets investigation. In its conclusion the OFT proudly trumpeted:

“Eight supermarkets have agreed to a set of OFT principles to address concerns over special offers and promotions for food and drink.”

Sounds promising? So when do these principles come into force? And how harshly will they be enforced?  The OFT is helpful here too, but not to us ripped-off Britons, stating:

“The principles do not 'come into force' on any particular date. They clarify existing guidance and should not be seen as rules with an implementation date.”

So the eight supermarkets have simply said they will stop ignoring what the OFT has already been saying. 

What is truly revealing is not that the supermarkets pull off stunts to rip us off. Not much surprise there. What is truly revealing is these stunts, even when put under the regulatory microscope by the OFT, are found to be legal!

As we have pointed out in previous posts, British law regards Britons as the lawful prey of businesses. The law regards us rather as a gamekeeper regards pheasant and grouse: we are worth protecting because we make such good eating. The law is happy for us to be ripped off so long as it is only the ‘less than average’ half of us that are the victims. It is the law of the jungle. 

However, the law of the jungle has a benefit. It makes species stronger by natural selection.

Consumer law does not make anybody stronger. The law refusing to protect the 'less than average' simply unleashes rippers-off, licencing them to rip off the vulnerable. By allowing retailers to rip us off it gives a competitive advantage to them over retailers who are honest. Driving honest retailers out of business. Making the 'retailing species' more corrupt.

To be fair to the OFT they just enforce the law created by Parliament. If the law says it is legal, then it is the law that is the problem.

Read More