RBS paid tax on Goodwin's £2.7m lump sum | Business | The Guardian Close This article is 7 years old A new row erupted over the pension for Sir Fred Goodwin today when MPs were told the former Royal Bank of Scotland chief executive had taken a £3m lump sum from his £16.9m pension pot – and the bank had paid 40% tax on the payment. The City minister, Lord Myners , told the Treasury select committee that the board of RBS was "in denial" and had "bent over backwards" to be generous to Goodwin, its departing chief executive, last October when the bank was on the brink of collapse. Myners revealed that Goodwin had agreed to repay the lump sum, provided his pension entitlement was increased. It later emerged that the exact sum withdrawn was £2.7m, at a cost to RBS of £4.5m when the tax payment is taken into account, and that Goodwin had not yet returned the sum because there was no agreement with the Revenue that he would not be liable for tax.

Myners, who was accused by MPs of being "bloody naive", revealed more details of Goodwin's "extraordinary" pension agreements. The bank treated Goodwin as though he had joined the pension scheme at the age of 20, rather than at 40 when he actually joined. None of his pension savings from previous employers were included in the scheme and 50-year-old Goodwin was allowed to choose his 12-month earnings figure from the best year in the previous decade. Documents released by the committee show that Peter Cummings, the HBOS executive who ran the division which caused record-breaking losses at the bank, has also been allowed to retire immediately even though he is only 53. He is receiving £352,000 a year after HBOS, now part of Lloyds Banking Group, treated departing executives as if they were made "redundant". Myners, facing hostile questions from the committee, insisted that the doubling of the pension for Goodwin to £703,000 a year was taken by the board of the bank and not by him.

The City minister has had a high-­profile battle with Goodwin , calling on him to hand back some of the extra pension which, he argues, the bank did not need to pay. Myners told MPs: "I still hope there's the opportunity for Sir Fred to do the right thing and either return some of his pension or make a very, very substantial and long-term commitment to charity both of money and of his undoubted energy and resources. Sir Fred can mitigate even at this stage." Myners, who was on the board of NatWest when RBS launched a hostile take­over bid 10 years ago, said RBS was warned by the remuneration consultants Watson Wyatt that the decision to double Goodwin's pension pot to £16m would not be approved by the bank's shareholders. "I think it is quite outrageous that a man who led a bank into the largest banking failure ever, a bank that depends on public support, should see a departing executive drawing a weekly pension of £13,000. "It does give an overall picture of a board of directors bending over backwards to be generous to Sir Fred. There was a real sense of denial at that time.

I was dealing with people who for the first time were realising the serious state of affairs," he said. He said he had been told during the weekend of 11-12 October when the bailout was being orchestrated that the non-executive directors would resign if chairman Sir Tom McKillop was forced to leave as well as Goodwin. Myners also said that Bob Scott, the non-executive director who had handled negotiations with Goodwin, had suggested they could "spread out" the disclosure of Goodwin's full pension. Myners insisted he had no regrets about how he handled himself over that weekend. "I developed a script for these meetings … There should be no rewards for failure, payments to departing executives should be minimised." But the Conservatives insisted he had failed in his duties to the taxpayer. The shadow chancellor, George Osborne, said: "Gordon Brown appointed Lord Myners to look after the taxpayers' interest and to keep an eye on the banks.

He has completely failed to do that and it is the taxpayer who is paying the price." North Yorkshire and Merseyside council pension funds are suing Sir Fred Goodwin and Royal Bank of Scotland Published: 16 Mar 2009 How Sir Fred Goodwin walked away with £693,000 a year for life - Telegraph Financial Crisis How Sir Fred Goodwin walked away with £693,000 a year for life Lord Myners had been in the Government for just four days when he was chosen as the hit-man who would get rid of the executives responsible for the meltdown of Britain's banking system. Fred Goodwin has now been stripped of his knighthood Photo: DANIEL JONES By Robert Winnett, Deputy Political Editor 8:00AM GMT 27 Feb 2009 The newly-minted City minister was told that Sir Fred Goodwin, the chief executive of Royal Bank of Scotland and previously one of the Prime Minister's closest allies, was top of the blacklist.

On October 7 last year Sir Fred was duly summoned to a private meeting in the Treasury, together with his chairman Sir Tom McKillop, where Lord Myners calmly but firmly told them they would both be leaving RBS under the terms of a £50 billion Government recapitalisation of the banks. A shellshocked Sir Fred later described the meeting as a "drive-by shooting", but any hopes he might have had of rescuing his career were dashed when the Daily Telegraph reported the following day that both he and Sir Tom would be pushed out of the bank under the terms of the Government bailout. A furious Sir Fred initially issued a denial of the story, but he knew his banking career was finished. All that was left was to negotiate the terms of his exit from RBS. Sir Tom and Bob Scott, a non-executive director of RBS, were charged with negotiating Sir Fred's departure. Related Articles Sir Fred Goodwin's letter defending his pension 26 Feb 2009 Under the terms of the chief executive's contract, Sir Fred was entitled to a year's severance pay and money in lieu of his bonuses. In total, the pay-off was worth well over £1m.

However, Lord Myners, and other Government ministers, were desperate to avoid the embarrassment of the disgraced banker receiving a multi-million pound bonus. The discussions of the RBS executives during the fateful week will now prove crucial to the growing calls for a full explanation of the Government's conduct. It is possible that RBS could have dismissed their chief executive. Given the scale of the problems that have now emerged at the bank, this would have seemed reasonable. However, instead, the RBS executives decided to draw up a "compromise agreement". Sir Philip Hampton, the new chairman of RBS, said yesterday that the Government was a party in the negotiations of this compromise deal. The agreement that was hammered out during the course of the week would mean that Sir Fred would waive his rights to the severance pay and bonuses. Crucially, however, he would be able to retire ten years early - when he was 50. He had conveniently celebrated his 50th birthday less than two months before. The early retirement on offer meant that he would receive £693,000 every year until he died.

The value of the scheme was £16.9m - compared to £8.4m if he had to wait to receive the money until his 60th birthday. It was far more lucrative than the pay and bonus package but was also far more discreet - or so it seemed at the time. On the evening of Saturday October 11th, Sir Tom and Mr Scott again met with Lord Myners and showed him the compromise agreement. Senior banking sources said last night that it would have been clear to most people that what was being offered was an early retirement deal - and therefore was clearly at the discretion of the bank. However, sources close to Lord Myners dispute this version of events. They claim that the RBS executives presented the deal as a contractual obligation. The Treasury refuses to reveal whether Lord Myners took his own advice or even questioned the decision. If not, he will face serious questions over his competency as a minister charged with key negotiations with billions of pounds of taxpayers' money. Whether the minister, who had been in position for just over a week, discussed the terms of the deal with Mr Darling or Mr Brown is also far from clear.

However, the RBS executives left the meeting with Lord Myners believing that the minister had given his approval to the deal. On Sunday October 12th, it is understood that Sir Fred signed the agreement. More than six RBS executives are also said to have signed off the deal. Sir Fred's intention to resign was announced on Monday morning. RBS and the Government appeared to have pulled off the coup of getting rid of Sir Fred with minimum fallout - until last week. Officials at UK Financial Investments, a Treasury body set up to manage the taxpayers' shareholdings in various banks, were studying tens of thousands of documents about RBS's finances. The bank was preparing to announce its annual results and officials were scrutinising how every penny of RBS's money was spent. Within these documents, details of Sir Fred's generous early retirement deal were "uncovered" and flagged up. The Treasury insists that it was only at this point that they realised that the offer of early retirement was "discretionary". On Wednesday, Lord Myners was drafted in once again to deal with the former RBS chief executive. He telephoned Sir Fred and suggested he surrender part of his pension.

The disgraced banker was surprised by the request given Lord Myners pivotal role in the original negotiations over the deal. Within 24 hours, Mr Darling and Mr Brown were attacking the pension deal in a series of interviews. The Prime Minister even talked about taking legal action. The Chancellor told MPs that he was not fully aware of the pension until last week. However, as the day progressed, the situation became murkier. RBS made it clear that the Government had known about the deal since the autumn. Sir Fred then released a letter he had sent to Lord Myners detailing the minister's direct role in the negotiations. Downing Street is now rushing to distance the Prime Minister from what is increasingly seen as the "dysfunctional" Treasury. With the former banker on the warpath, Fred "the shred", as he was nicknamed, may yet claim a ministerial scalp as his final act.

Minister in Sir Fred row 'should resign' - The Scotsman Minister in Sir Fred row 'should resign' 20:20 Friday 27 February 2009 00:00 Saturday 28 February 2009 PRESSURE was growing last night for the resignation of the minister who allowed Sir Fred Goodwin, the former chief executive of Royal Bank of Scotland, a £693,000-a-year pension. Unions led calls for the departure of Lord Myners – long a trusted banking adviser to Gordon Brown – after he admitted he was "not aware" of Sir Fred's pension arrangements when negotiating his departure in October. The calls came as Ann Clwyd, a former Labour minister, said she plans a Bankers Pensions (Limits) Bill to cap bank pensions. The government defended Lord Myners' actions and suggested he had been misled by RBS. The Prime Minister yesterday said the government may use legal means to stop Sir Fred drawing the "unjustifiable and unacceptable" pension, which he has refused to give up.

John Prescott, the former deputy prime minister, said it had been an "extraordinary" decision to award Sir Fred the pension and called for the use of "all legal means" to claw it back. Asked whether, if necessary, payments should simply be stopped, Mr Prescott said: "Yes I think I would do that. I think it's so enormous what's happening. "The taxpayer has rescued them, there is billions of pounds involved, he's not entitled to this kind of pension. Take it off him and let him sue." John Mann, a Labour member of the Treasury select committee, also claimed Sir Fred misled its inquiry into the banking crisis this month.

Asked by Mr Mann whether his pension should be linked to the RBS share price, Sir Fred told the MPs: "My pension is the same as everyone else's in the bank who is in a defined benefit scheme." Mr Mann said: "He wasn't accurate in what he said … because, of course, his pension doesn't appear to be the same as everyone else's in the RBS." Meanwhile, UK Financial Investments denied that John Kingman, its chief executive, had asked Peter Cummings, former head of corporate lending at HBOS, to return a 660,000 severance payment. The body, set up to represent the government's shareholder interests in Britain's banks, said it had sought assurances from Lloyds Banking Group that HBOS directors who left as part of the takeover received only what it was legally obliged to pay. Critics of the government said the attack on Sir Fred by senior Labour Party members was only a means of "deflecting attention from Lord Myners' incompetence". They said the government should have done more to keep Sir Fred's pension down.

Paul Kenny, the general secretary of the GMB union, said: "If reports are true that Lord Myners agreed Fred Goodwin should get a bigger pension than he was legally entitled to, or if he did not check what sort of pension he was going to get, he should go. "The government needs to recover the bonuses paid to these bankers under false pretences. This is not just a question of future pensions, action should be taken against previous bonuses." Ruth Lea, the economic adviser to the City stockbroker Arbuthnot, said: "It does seem he (Lord Myners] could have been more careful. Due diligence seems to be in short supply." George Osborne, the shadow chancellor, said Lord Myners was in "a very difficult position", but stopped short of demanding his scalp. Ministers let slip the opportunity to block the discretionary payments in October and it was "pathetic" to protest now, he said. Key questions at heart of Goodwin debacle Who originally agreed Sir Fred Goodwin's pension deal? According to Royal Bank of Scotland, the pension arrangement was set up when Sir Fred was made chief executive and would have been decided by its remunerations committee.

Why did Lord Myners not know what was going on? The government has implied that RBS misled Lord Myners by suggesting the pension arrangements could not be changed. This has been denied by RBS. Opponents believe that the minister simply "took his eye off the ball". Should Lord Myners resign? Supporters say that he has done a good job in very difficult circumstances. However, opponents say it is part of a larger problem that Lord Myners failed to tackle the reward for failure culture. Why can't Sir Fred's pension simply be cancelled? Can it be clawed back? The government has suggested it will take legal action, but there are question marks over whether it can prevent him collecting a pension which he is contractually entitled to, especially as he was not sacked. Is this a similar problem to that the government faced with bonus payments to bankers? Yes. One problem the government faced with bank bonuses was that human rights legislation prevented it from blocking large bonuses still to be paid to bankers as they were written into contracts. Did Sir Fred mislead the Commons Treasury Committee about his pension last month? Some MPs believe so. Sir Fred told them his pension was"determined the same way as anyone else's in a defined benefit scheme".

It is much larger. RBS timeline: the Fred Goodwin era RBS timeline: the Fred Goodwin era Tweet Share We trace the career trajectory of Fred Goodwin, from the moment he became chief executive of RBS (LSE: RBS.L - news ) , to the loss of his knighthood today, 11-years on, as he finally pays the price for his part in Royal Bank of Scotland's near collapse in 2008. March 6, 2000: RBS offer for NatWest is declared "unconditional". Sir Fred Goodwin replaces Sir George Mathewson as chief executive of the bank. Sir George becomes chairman. shares £2.70. May 4, 2004: Charter One bought for £5.8bn. RBS launches £2.5bn rights issue to fund takeover of US bank. Deal fails to hit income targets, prompting investor criticism. shares £4.81. September 14, 2005: Queen opens new £350m headquarters building at Gogarburn.

May 28, 2006: Sir Fred, having been knighted in 2004, is voted most powerful businessman in Scotland for the fourth year in the Scotland on Sunday Power 100 list. shares £4.74. April 16, 2007: Consortium led by RBS enters bidding war for Dutch bank ABN Amro, which was already in advanced talks with Barclays (LSE: BARC.L - news ) for a friendly merger. Shares £5.78. October 10, 2007: RBS declares takeover of ABN "unconditional", but there is little celebration within the bank as market value of assets plummet in midst of credit crunch. April 22, 2008: under pressure from board directors and Government, RBS announces £12bn rights issue to shore up its weak capital base. shares £3. October 13, 2008: a week after accepting emergency funding, RBS receives multi-billion pound bailout as it comes close to collapse, leaving taxpayer as its majority shareholder.

Shares 65.7p November (Stuttgart: A0Z24E - news ) 2008: The Government takes a 58pc in RBS for £15bn, with a further £5bn of preference shares. Sir Fred Goodwin steps down as RBS chief executive, and is replaced by Stephen Hester. February 26, 2009: RBS reports a loss of £24.1bn for 2008, the biggest in British corporate history. The government asks Sir Fred to give up an annual pension worth about £700,000. February 10, 2009: Sir Fred and former chairman Sir Tom McKillop appear before MPs (BSE: MPSLTD.BO - news ) . Sir Fred and Sir Tom apologise for the near collapse of RBS and the "distress" it caused. Shares 23.8p. February 27, 2009: Prime Minister Gordon Brown piles pressure on Sir Fred, saying legal action may be used to claw back some of the pension payout. Sir Fred has said he has no intention of giving up his benefits, angering officials and taxpayers.

March 9, 2009: RBS says in its annual report that Sir Fred was paid £1.3m in 2008. April 1, 2009: Protesters target an RBS branch as the G20 heads of government gather in London while windows were smashed and a car damaged the previous month in an attack on Sir Fred's home. April 11, 2009: Financial Services Authority launches formal investigation into the events which led to last year's emergency Government rescues of HBOS and Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS). December 2, 2010: Sir Fred and other RBS executives during the financial crisis escape punishment by the FSA despite what the regulator describes as a “series of bad decisions” in 2007 and 2008. February 24, 2011: Bank reports full year losses narrowed to £1.1bn from £3.6bn. Reveals more than 100 staff earned more than £1m in 2010, despite Government attempts to restrict bankers' pay. Mr Hester accepts £2m bonus.

March 10, 2011: John Hemming MP discloses in the House of Commons that Sir Fred has obtained a "super-injunction" from the courts banning the publication of certain information about him, or even revealing the nature of that information. The very existence of the injunction can only be acknowledged because Mr Hemming's comments are protected by Parliamentary privilege June 09, 2011 : Sir Fred Goodwin admits for the first time that he had an affair with a senior colleague at the Royal Bank of Scotland in the run-up to its near collapse and concealed the sexual relationship from colleagues, via a super-injunction, fearing their disapproval and that it would damage his career.

December 12, 2011: A Financial Services Authority notice to the RBS board containing details of its concerns over the bank’s deteriorating relationship with its officials, as well as worries over its exposure to commercial property loans, was watered down by Fred, according to a report into the lender’s collapse January 31, 2012 : Continued criticism of his role in the bank's near collapse and public anger at the way he was allowed to keep his title resulted in the Queen, acting on advice from Whitehall officials, annulling his knighthood. Reblog As RBS announces record losses, Simon Hattenstone searches for an apology from Fred Goodwin | Business | The Guardian Share on Messenger Close Something weird happens to me when I go to the bank these days. My eyes bulge, my face purples, and I hector innocent clerks sat behind the partition.

"You told me to put my savings into X account, and I did, and you promised me it would grow exponentially even though I was happy with what I had, and now it's worth half what it was." I want the bank clerks to get down on their knees, to apologise, to say they were wrong, wrong, wrong. Of course, I'm the one who's wrong. There's every chance they have also lost any money they'd saved or been denied a vital loan. But they are the only faces we can put to the very few men - invariably men - who have lost us billions of pounds; the men who might well have bankrupted Britain. In 2007 Adam Applegarth, former Northern Rock boss, achieved the then seemingly impossible - bringing a bank to the brink of bankruptcy. Today, Wikipedia rightly or wrongly credits him with being the instigator of the world economic recession. He duly resigned and retired to his mansion in Northumberland.

We learned about his affair with an employee, how she managed to buy five homes using loans from the bank despite just earning £30,000 a year (she and Applegarth both deny any financial wrongdoing), how he took a £760,000 payoff and a £2.2m pension pot after he brought the bank to its knees, and how he spends his days playing cricket. Yet from him, we heard nothing, let alone a fully fledged apology. Then there is Andy Hornby, formerly known as the Boy Wonder. He was likeable, clever and commercially minded - he studied English at Oxford, went on to top a year of 800 at Harvard Business School, was crazy about football minnows Bristol City and made a star of Howard the singing bank clerk in the Halifax commercials. Hornby was adored in the City until he took HBOS on a suicide run. Three months ago the government ordered him to stand down when it rescued HBOS. Yet, astonishingly, he has stayed as a consultant - at £60,000 a month. And so to the most ignominious fall of all; that of Sir Fred Goodwin.

Goodwin's descent from hero to zero is as shocking as his bank's finances. This week it was announced that the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) had suffered a £28bn loss - the biggest loss a company has recorded in Britain. Shares crashed by two-thirds overnight. Now it is valued at £5bn compared with last year's £50bn - and this despite the government pouring in £20bn in bail-out money. He had been Gordon Brown's favourite banker, until the prime minister turned on him this week, saying that RBS had been "irresponsible" under Goodwin's control (and it has to be said on Brown's watch). Over the past year, Goodwin received salary and bonuses amounting to £4.2m. In 2002, he was named Forbes Businessman of the Year - the ultimate business accolade. Back then he was known as Fred the Shred for the incisive way he had shredded staff numbers to boost profits. Today Goodwin, who formally leaves his post on 31 January, is known as the "disgraced Fred the Red". Goodwin can take some comfort in an annual £579,000 pension.

What do Goodwin, Hornby and Applegarth have in common beside banking? Plenty. Similar ages for one - Goodwin is the oldest at 50. Testosterone-fuelled and sports-crazy, they played fast and loose with depositors' money, and had an air of invincibility. None appear to consider themselves accountable to the public, none have shown humility publicly, and none have put out a heartfelt apology. Hornby said he was sorry to his shareholders, but that's all. The ordinary people, the punter, can go to hell in a hand cart - once we've bailed the bankers out (to the tune of at least £500bn so far). And that's before we've mentioned the resultant unemployment (2 million and growing) and house repossessions (an expected 75,000 this year). Goodwin also muttered an apology to his shareholders at his bank's extraordinary general meeting (EGM) in November. To his employees, he simply sent an email saying it was time to go - no apology, of course, no regrets. As for the public? Nothing.

Of the triumvirate of mega-losers, it is the rise and fall of Goodwin that most accurately tells the story of British banking. A tale of hubris, greed and, ultimately, apocalypse. Goodwin, the grammar school boy from Paisley, was phenomenally successful in his early days taking RBS from being just a sleepy Edinburgh bank to one of the world's big five. But once he got the taste for expansion he couldn't stop. He flew too close to the sun and, even as he was melting in front of our eyes, he insisted everything was just dandy. When experts told him he was taking on too much, buying yet more banks at the start of the credit crunch, paying a ridiculous price at a ridiculous time, he dismissed them. He was Sir Fred, Gordon's guru, master of the universe. Even when the government rescued RBS in November, he showed no gratitude, merely complaining that it was "more like a drive-by shooting than a negotiation". Yes, a deregulated system invited these men to behave with monstrous disregard for our pensions or offer loans we could never pay back, but surely they have to take individual responsibility too. Of course, some is a systemic failure.

Where were the sanctions from the Financial Services Authority? Why didn't the government step in? If Britain goes down the plug hole, we can't blame three "loadsamoney" bankers, but did they need to be quite so gung-ho about it, and so mealymouthed with their apologies. As Elton John said all those years ago, sorry does seem to be the hardest word for Britain's former financial titans. The more I think about it, the more personal their indifference seems. JUST SAY SORRY. It's beginning to obsess me. I phone RBS headquarters in Edinburgh and ask for an apology from Goodwin. "Sir Fred has fulfilled his contractual obligations with us," says Linda Harper in the press office. "A line has been drawn in the sand." A line has been drawn in the sand? Not by me. How dare they? Without me - us - she wouldn't have a job. The more I think about it, the more apoplectic I become. Right, first thing tomorrow, I'm going up to Scotland to demand a personal apology from Goodwin. Sod the price. It's not the most rational decision I've ever made, but few people do seem to be acting rationally these days.

At Edinburgh airport, I feel I'm hallucinating. Every wall is plastered blue and white with RBS logos and sponsorships. "Sport and RBS. Both global and driven by competition and success," Sir Jackie Stewart, RBS global ambassador and three times formula one world champion, tells me in one ad. "The principles behind sporting success and business success are identical," Jack Nicklaus, RBS ambassador and golfing legend, tells me in another. It's said that RBS became Goodwin's personal fiefdom - a plaything in which he could indulge every whim. He is a great fan of formula one and golf. His office famously contained only one picture - not of his wife or children, but Sir Fred himself alongside Nicklaus. There are rumours he might replace Max Mosley as the formula one head, which would make for a neat circular journey as RBS bailed the sport out of trouble with a $1.1bn (£807m) loan. Alex, an airport worker, is more upset than I am with Sir Fred. "It beggars belief that we've got to bail them out.

If I was to lose my job and not be able to pay my mortgage they would take my house away, they wouldnae say, 'Well, sorry about that but here's a big payoff anyway.' Disgusting." If I find Goodwin, what message would he like me to pass on? "Tell him he better nae come near us because we'll rip him apart." RBS headquarters is on the outskirts of Edinburgh, a private estate part San Simeon, part Truman Show. A specially-built bridge carries an RBS logo spiked at the top to deter pigeons. The estate, which used to house an asylum, has it own street with its own shops and grandiose lawns. The only people who walk around appear to be security guards. One questions me and the photographer before allowing us to pass. "Do you think you'll still have a job soon?" I ask. "I'm OK. I'm coming up to retirement and I've got my pension in the bank." At reception, Paula greets me. I explain why I'm here - to see Sir Fred, get an apology etc. She listens politely, smiles and says: "That shouldn't be a problem, sir." This is going to be easy.

Tommy from security brings us a cup of tea, and I'm feeling more benign towards RBS. After a few minutes, two people approach us - unsmiling and disapproving, even from distance. "Sir Fred's not working here any more. He's fulfilled his contractual obligations," says the woman." I recognise Harper's voice. "Did we not have that discussion yesterday, Simon?" Perhaps Stephen Hester, the new CEO, would like to apologise on Goodwin's behalf? "Look guys I absolutely know where you're coming from, but ... this is not something we can discuss," says Neil Moorhouse, who's playing the softie to Harper's hard nut. "But wouldn't it be great to hear you say you're sorry 'cos we, the public, are certainly sorry." "You've had all those opportunities with that," Harper says. I can't contain myself. "No, it's not our opportunity, it's your opportunity to say sorry," I say. "Right, thanks guys." Moorhouse says. "We've gone backwards and forwards on this. New CEO. Moving on. And ... er, we'll update you in Feb. Accountability has been taken." Does that mean Sir Fred was accountable?

"We've obviously take action in that respect and we're engaging with the goals on how best to sort things out." "So if accountability has been taken, is Sir Fred accountable?" "I think we've covered those questions Simon," Harper says. "But they've not been answered." "Yes they have." She appears to be showing me and the photographer out. On the south side of Edinburgh is a sandstone mansion: Goodwin's house. I knock on the door. No reply. I call out his name. No reply. The trees in the garden are huge, the video cameras recording our every move numerous. There is no sign of his Ferraris in the garages. Goodwin lists fixing classic cars as a hobby. Across the road in the flats, his neighbours are not keen to speak. Yes they know he lives here, no they don't know him, no they have nothing to say. "No one was complaining when he was making millions for them," a middle-aged man says. Goodwin has not been seen for a few days, and the local papers are suggesting he has gone into hiding. At the end of the road, an elderly couple wait for the bus. They are not so forgiving.

"I'm very cross," says Moira, 80, a former nurse. "Everybody has been greedy and they've not had enough foresight. The ordinary people like us who have saved a little as we went along have been hit." "They just thought they'd get away with it," adds David. "They weren't as straight-laced as they should have been." "I think they should have the grace to give back these huge bonuses. You work in nursing homes or in a shop, you don't get bonuses, so why should they?" I feel honour-bound to track down Goodwin for Moira and David if nothing else. I have been tipped off that he is with his in-laws, the McLeans, in Glasgow. I know the road name, and sure enough the electoral roll confirms there are two McLeans living there. Then again McLean is not an uncommon name in Scotland. My worry is that he is staying there, but nobody answers the door or he decides he doesn't want to apologise to me after all. I rent an old-fashioned loudhailer to ensure I'll be able to get my message across whatever. In a comfortable middle-class road in Glasgow is a bungalow with two Mercedes cars in the drive.

A strong-looking elderly man answers the door. He looks confused when I ask for Fred. "There is no Fred here." "You are the father of Joyce?" "Yes, I am." "And her husband, Fred, is not staying with you?" "He's definitely not here no." How does Sir Fred's father-in-law feel about what has happened with the banks? "Well I don't want to comment. I really don't. It's your business, you guys get on with it. It's not my business. It's nothing to do with me. Thank you very much." Norman McLean has been charming, and I do as he says - get on with my business. I feel slightly guilty as I get out my loudhailer, but I've come this far, and even if there is the tiniest chance he's there I must make my case. Perhaps Norman will pass my questions on to Goodwin. "Sir Fred," I say. I'm not sure they can hear inside. Whoever is inside. "Sir Fred, I know your father-in-law has just said you're not here, but if you have just popped in for a visit, I have a series of questions to ask you.

One: would you like to apologise to the public for the state of the RBS? Two: would you like to thank the public for bailing you out? Three: would you like to give back your bonuses? Nothing. It's cold and windy. "Sir Fred, it's cold and windy and if you do happen to be there we wouldn't say no to a cup of tea. And perhaps you might just apologise to the British public at the same time?" Diddly squat. We make to leave, and as I head for the car, I see Norman's next-door neighbour sticking up an approving thumb. I run up his drive. He invites us in for a cuppa. Frank Fox says he couldn't quite hear what we were up to, but he loves the sight of a loudhailer, "Just like the old days," he says. I explain all. He says he's known his neighbour for ages, cuts his hedge, plays golf with him, and didn't have a clue that Goodwin was his son-in-law. "I'd just like to say Norman McLean and his wife, Nessie, are the nicest people you could wish to meet. He's a good golfer, too.

But as you say, anybody who makes a codswallop of their job would get reprimanded one way or another, but with these guys it seems the bigger the arse you make of it, the more you can get away with it." Will the bank crisis affect him? "I retired on my savings at 62, and we planned to live off our savings. We thought we had enough. But the amount we've got coming in now is three fifths of sod all. You might as well put it under your bed. At least that way you know you've got your money." I leave happy. We've met a lovely man, been invited into his home, drank with him, and even though I've not met Goodwin I've passed on my message to his father-in-law. Perhaps Sir Fred will now get in touch to say sorry. On the way out, I notice a police car and two officers in the road. They ask for our names and addresses and say there has been a complaint from next door. "Do you understand what a breach of the peace is?" But nobody asked us to be quiet, I whimper. The officer is stony faced.

I tell him I was helping Sir Fred out - giving him the opportunity to apologise. I assume the officers will understand - they are normal men, affected by all these decisions at the top. "Well, this time we won't caution you," he says, "But next time ..." I'm confused. Aren't I the one in search of an apology? As I head for the car I can see Sir Fred's father-in-law at the window. I wave goodbye. He doesn't wave back. Phil Hall, the former editor of the News of the World, has been employed by Goodwin in a minder capacity. He phones up my deputy editor and delivers a lecture in journalistic ethics. He says I overstepped the mark - Goodwin's family was in the house after all, and his children were scared by the megaphone. Jesus. He's right. I don't want to be a tabloid kiddy frightener. What was I thinking of? Children, if you're reading this, I am the man with the megaphone, and I am truly sorry if I went too far. But having exhausted every avenue, how else could I have asked Sir Fred these questions? And they are, surely, questions that have to be asked.

I ask Hall if Goodwin might like to take the opportunity to also say sorry. He says it's a much more complicated issue than sorry, and that Sir Fred has signed a confidentiality clause with RBS. It wasn't supposed to end like this. Sir Fred Goodwin injunction: RBS chief's sexual relationship on eve of £45bn collapse | Daily Mail Online Former mistress is senior executive at troubled bank Appears to have broken his own bank's code of conduct with relationship 'This is about the right to know about wrongdoing in public life' Unlike her husband's mistress, Lady Goodwin had no anonymity to hide behind. Looking weary and sombre, Lady Joyce Goodwin cut a lonely figure as she was pictured leaving the £3.5 million family home in Edinburgh where she is being comforted by a close relative thought to be her mother. It is thought to be the first time she, the mother of Sir Fred's two children, has been seen publicly since the allegations surfaced about her husband's infidelity. 'Fred does live here but you won't find him because he's never in,' said a gardener.

'Joyce is always here but usually alone.' Sir Fred Goodwin is facing claims from MPs that his alleged affair with a senior colleague could have affected his judgment as the Royal Bank of Scotland collapsed. Stony-faced: Sir Fred Goodwin's wife leaves the family home in Edinburgh after allegations about her husband surfaced The mansion in 2.3 acres was built for footballer Graeme Souness and bought by the Goodwins in June. It has a floodlit tennis court, Japanese garden and a circular fountain in the driveway. The couple met when Sir Fred, 52, was working for the Touche Ross accountancy group in the 1980s. RELATED ARTICLES Share this article Share Joyce was with a rival institution and was pitching for the same client as her future husband. In one of his few interviews, Sir Fred said their romance grew after he experienced ‘the rough edge of her tongue’ during this encounter. They married in Glasgow in 1990 as Sir Fred began climbing the corporate ladder. Whilst the Paisley-born banker began mixing with his sporting heroes Jackie Stewart and Jack Nicklaus, his wife also enjoyed the trappings of wealth.

Affair: An injunction hiding Sir Fred Goodwin's illicit relationship with a female colleague during the time of the RBS collapse has been revealed after it was lifted following comments in the House of Lords There were lavish dinners in Britain with royalty and the great and good, and even a banquet at the White House. For the first time, the public learned that Sir Fred took out a privacy injunction to cover up an affair he was having with a senior woman executive as he led the bank to a disaster that ultimately cost the taxpayer £45billion. MPs and peers called for the whole truth and questioned whether Sir Fred’s decision-making was impaired. There were also demands for him to be re-interviewed by the Financial Services Authority which is compiling a long-awaited report into the 2008 collapse of RBS. After weeks of speculation over why the disgraced banker had taken out a gagging order, the reason was dramatically revealed in Parliament. Lord Stoneham of Droxford used Parliamentary privilege to pull down Sir Fred’s wall of secrecy. Love cheat: Sir Fred and Lady Joyce (pictured) have been married for more than 20 years.

He apparently broke his own bank's code of conduct when he began a sexual relationship with a colleague Asking a question on behalf of his colleague Lord Oakeshott, a critic of Sir Fred, he said: ‘Every taxpayer has a direct public interest in the events leading up to the collapse of the Royal Bank of Scotland, so how can it be right for a super-injunction to hide the alleged relationship between Sir Fred Goodwin and a senior colleague? If true, it would be a serious breach of corporate governance and not even the Financial Services Authority would be allowed to know about it.’ Hours later, the Daily Mail applied for the existing injunction covering Sir Fred to be lifted. Lawyers for Sir Fred told Mr Justice Tugendhat in the High Court that since the affair was now in the public domain they would not try to maintain his protection. The judge partially lifted the injunction but said terms preventing publication of the name of the woman or details of their ‘sexual relationship’ should remain in force.

Lord Stoneham, pictured yesterday, revealed details of the former chief executive of Royal Bank of Scotland's court order in the House of Lords Lord Oakeshott, who began asking Parliamentary questions about Sir Fred last month, said the FSA must redouble its efforts to find out the truth behind the bank’s collapse. ‘We must get to the bottom of what went wrong when the Royal Bank of Scotland went bust,’ he said. ‘We must learn the lessons through a full report from the Financial Services Authority so the banks can never bring Britain to its knees again. If that is not in the public interest I don’t know what is.’ Lord Oakeshott today told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: 'I'm very concerned the whole story should be out there, should be properly investigated and we should all learn the lessons of the collapse. 'This was the biggest corporate crash in British history.' He said he would not consider revealing details of other superinjunctions, such as those banning reports of footballers' and actors' alleged affairs. He added: 'I couldn't care less if footballers are playing away. This is quite different, this is not the question of footballers' sex lives - I'm not interested in that.

This is a major, overwhelming public interest.' He branded secrecy around the former RBS chief executive 'stupid', saying the alleged affair may be crucial to a Financial Services Authority probe into RBS' collapse. Lord Oakeshott added: 'I wanted to make sure the regulator could look at this. 'If this is not overwhelming public interest to get to the bottom of what happened when the Royal Bank of Scotland collapsed causing billions (of pounds) of cost to taxpayer and many thousands of families lost their jobs - I can't conceive of a more overwhelming public interest.' One key question is whether Sir Fred broke the RBS code of conduct, which says employees who have affairs with colleagues should tell their managers if there is any possibility that their judgment might be affected. The bank, which had grown to become one of the biggest financial organisations in the world under Sir Fred’s aggressive leadership, bought a Dutch rival, ABN AMRO, in a £55billion takeover October 2007. It subsequently collapsed under the weight of bad loans and its own lack of cash. Sir Fred, 52, quit after negotiating the effective nationalisation of the bank at vast cost to taxpayers.

An investigation into the collapse by the FSA, the City regulator, has been long delayed and is eagerly awaited. However, the privacy injunction has meant the FSA has been unable to inquire into whether Sir Fred’s relationship with a colleague had any impact on the fate of the bank. In the High Court yesterday, Hugh Tomlinson, QC, representing Sir Fred, described the background to the injunction as a ‘piece of tittle tattle’ and added that there was no true ‘public interest’ in the details being made public. But he continued: ‘Because matters have come out into the public domain in this case it is sensible to vary the order of the court and what has been put into the public domain through Lord Stoneham’s announcement or question in Parliament.’ Mr Justice Tugendhat said: ‘The main point is that this is an injunction relating to a sexual relationship. The existing order prohibits the naming of the other person to the relationship and prohibits the publication of any details.

That remains in force.’ He also said: ‘I should add that the original injunction had no effect on the FSA or any other regulatory body.’ The political spotlight turned on to Sir Fred – who was first named in connection with a privacy injunction in the Commons in March by LibDem MP John Hemming – last month. Peers began asking questions about him after BBC TV personality Andrew Marr admitted to the Mail that he had taken out a privacy injunction to hide an affair with a journalist. The woman had a child who at one stage Mr Marr thought was his own. PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE 1. What is it? It is the privilege which stops MPs and peers from being sued for defamation for any statement they make in Parliament. 2. What are its origins? The origins date back to the English Civil War when Parliament was fighting for the right to independence from the monarchy. Back then the law was the will of the King. But it was the 1689 the Bill of Rights which established parliament's rights following the Glorious Revolution and officially enshrined parliamentary privilege in English law.

Article 9 guarantees freedom of speech stating "the freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in parliament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Parliament". 3. Why is it an issue now? It is controversial now as the Lord Chief Justice said today newspapers could be found in contempt of court for merely reporting what is said in Parliament. His comments are seen by critics as an attempt by the courts to censor parliamentary proceedings - when it is a constitutional right enshrined in English law - and they say the law belongs to everyone - not just judges and the courts. Campaigning politicians welcomed the outing of Sir Fred but said taxpayers still need to know the truth about the collapse of RBS. Mr Hemming, MP for Birmingham Yardley, said: ‘The decision to lift the anonymity of Fred Goodwin today is a small victory for free speech. It is, however, a victory. ‘I think the judiciary recognise which way the wind is blowing. However, what they really need to do is to change tack.’ Lord Stoneham told Channel 4 News: ‘An issue like this, where RBS was bailed out by the taxpayer, this is the chief executive of that bank.

There are issues of corporate governance, and they should be out in the open. ‘I’m all for the families being protected but I think the individual, the chief executive, has to be held accountable.’ Did Sir Fred's affair with senior colleague affect his judgment before RBS collapse? Big shot: Sir Fred on a clay pigeon shoot. The nature of the injunction he had meant that his former employers had no idea what he got up to during his time as chief executive Sir Fred Goodwin apparently broke his own bank’s code of conduct when he began a sexual relationship with a colleague before the credit crunch. Royal Bank of Scotland rules say close personal relationships with colleagues can create conflicts of interest and employers should report them to their managers. The code’s opening paragraph states: ‘While the Group entirely respects the right of every one of us to form friendships and personal relationships at work, there will be occasions when it will be appropriate to tell your manager about a relationship that may impact on your work by creating a conflict of interest.’ But the real question facing both RBS and its disgraced former boss last night was whether his affair badly affected his judgment at such a fraught time, just before the credit crunch. It is clear he did not disclose his relationship with a colleague to the board.

Sir Fred left the bank in October 2008. But rumours of his affair did not begin to circulate until earlier this year. The injunction obtained by Sir Fred on March 2 this year prevented the public from being told about his affair. Indeed, it initially barred the media from even reporting that it concerned a banker or naming Sir Fred. In a further twist, the Financial Services Authority – the regulator currently charged with investigating the collapse of the bank – could not consider whether it had any relevance. Its report has still to be published. And the court order meant the board of RBS, Sir Fred’s former employers, were not allowed to be informed about what really happened during his time as chief executive. Had he followed his firm’s own code of behaviour, he would have been duty bound to inform the bank’s chairman, Sir Tom McKillop, about his affair. It was only when LibDem MP John Hemming used Parliamentary privilege to name Sir Fred in the Commons on March 10 that the public – and the RBS board – realised the disgraced ex-chief executive had something to hide.

Breaking the rules: Sir Fred Goodwin broke RBS's own code of conduct regarding personal relationships by conducting the affair with the woman It was during the tumultuous months of 2007 that Sir Fred engineered the £55billion takeover by RBS of Dutch bank ABN AMRO. The disastrous move was made in the spring of that year. But soon after RBS won the auction for ABN the credit crunch struck, wholesale money markets froze over and Northern Rock became the first British bank to suffer a run on its deposits since the 19th century. At this point RBS, had yet to take possession of the Dutch bank and could have pulled out of the deal. Instead, Sir Fred pressed ahead. The acquisition left RBS saddled with mountains of toxic debt linked to U.S. sub-prime mortgages, whose value plunged as U.S. house prices crashed. A desperate Sir Fred raised £12billion from shareholders in June 2008, as he tried and failed to sell off insurance subsidiaries Churchill and Direct Line for £7billion; as he tried to bluff his way through the summer pretending his bank was doing fine; and as, in his final act, he negotiated its state bail-out.

According to latest estimates, that bail-out has cost taxpayers £45billion, enough to cover Britain’s annual defence budget. Did the fact that Sir Fred was involved in an alleged affair with a colleague – who, like him, was married with children – over this period affect his judgment at any point? The bank’s code of conduct is clear that Sir Fred should have informed a superior of what was going on. It says: ‘You may not be able to see that your judgment has been compromised. Asking your manager to help you make a judgment will assist in ensuring that your position is viewed objectively.’ And it adds: ‘If, in the context of performing your duties, it could be suggested that you are acting in your own interests or those of another person with whom you have a relationship, rather than in the interests of the Group, you may have a conflict of interest.’ Yesterday RBS declined to say whether Sir Fred had told the board about his relationship. The deliberations of Mr Justice Henriques, the judge who originally decided to grant the injunction to Sir Fred, are unknown.

However if he followed the procedures commonly used by judges in privacy claims, he will have considered whether there was any public interest in the publication of news about Sir Fred’s affair, and decided there was none. LibDem MP Mr Hemming said yesterday: ‘I have some difficulty understanding the logic of the judiciary. In one recent privacy case a judge has said there has been blackmail, without any apparent evidence of that. ‘Now we have a judge who sees no public interest in the behaviour of the chief executive who was in charge of the biggest loss in banking history which appears to have run against his own organisation’s code of conduct.’ Mr Hemming added: ‘In the new circumstances, you would expect the RBS to say whether Sir Fred complied with the code of conduct or not. Silence speaks volumes.’ This isn't tittle tattle - it matters to us all By JOHN HEMMING (LIB DEM MP) Passionate: John Hemming said that he revealed Sir Fred Goodwin's injunction because he believes the courts are on a very worrying path Ask the average man or woman on the street if they think they have a right to know about another individual’s sex life and they will most likely answer ‘no’.

But ask that same person if they think they have a right to know about another person’s sex life if it may have affected their ability to do their job – a job which saw them looking after millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money – and the answer would probably be an emphatic ‘yes’. So when it was revealed yesterday that former RBS chief executive Fred Goodwin had sought to legally suppress information about his alleged relationship with a senior colleague, the debate about super-injunctions was thrown into sharp focus. There is absolutely no doubt that this is a matter of great public interest – the man who presided over the biggest banking loss ever incurred in this country stands accused of a serious breach of corporate governance. No chief executive should ever be excused from answering such charges because of trumped-up concerns over privacy. And far from protecting individual privacy – which is the argument given by those taking out these costly measures – what the draconian injunctions actually do is to go against the rule of law, by preventing the authorities from investigating matters they have every right to look into.

When the Government commissioned reports into the collapse of MG Rover in 2005, it rightly focused on the personal relationships of directors and found that one had paid more that £1.6million to a consultant with whom he was having an affair, just as the company was collapsing. Scrutiny has been much harder as judges have begun interpreting legislation on privacy from the European Court of Human Rights differently, without consulting Parliament. When I revealed in Parliament earlier this year that Sir Fred had taken out an order preventing him from even being referred to as a banker, I did so because I have come to believe passionately that our courts are on a very worrying path. The danger of creeping court secrecy is that it allows bad behaviour to go unchecked. And while it is true that not everything should be reported in the Press – for example, some sensible limits are needed on the reporting of disputes between parents and children – these limits should not prevent people from complaining when things go wrong. Do not be fooled into thinking this is merely a debate about the private lives of a few celebrities. This is about something far more fundamental, and relevant to us all – the right to know about wrongdoing in public life. The job of the Press is to make sure people know what is going on.

If they are able to do so, those in the public eye are more likely to behave properly as a result. The recent MPs’ expenses scandal is a pertinent example of how badly people can behave when their behaviour is not being scrutinised. Only when the debacle came to light were changes made to the system and individuals made to explain themselves. Recently, we found that a judge has banned the reporting of the fact that toxic substances are likely to have been in drinking water tanks on some passenger ships. Surely this should not be withheld from the public simply because a company is wealthy enough to take out a gagging injunction? In another instance, details about a relationship between two actors which resulted in one being sacked – a clear example of discrimination – has become the subject of a super-injunction and cannot be reported. And even more worryingly, I personally know of two instances where an injunction taken out by a local authority has prevented constituents of mine complaining to me about perceived injustices. So do not be fooled into thinking this is merely a debate about the private lives of a few celebrities – they just happen to have taken advantage of the current direction of the courts. This is about something far more fundamental, and relevant to us all – the right to know about wrongdoing in public life.

After all, with even the limited amount of information that has seeped out about Sir Fred, do you not believe we have a right to know exactly what was going on as he presided over a banking disaster which affected us all? BBC NEWS | UK | UK Politics | Stand-off over Sir Fred's pension Stand-off over Sir Fred's pension Gordon Brown on his anger over Sir Fred Goodwin's pension Gordon Brown has repeated his threat of legal action against ex-Royal Bank of Scotland chief Sir Fred Goodwin over his "unacceptable" ï¿½16m pension. The PM said he shared public "anger" about the size of the pension and was "considering every legal means at our disposal" to get some of it back. Sir Fred has rejected pleas to return it, claiming ministers approved it. The Tories say Mr Brown's anger is "synthetic" as ministers knew about the pension and should have stopped it. Sir Fred's pension pot doubled to ï¿½16m last October, guaranteeing the 50-year-old ï¿½693,000 for life, when he agreed to take early retirement. It is thought he would have received significantly less if he had been sacked.

'Unjustifiable' The Treasury, which pumped ï¿½20bn into the crippled bank, was anxious to get new management in place. But it now says it was misled by RBS's board at the time, which "gave the impression" that Sir Fred's pension was legally binding. Gordon Brown said he discovered "in the last few days" that the package was "discretionary" and could have been blocked and he believed there was a possibility some of it could be retrieved in the courts. They knew all along about this pension so all this synthetic anger now is just long after the horse has bolted Shadow chancellor George Osborne Profile: Sir Fred Goodwin "The behaviour in the Royal Bank of Scotland, where very substantial additional pension awards were given, is something that makes me angry and will make the public of the country angry," he told BBC News. He said the government was still appealing to Sir Fred, who was knighted for services to banking, to voluntarily waive some of his pension. "When banks fail...

the people who make the mistakes cannot and should not run off with entitlements and with additional discretionary payments." He added: "This is unjustifiable, unacceptable and we are going to clean up the banks so that this doesn't happen again." The government's appeal on Thursday to Sir Fred to hand his pension back voluntarily was angrily rejected by the former banker, who claimed it had been approved by Treasury Minister Lord Myners. 'Synthetic anger' Sir Fred said he had already given up a significant part of his salary as a "gesture" when he was negotiating his departure from the bank. In a letter to Lord Myners, he said: "I am told that the topic of my pension was specifically raised with you and you indicated that you were aware of my entitlement and that no further 'gestures' would be required". I believe basically take it off him and let him sue in the courts John Prescott, former deputy prime minister In a letter to Sir Fred, released by the government, Lord Myners said the discussions he had with the former banker about the financial arrangements of his departure from RBS "did not amount to approval" of his pension payment.

He added: "I do not agree with your rationale for declining my request that you voluntarily reduce your pension." "And indeed I hope that on reflection you will now share my clear view that the losses reported today (Thursday) by the bank which you ran until October cannot justify such a huge reward." 'Utterly grotesque' But shadow chancellor George Osborne, for the Conservatives, said the government's anger at the former bank chief's pension was "synthetic" because they knew about the package. He said: "The problem for the government, and for Lord Myners who's a government minister, is that they knew all along about this pension so all this synthetic anger now is just long after the horse has bolted." The shadow chancellor added: "It seems to me they're on the hook either way. They knew and they didn't stop it and that's what Fred Goodwin's saying." He said the pension payout was "very symbolic" of what had gone wrong in the City and there was little chance of recovering the money in the courts, if the government decided to sue. "I don't think the government's got much of a leg to stand on in the courts if they're going to take legal action.

Let's hope they succeed, but it's doubtful." Sir Fred is grilled about his pension by the Treasury Committee earlier this month Mr Osborne's assessment was echoed by Lib Dem Treasury spokesman Vince Cable, who said: "It's clearly utterly grotesque that somebody should be paid this enormous sum of money." Former deputy prime minister John Prescott said it had been an "extraordinary" decision to award Sir Fred the pension and called for the use of "all legal means" to claw it back. He told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "The taxpayer has rescued them, there is billions of pounds involved, he's not entitled to this kind of pension, whether who knew about it or not, you can investigate that later. "I believe basically take it off him and let him sue in the courts." He blamed the former board of RBS for the "extraordinary" decision to award the "obscene" level of Sir Fred's pension. In October, Alistair Darling hailed the fact Sir Fred had waived his contractual entitlements and decided "to do the right thing". There was no mention of the size of pension he was going to receive.

Bookmark with: Profile: Fred Goodwin - BBC News BBC News Close share panel Image caption Mr Goodwin had the reputation of being a ruthless cost cutter Fred Goodwin has been stripped of his knighthood due to his role in the collapse of Royal Bank of Scotland, which had to be bailed out by UK taxpayers. The former head of RBS, who was said to have revelled in his nickname Fred the Shred, will no longer be able to use the honorary title he was given for services to banking. Mr Goodwin was in charge at Royal Bank of Scotland for nine years and steered it from being a bit-part player to global icon as one of the world's top five banks. Commonly described as the most charismatic and also most abrasive of the banking bosses, Mr Goodwin's position became untenable as the bank had to be saved with £20bn of public money. The total injection of public money now totals £45.5bn and taxpayers face a loss on that investment of £22bn.

He built up the bank with acquisition after acquisition - Natwest, Coutts, Adam & Co, Direct Line, Ulster Bank, Churchill and Citizens Bank in the US - and then ruthlessly cut costs through staff reductions to generate bigger profits. The takeover of Natwest in 2000 was seen as a particular success, with Mr Goodwin praised for the way he integrated the much-larger bank into RBS. Taking away an honour does nothing to improve the safety of the banks or enhance the reputation of bankers. By Douglas FraserBBC Scotland Business and Economy Editor Peston: Knighthood shredded At its peak it had a huge balance sheet of loans and investments worth £2 trillion, considerably bigger than the UK's annual output or GDP. It briefly became the largest bank in the world. But the wheels started to come off with the record-breaking acquisition of ABN Amro as part of a consortium at the height of the boom in 2007. "It just shows how quickly things change," an under-fire Fred Goodwin told the BBC News website in 2008 , after the bank announced heavy losses a few months later.

A combination of the ABN takeover and huge investments in bonds made out of poor-quality US subprime loans left RBS on the brink of collapse after the demise of the US investment bank Lehman Brothers in September 2008. He stepped down as the government took control of the bank the following month. Vintage cars Before leaving RBS, he split his time between the City of London and the bank's new headquarters on the edge of Edinburgh. Rise and fall of Fred Goodwin 2000: Appointed chief executive of RBS 2004: Knighted for services to banking 2007: RBS buys Dutch bank ABN Amro in the world's biggest bank deal 2008: Government takes over RBS to prevent collapse; Fred Goodwin leaves 2009: RBS announces biggest loss in UK corporate history; Fred Goodwin says sorry to committee of MPs 2012: Stripped of knighthood He is married to Joyce and has two children, but he has worked hard to protect his family's privacy. Mr Goodwin likes to restore vintage cars and the RBS's long association with Formula One may be in part due to his passion for cars.

It certainly did not last long after his departure, as RBS ended its sponsorship of the Williams Formula One team at the end of 2010. He plays golf, and is a fan of rugby. The bank is heavily involved as a sponsor of the Six Nations rugby union championship and it recently extended its sponsorship for a further four years in a deal worth £20m. Mr Goodwin was a regular visitor to 11 Downing Street when Gordon Brown was chancellor. He attended grammar school in Paisley and then went on to Glasgow University. He studied law and later became a chartered accountant in 1983 rising to partner at Touche Ross five years later. Image caption Mr Goodwin told MPs in 2009 he was sorry for what had happened Mr Goodwin led the team handling the liquidation of the Bank of Credit and Commerce International and his subsequent banking career took him to top positions at the Clydesdale Bank and Yorkshire Bank after which he joined the board of RBS in 1998. He was knighted for his services to banking in 2004 and was chairman of the Prince's Trust charity for a number of years.

The chief executive agreed to waive a pay-off, which includes the right to a year's salary - £1.29m in 2007. Including his £2.86m bonus, he was paid a total of £4.2m that year. Mr Goodwin apologised to a committee of MPs at the beginning of 2009, telling them that he "could not be more sorry" about what had happened. But public anger intensified when it emerged that the 50-year-old was drawing payments worth about £700,000 a year from a pension pot then valued at £16m. The Cabinet Office said that that the failure of RBS played an important role in the financial crisis of 2008-9 which, together with other macroeconomic factors, triggered the worst recession in the UK since World War II and imposed significant costs on UK taxpayers and businesses. A report published last year by the City regulator the FSA blamed failings of regulation and management at RBS for the collapse of the bank. It highlighted poor management decisions, lack of mechanisms for challenging decisions internally and deficiences in culture at the bank, "particularly its attitude to the balance between risk and growth".

Sir Fred Goodwin: the RBS chief who bet the bank and lost - Telegraph Sir Fred Goodwin: the RBS chief who bet the bank and lost It's Sir Fred Goodwin's last official day at the Royal Bank of Scotland on Saturday. By Philip Aldrick, Banking Editor 4:51PM GMT 30 Jan 2009 Ten years after joining the bank's board and eight years since buying NatWest in one of the deals of century, he leaves as the most reviled man in Britain – guilty of running his lender into the ground and widely blamed for the recession. Sir Fred Goodwin leaves Royal Bank of Scotland the most reviled banker in Britain. To hear Gordon Brown, Britain's woes can be pinned on sub-prime US homeowners and the "irresponsible mistakes of a few bankers" – a thinly disguised an attack on Sir Fred. He is a convenient scapegoat and guilty of many sins, but the recession is bigger than one man. Like many successful people, arrogance was Sir Fred's Achilles heel. After the success of the NatWest deal and buoyed by a sense of invincibility, he went on a spending spree – buying 26 banks in just seven years.

At its peak, RBS bestrode the globe as the world's fifth largest lender. It wasn't enough. Shareholders, who once regarded Sir Fred untouchable, begged him to rein in his ambitions. He did, for about six months, before launching the disastrous consortium bid for ABN Amro in 2007. When the dust settled, RBS had paid £10bn for a motley group of international assets. Earlier this month, RBS' new management wrote the lot off. It's fitting his career is bookended by acquisitions. One his making, the other his undoing. But RBS's woes were bigger than the calamitous ABN mistake. RBS had been running on empty for far too long. The cost of Sir Fred's endless acquisition spree was that the bank always operated off a very thin capital base. In a boom it didn't matter. In a bust, there was no buffer for bad debts. As an avowed petrol head, Sir Fred should have known that if you gun an engine too hard for too long it will blow. He kept his foot down at RBS for eight years, even when the bank was running on fumes, and when the recession came, it hit the wall.

In a way, Sir Fred can be seen as a cipher for Brown's Britain – borrowing his and the bank's way to glory and riches. RBS's strategy now looks little more sophisticated than an amateur property speculator, buying assets with someone else's money and praying the boom will hold. Essentially, Sir Fred bet the bank on the boom. The British public's woefully low personal savings rates show the rest of the country was doing much the same, only with sums that did not imperil the country. Related Articles

Question: Much in the news this year (2009) from which bank did Sir Fred Goodwin resign?
Answer: ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND