Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free
Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.
Former NatWest chief executive Alison Rose will forfeit £7.6mn in outstanding pay and bonuses she could have been due from the bank, after the conclusion of a review into her role in the scandal surrounding the closure of Nigel Farage’s accounts.
On Friday, the board said she did not qualify for “good leaver” status that would have entitled her to the full amount. However, NatWest, which counts the UK government as its largest shareholder, said there was “no finding of misconduct” against Rose, who had been chief executive of the bank since 2019.
That means that under the terms of her contract, Rose is entitled to receive her 2023 salary, pension and fixed-pay share allowance, which total £1.75mn for the remainder of her notice period until July next year. She will then have received £2.4mn altogether for 2023.
Rose will also receive £395,000 for her legal fees and £60,000 for outplacement support, with value added tax costs covered on top.
She will nevertheless lose about £7.6mn in potential pay. She will forego £4.7mn in unvested future share awards and will not be paid a bonus for 2023, which could have been a maximum of £2.9mn. Rose will, however, continue to receive about £850,000 of stock that can be cashed in before her notice period ends in July.
“I am pleased that NatWest has confirmed that no findings of misconduct have been made against me,” Rose said in a statement. “I can also confirm acceptance of the terms of the settlement agreement . . . bringing the matter to a close.”
Rose — one of the most high-profile female executives in the UK and who received a damehood in the 2023 honours list — stepped down by mutual consent in July amid a row over the “debanking” of Farage, the former leader of the UK Independence and Brexit parties.
Rose previously admitted unintentionally misleading a BBC reporter into writing a story that said NatWest’s private bank, Coutts, cut ties with Farage for purely commercial reasons and that the decision had nothing to do with his political views. She denied sharing confidential customer data and said she had incomplete information at the time.
Farage subsequently obtained and released a dossier of internal documents from Coutts that showed its reputational risk committee had accused him of “pandering to racists” and being a “disingenuous grifter”, which was “at odds with our position as an inclusive organisation”.
NatWest last month published an independent review by law firm Travers Smith that found the decision to close Farage’s bank account was lawful and in line with its policies. It did, however, acknowledge that the bank had failed to communicate the decision properly and had mishandled Farage’s complaint.
Continuing a chaotic series of events, late last month the Information Commissioner’s Office initially concluded Rose had inappropriately shared Farage’s personal data in an inaccurate way.
Two weeks later, the ICO was forced to apologise to Rose after conceding that it had given a misleading impression that she had breached data protection law, as well as failing to interview her during its probe or giving her the chance to comment on its findings.
