Summer update. 

The Fight Continues

Firstly, thank you for your patience and continued support. We know communications have been quieter than usual in recent months.

Nancy has been dealing with a family bereavement, but behind the scenes the committee, alongside our academic partners at the University of Exeter and key campaign supporters, have been working hard to keep momentum going.

This campaign is far from over.

HSBC AGM: More of the Same

In May, Nancy attended HSBC’s AGM and challenged the Board directly, hopeful that the new Group Chair, Brendan Nelson, might offer a fresh perspective. Sadly, the response was the same familiar rhetoric.

The bank continues to insist that State Deduction (Clawback) is fair, legal and was “clearly and consistently communicated.” Yet despite repeated requests, they still refuse to provide evidence to support their claim that removing clawback would unfairly disadvantage other pension sections.

Nancy followed up by writing directly to Brendan Nelson, and while he did reply, his response offered no meaningful change in position.

This reinforces what many of us have long suspected: HSBC is not going to voluntarily remove clawback.

That does not mean the fight stops. It means our focus must evolve.

The Next Major Step: FCA Super Complaint

If HSBC will not listen, the next stage is to take our concerns beyond the bank.

Over the past 18 months, many of you have sent in Financial Planning Reviews and personal accounts. We are extremely grateful to everyone who has contributed.

This evidence has become one of the strongest foundations of our campaign.

As Trevor Kloten has reported, the documents submitted show a clear and repeated pattern: many staff, Financial Planning Advisers and even management appeared to have little or no understanding of clawback when pension planning discussions were taking place.

That matters.

It strengthens the argument that clawback was not properly understood, properly explained, or properly communicated.

Building on this evidence, significant progress has been made in preparing what could become one of the most important developments in our campaign so far: a formal Super Complaint to the Financial Conduct Authority.

So far, evidence has been gathered from 80 former HSBC employees.

Of those, 79 — an extraordinary 98.75% — state they were never informed about clawback during their working careers.

That is powerful evidence.

The next planned actions include:

• Submitting the Super Complaint directly to the FCA
• Informing HSBC at the same time, including Rachel Montgomery, Head of HR for UK Bank
• Continuing to gather statements from former compliance and sales training staff
• Coordinating media coverage to ensure wider public scrutiny once the complaint is filed

This changes the focus.

The issue is no longer simply whether clawback is “legal.”

The question now is whether HSBC communicated it fairly, transparently and in line with the standards expected of a major financial institution. Potential outcomes could include procedural changes at HSBC, regulatory penalties, the identification and compensation of affected members, and significant reputational scrutiny.

For many of us, this now feels like the strongest route forward.

Voices from the Committee

Roger George has argued, the campaign must now widen beyond HSBC itself.

Roger has been active in responding to both the Pension Commission consultation and the Department for Work and Pensions consultation on pension surpluses, making the case that pension members must receive fairer treatment — not just employers.

His view is clear: if employers will not voluntarily end clawback, legislation may ultimately be the only route to achieving fairness.

Peter Clare recently spoke with more than 70 former colleagues at a reunion event and found that many felt the campaign had “gone quiet” since the AGM, with some believing HSBC would never change.

That feedback matters. It reminds us how important it is to keep members informed and to show that, even when progress is happening behind the scenes, the campaign remains active and moving forward.

Neil Ballantyne continues to challenge HSBC publicly and remains outspoken about what he sees as the bank’s contradiction: promoting hardship support through its charity while continuing to reduce pensions through clawback.

As Neil puts it, former staff should not have to rely on charity when they are simply asking for the pensions they believed they had earned.

Sandra Smith reminds us that for many campaign members, the frustration is not just that clawback exists, but the way it was calculated and the way it was understood at the time.

Like many others, Sandra recalls being repeatedly told throughout her career that her pension would amount to a proportion of final salary, with no real understanding of the deductions that would later apply.

The Human Cost of Clawback

For many, this is not simply about policy. It is about fairness.

Neil Ballantyne reminds us that while HSBC promotes charitable hardship support through its workers’ fund via the BWC, many former employees should not need charity in the first place.

Many simply want the pension they spent decades working for. Clawback disproportionately impacts lower-paid pensioners, and many women are particularly affected, widening an already significant gender pension gap.

For some, these deductions amount to thousands of pounds a year. For others, it has a direct impact on their quality of life and financial security.

Research Update from the University of Exeter Law School

Our collaboration with the University of Exeter Law School continues to be hugely important.

Dr James Kolaczkowski and Dr David Barrett recently met with Nancy and campaign members to discuss the impact of clawback and its relevance to the work of the Pensions Commission.

The Commission is currently considering large-scale structural reforms to the pensions system and is due to submit its final report to government in Spring 2027.

While clawback is not specifically mentioned in its interim report, the Commission is examining pension adequacy and the gender pensions gap — both areas directly relevant to our campaign.

The Exeter team noted that, from their discussions with members, clawback appears to have a particularly significant impact on women’s pensions, especially when viewed in the context of barriers faced by women entering the workplace in the 1970s and 1980s.

They will be submitting their own academic response to the Commission and will continue their research into clawback during the coming academic year, while exploring future opportunities to bring this issue into wider pension reform discussions.

This is an important step in making sure our experiences help shape the future pensions debate in the UK.

What You Can Do

This campaign only works because of you.

Right now, there are four practical ways you can help:

• Keep sharing any pension review documents or evidence you hold
• Be prepared to write to your MP again as we prepare our next lobbying push
• Keep talking about clawback — online, with former colleagues, and within your networks
• Encourage other affected pensioners to subscribe to the campaign newsletter so they stay informed

The bank may hope this issue fades away.

We will make sure it doesn’t.

Thank you for standing with us.

The Midland Clawback Campaign Committee

#fightingforfairness