Professor Philip Lane:

There was a lot of activity after 2010 and there were interventions in the 7,100 cases to which we referred earlier. There have been changes to the codes to reinforce the importance of handling these mortgages correctly and these may have avoided even more cases during the period in question. It is disappointing that, despite these interventions, this went on in such a comprehensive way. We are now trying to push the banks to offer redress and compensation as quickly and as comprehensively as they can and we are proactively trying to hold the banks to their promises in this regard. Some 13,000 cases have been accepted. In 3,000 cases, there has been an initial payment and we think a lot has been done. If we could have done more at an earlier point, it would have been better, but a lot was done in the initial phase. In 2014, the enforcement against Springboard happened and this examination was unprecedented in the way we pushed the banks to do the right thing within what we could legally do.

We are doing a lot to sort out the problem. We believe there are banks which should have moved more quickly. Some banks did comply and engaged with the process fully from the word "Go" but we want to get to the end of the process now. We want to show the degree to which this examination process will yield good results for those who have been affected while allowing people to turn to the traditional mechanisms to get satisfaction if necessary. This has been effective to a degree and there is more to come. It is important to reassure those affected that a lot will be delivered by this examination and saying we have been ineffective does not send out the right message. We are pushing the banks quite a lot. A lot will be achieved that would not have been achieved if we had not intervened. We are working on behalf of those affected and this is the most effective way to deal with it.