Banker tells Craig Whyte fraud trial his takeover bid appeared to be of 'substance'

A banker involved in Craig Whyte's takeover of Rangers said his bid had appeared to be of “substance”.

Ian Shanks was a senior official with the club's bank Lloyds when Whyte's interest became known in 2010.

Rangers at the time had a sizeable debt to Lloyds – including an £18m loan.

A jury heard Lloyds saw the sale of Rangers as “sensible”.

But, later asked if there had been pressure to accept Whyte's bid, Mr Shanks said the bank was “a bystander looking to get the debt repaid”.

The evidence was today heard at Whyte's trial at the High Court in Glasgow.

The 46 year-old denies a charge of fraud and a second allegation under the Companies Act in connection with his 2011 takeover.

The role of Mr Shanks at the time involved him working struggling companies who used the bank.

The Murray group – ran by then Rangers owner Sir David Murray – was said to owe “an enormous” amount to Lloyds running into “hundreds of millions”.

The court previously heard how Sir David put Rangers on the market.

The debt ridden club at the time had a large overdraft and loan with Lloyds.

Prosecutor Alex Prentice QC asked: “Did the bank have any say whatsoever in the running of the club?”

Mr Shanks: “No, they did not.”

The 50 year-old witness said the objective was to “reduce” what was owed.

The court heard claims that Lloyds wanted out of Rangers and football altogether.

But, Mr Prentice asked had there been “pressure” on the Murray group to sell Rangers.

Mr Shanks said: “No.”

The banker said he went on to learn of Whyte's proposal to buy Sir David's shares in the club.

Mr Prentice: “Was there something of substance in this new interest?”

Mr Shanks: “Yes, there was.”

The court heard, that in January 2011, Mr Shanks attended a meeting in London with the “Whyte team” to look at any bid.

Whyte himself was said not to have been present.

It was claimed Whyte's lawyer Gary Withey had raised the possibility of the bank's “appetite” to write off any of the debts owed.

But, Mr Shanks said that was of no interest to Lloyds.

An initial £33m offer to takeover was lodged before a bid of around £28m with a final £27m proposal put forward.

Whyte later went to strike a £1 deal with Sir David to takeover Rangers.

Under cross examination, Whyte's QC Donald Findlay asked: “Did the bank see the possible sale of Rangers being a sensible proposition?”

Mr Shanks: “Yes.”

Mr Shanks went on to state football was a “sector” Lloyds had become “uncomfortable” lending against.

Mf Findlay went to ask if the bank had put pressure on the Rangers board or Murray to “complete” the Whyte deal.

The trial, before Judge Lady Stacey, continues.

Mr Shanks said it had not adding: “The bank was a bystander looking to get the debt repaid.”

Mr Findlay later suggested there was “a war going on behind the scenes” in the run-up to Whyte's takeover.

This included it appeared the bank “lacked trust” in the then Rangers board.

The QC went on to state this was “the mess that Mr Whyte was walking into”

The jury was also told of emails between Mr Shanks and his boss at the bank.

In one, then Ibrox chairman Alastair Johnston was branded “ a major liability”.

Johnston had handed the club chief executive Martin Bain a new contract without getting approval.

Mr Findlay: “These are the people running Rangers Football Club...no wonder things were going bust?”

Mr Shanks: “I don't believe things were going bust.”

Mr Findlay later claimed the bank were “quite happy” there appeared to be “inter board conflict”.

The jury heard how Lloyds were keen for the Whyte deal to be completed.

But, Mr Shanks described any attempt to withdraw Rangers banking facilities should it not go ahead as “leverage”.

Mr Findlay: “That not pressure?”

The witness: “Leverage...a negotiating tactic as part of the transaction.”

• Ian Shanks