Daily Archives: July 26, 2012


Great news, you guys. We can go ahead and scratch at least one bank off the list of egregious interest-rate manipulators. That’s because this bank has heroically determined that it is totally innocent. Almost totally, anyway.

Reuters reports that Deutsche Bank, the biggest German bank, has carefully investigated its own role in the habitual, fraudulent, global rigging of Libor, the most important interest rate in the world. And you might want to sit down for this, but Deutsche Bank has determined, to what we can only imagine is its own profound relief, that Deutsche Bank was only barely involved in the scandal. Hardly any involvement, really. If you blur your eyes a bit, it even kind of looks like Deutsche Bank wasn’t involved at all. Certainly not in its top executive ranks. That’s the way Deutsche Bank would like you to see it, anyway.

Hmm, one small problem, though: Handelsblatt is reporting that Deutsche Bank is bracing for “a huge fine” in the Libor scandal, setting aside between $300 million and $1 billion — the middle point of which would be higher than the $450 million Barclays paid. Does that sound like a bank that really expects to get out of this without any mud getting splashed on the C-suite?

Rest here…

RICO class actions claim against Citibank and JP Morgan Chase

Courthouse News Service.


SAN FRANCISCO – RICO class actions claim Citibank and JP Morgan Chase “conceal the unlawful assessment of improperly marked-up or unnecessary third-party fees for default-related services, cheating borrowers who can least afford it,” in Federal Court.

Here is the class action complaint.

Open thread for Thursday

Grant & Eisenhofer P.A. Brings Consumer-Rights Class Action Against JPMorgan Chase & Co. in Connection With Its Brokerage and Investment Management Services

NEW YORK, July 16, 2012 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ — Grant & Eisenhofer P.A. filed a class action lawsuit on July 13, 2012 in the Supreme Court of the State of New York against JPMorgan Chase & Co. (“JPMorgan”). JPMorgan, unbeknownst to its customers, has directed its clients into its own JPMorgan funds even when those funds were not suitable investments. JPMorgan did so to earn increased fees at the expense of their clients. As a result of Defendant’s conduct, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”), the Manhattan district attorney, and officials in New Jersey and Delaware are investigating Defendant’s sales practices. All current or former JPMorgan clients who invested in JPMorgan mutual funds from January 1, 2007 through the present are eligible to participate in the suit.

Read on.

Good FDCPA opinion by the 6th Circuit

We previously reported that Bryllaw won an FDCPA case in Virginia against HSBC Mortgage Corporation, obtaining damages, sanctions, and attorney fees on behalf of an Ashburn homeowner.

Now an Ohio homeowner was able to win on appeal in the 6th Circuit, overturning a typical pro-bank/judicial-bailout ruling by an Ohio federal district judge.

The 6th Circuit held that a homeowner successfully stated a claim under the Federal Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) where Washington Mutual  foreclosed on property before receiving an assignment and transfer of the promissory note and before recording the transfer.  A full text of the opinion is set forth below.

Read on.

MBIA wants seal lifted on BofA depositions, expert reports

Thomson Reuters News & Insight.


Last week, when I wrote about the impact of Syncora’s $375 million settlement with Bank of America, I had a bit of an existential crisis. Sources kept telling me that the mortgage-backed securities litigation between the bond insurer and Countrywide was more of a sideshow than the main event, and that business considerations, not developments in the breach-of-contract case, drove the settlement. You can imagine how that made me feel, considering the brain cells I’ve sacrificed to coverage of monoline put-back litigation. Has all this fulmination — not just by me, but by dozens of lawyers getting paid millions for their trouble — been for naught?

I still don’t know the answer, but I’ve perked up again, thanks to a letter MBIA’s lawyers at Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan sent to New York State Supreme Court Justice Eileen Bransten on Wednesday afternoon. Quinn Emanuel wants Bransten’s permission to file a motion to lift the seal on expert reports, deposition testimony by bank executives and the documents accompanying the reports and depositions. It’s a purely tactical play by MBIA, but the letter is a reminder that litigation occasionally shines a megawatt light on information that businesses would rather keep locked away in a dark closet.

Biloxi Buzz for Thursday

Senate Passes Bill To Preserve Middle Class Tax Cuts


Colorado Shooting Suspect Sent Chilling Note Before Attack


House Overwhelmingly Passes Bill To Audit The Federal Reserve

Free Care For Some Shooting Victims