Daily Archives: May 15, 2013

Link

Barclays’ LIBOR Case Dismissed

Barclays’ LIBOR Case Dismissed

Barclays PLC ( BCS – Snapshot Report ) won the dismissal of the U.S. lawsuit filed against it by the stockholders. The shareholders accused Barclays of indulging in activities which resulted in loss of money for them.

As per the U.S. District Judge, shareholders of Barclays’ American depositary shares failed to provide evidence that the British bank misguided them about London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR). LIBOR supports transaction worth trillions of dollars which are used to fix interest rates on credit cards, student loans and mortgages. The investors failed to prove that the bank did not disclose the potential liabilities.

Moreover, the judge pointed out that the stockholders were unable to provide evidence related to alleged LIBOR manipulation by Barclays between Aug 2007 and Jan 2009 which caused investors to lose money through Jun 2012.

Link

Minority homebuyers to receive portions of $3.2 million Wells Fargo settlement

Minority homebuyers to receive portions of $3.2 million Wells Fargo settlement

More than 1,000 minorities who took out a subprime mortgage loan from Wells Fargo to buy a home in Philadelphia will receive a portion of a $3.2 million settlement, the state said today.

The settlement is part of a multistate, $175 million settlement with Wells Fargo announced in December 2012, according to a statement. The $3.2 million was an increase from an original $2 million figure.

“Housing discrimination is simply not tolerated in Pennsylvania,” JoAnn Edwards, the commission’s executive director said in a statement. “We hope this settlement sends a clear message that home loans must be based on financial qualifications, not on race, national origin or any other protected factor.”

The 1,000 represents African-Americans and Hispanics who lived in Philadelphia and took out home loans with Wells Fargo from 2004 through 2009. The residents received notices of the amount they will receive if they participated in the settlement.

Link

Wells Fargo sued on claims it wrongfully litigated California man to death

Wells Fargo sued on claims it wrongfully litigated California man to death

Larry Delassus’ heart stopped on December 19, 2012 during a court hearing against Wells Fargo, the bank that had for two years demanded he pay more than ten thousand dollars of his neighbor’s late property taxes and is now being sued for wrongful death.

The retired 62-year-old US Navy veteran had been battling Wells Fargo for two years, following a mistake by the bank which held him liable for property taxes actually owed by a neighbor – $13,361 which the bank paid in order to keep that property’s mortgage afloat.

Unfortunately for Delassus, described as a quiet man who suffered from a rare and debilitating blood clot disorder known as Budd-Chiari syndrome, the simple typo that caused Wells Fargo to misidentify him for his neighbor seemed to be an error that the fourth-largest bank in the United States simply would not rectify.

According to an investigation conducted by LA Weekly, even after admitting that a mis-entered number had dragged Delassus into the ordeal, the bank eventually foreclosed upon and sold his condominium apartment. This was after increasing his mortgage payments from $1,237.69 to $2,429.13 in order to recover the $13,361 in taxes he never owed.

Delassus, a retiree living on a limited budget, couldn’t meet the increased mortgage bill, and once he stopped paying became delinquent. Following the foreclosure on his home, he had to move to a small apartment in an assisted-living home.

In January 2009 Delassus was first informed that he owed tens of thousands in property taxes. After consulting with Anthony Trujillo, his attorney and next-door neighbor, Trujillo confirmed that he was actually six months ahead on those taxes, paid directly to Los Angeles County. By March 2009 the bank had doubled his mortgage payment, and by December of that year the bank was ready to foreclose.

Link

Bank Of America Gives Existing Customers Yet Another Reason To Flee

Bank Of America Gives Existing Customers Yet Another Reason To Flee

Many banks offer benefits to account-holders who also have their home loan serviced by the institution. Bank of America has been doing that for years, cutting fees for people with both checking accounts and mortgages. But now BofA has gone and sold off millions of these mortgages to another servicer, starting a countdown clock for account-holders to go elsewhere or likely face new fees.

 

The L.A. Times’ David Lazarus, who admits to being one of those affected by the move, says that BofA customers whose mortgage servicing has been sold off to a company called Nationstar won’t continue to enjoy the benefits of having a mortgage and checking account at the same bank. Instead, there is a 12-month grace period before BofA will start charging any fees for affected customers.

In other words, these people have 12 months to close out their BofA account and move it elsewhere.

Link

Aurora foreclosure halted; constitutionality issue unresolved

Aurora foreclosure halted; constitutionality issue unresolved

A federal judge on Tuesday formally stopped the foreclosure auction of an Aurora woman’s house, leaving unanswered whether he can determine if a part of Colorado’s foreclosure laws is unconstitutional.

While U.S. District Judge William J. Martínez’s order enjoins U.S. Bank, the trustee on Lisa Kay Brumfiel’s mortgage, from seeking a public-trustee foreclosure, it doesn’t stop the bank from pursuing her house the old-fashioned way — via a lawsuit in state court.

The bank conceded to the injunction late Monday because, lawyers said in a court filing, it had already closed the foreclosure case it filed against Brumfiel with the Arapahoe County public trustee’s office more than 18 months ago.

Read more:Aurora foreclosure halted; constitutionality issue unresolved – The Denver Posthttp://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_23242542/foreclosure-halted-constitutionality-issue-unresolved#ixzz2TKR6qNlC

ELIZABETH WARREN PUSHES FEDS FOR ANSWER ON BIG BANK ENFORCEMENT

WASHINGTON — Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) raised the stakes of her quest to find out why a single Wall Street bank has not been prosecuted in the aftermath of the financial crisis Tuesday, sending a letter to the heads of three federal agencies.

Warren, a member of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing & Urban Affairs asked Attorney General Eric Holder, current Securities and Exchange Commission Chairwoman Mary Jo White and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke whether they had done any cost-benefit research into prosecuting a bank versus settling with one, which is equivalent to a slap on the wrist for a profitable financial institution.

“Have you conducted any internal research or analysis on trade-offs to the public between settling an enforcement action without admission of guilt and going forward with litigation as necessary to obtain suchadmission and, if so, can you provide that analysis to my office?” Warren said in the letter.

On Feb. 14, Warren came to her first banking committee hearing and asked federal agencies tasked with bank regulation a related, straightforward question: When was the last time you took a Wall Street bank to trial?

“We do not have to bring people to trial,” said Thomas Curry, the head of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the independent bank regulator within the Treasury Department.

Warren then put the question to Elisse Walter, the former SEC chairwoman. Her response: “I will have to get back to you with specific information.”

“There are district attorneys and United States attorneys out there every day squeezing ordinary citizens on sometimes very thin grounds and taking them to trial in order to make an example, as they put it. I’m really concerned that ‘too big to fail’ has become ‘too big for trial,’” Warren said.

Warren submitted the question to the OCC for the record, and they responded last week that no, they had not conducted research into trade-offs. “The OCC does not have any internal research or analysis on the trade-offs of settling without an admission of liability,” the OCC responded, according to Warren’s letter.

Now it’s up to Bernanke, Holder and White to answer.