Monthly Archives: January 2014


Goldman sued by Libyan fund over $350m profits

Goldman sued by Libyan fund over $350m profits

Goldman Sachs is being sued by the Libyan Investment Authority over $350m (£212m) of profit made in a series of derivative trades which turned sour in the financial crisis.

The investment bank stands accused of “deliberately exploiting” its relationship with the sovereign wealth fund in order to make “substantial profits.”

Goldman is being sued in the High Court in London over a $1bn series of nine trades into companies including Citigroup, EdF, Santander and ENI.


Goldman Said to Boost CEO’s Bonus 11% to $21 Million

Goldman Said to Boost CEO’s Bonus 11% to $21 Million

Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS) Chief Executive Officer Lloyd C. Blankfein, the highest-paid head of a U.S. bank for 2012, saw his bonus increase 11 percent to $21 million for his work last year.

Blankfein, who also serves as chairman, received 88,422 restricted shares on Jan. 28 valued at $14.7 million, according to a regulatory filing. He also got a cash award amounting to the typical 30 percent of his total bonus, according to a person with knowledge of the payout. On that basis, the cash portion of his bonus would be about $6.3 million.


Citibank Settlement

Citibank Settlement

SAN FRANCISCO – A class alleging that Citibank charged unfair overdraft fees on debit card transactions is working on a settlement, a federal judge said.


Big Win For Homeowners – California Supreme Court Depublishes Aspiras v. Wells Fargo

Big Win For Homeowners – California Supreme Court Depublishes Aspiras v. Wells Fargo

On August 21, 2013, the California Court of Appeal issued a negative ruling against homeowners in an area homeowners thought they were winning.

The story begins in February 2013, when the California Court of Appeals (the First District), issued a groundbreaking decision in Jolley v. Chase, which found that mortgage servicers could be held liable for negligence if they mishandled the loan modification process and caused foreseeable harm to affected homeowners. This ruling was a significant win for homeowners who had long sought to hold mortgage servicing companies accountable for fraudulent, unfair, and deceptive conduct when reviewing people for and negotiating loan modifications. The ruling was also a watershed moment for homeowners since most of the case law prior to this ruling found that banks could never be held liable for negligence in the loan modification context—no matter how egregious their conduct.


U.S. seeks $2.1 billion from Bank of America in fraud case

U.S. seeks $2.1 billion from Bank of America in fraud case

Reuters) – The U.S. government has raised the amount it is seeking in penalties from Bank of America Corp (BAC.N) to $2.1 billion after a jury found the bank was liable for fraud over defective mortgages sold by its Countrywide unit.

The request in a court filing late on Wednesday was based on gross revenue generated by the fraud, the government said. The Justice Department had previously asked for $863.6 million.

The initial request was based on gross losses it said government-sponsored mortgagefinance companies Fannie Mae (FNMA.OB) and Freddie Mac (FMCC.OB) incurred on loans purchased from Countrywide Financial Corp in 2007 and 2008.


Citigroup plans to hire 2,500 professionals in India this year

Citigroup plans to hire 2,500 professionals in India this year

MUMBAI: Citigroup is planning to increase its headcount in India by hiring 2,500 professionals in 2014, though globally the bank does not plan to increase its people’s strength from a net add point of view. “India is a place we are investing in. Last year, we hired around 2,500 people in India and this year we will hire about the same number of professionals,” said Paul McKinnon, head of human resources at Citigroup.

“India is an important market for Citi. It is one of our high growt .. 


Homeowners name Bank of America in lawsuit

Homeowners name Bank of America in lawsuit

WINFIELD — A Putnam County couple has sued Bank of America, claiming the company of trying to alter a mortgage agreement.

Barbara and James Jones filed suit Jan. 16 in Putnam Circuit Court, accusing Bank of America of unilaterally rescinding a mortgage agreement between the parties in violation of West Virginia Code.

According to Jones, they purchased their home located at 185 Shawnee Estates in Winfield in the 1980s. In 2008, the couple says they endured medical issues that caused them financial hardship. The Jones say they modified their mortgage with Bank of America and in 2012 they worked with West Virginia’s attorney general and had an existing foreclosure canceled.

The Jones go on to say that they fully complied with the modification. Their mortgage was purportedly modified but in 2013 Bank of America tried to cancel the modification, and sign a new settlement and release agreement whereby they would release any legal claims against Bank of America.

The Jones say Bank of America has been harassing them and have breached the contract into which the two parties entered.