S&P agrees $1.5bn settlement

BY Richard Summerfield

After years of legal wrangling, credit rating agency Standard & Poor's has agreed to pay the federal, state and D.C. governments around $1.5bn to resolve several lawsuits covering the firm’s role in the 2008 financial crisis.

While the settlement does not bring an end to the scrutiny placed upon the wider ratings business (indeed, S&P’s competitors Fitch and Moody’s are still embroiled in legal battles), the agreement does bring to a close an embarrassing chapter in S&P’s history. The firm, much like its rival agencies, stood accused of issuing falsely inflated ratings of mortgage-backed securities during the housing boom of 2004 to 2007, which contributed to the onset of the 2008 financial crisis. “As S&P admits under this settlement, company executives complained that the company declined to downgrade underperforming assets because it was worried that doing so would hurt the company’s business,” said Attorney General Eric Holder. “While this strategy may have helped S&P avoid disappointing its clients, it did major harm to the larger economy, contributing to the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.”

Under the terms of the agreement, S&P’s parent group, McGraw Hill Financial Inc, will pay $687.5m to the US Department of Justice, and $687.5m to 19 states and the District of Columbia, which had all filed similar lawsuits. According to S&P, the firm agreed to the settlement in order “to avoid the delay, uncertainty, inconvenience and expense of further litigation".

S&P has also reached a separate $125m settlement agreement with the California Public Employees’ Retirement System. The pension fund opened legal proceedings against S&P in 2009.

The agreement reached between S&P and the DOJ is a so-called ‘no fault’ deal. Accordingly, the firm has admitted no wrongdoing as part of the settlement. No fault agreements have been particularly unpopular in the past and the S&P agreement has drawn fierce criticism from some circles. Critics of the plan have been particularly vocal in their opposition to the deal as S&P was not found to have violated the law under the terms of the deal. Some commentators had hoped that the firm would be held accountable for its actions, in order to act as a preventative measure in the future.

News: S&P reaches $1.5 billion deal with U.S., states over crisis-era ratings

Regulators hit banks with £2.7bn fine following FOREX investigation

BY Fraser Tennant

Six banks have been hit with fines totalling £2.7bn for their part in failing to stop traders who were manipulating the financial system by rigging the £3.5 trillion-a-day foreign exchange (FOREX) markets.

The penalties were handed out to Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS), HSBC, JPMorgan, UBS, Citibank and Bank of America Merrill Lynch following an 18-month investigation by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and its counterparts in Switzerland and the US.

The FCA’s portion of the fines represents the biggest financial punishment ever levied by the British regulator. 

Yet another British bank, Barclays, has been told to expect similar punitive action for its part in the scandal.

The regulators’ investigation discovered that some traders, who referred to themselves as ‘the A-team’, ‘the Players’ and ‘the 3 musketeers’, made millions for their banks while pocketing bonuses worth hundreds of thousands of pounds – often in just a single afternoon.

Evidence collected showed that traders posted messages on forums bragging about making 'free money' and collecting eye-watering profits – the very same forums where, over a five-year period, they colluded to share privileged client information. 

The regulators have also warned that anyone found guilty of manipulating the FOREX market could face jail but although it’s believed that 30 traders have been sacked or suspended, not one has faced charges.

Martin Wheatley, chief executive of the FCA, said “The FCA does not tolerate conduct which imperils market integrity or the wider UK financial system. These record fines mark the gravity of the failings we found and firms need to take responsibility for putting it right. They must make sure their traders do not game the system to boost profits or leave the ethics of their conduct to compliance to worry about. Senior management commitments to change need to become a reality in every area of their business.

“But this is not just about enforcement action. It is about a combination of actions aimed at driving up market standards across the industry. All firms need to work with us to deliver real and lasting change to the culture of the trading floor. This is essential to restoring the public’s trust in financial services and London maintaining its position as a strong and competitive financial centre.”

News: Six Banks to Pay $4.3 Billion in First Wave of Currency-Rigging Penalties

Standard Chartered probes fresh allegations

BY Matt Atkins

In response to fresh US allegations over money laundering, the UK bank Standard Chartered will soon begin trawling its extensive data banks for signs of questionable activity, in an effort to avoid additional penalties. Standard Chartered clears approximately two million US dollar transactions each month. The process of sifting through the data will therefore prove a mammoth task.

The UK bank came under scrutiny in 2012, when flaws in its anti-money laundering program were uncovered by a monitor imposed by the New York Department of Financial Services (DFS). The DFS and federal authorities took separate actions against Standard Chartered at the time fining the bank a total of $667m for violating US sanctions by hiding transactions linked to Iran.

Standard Chartered is again under scrutiny from the DFS, the bank disclosed in an earnings announcement last week. A penalty of more than $100m and an extension of the monitorship is possible.

The bank's issues stem from a  problematic transaction-monitoring software system installed in the 2000s. The system is intended to flag suspect transactions, however the so-called 'detection scenarios' that tell the system what activity to flag for human review have not been properly calibrated, according to a Reuters source. Most of the scenarios have now been corrected, said the source, and efforts are underway to fix the others before the bank moves to a new system early in 2015.

The news comes in the same week that a senior executive at Standard Chartered slammed regulators for treating banks and their employees unfairly. "Banks have been asked to play the role of policing anti-money laundering … [but when] we have a lapse we don't get treated like a policeman, we are treated like a criminal," said Jaspal Bindra, who runs Standard Chartered's business in Asia.

The bank said the remarks by Mr Bindra reflected his personal views. Standard Bank's CEO, Peter Sands, said when he was presenting the bank's results, that he respected the views of regulators.

News: Standard Chartered to scour records for money laundering, with penalty at stake

Icahn faces insider trading claims

BY Matt Atkins

Renowned activist investor Carl Icahn has come under investigation for insider trading along with two others. According to reports, the investigation began three years ago and is the latest to emerge from an ongoing crackdown on insider trading by US authorities.

The investigation reportedly centres on suspicious trades in consumer products company Clorox Co by golfer Phil Mickelson and high-profile sports better William Walters. The trades came shortly before Mr Icahn made a bid to take over the company in 2011. Mr Icahn had accumulated a 9.1 percent stake in Clorox in February 2011. In July, he made an offer which valued the company at above $10bn and did wonders for its stock price.

Federal prosecutors in Manhattan are handling the inquiry in conjunction with the FBI and the SEC. The investigation appears to be looking at whether Icahn leaked details of his failed takeover bid to Mr Walters – who Mr Icahn knows – which were subsequently passed on to Mr Mickelson.

Investigators are also looking into trades made by Mr Mickelson and Mr Walters in relation to Dean Foods Co, just before the company announced quarterly results in 2012. These trades appear unconnected to Mr Icahn.

Even supposing Mr Icahn had leaked information about his plans regarding Clorox, there is confusion to whether he would have violated the law. Insider trading regulations prohibit trading based on material, non-public information obtained from someone who breached a fiduciary or confidentiality duty by disclosing it. Since he was not a board member at Clorox, Mr Icahn owed no duty to its shareholders. It is possible that Mr Icahn owed a confidentiality duty to his own investors, though this legal argument may be a stretch, given he owned more that 90 percent of Icahn Enterprises at the time.

Mr Icahn denies all allegations against him. He told Reuters that he was unaware of any investigation and said that his firm always followed the law. He acknowledged a business relationship with Walters but said that he did not know Mickelson personally. "I am very proud of my 50-year unblemished record and have never given out insider information," he said.

News: Icahn, Mickelson are investigated in US insider trading probe

SFO outlines changes to UK Bribery Act

The director of the Serious Fraud Office (SFO), David Green QC, has proposed a number of changes to the UK Bribery Act, which, if enacted, could make it easier for the SFO to prosecute corporations under the Act. Furthermore, the Home Office has is considering financially incentivising whistleblowers in cases of fraud, bribery and corruption. If this is implemented it will represent a significant development in the discovery and enforcement of fraud, bribery and corruption offences in the UK.

FW spoke to Satnam Tumani, a partner at Kirkland & Ellis International, Siobhain Egan, a director at Lewis Nedas Law, and Sam Eastwood, a partner at Norton Rose Fulbright, about the proposed changes.

TalkingPoint: Proposed changes to the UK Bribery Act