Seeking Alpha
Seeking Alpha Portfolio App for iPad
Finance
(1)
Market Currents

Fourteen banks are reportedly set to reach a $10B settlement with regulators over abusive...

  • Monday, December 31, 2012, 2:37 AM ET
    Fourteen banks are reportedly set to reach a $10B settlement with regulators over abusive foreclosure practices such as incorrect paperwork and excessive charges. The banks include the five that agreed to pay $26B in another deal earlier this year - JPMorgan (JPM), Bank of America (BAC), Wells Fargo (WFC), Citigroup (C) and Ally Financial. The latest settlement will allow banks to end a review of 4M loan files that has cost 1.5B so far.
Track new comments on this story

This news story has 32 comments:

  • More great news for stockholders as this was going on for decades. Billions in fines and costs from the banks. To make a statement about corporate fraud, and to offer a lesson for the future, I hope some heads roll or have rolled in the bank's REO departments. And if some lawyer was involved or behind any of this, he should be disbarred and working in the fast food industry. I suspect that the elite banking law firms either created or knew all about the fraudulent practices and the bar associations or the state attorneys general should take appropriate action against their top dogs in real estate law.
    31 Dec 2012, 03:08 AM Reply Like
  • Yes, incorrect paperwork is a frightening thing. Bet it never happens where you work.
    31 Dec 2012, 05:00 AM Reply Like
  • Forging names and flat out fake paperwork? I thought people were breaking rocks for that. But it depends who you are and how widespread it is. America! What a country!
    31 Dec 2012, 01:46 PM Reply Like
  • "Faulty paperwork", indeed.

    HA! I was commenting above as someone with stock. I just remembered an adventure I had with mortgage servicers! Some years ago I had a rental home and payments current for years. Then I switched insurance policies. The new company sent the appropriate paperwork. A year or so later, my payment jumped. I called and found out that a new insurance policy had been taken out on my property since I allowed the insurance to "lapse". Guess who had to pay a nice chunk of change for double coverage? Guess who owned the "Troubled Loan" insurance company? I had money, thank God, or I would have lost the house or been forced to sell.

    On on the harmless aspects of this call the lady in the Jacksonville office who was on the other side. The description and press release was undoubtedly negotiated and I suspect some borrowers would use stronger language.

    I know, banks just pay billions because of mean old judges.
    31 Dec 2012, 01:59 PM Reply Like
  • pm is Phillip Morris. jpm is jp Morgan. sheesh
    31 Dec 2012, 06:54 AM Reply Like
  • What's your point? Don't see where anyone disagreed with you.
    31 Dec 2012, 01:40 PM Reply Like
  • JPM was given the ticker symbol PM this morning in typical non-proof read SA fashion. This happens quite a bit with market currents it seems (wrong ticker symbol for the stock being discussed).
    31 Dec 2012, 01:43 PM Reply Like
  • I did not see that in this article - was it corrected before I saw it?

    "Monday, December 31, 2012, 2:37 AM Fourteen banks are reportedly set to reach a $10B settlement with regulators over abusive foreclosure practices such as incorrect paperwork and excessive charges. The banks include the five that agreed to pay $26B in another deal earlier this year - JPMorgan (JPM), Bank of America (BAC), Wells Fargo (WFC), Citigroup (C) and Ally Financial. The latest settlement will allow banks to end a review of 4M loan files that has cost 1.5B so far."
    1 Jan, 05:41 PM Reply Like
  • It was PM in the morning before you saw it not jpm as the ticker. Happens with some frequency here from what I see
    1 Jan, 07:13 PM Reply Like
  • I was looking for an article related to the real PM too.
    2 Jan, 04:10 AM Reply Like
  • getzeman, 14 banks are willing to pay 10 bill, that's on top of another 26 bill. that's not accidental, that's rico.

    they're willing to pay that money because they're dead bang caught.

    that's the entitlement problem. not little people's pensions and unions and medicare. the bankers and shareholders who steal and pay a pittance and have none of their profits or their personal fortunes seized or are not sent to the stoney lonesome. only the outsiders go.
    31 Dec 2012, 07:43 AM Reply Like
  • If you actually read the story...It stated that after countless billions spent on combing through mortgage documents they found little to no discrepancies. The settlement was cheaper than spending another three years going through the the remaining documents.
    31 Dec 2012, 11:56 AM Reply Like
  • Hmm, I should have read this article before commenting, now that I have, it just doesn't add up.

    On the one side, you have regulators telling banks to pay $10 billion in order to stop being required to look for victims. So if there are no victims identified, how can the funds be dispersed?

    On the other side, the reviews weren't just looking for people who were charged fees or evicted unfairly, they were also looking for faulty paperwork. So taking this article at face value, apparently all the reports of NINJA loans weren't true. Nobody got a mortgage during the housing bubble that shouldn't have. Who knew?

    Of course there's always the possibility that the independent consultants really weren't all that independent.
    31 Dec 2012, 01:57 PM Reply Like
  • That I don't know. I can only tell you what I "believe" is happening.

    What I believe is happening is that in 2009 The government "encouraged these banks to take on some of the liabilities fostered by the housing bust. Since then they have been working together to try to get money through the banks to as many mortgage holders that are in trouble as possible. The Fed prints free money gives it to the banks who in turn use the money to re-imburse customers or modify loans to try to take some of the heat off of the Federal Budget.

    In the mean time...a bunch of lawyers get rich. That is just what I believe maybe I am a "nut:
    1 Jan, 07:57 AM Reply Like
  • I fear that the word game was played with the bank's counsel to cop the plea or we have a bunch of innocent business people getting soaked.
    3 Jan, 12:09 PM Reply Like
  • Litigation costs and settlements are all coming out of the profits from the banks. The money is set aside as a cost on the balance sheet. The money is not coming from the Fed. The Bailout money for BAC has all been repaid, with interest, and the preferred stock redeemed. Warrants that were given to the U.S. Treasury were also part of the deal and were sold in 2010 for a bonus profit for taxpayers! The current litigation is now soon to be part of the past. The people at the bank are currently not the ones that were around when this all happened. Countrywide credit was the biggest ones at fault - they were acquired by BAC in the bailout that saved us from the complete collapse of the economy and you say we should punish the economic heroes of our society because of a personal problem you had that may have been partly your fault.
    7 Jan, 06:00 AM Reply Like
  • Mex,

    Didn't mean to imply that it was a bailout. By Fed I meant the Federal Reserve and by free money I meant loaning to the banks at zero interest rate which they then turn to profits and move to customers. The problem I have is that this is done through lawyers and lawsuits instead of other methods. This story is just another example of a lawsuit that is being settled out of court where no wrongdoing was found on the part of the banks who settled to get the problem and litigation behind them.

    Don't get me wrong... I believe BAC was "encouraged" to take on Merrill and Countrywide just as JPM was "encouraged" to take on Bear Stearns. I think these big banks did us all a favor and don't deserve the scorn they recieve. It is unbelievable to me that we even hear anyone talking about breaking up these banks. My memory of the events was that the companies that got in trouble during the crisis were a Car Company, three brokerage companies, and an Insurance company.
    7 Jan, 07:17 AM Reply Like
  • I appreciate your reply and appologize for my negative interpretations.
    7 Jan, 10:15 AM Reply Like
  • The "little peoples'" pensions and 401k's are the shareholders. A better question is how long are investors going to be willing to continue coughing up billions out of their retirement funds to prevent corporate managers from being prosecuted.
    31 Dec 2012, 08:26 AM Reply Like
  • Right you are. It is much more profitable to the government to squeeze billions out of wrong doers that to put them into jail.
    1 Jan, 03:15 AM Reply Like
  • The reason I don't, is because after years of reading thousands of
    comments, I realize that 90% of them are either racist, a personal
    opinion, or way off base.
    The intelligent one's are few and far between.
    Happy New Year !!!
    31 Dec 2012, 08:51 AM Reply Like
  • This money could have been (and should have been) money that reached shareholders. Think about it. What was really done here is to take money that belonged to the shareholders and give it to our "great leader" to squander on the favorite federal program du jour.
    31 Dec 2012, 09:25 AM Reply Like
  • You mean to give it to a fake green company that will be bankrupt before the ink is dry. I am convince that billions of the unaccounted for spending by the government goes into the pockets of government officials and their friends.
    1 Jan, 03:18 AM Reply Like
  • But, of course, there were no individuals responsible
    31 Dec 2012, 09:51 AM Reply Like
  • jelrod3--

    Business has gotten uglier and uglier. Like to see some law do something about that. Not that politics is any prettier.
    31 Dec 2012, 11:54 AM Reply Like
  • Think for a moment who makes the laws???
    31 Dec 2012, 01:41 PM Reply Like
  • I challenge anyone, professional, experienced, or lawyer, to consistently complete accurate documentation for real estate loans given the phenomenally complex, voluminous, and restrictive requirements in place now in the business of real estate lending. When you got your loan you signed them, did you read them?
    31 Dec 2012, 05:06 PM Reply Like
  • Yes.
    1 Jan, 08:44 AM Reply Like
  • Yes and more than once had them corrected before I signed.
    Especially escrow instructions & final docs.
    2 Jan, 02:42 PM Reply Like
  • You know, it suddenly dawned on me why the banksters are never charged with anything. If the all the people ransacking the country via these financial reamings were prosecuted, where the heck would we find anyone to appoint to gov't positions? I mean, can you seeing Dimon taking over for Timmy if he had several felonies to his credit? Do you think Diamond will be stepping in as printer in chief? I guess he is almost as qualified to fudge the interest rates as the Bernak.
    1 Jan, 04:56 PM Reply Like
  • You mean Timmy the tax cheat?
    3 Jan, 11:42 AM Reply Like
  • I wish there was an ignore button here.
    7 Jan, 06:07 AM Reply Like
Other date
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)