Seeking Alpha

New York's AG has filed a civil complaint against JPMorgan Chase (JPM), alleging widespread...

New York's AG has filed a civil complaint against JPMorgan Chase (JPM), alleging widespread fraud in the sale of mortgage-backed securities in the run-up to the financial crisis. The suit relates to billions of dollars of subprime securities issued by Bear Stearns' before its takeover by JPM, and is the first brought under the authority of a law enforcement group formed by President Obama in January to pursue alleged wrongdoing during the financial crisis. More cases are expected to follow. Shares -0.8% AH.
Comments (39)
  • so the government forces a shotgun wedding and then new york sues. that sounds reasonable.
    1 Oct 2012, 06:15 PM Reply Like
  • Next time the government comes to the table with a sick bank to be taken over "good luck" to them.


    Or the acquirer will ask for blanket immunity from all civil and criminal charges due to malfeasance from prior management.


    Notice this was a civil suit?
    1 Oct 2012, 06:34 PM Reply Like
  • So JPM Morgan took over Bear Stearns with the Gov't holding a gun to their head? JP Morgan was forced to buy Stearns? The genius of Dimon didn't see it coming even when BA took on Countrywide? Yes it's clear JP Morgan is the victim. (sarcasm)
    2 Oct 2012, 12:20 AM Reply Like
  • not saying jpm is a victim. i just think its ridiculous that dimon stepped in when nobody else wanted (meaning could) step in and really helped the govt out by buying all that garbage, albeit for pennies on the dollar. then he gets sued a few years later for the shit he took on via a govt backed loan.
    2 Oct 2012, 07:27 AM Reply Like
  • How to stimulate the economy - print money, sue banks.
    1 Oct 2012, 06:26 PM Reply Like
  • Dang! Tried to "like" this comment, found out I'd already voted. I just SO agree with "print money, sue banks" comment.
    2 Oct 2012, 02:35 PM Reply Like
  • Perhaps the bank could sue the Govt for entrapment or coercion?
    1 Oct 2012, 06:27 PM Reply Like
  • Its about time that they also brings out the silver manupulation
    1 Oct 2012, 06:43 PM Reply Like
  • Unless the government is planning on putting some of the original fraudsters in jail which they aren't they should put an end to this endless litigation non-sense. It doesn't help anyone.
    1 Oct 2012, 06:47 PM Reply Like
  • Nothing will happen and none goes to jail. Case closed, they got the judges and the politicians in their back pocket.
    1 Oct 2012, 06:51 PM Reply Like
  • The Bear Stearns guys are already gone. Hence it is not a criminal case. Who do they charge?
    1 Oct 2012, 07:18 PM Reply Like
  • Eggggactly!!!! Bring no one to trial but bitch and complain about how the government is coercing companies to buy bad companies. I guess people are FINALLY starting to see a pattern with Dimon.
    2 Oct 2012, 12:22 AM Reply Like
  • It has been standard practice in the past 40 years at least for the government to have failing institutions picked up by stronger institutions. It has nothing to do with Jamie Dimon. The government does not want to run a bank.


    Now you can say you learned something today.
    2 Oct 2012, 01:27 PM Reply Like
  • It has been implied (not by you) that the FED's used pressure on JPM Morgan (Bear Stearns) and BAC (Merrill Lynch) to buy these companies which IMO is B.S. Sure failing institutions are bought by stronger companies but the financial crisis back in 2008 is whole different issue than a bank taking over deposits of another institutions when the FED's come in and take over banks. So my point is whether they were pressured or not, they took over the companies and now hold responsible for past actions. The JPM Chase or even BAC could've/should've said no as they have a fidicury responsibility to the company and shareholders.
    3 Oct 2012, 01:31 PM Reply Like
  • redarrow5150............. JPM or even BAC could've/should've said no....."


    I disagree. And there was more than pressure, there was coercion, even threats. There were implications during interviews to this effect at the time specifically with BAC executives. I was also skeptical because, as you point out, the required shareholder fiduciary responsibility, & after all, this is America. Then NY sued BAC for violating its shareholder fiduciary responsibility regarding the acquisition of Merrill. BAC executives leaked actual memos & emails from Treasury that frankly turned my stomach. And magically, the leaked memos stopped & the law suit was quickly settled.
    Now that doesn't speak to JPM & any coercion of Dimon regarding Bear. And Diamon hasn't said, but my point is its very possible as it clearly happened regarding Merrill.


    All said, on the verge of another recession this lawsuit is another distraction. Government bails out banks, then sues them just as they are getting their footing, its nuts! Banks are not the 'evil empire', they need to get back to business, the country desperately needs a strong banking system.
    4 Oct 2012, 10:36 AM Reply Like
  • Then why haven't these institutions filed a lawsuit? What you're saying are rumors and not in facts. These institutions have taken on a huge amount of risk so if they were in FACT pressured or coherced in taking on these risks, than the conspiracy of government would put the oneous on the financial firms in disclosing these documents. What's ironic about your statement about BAC is they were REALLY hemoraging money at an incredible rate at the peak of the financial crisis because of the acquisition of Countrywide. So we are to believe they are to take on more risk given the nature of when they bought Merrill Lynch for $2 a share? Hell look at it today and you can clearly see that in many ways the acquisition of Merrill Lynch has propped up BAC more than anyone expected.
    4 Oct 2012, 12:40 PM Reply Like
  • Suing the government is almost ridiculous. They can make you pay for making them look bad.


    BAC bought ML for a lot more than $2 a share. Go check your facts.


    gh is right.........this is a distraction and the Fed is in the middle of it.


    And banks are leaned on as standard practice to absorb failing banks. It has been the Feds standard approach as they know nothing about running a bank.
    4 Oct 2012, 09:26 PM Reply Like
  • The $2 was the original offer but believe they setlled at what $9 a share? It's totally idiotic to think the court systems with judges and juries are out to get the banks with the Fed's backing. Of course other banks buy other banks when they are failing even before and after the financial crisis. This whole aspect of some conspiracy is laughable.
    4 Oct 2012, 10:00 PM Reply Like
  • redarrow5150.............


    Its not a conspiracy, usually its the FDIC that negotiates troubled assets deals. But in the crisis the Fed & Treasury were also involved. It got ugly at BAC because they tried to back out of the Merrill deal, Why? Because of shareholder fiduciary responsibility! What they were later sued for! At the time Merrill may have been worthless. The threatening memos were published after NY decided to pursue a shareholder fiduciary civil suit regarding Merrill & it wasn't, as you say; "laughable".
    An example of what I guess you think is a conspiracy is the FDIC funded the absorption of a Florida thrift AmTrust into NYB in the 1st half of 2010. It was not the 2 banks, the FDIC orchestrated the deal, & agreed to a government backed loss-sharing arrangement. This happened often with government involvement, but the message was; you better not back out! And so would you now expect the government to sue NYB over MBS issues at AmTrust?


    This law suit is ridiculous, & political for Dimon's critical comments! I stand by my comment, The JPM/Bear could have been, probably was a similar deal.
    5 Oct 2012, 09:58 AM Reply Like
  • red


    You cannot even get public information right which gives away how much you are just guessing on everything. The price was around $29 per share. You are only off by 15X.


    You are in over your head in these issues.
    5 Oct 2012, 04:08 PM Reply Like
  • If this was to go to a jury or a judge that's where the conspiracy is laughable because they would have to be in on it as well. To say they are going after Dimon based upon his comments is not based upon facts. There was not disclosure by JPM Chase in regards to the losses which is why the Gov't is pursuing on one level and another on the mortgage losses.
    7 Oct 2012, 10:25 AM Reply Like
  • So the government did not disclose the losses to JPM which they knew about before the sale so therefore JPM did not know about them? But they should have disclosed these unknown losses?


    Any more logic to drop on us?
    7 Oct 2012, 02:53 PM Reply Like
  • You are correct my bad. I apologize as I was thinking about Bear Stearns so I will not say anymore about this.
    8 Oct 2012, 10:15 AM Reply Like
  • Let the law take it's own course. I also do not understand how JPM is responsible for any wrong doings of Bear Stearns.
    1 Oct 2012, 07:34 PM Reply Like
  • Same way BAC has been sued to hell and back for Countrywide's mess....
    1 Oct 2012, 08:49 PM Reply Like
  • Until Maxine Waters, Barney Frank, And Chuck Schumer are indicted we will not see either the truth or the end of this.
    1 Oct 2012, 07:37 PM Reply Like
  • More cases expected to follow?? What took so long to even get after Bear Sterns, much less others?
    1 Oct 2012, 07:47 PM Reply Like
  • That should get granma's vote. Good timing,
    1 Oct 2012, 08:08 PM Reply Like
  • Most of these posts are spot-on! This has nothing to do with MBS, justice, fairness, or any other excuse. Its all about politics & Jamie Dimon. for his criticism.
    1 Oct 2012, 09:03 PM Reply Like
  • Absolutely spot on.
    2 Oct 2012, 02:38 PM Reply Like
  • Where the he'll is the civil complaint against Jon Corzine and MF Global?


    Bundle enough money for the right people and you not only stay out jail, but you summer in the Hamptons.
    1 Oct 2012, 10:11 PM Reply Like
  • Stone cold.
    1 Oct 2012, 10:45 PM Reply Like
  • deercreekvols..........


    Best post I've read in a while!!


    I've read or heard on Bloomberg/CNBC some mushy reason why Holder's AG office can't pursue Corzine. All said MF Global just screwed a bunch of mid-west, & southern farmers out of their $1.2 billion hedge money & nobody cares including the media! I guess these now-poor farmers will learn to support the correct candidates
    2 Oct 2012, 09:40 AM Reply Like
  • I thought that when JPM took over BS the govt. agreed to be responsible for a portion of future litigation
    2 Oct 2012, 12:04 AM Reply Like
  • Is it me or, is anyone else sick of this cr*p? F-Corzo the Clown.
    2 Oct 2012, 12:28 AM Reply Like
  • Don't F-him. Prosecute him. That will really F-him and his gang of thieves. If you had lost money with MF Global you would not be sick of this cr*p, you would want your money back and for someone to go to jail.
    2 Oct 2012, 03:20 PM Reply Like
  • yup. dimon was just standing there minding his own business. totally and completely out of it. a saint. a modern hero. the kind of person hearst would pay rand to write about. totally agree. uh huh.


    he was perhaps the only one smart enough not to buy what he was selling. all i can say is if the booze is poisoned, look at the guy who wasn't drinking.


    but shirley the assets of bear are still reachable? just because dimon was forced to buy them, that doesn't mean that killers on their staff get to walk. they'll have their lawyers work out a reach around. it's part of the price of being a modern robber baron, isn't it? at least he doesn't toss orphans a nickle like that old guy did.
    2 Oct 2012, 04:43 AM Reply Like
  • User 509088........


    What assets left from Bear would that be? I'm reasonably certain after losses were written down & legal fees paid there wasn't much left. I'm sure Dimon would have gladly backed out of the acquisition. But, as I recall wasn't given the option by the Fed & Treasury. Coercion was the name of the game in those days.


    All said, even the lefty commentators on CNBC this morning seem to believe this law suit is a bad idea. You know it might be a good idea if the banks were encouraged to start lending again instead of dealing with this nonsense.
    2 Oct 2012, 10:00 AM Reply Like
  • User


    See my prior post. You might learn something.


    And if the government has names of people who broke the law then they would file a criminal case against them directly.


    This is babysitting.
    2 Oct 2012, 01:31 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)