User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Judge Blocks Citigroup Settlement With S.E.C.

  1. #1
    Original Ranter
    Points: 112,719, Level: 81
    Level completed: 69%, Points required for next Level: 931
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    SocialTagger Second Class50000 Experience PointsYour first GroupVeteran
    Conley's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    7413
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    22,473
    Points
    112,719
    Level
    81
    Thanks Given
    4,582
    Thanked 2,511x in 2,019 Posts
    Mentioned
    238 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Judge Blocks Citigroup Settlement With S.E.C.

    WASHINGTON — A federal judge in New York on Monday threw out a settlement between the Securities and Exchange Commission and Citigroup over a 2007 mortgage derivatives deal, saying that the S.E.C.’s policy of settling cases by allowing a company to neither admit nor deny the agency’s allegations did not satisfy the law.

    The judge, Jed S. Rakoff of United States District Court in Manhattan, ruled that the S.E.C.’s $285 million settlement, announced last month, is “neither fair, nor reasonable, nor adequate, nor in the public interest” because it does not provide the court with evidence on which to judge the settlement.
    The ruling could throw the S.E.C.’s enforcement efforts into chaos, because a majority of the fraud cases and other actions that the agency brings against Wall Street firms are settled out of court, most often with a condition that the defendant does not admit that it violated the law while also promising not to deny it.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/29/bu...with-citi.html

    I'm encouraged that a federal judge is still concerned about what is best for the public interest. It's only a small step and likely will mean nothing in the grand scheme of things, but hey, it's a positive.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Conley For This Useful Post:

    waltky (11-10-2012)

  3. #2
    Points: 39,654, Level: 48
    Level completed: 69%, Points required for next Level: 496
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    VeteranTagger First Class25000 Experience PointsSocial
    waltky's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    5662
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    8,859
    Points
    39,654
    Level
    48
    Thanks Given
    2,515
    Thanked 2,140x in 1,616 Posts
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Angry

    Pandit's golden parachute...

    Citigroup pays fired executives millions
    Nov. 10,`12 (UPI) -- U.S. banking giant Citigroup said it would pay its recently fired Chief Executive Officer Vikram Pandit $6.65 million as a bonus for his work in 2012.
    The bank said it would pay Pandit the bonus as part of his "incentive" pay, The New York Times reported Saturday. The bank's board of directors announced Pandit resigned in October, but his sudden departure was orchestrated by Chairman Michael O'Neill, the Times said. His resignation was announced in conjunction with the ouster of Chief Operating Officer John Havens.

    Pandit is scheduled to receive a stock and cash package worth $8.8 million, but he will lose out on retention pay, that a source said was worth $24 million.

    Havens is expected to be given $6.8 million in incentive pay on top of a deferred stock and cash package worth $8.725 million. But he will also lose his retention pay, the Times said. The bank named Michael Corbat as Pandit's replacement.

    Source

  4. #3
    Points: 84,367, Level: 70
    Level completed: 80%, Points required for next Level: 483
    Overall activity: 3.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience Points
    roadmaster's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    10157
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    18,760
    Points
    84,367
    Level
    70
    Thanks Given
    3,287
    Thanked 6,300x in 4,607 Posts
    Mentioned
    143 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Citigroup is corrupt. First hand I know some that called in their payments to only have them wait to cash them so they could try to say the people didn't pay on time.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts