Portland Bankruptcy Attorney

Bankruptcy Lawyer Portland Or

Portland Bankruptcy Attorney
CALL 503-380-7822
email-iconmap-marker
  • Home
  • Bankruptcy
    • Personal Bankruptcy
    • Business Bankruptcy
    • Zero Down Bankruptcy
    • Foreclosure
    • Chapter 7 Bankruptcy
    • Chapter 13 Bankruptcy
  • Estate Planning
  • About
  • Contact

U.S. Dept. of Justice Announces $1.375 Billion Settlement with Standard & Poor’s Rating Agency for Defrauding Investors, Helping Cause the Financial Crisis

February 4, 2015 by Chris Kane

Standard & Poor’s pays for giving AAA ratings to mortgage-backed securities that turned out to be little better than junk.

 

Yesterday, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder announced that the Department of Justice and the attorneys general of 19 states plus the District of Columbia had reached a settlement in their lawsuits against Standard & Poor’s for its central role in fueling the subprime mortgage meltdown of a half-decade ago.

The Role of the Rating Agencies

A credit rating agency is very different from a consumer credit reporting agency, like Equifax) that provides personal credit scores. In contrast it is a company that, among other services, assigns credit ratings for financial and other institutions on the debt obligations that they issue, such as securities and bonds. These assigned credit ratings are relied on by investors who are considering whether to invest in those securities and bonds, helping them make good decisions about the riskiness of those investments.

Credit rating agencies play an indispensable role in the in the creation and sale of mortgage-backed securities and thus in the U.S. financial system as a whole. They hold themselves out to be objective, independent, and reliable sources of information for investors about the safety of potential investments. Most of the time, these securities have to have a favorable rating from a respected credit rating agency for investors to be willing to invest in them. In fact, often the investors are not allowed to put their money into such securities and bonds otherwise. So having a good rating is often essential to the successful sale of a set of securities and bonds, the difference between an issuer of those financial instruments being able to generate the profit is wants, and not being able to.

The DOJ’s Original Allegations Against S&P

Almost exactly two years ago the Department of Justice sued S&P. Its Complaint alleged that S&P systematically defrauded investors in mortgage-backed securities, resulting in losses for those investors amounting to billions of dollars. Its alleged ongoing scheme occurred from 2004 through 2007, and intended to provide inflated credit ratings for mortgage-backed securities in order to enrich itself. By making these securities look like safer investments than it knew they were, S&P would keep getting hired and paid by the banks that were creating and selling these mortgage-backed securities. The alleged direct result of S&P’s fraudulent scheme was that the buyers of these securities—specifically federally insured financial institutions—lost billions of dollars when most of these investments became worthless after having received intentionally inflated credit ratings from S&P. The Department of Justice’s Complaint demanded $5 billion in penalties against S&P.

The Terms of the New Settlement

S&P has agreed to pay the Department of Justice $687.5 million, and the 19 states plus the District of Columbia an additional $687.5 million, a total of $1.375 billion, all within 30 days. This amount exceeds the company’s profits earned for providing ratings for mortgage-backed securities during the period covered.

S&P did not directly admit to any violations of law, but it did “acknowledge the facts set out in” a 16-paragraph Statement of Facts. A press release of Tuesday, February 3, 2015 from the Department of Justice summarized these acknowledged facts as follows:

… S&P admits that its decisions on its rating models were affected by business concerns, and that, with an eye to business concerns, S&P maintained and continued to issue positive ratings on securities despite a growing awareness of quality problems with those securities. S&P acknowledges that:

  • S&P promised investors at all relevant times that its ratings must be independent and objective and must not be affected by any existing or potential business relationship;
  • S&P executives have admitted, despite its representations, that decisions about the testing and rollout of updates to S&P’s model for rating CDOs [Collateralized Debt Obligations] were made, at least in part, based on the effect that any update would have on S&P’s business relationship with issuers;
  • Relevant people within S&P knew in 2007 many loans in RMBS [Residential Mortgage Backed Securities] transactions S&P were rating were delinquent and that losses were probable;
  • S&P representatives continued to issue and confirm positive ratings without adjustments to reflect the negative rating actions that it expected would come.

In return the Department of Justice and the state attorneys general agreed to dismiss its lawsuits against S&P and release all claims against it for any wrongdoing related to its credit rating of the debt and securities instruments during the 2004-2007 period at issue.

The settlement does NOT release, and leaves open for possible further litigation:

  • The liability of any individual person—the settlement is only with S&P and its corporate parent—not any of their managers or employees
  • Any criminal liability
  • Any potential lawsuits brought by private persons or entities
  • Any claims by county, municipal or other local pension funds
  • Any claims by any local governments

Filed Under: Bank Regulation, Bankruptcy History Tagged With: financial fraud, financial regulation, fraud, Standard & Poor's

Welcome to the Portland Bankruptcy Law Blog

I'd like to help you overcome your financial problems. One good way to start is to provide you with accurate and timely information about the bankruptcy laws. I do that here through informative blog posts, with a new one published here every week. I've been doing this for years so there is a wealth of information for you here.

But please be aware that since you are unique person you need a highly personalized solution to your challenges. That requires the analysis and advice of a conscientious and highly experienced attorney. That's really the only sensible way to get the benefit of the many powerful and effective remedies that the law provides.

So I hope the information provided here is helpful to you. Please contact me for guidance to a much better place:

503-380-7822

Recent Posts

  • No link found between bankruptcy and employment prospects
  • Creditor found in violation of automatic bankruptcy stay
  • What are the short- and long-term credit impacts of bankruptcy?
  • Bankruptcy Attorney Portland, Or | Bankruptcy Lawyer Oregon | Christopher J. Kane P.C.

Categories of Blog Posts

  • Portland Bankruptcy Attorney
  • Personal Bankruptcy
  • Business Bankruptcy
  • Stop Foreclosure
  • Chapter 7 Bankruptcy
  • Chapter 13 Bankruptcy
  • Zero Down Bankruptcy
  • Filing Bankruptcy in Oregon
  • Testimonials
  • FAQ
  • Blog

FREE CONSULTATION

GET A FREE CONFIDENTIAL CONSULTATION THIS MONTH.
*Please see below.

CONTACT

Christopher J. Kane, P.C.

Address: 2207 NE Broadway, Suite 100, Portland OR 97232

Phone: 503-380-7822

Email: chris@ckanelaw.com


We are a debt relief agency.

We proudly help people understand their options and, if appropriate, help them file for bankruptcy relief under the Bankruptcy Code.

DIRECTIONS

CONNECT

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
Avvo - Rate your Lawyer. Get Free Legal Advice.
Best Bankruptcy lawyers in Portland
Best Bankruptcy Lawyers in Portland

* Using this form, or email, for communicating with us does not establish an attorney-client relationship, until we do that in writing. So please do not send confidential or time-sensitive information through this form or by email. You affirm that you have read and understand this disclaimer.
CAUTION: This website is to provide visitors with basic information about our firm, and information about how to contact us. Every situation is different, and no information on this website is legal advice on any specific question. You should not act on any of the information without first conferring with an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction. No attorney-client relationship or privilege is formed by visiting this site or by unsolicited email. Therefore, initial emails should not contain any confidential information. We may already represent parties adverse to you and cannot advise or represent you until we check for conflicts. We are licensed only in Oregon and offer our services only to those doing business in Oregon, unless we are associated with local counsel in accordance with other states laws. The applicable laws may have changed after the information on this website was published. While effort is made to keep the information current, you should not presume that all information is up to date. You must confer with an attorney to be sure you have current information.
Copyright © 2021 · Christopher J. Kane Attorney at Law · 503-380-7822 · Designed by Artizon Digital