UK Banking facing Judicial enquiry


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Politics : UK Banking facing Judicial enquiry

Previous · 1 . . . 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · Next
Author Message
Profile Gary Charpentier
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 11732
Credit: 5,969,877
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1314033 - Posted: 11 Dec 2012, 17:23:37 UTC

http://www.foxbusiness.com/business-leaders/2012/12/11/uk-makes-three-arrests-in-libor-probe/?intcmp=obnetwork

Britain's Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has made the first arrests as part of a global investigation into the manipulation of interbank lending rates.


____________

betreger
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 1748
Credit: 3,590,464
RAC: 7,980
United States
Message 1314067 - Posted: 12 Dec 2012, 0:12:42 UTC - in response to Message 1314033.

http://www.foxbusiness.com/business-leaders/2012/12/11/uk-makes-three-arrests-in-libor-probe/?intcmp=obnetwork
Britain's Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has made the first arrests as part of a global investigation into the manipulation of interbank lending rates.


HSBC announced on Tuesday that it had agreed to a record $1.92 billion settlement with authorities. It seems no criminal charges will follow for the admitted money laundering. A few of years of incarceration would also be appropriate.
____________

Profile John Clark
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Sep 99
Posts: 16515
Credit: 4,418,829
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1314083 - Posted: 12 Dec 2012, 1:01:36 UTC
Last modified: 12 Dec 2012, 1:02:52 UTC

See today's fine on HSBC by the Yanks?

Assuming the States regulators can substantiate the accusation, and £1.5 billion fine, then they deserve this outcome.
____________
It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues



betreger
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 1748
Credit: 3,590,464
RAC: 7,980
United States
Message 1314104 - Posted: 12 Dec 2012, 2:09:33 UTC - in response to Message 1314083.
Last modified: 12 Dec 2012, 2:10:12 UTC

Internal emails substantiated the charges and I still want criminal prosecution. Relative to the size of the bank the fines are small. The potential damages to your and my country are criminal felonies and deserve hard time.
____________

Profile Gary Charpentier
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 11732
Credit: 5,969,877
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1314159 - Posted: 12 Dec 2012, 6:08:15 UTC - in response to Message 1314104.

Internal emails substantiated the charges and I still want criminal prosecution. Relative to the size of the bank the fines are small. The potential damages to your and my country are criminal felonies and deserve hard time.

Citizens United. By all means put the company in prison. If you or I go to prison they don't let us continue to do business. Same for HSBC. Bankrupt and let the investors fork up the cash for the criminal fine.

Frankly they are too afraid of too big to fail institutions. Well, break them up into chunks. Nothing should ever be allowed to get too big to fail, because it will happen then.

____________

Profile Chris S
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 29483
Credit: 8,894,692
RAC: 27,223
United Kingdom
Message 1314235 - Posted: 12 Dec 2012, 12:37:11 UTC

Frankly they are too afraid of too big to fail institutions.

It has to be realised that many pension funds invest in large companies in addition to Gilts. When a big one goes down the plughole it can have quite a large knock on effect to the general public apart from shareholders. Responsible governments and regulators are aware of all that. As a poster here always reminds us "I think you'll find it isn't as simple as that".

Profile Gary Charpentier
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 11732
Credit: 5,969,877
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1314286 - Posted: 12 Dec 2012, 15:43:40 UTC - in response to Message 1314235.

Frankly they are too afraid of too big to fail institutions.

It has to be realised that many pension funds invest in large companies in addition to Gilts. When a big one goes down the plughole it can have quite a large knock on effect to the general public apart from shareholders. Responsible governments and regulators are aware of all that. As a poster here always reminds us "I think you'll find it isn't as simple as that".

Why are pension funds permitted to invest in companies that commit felonies and must go down the plughole because of it? Shouldn't the pension fund managers be prosecuted for making such investment choices? After all committing a felony isn't an ordinary business risk, it is an overt choice. Where is the due diligence of the fund managers? Dump it like a hot potato the moment this kind of thinking starts in management. Feet to the fire!

____________

betreger
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 1748
Credit: 3,590,464
RAC: 7,980
United States
Message 1314318 - Posted: 12 Dec 2012, 17:44:48 UTC - in response to Message 1314159.

Gary, there are people in HSBC who aided countries and drug cartels who are overtly doing acts of war against the US. Those HSBC people belong in jail.
____________

Profile Gary Charpentier
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 11732
Credit: 5,969,877
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1314400 - Posted: 12 Dec 2012, 20:37:30 UTC - in response to Message 1314318.

Gary, there are people in HSBC who aided countries and drug cartels who are overtly doing acts of war against the US. Those HSBC people belong in jail.

Are any of them US citizens? Did they do the acts on US soil? Does USA law apply to them? Sort of like Mr. Assange.

____________

betreger
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 1748
Credit: 3,590,464
RAC: 7,980
United States
Message 1314408 - Posted: 12 Dec 2012, 20:56:45 UTC - in response to Message 1314400.

Yes, there were Americans involved on this side of the pond. I don't recall his name, but he was the chief operating officer over here. Emails exist showing him complaining to his boss in England and the response he got was the US was being too overbearing concerning money laundering and to shut up. As for US law HBSC in the settlement concedes US law does apply. Part of the settlement is that if the bank stays clean for 5 years no criminal charges will be brought.
____________

Profile Gary Charpentier
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 11732
Credit: 5,969,877
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1314444 - Posted: 12 Dec 2012, 22:22:58 UTC - in response to Message 1314408.

Yes, there were Americans involved on this side of the pond. I don't recall his name, but he was the chief operating officer over here. Emails exist showing him complaining to his boss in England and the response he got was the US was being too overbearing concerning money laundering and to shut up. As for US law HBSC in the settlement concedes US law does apply. Part of the settlement is that if the bank stays clean for 5 years no criminal charges will be brought.

What act specific act, date / time and action, did this US COO do? Bitching to his boss isn't a crime. Not picking up the phone and reporting it isn't a crime. Failing to file http://www.fincen.gov/forms/files/fin8300_cashover10k.pdf is a crime if the cash was in the USA.

US laws apply to the corporation because it had a physical presence in the USA.

____________

betreger
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 1748
Credit: 3,590,464
RAC: 7,980
United States
Message 1314456 - Posted: 12 Dec 2012, 23:03:10 UTC - in response to Message 1314444.

Gary, I'm sure you read newspapers. This is in at least 3 papers I have read in the last two days.
http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/12/10/hsbc-said-to-near-1-9-billion-settlement-over-money-laundering/?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20121211
Being part of a conspiracy is a crime!
____________

Profile Gary Charpentier
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 11732
Credit: 5,969,877
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1314529 - Posted: 13 Dec 2012, 6:22:21 UTC - in response to Message 1314456.

Being part of a conspiracy is a crime!

Knowing about a crime or failing to report a crime is not the same as attempting to cover up a crime. You have to prove a specific act in furtherance of the crime to have a conspiracy. It is a fine point but an important one.

The guy who hears scuttlebutt at the water cooler isn't a conspirator. The guy who overhears crooks planning the next heist at the restaurant isn't a conspirator. The guy who brings maps to plan with is a conspirator.

Now if this COO certified they were in compliance and he knew it was false, that is a primary crime of perjury. But proving he knew it was false is proving his mental state when he signed. He may have suspected it was BS, but there is a difference between suspecting something and knowing it for a fact.

As you may gather actually proving these things is very hard without a confession or documentation of mental state, e.g. phone taps.

____________

Profile Sirius B
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 00
Posts: 9294
Credit: 1,357,704
RAC: 1,389
United Kingdom
Message 1314934 - Posted: 13 Dec 2012, 23:50:46 UTC

Queen questions financial crisis

"When told that the officials in the room were there to prevent another crisis, the Duke jokingly asked: "Is there another one coming?""

Of course there'a another coming your highness, how else do you think we serfs are kept in line?
____________

betreger
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 1748
Credit: 3,590,464
RAC: 7,980
United States
Message 1314957 - Posted: 14 Dec 2012, 0:44:09 UTC - in response to Message 1314529.

Being part of a conspiracy is a crime!

Knowing about a crime or failing to report a crime is not the same as attempting to cover up a crime. You have to prove a specific act in furtherance of the crime to have a conspiracy. It is a fine point but an important one.

The guy who hears scuttlebutt at the water cooler isn't a conspirator. The guy who overhears crooks planning the next heist at the restaurant isn't a conspirator. The guy who brings maps to plan with is a conspirator.

Now if this COO certified they were in compliance and he knew it was false, that is a primary crime of perjury. But proving he knew it was false is proving his mental state when he signed. He may have suspected it was BS, but there is a difference between suspecting something and knowing it for a fact.

As you may gather actually proving these things is very hard without a confession or documentation of mental state, e.g. phone taps.

Gary, that is one spin being put out, another is the fear that criminal charges could bring down HSBC. As for evidence all they did not have is wire taps. They do have internal HBSC documentation and a confession. As it is going down the only penalties are to the share holders in the loss of the revenue going to pay the fine, the people who committed the money laundering will suffer no punishment. I fail to see how that will deter future crimes. This is a very sordid affair.
____________

Profile Gary Charpentier
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 11732
Credit: 5,969,877
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1314992 - Posted: 14 Dec 2012, 4:10:19 UTC - in response to Message 1314957.

Being part of a conspiracy is a crime!

Knowing about a crime or failing to report a crime is not the same as attempting to cover up a crime. You have to prove a specific act in furtherance of the crime to have a conspiracy. It is a fine point but an important one.

The guy who hears scuttlebutt at the water cooler isn't a conspirator. The guy who overhears crooks planning the next heist at the restaurant isn't a conspirator. The guy who brings maps to plan with is a conspirator.

Now if this COO certified they were in compliance and he knew it was false, that is a primary crime of perjury. But proving he knew it was false is proving his mental state when he signed. He may have suspected it was BS, but there is a difference between suspecting something and knowing it for a fact.

As you may gather actually proving these things is very hard without a confession or documentation of mental state, e.g. phone taps.

Gary, that is one spin being put out, another is the fear that criminal charges could bring down HSBC. As for evidence all they did not have is wire taps. They do have internal HBSC documentation and a confession. As it is going down the only penalties are to the share holders in the loss of the revenue going to pay the fine, the people who committed the money laundering will suffer no punishment. I fail to see how that will deter future crimes. This is a very sordid affair.

betreger, I posting what is, not what should be. Think of it as a prosecutor deciding what a judge will let get in front of a jury and what a defense lawyer will get tossed.

They did not charge HSBC Inc because a felony conviction automatically would bring it down. That puts the taxpayers on the hook for the deposit insurance.

As to the people, as far as I suspect could be proved to a jury, the people in the USA were nothing more than people hearing about it around the water cooler. The people doing the laundering were in the UK and other countries. As such US law against money laundering does not apply to them as individuals. As to the bank itself, if it wants a US license, it has one, then the bank must agree to abide by US bank regulations. It didn't abide by them. The US doesn't want to be on the hook for the deposit insurance. Ergo a negotiated fine. I don't know how they arrived at the amount of the fine and I doubt the press would report that. You have to trust that the bureaucrats at least took all the profit of the money laundering away plus all the investigatory costs.

____________

betreger
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 1748
Credit: 3,590,464
RAC: 7,980
United States
Message 1315008 - Posted: 14 Dec 2012, 5:19:28 UTC - in response to Message 1314992.
Last modified: 14 Dec 2012, 5:21:17 UTC

Gary your quote "You have to trust that the bureaucrats at least took all the profit of the money laundering away plus all the investigatory costs."
My response, I doubt it. I suspect HBSC still made a net profit. They were doing big time money laundering for over a decade and their internal documents claimed it to be a "low risk" transaction.
We agree the reason no criminal charges were brought is probably the thought of HBSC going down. Sadly the bastards in the UK and elsewhere who helped finance mutual foes will suffer not.
____________

Profile John Clark
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Sep 99
Posts: 16515
Credit: 4,418,829
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1315790 - Posted: 15 Dec 2012, 23:05:05 UTC - in response to Message 1315008.

Sadly the bastards in the UK and elsewhere who helped finance mutual foes will suffer not.


Just in line with the US mainland Banks involved in the rate setting fiasco, as were UK Banks. The traders involved in the US were never prosecuted either, and, in their case, for that issue the US regulations applied. Cannot have it one way, but the threat to their 7lUS license is a big deterrent ...
____________
It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues



betreger
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 1748
Credit: 3,590,464
RAC: 7,980
United States
Message 1315799 - Posted: 15 Dec 2012, 23:33:05 UTC - in response to Message 1315790.

Sadly the bastards in the UK and elsewhere who helped finance mutual foes will suffer not.


Just in line with the US mainland Banks involved in the rate setting fiasco, as were UK Banks. The traders involved in the US were never prosecuted either, and, in their case, for that issue the US regulations applied. Cannot have it one way, but the threat to their 7lUS license is a big deterrent ...

We have allowed these lords of the universe to become so large that they are deemed too big to fail. The small felon will do the time and these crooks can do as they please and I do consider this money laundering to be treason. Don't you Brits also have trade embargoes against Iran?
____________

Profile Chris S
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 29483
Credit: 8,894,692
RAC: 27,223
United Kingdom
Message 1315812 - Posted: 15 Dec 2012, 23:53:16 UTC

Don't you Brits also have trade embargoes against Iran?

Of course the British Government has.

Iran Sanctions

Previous · 1 . . . 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · Next

Message boards : Politics : UK Banking facing Judicial enquiry

Copyright © 2014 University of California