At the S.E.C., a Chance to Get Tougher on Settlements


Making Them Pay (and Confess)

MARY JO WHITE will have a long to-do list at the Securities and Exchange Commission.

By nominating Ms. White, a former federal prosecutor, to head the S.E.C. last week, President Obama appeared to send a message that Washington was finally going to get tough with financial wrongdoers. Tough enforcement has been pretty much AWOL on his watch. Maybe Ms. White can change that with a new, aggressive approach.

Here’s a good place to start: The S.E.C. routinely lets companies and individuals settle cases against them without admitting or denying its findings. This lets bad actors pretend that they’ve done nothing wrong. It also makes it harder for investors to mount successful lawsuits against them.

Regulators say this is the best approach. The practice, they contend, helps the S.E.C. and other agencies avoid costly, time-consuming litigation that would tax already-stretched resources. Quick settlements, rather than long trials, mean victims get restitution faster. And there’s always the possibility that the S.E.C. might lose in court.

Rest here…


7 Responses to “At the S.E.C., a Chance to Get Tougher on Settlements”
  1. Charles Fetters says:

    I say it is time to start a petition to stop Mary Joe from being appointed.
    It’s the same as having the fox guard the hen house. It also proves these politicians will sleep with any banker, for kick backs.

    • gwen caranchini says:

      it is not unusual for prosecutors to go get exp in big law firms on the civil side. I think your comment is totally ill founded because you don’t understand the system so to speak as to how these high profile prosecutors move around for “experience”. Eric Sneiderman is the perso to look to for comments. He supports her. So do I until she proves otherwise. Your comment is another example of pro se litigaants or people unfamiliar with how lawyers move around actually works. Stick to what you knnow or admit you don’t know what you are talking about.

  2. Well here ya goe. When Diamon says she is perfect for the job He means perfect for the banks. Look at his glowing smile like a win win!

  3. gwen caranchini says:

    These “no admission” clauses came about in the 80’s and were accompanied by “confidentiality clauses” in individual cases of all kinds. I know that from my own practice. But what is sadder about these cases is that although I assist in foreclosure defense issues and talk via the internet with hundreds of individuals in foreclosure and their lawyers, I have yet to see how any of these touted settlements have helped anyone at all. I know not one person who has received a settlement at all, let alone a reasonable one. BOA especially is only interested in “loan mods”. Most of the other banks do the same when litigation is initiated over foreclosures or to stop foreclosures in the bankruptcy forum or by quiet title actions. They are not interested in “paying” for the numerous problems in the “paperwork”, their “crimes”, quieting titles, or paying attorneys fees. The settlements are essentially a “joke” for those still fighting these entities. Perhaps making them admit their crimes would help. However, until these banks are made to “pay up” in individual litigation and relatively small class actions, there is a total myth that the foreclosure crisis is ending or being dealt with under the rule of law. Add to that problem that a vast majority of judges in state and federal courts still believe the “free house” myth and refuse to apply the law on a daily basis to any number of issues. Such refusals further the belief by the average american in foreclosure and their valiant attorneys facing uphill battles that the courts have become the pawns for the most part of big business, and right now, the banks. So if this touted prosecutor can make a difference in the everyday foreclosure case I say go for it. But until the average american sees that result, she’s just another AG getting money for his/her state coffers and not there for the average american.
    Gwen Caranchini, Kansas City, Mo. I don’t need or want a pseunonym.

  4. All the above arguments for a quick settlement are so wrong, and just an excue to let the banks off the hook. Pennies on the dollar for restittion gives no one immediate justice. Lives ruined, jobs and incomes lost and homeless does not justify 200.00 tio 125,000.00 for just a few for any reasonaly justice served at all. It is a ploy to let the banks off. Americans demand justice and full restitution no matter how long it takes and orders for foreclosures to stop immediately until the cases are resolved. There is enough evidence exsposed to warrant an immediated Cease and Desist on all foreclosures. A Moritorium on foreclosures is the only just course to take.

  5. bobbi swann says:

    This is a joke!!!! That woman is going to do NOTHING! This is just another side step to show that Obummer is staying the game and protecting the arses of the banksters who put him in office in the first place!!!! Ugh…disgusting!

Leave a Reply