Monday, February 22, 2010

Judge approves SEC-BofA settlement on Merrill deal

Check out this Article.. Warner Bros. - AOL - Intel -SGI - Lockheed Martin - SGI .. Your Next... as you have been misleading shareholders on a Trillion Dollar Liability for around a decade... Need Proof Shareholders - Well there is over 1200 documents of Proof at www.Iviewit.TV - there is information at www.DeniedPatent.com including a Federal RICO Lawsuit and SEC Complaints that Being Ignored - Shareholder YOU LOSE.

You will suffer from this Massive Shareholder Fraud and Intel Corp. - Warner Bros. - AOL - Lockheed Martin - Proskauer Rose - Foley and Lardner and the other alleged Criminals in this Trillion Dollar Technology Heist .. WELL they will get their insurance companies and shareholders to pay for their blatant, obvious, fraudulent "Mistake" and their happy lives with HUGE paychecks will continue to go on as before... Your life as a Shareholder of these companies who lose everything to do their Blatant Ignoring of Fraud, of Signed Contracts of Theft.. well your life will change for ever as your financial portfolio drowns in their "mistakes"...

Here is Todays News on Merrill Deal...

"" NEW YORK – A federal judge said Monday he would reluctantly approve an amended $150 million settlement between the Securities and Exchange Commission and Bank of America to end civil charges accusing the bank of misleading shareholders when it acquired Merrill Lynch.

But U.S. District Court Judge Jed S. Rakoff called the revised pact "half-baked justice at best" and said the court approved it "while shaking its head." The dispute had been scheduled for trial next week.

The judge last year rejected a $33 million settlement stemming from the early 2009 acquisition, calling it a breach of "justice and morality."

Rakoff said Monday in his written order approving the revised settlement that it was "considerably improved" but "far from ideal."

He said the new deal's greatest defect "is that it advocates very modest punitive, compensatory and remedial measures that are neither directed at the specific individuals responsible for the nondisclosures nor appear likely to have more than a very modest impact on corporate practices or victim compensation."

He added: "While better than nothing, this is half-baked justice at best."

The SEC had accused Bank of America of failing to disclose to shareholders before they voted on the Merrill deal that it had authorized Merrill to pay up to $5.8 billion in bonuses to its employees in 2008 even though the investment bank lost $27.6 billion that year.

He said his approval depends on both sides formally ratifying the amended agreement by Thursday, including a change he had recommended — that an independent auditor be fully acceptable to the SEC with the judge having final say if the two sides cannot agree.

The new deal also requires that the independent auditor assess over the next three years whether the bank's accounting controls and procedures are adequate to assure proper public disclosures. And it calls for the bank to begin submitting executive compensation recommendations to shareholders for a nonbinding vote of approval or disapproval over the next three years.

"Given that the apparent working assumption of the bank's decision-makers and lawyers involved in the underlying events at issue here was not to disclose information if a rationale could be found for not doing so, the proposed remedial steps should help foster a healthier attitude of `when in doubt, disclose,'" the judge wrote.

The judge said he would have rejected the revised settlement, which he said provides shareholders a few pennies per share, if he were deciding the issue solely on the merits but he said the law requires him to give substantial deference to the SEC's view and he believed it was an instance when judicial restraint was appropriate.

Bank of America spokesman Robert Stickler said the bank was "very pleased" that the settlement was approved.

The SEC did not immediately respond to a message for comment.

At a recent hearing, Rakoff had questioned why the SEC's agreement with Bank of America was not as critical as recent charges brought by the New York attorney general's office that were more suggestive of intentional fraud by bank executives.

He said he has since reviewed the underlying facts before the SEC and the inferences the agency had drawn and found them "not to be irrational."

He said he was most troubled by the fact that a penalty package that essentially consists of a $150 million fine "appears paltry."

He said he was also bothered that the fine penalizes the shareholders for what was, "in effect if not in intent, a fraud by management on the shareholders."

The irony, he said, was that it is an acquisition that "may yet turn out well but that could have been a bank-destroying disaster if the U.S. taxpayer had not saved the day.""

Link to Source
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100222/ap_on_bi_ge/us_bank_of_america_merrill_lynch

One more NOTE here, how are Banks who let the Real Estate Collapse happen going to recover ?? well the Real Estate Victims who the banks are now seizing their properties left and right whether they are "under water" or not... this is how the banks will Recover from their Fraud on Shareholders, Fraud on the Real Estate Consumer - the will Take YOUR HOME..

Crystal L. Cox
Industry Whistleblower