
Morgan Stanley settles email lawsuit
LOSSES & LAWSUITS
The SEC said Morgan Stanley "did not diligently search for back-up tapes containing responsive emails until 2005. Morgan Stanley also failed to produce responsive emails because it over-wrote back-up tapes." The complaint also alleges that the firm "made numerous misstatements regarding the status and completeness of its productions; the unavailability of certain documents; and its efforts to preserve requested email." The regulator charged Morgan Stanley with violating the provisions of the federal securities laws requiring it, as a regulated broker-dealer, to produce its records and documents in a timely fashion to the regulator.
The investment bank settled the suit without admitting or denying the allegations. It has also consented to a permanent injunction and payment of a $15 million civil penalty, $5 million of which will be paid to NASD and the New York Stock Exchange in separate related proceedings. The firm has also agreed to adopt and implement policies, procedures and training focused on the preservation and production of email communications.
Antonia Chion, associate director of the SEC's division of enforcement, said "Morgan Stanley's repeated production failures and misstatements prejudiced two major investigations. This settlement will require Morgan Stanley to put into place reforms to prevent similar misconduct from recurring."
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. Printing this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. Copying this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Grim repo warning spotlights BNP Paribas booking model
Federal regulators may be targeting French bank’s Paris-based book of US Treasuries
We’re all outliers now: Europe’s unflattering IRRBB test
Banks, fearing overreaction from supervisors, urge European Commission to reject NII-based assessment
SEC targets ‘dark magic’ in fixed-income pricing with Bloomberg fine
US regulator is going after pricing vendors that deviate from their published methodologies
Alameda’s mystery bank stake reignites Fed deposit debate
Crypto challenger Custodia accuses regulator of unlevel playing field over master accounts
More EU banks will fail new IRRBB test as rates push upwards
Half of all EU banks could cross outlier threshold for new test of net interest income
Finra head recognises ‘challenges’ for bond transparency drive
Cook says regulators thinking about industry’s operational and liquidity concerns
Why central banks shouldn’t ignore stablecoins
Rapid growth of stablecoins could impair monetary policy transmission
Hedge funds doubt tall tales around UK short-selling review
FCA has never used powers to ban short-selling, but reporting tweaks would be welcome