UBS SUED BY HSH NORDBANK ON SUBPRIME MORTGAGE SECURITIES
NEW YORK - Swiss investment bank UBS is facing a lawsuit from German bank HSH Nordbank, the largest global provider of shipping finance, over the mis-selling of subprime mortgage securities. The German bank has stated that it intends to sue UBS in New York courts to recoup losses to its $500 million (£254 million) investment fund. The Swiss bank is still recovering from the biggest quarterly loss in banking history and seeing writedowns reach $18.1 billion (£9.2 billion). UBS is also currently considering emergency funding measures from GIC, a Singapore sovereign wealth fund, and an unnamed Middle Eastern investor.
News of the lawsuit has stoked media speculation that there could be a knock-on effect, with more lawsuits filed by angry investors and institutions against the large investment banks that securitised debts from the US subprime mortgage market but have since suffered enormous writedowns on those flawed investments. HSH says it invested $500 million in excess regulatory capital in the fund in question expecting secure returns. It accuses UBS of breaking contractual terms by making high-risk investments and taking out some investments solely for UBS' own benefit.
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.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
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. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Esma denies need for new competitiveness mandate
MEP wants explicit requirement; Esma official says it’s already covered in existing rulebook
US regulators cut FRTB’s IMA capital hit by 59%, Isda finds
Trade body pushes for further changes to cross-product netting, default risk charge
US FRTB glitch could spit out negative capital charges
Effort to recognise risk diversification between IMA and standardised approach went too far
Euronext, LCH back Esma as exchange super-regulator
National oversight hurts Europe, exchange officials say – but some are not ready to accept a single watchdog
Double, but no trouble? CVA capital hit may lack clout
Industry opinion mixed around Basel III endgame derivatives charge
Amid debanking drama, banks try to say ‘no’, safely
A basic risk management tool – the ability to turn a customer away – has become a political football
Erba myth: will US banks choose new capital measure?
B3E gives US banks a dilemma – adopt expanded risk-based approach, or a new standardised alternative
Illiquid assets pricing still needs expert judgement, say banks
EU regulators want more transparency in valuations, but some asset prices remain elusive
