Moody's sued over inaccurate subprime-backed bond ratings
NEW YORK – Investors were beginning to line up lawsuits against the rating agencies in July, in the wake of the subprime mortgage market scandal.
According to wire service reports, Linda Huber, chief financial officer of Moody's, is being sued by an investor who said Huber failed to disclose that Moody's assigned "excessively" high ratings to bonds backed by subprime mortgages.
The investor alleges that Moody's investors paid artificially high prices for the rating agency's stock because of Huber's "false and misleading" statements. The investor seeks to represent all investors who bought Moody's stock between October 25, 2006 and July 10 this year, and he asks for unspecified damages.
Moody's, Standard & Poor's and Fitch Ratings have been criticised by investors because their ratings on bonds backed by mortgages to people with poor or limited credit did not reflect the highest default rate in 10 years. Some bonds backed by subprime mortgages fell by more than 50 cents on the dollar this year without their credit ratings changing.
On top of this, according to the investor's lawsuit, Moody's "shocked investors" in mid-July when it announced the downgrading of 399 mortgage-backed securities issued in 2006 and the review of an additional 32 for downgrade, affecting bonds worth approximately $5.2 billion.
Further legal fallout for the rating agencies is expected over the next new months.
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
Foreign banks can swerve US Basel op risk capital charges
New proposal offers category III and IV banks op-out from regime, but intragroup trades penalised
BoE’s Bailey expects global consensus on FRTB internal models
Isda AGM: UK is reviewing proposals from US and EU regulators before finalising its IMA rules
DRW chief slams ‘ridiculous’ OCC stablecoin rule
Isda AGM: Wilson warns week-long redemption freeze would deter use of Genius Act coins as cash leg of tokenised repo
Dealers push for more revisions to Basel III endgame
Isda AGM: Goldman, JP Morgan bankers want changes on cross-product netting, CVA and default risk charges
StanChart: UK, EU should copy US ‘commercial’ Basel III
Isda AGM: Exec warns divergent Basel III rules will push trading into less-regulated entities
NBFI oversight ‘no longer adequate’, say BdF economists
Researchers call for stronger supervision of non-bank sector ‘before risks actually materialise’
Why Brexit still stirs up trouble for cross-border business
As EU erects another obstacle, banks consider ways around it – or exit strategies
Can US regulators keep Collins happy with one capital stack?
Legal experts say Basel III endgame redraft retains spirit if not letter of the floor