Quantcast
BANKTHINK
ACCOUNTABLE

The Little We Know About Foreclosure Reviews Is Troubling

MAR 5, 2012 8:00am ET
Print
Email
Reprints
(5) Comments

Another problem is that the engagement letters disclosed by the Fed last month, like the ones from the OCC, allow some law firms that support the reviews to engage directly with the banks' legal counsel, rather than as a subcontractor to the independent consultant. It may be that both of the Big Four audit firms conducting these reviews – PwC and Deloitte – and the banks themselves prefer it that way.

U.S. audit firms are not allowed to perform legal services for clients. The firms routinely have lawyers working for them directly and as contractors. But if they don't have to subcontract to the lawyers, they have fewer compliance headaches – no separate reports to file to avoid the appearance of an auditor doing legal work, for instance.

Meanwhile the banks retain a legally privileged relationship with their lawyers. But that structure is not in the best interest of regulators, investors and borrowers. Assertion of attorney-client privilege by the banks could hamper open disclosure to all interested parties.

We don't have the full picture yet. Still missing are engagement letters from an HSBC unit regulated by the Fed and Ally Financial's GMAC Mortgage. And there's been no disclosure by the Fed yet of plans and arrangements for the GMAC/Ally foreclosure review. This would be symbolically important, since it was the deposition of an Ally employee (Jeffrey Stephan) that first raised the issue of robo-signing back in the fall of 2010. The Fed promises the rest of the documents for mortgage servicers under its jurisdiction will be released "soon."

I'd like to see the OCC follow the Fed's lead and post action plans as well as engagement letters. I'd also like to see the OCC and Fed address the independence conflicts and issues of attorney-client privilege constraints I've raised.

The regulators recently extended the time for borrowers to file claims for compensation for wrongful foreclosures. It would also be great to see additional detailed interim reporting of the progress of the claims process as well as the actions to implement national servicing standards and improve servicer systems and controls.

Francine McKenna writes the blog re: The Auditors, about the Big Four accounting firms. She worked in consulting, professional services, accounting and financial management for more than 25 years.

JOIN THE DISCUSSION

(5) Comments

SEE MORE IN

RELATED TAGS

 

 
Kumbaya Moment for Banks, CUs; Brown-Vitter as WMD: Week's Best Quotes
The most notable quotes from American Banker stories of the previous week. Readers are encouraged to add their own observations in the Comments fields at the bottom of each slide.

(Image: Fotolia)

Comments (5)
When only a handful of auditors exist that have the breadth to examine the operations of big banks and their foreclosure operations, it comes as no surprise that conflicts of interest are endemic. That makes the auditors' opinions a lot like the so-called fairness opinions that Wall Street firms produce to justify acquisitions they hope to cash in on. Or the overwhelmingly positive research they produce to sell stocks. The real shame may belong to the government for playing along and adding a patina of respectability to the process that it doesn't appear to deserve. Neil Weinberg, Editor in Chief, American Banker.
Posted by Neil Weinberg | Monday, March 05 2012 at 5:18PM ET
Mo fraud and collusion. Nothing new. Auditors are like regulators -- see no evil, speak no evil, hear no evil. Go home at night and drink a beer. Keep my job and do the job for the MAN that pays the bills. AKA --- Da bank !!!!

Obama, Holder, Bernake, Shapiro and Walsh don't care -- keep screwing the homeowners.
Posted by Ronald L | Tuesday, March 06 2012 at 9:10AM ET
Neil W is right on the money and our Regulators all the way up to the top are fully aware!
Posted by robrose | Thursday, March 08 2012 at 2:45PM ET
The FSOC was to have had a definitive report delivered to it in January 2011. Michael Barr reported an amazing litany of crimes in Nov 2010 that were whitewashed by Geithner and the plunge protection ilk. This is old, sad news. http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/11/foreclosure-task-force-worse-than-stress-tests.html
Posted by Stentor | Friday, May 11 2012 at 9:43PM ET
Question to Francine: Why weren't ANY of the Big Snore (I mean, Big Four) made to testify before Levin's Congressional Oversight Panel, the House/Senate, or the FCIC? Unlike Her Majesty's Treasury, the US has uniformly not prosecuted or meaningfully investigated - in a public fashion - the abject FAILURE of the Big Four. How is their "crime" (so to speak) any less a problem than the failures of the rating agencies? Is it because SOX was supposed to "fix" that industry and Congress can't admit SOX did little but make costs increase?
Posted by Stentor | Friday, May 11 2012 at 9:53PM ET
Add Your Comments:
You must be registered to post a comment.
Not Registered?
You must be registered to post a comment. Click here to register.
Already registered? Log in here
Please note you must now log in with your email address and password.

Email Newsletters

Get the Daily Briefing and the Morning Update when you sign up for a free trial.

TWITTER
FACEBOOK
LINKEDIN
Marketplace
Fiserv is a leading global provider of information management and electronic commerce systems for the financial services industry.
Learn More
Informa Research Services is the premier provider of competitive intelligence, mystery shopping, and compliance testing services to the financial industry.
Learn More
CSC is a leader in private-label, third-party loan servicing with 30+ years of proven experience in delivering effective, cost-effective solutions.
Learn More
Already a subscriber? Log in here
Please note you must now log in with your email address and password.