BankThink

A recent court ruling filed by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has casted doubt over whether renominated Richard Cordray will continue to serve as director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Virtually all discussions of banking crises these days assume that depositors should always be protected, often at taxpayer expense. Let's consider whether at least some depositors should be bailed in.

Promontory responds to Joe Slavens.

Receiving Wide Coverage ...And RBS Makes Three: Royal Bank of Scotland has reached a settlement with U.S. and U.K. regulators over its involvement in the Libor rate-rigging scandal. The settlement includes a combined $612 million fine. As previously speculated, RBS' Japanese unit pled guilty to criminal wrongdoing. Per Dealbook, this involves "a single count of felony wire fraud to settle the case." John Hourican, the head of RBS's investment bank, resigned as part of the settlement and his and other investment bankers' bonuses will be clawed back. Tangentially, an FT article, written prior to the formal settlement announcement, reports that U.K. Business secretary Vince Cable plans to "revive a radical plan to return Royal Bank of Scotland to the private sector by distributing free shares to the public," though it's unclear how likely this plan is to be implemented. The settlement makes RBS the third "giant global bank" to settle with regulators over the rate-rigging scandal.

Regulators seem obsessed with preventing false negatives: loans that pass underwriting and then default. They should consider the costs of false positives, i.e., restricting loans that probably would perform fine.

A recent court ruling has put CFPB Director Richard Cordray’s job in jeopardy. But who should run the bureau if he has to step down?

Observers are wondering how focused successor Jack Lew will be to the Financial Stability Oversight Council in comparison to recently departed Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.

"Small banks received special attention - and critical relief - in the Dodd-Frank Act and proposals tied to Basel III. Both include new minimum capital ratios, but banking companies with less than $500 million of assets are exempt from those requirements," writes American Banker's Andy Peters.

Improving the branch experience could fail to increase foot traffic, but will boost customer satisfaction, loyalty and, ideally, advocacy.

Receiving Wide Coverage ...Charges Filed: The Justice Department is suing credit rating agency Standard & Poor's for allegedly ignoring their own standards and rating mortgage investments much higher than they should have been in years leading up to the financial crisis. Per the suit, filed by U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder: S&P "falsely represented that its credit ratings of RMBS and CDO tranches were objective, independent, uninfluenced by any conflicts of interest that might compromise S&P's analytical judgment, and represented S&P's true current opinion regarding the credit risks." According to Dealbook, prosecutors "have uncovered troves of e-mails written by S.& P. employees" that indicate concern over how mortgage investments were being rated. The complaint reproduces an internal instant message written by an S&P employee in April 2007 that reads "We rate every deal. It could be structured by cows and we would rate it."