![Risk.net](https://www.risk.net/sites/default/files/styles/print_logo/public/2018-09/print-logo.png?itok=1TpHrpuP)
Bank of America sues Bear Stearns, Cioffi and Tannin
NEW YORK - Failed US bank Bear Stearns and two of its former hedge fund managers, Ralph Cioffi and Matthew Tannin, are being sued by Bank of America. The bank accuses Bear Stearns and both men - already indicted in June on federal charges of subprime market abuse - of misleading it in a "desperate" bid to obtain capital to prop up ailing hedge funds. Bank of America is seeking $2 billion from Bear Stearns, which has become part of rival Wall Street bank JP Morgan after its forced sale in April. JP Morgan has previously said it expects losses arising from litigation, consolidation and other issues surrounding the takeover to reach $6 million.
Tannin was Bear Stearns' head of asset management, while Cioffi was directly responsible for managing the funds in question.
Bank of America has claimed in the New York Federal Court that the two men were engaged in "egregious conduct" in their search for liquidity relating to a 'CDO-squared' transaction - effectively a further derivatives product on an existing collateralised debt obligation (CDO). According to the complaint, mortgage-backed assets owned by the Bear Stearns hedge funds were used in the sale of securities packaged by Bank of America. The hedge fund losses were allegedly hidden from Bank of America, leading to the funds' eventual collapse and decline in value of the assets and securities themselves. Bank of America claims the damages were compounded by the men luring it into providing a further $1 billion in funding to keep the funds afloat, leading to what says were "significant losses".
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
Markets worry EU’s reporting simplification will add to burden
Rather than reducing firms’ obligations, market participants fear it could end up increasing requirements
EU banks show basic instinct for credit valuation adjustments
Simpler approach to CVA appeals even to some already using more complex models for counterparty risk
Bank of England wants dynamic Emir for UK clearing houses
Review won’t just photocopy EU legislation, as BoE seeks to make rules simpler and adaptable
Big banks could be sidelined from future rescue deals – FSB
Exacerbation of too-big-to-fail means G-Sibs could already be too large to take extra assets
More guidance, less enforcement: the SEC under Paul Atkins
Current and former insiders expect clearer crypto rules and an end to regulatory violation sweeps
During Trump turbulence, value-at-risk may go pop
Trading risk models have been trained in quiet markets, and volatility is now looming
Bank of England mustering unit to model system-wide stresses
Permanent team at UK supervisor will work on buy- and sell-side interactions
Regis-TR and the Emir Refit blame game
Reporting overhaul was marred by problems at repositories, prompting calls to stagger future go-live dates