CITI and Wells call legal hiatus over Wachovia
NEW YORK, SAN FRANSISCO, CA & CHARLOTTE, NC - The two rival bidders for Wachovia have called a temporary ceasefire in their legal struggle, after Wells Fargo announced it had won the competition for the troubled US bank. Citigroup had been reported as the preferred bidder and gained approval from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) until the surprise $15.1 billion deal between Wells and Wachovia.
Citi has promised legal action against the other two banks involved.
The FDIC-approved deal with Citi was for Wachovia's banking business but excluded the bank's securities brokerage and mutual funds units.
It is understood the deal with Wells was favoured by Wachovia because it covered all operations, allowing the bank's structure to remain intact.
Ongoing talks with the Federal Reserve have since resulted in separate statements from both Wells and Citi claiming a "litigation standstill" over the future of Wachovia's assets.
Wells has said it expects to incur merger integration costs of $10 billion with Wachovia, which has itself reported a $23.9 billion Q3 loss. The legal ceasefire agreement seems confirmation of a necessary compromise deal between the two rivals.
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
EU officials tamp down hopes for bank capital relief
Capital cuts are not a done deal in EC’s review of competitiveness, despite US deregulation
EU regulators clash over ceding supervision to Esma
Belgian and Spanish regulators differ on drive for centralised oversight of cross-border firms
Why Trump’s latest Truth should make TradFi twitchy
Wall Street is becoming the villain in US president’s crypto movie
EBA guidance prompts banks to rethink CSRBB perimeters
Banks will likely have to expand their credit spread risk coverage following recommendations
Market players warn against European repo clearing mandate
Regulators urged to await outcome of US mandate and be wary of risks to government bond liquidity
Esma won’t soften regulatory expectations for cloud and AI
CCP supervisory chair signals heightened scrutiny of third-party risk and operational resilience
BPI says SR 11-7 should go; bank model risk chiefs say ‘no’
Lobby group wants US guidance repealed; practitioners want consistent model supervision and audit
Esma supervision proposals ensnare Bloomberg and Tradeweb
Derivatives and bonds venues would become subject to centralised supervision