---

Judge Rules Against Bank Of America For Harassment

http://dailybail.com/home/judge-rules-against-bank-of-america-for-harassment.html

-12/31/2011-

---

-WallStreetJournal-

Judge Says Widow Harassed, Collection Firm Was Hired by Bank of America to Pursue Dead Man's Debts

-Dec. 28, 2011- By JESSICA SILVER-GREENBERG

(WallStreetJournal) Bank of America Corp. and a debt collector it hired to go after deceased customers' debts violated state law by repeatedly calling a Florida woman about paying the credit-card bill of her late husband, a Florida state-court judge ruled this month.

Judge Keith R. Kyle in Lee County, Fla., found that collection attempts by West Asset Management, an Omaha, Neb., firm working on behalf of Bank of America, amounted to harassment.

The ruling clears the way for the plaintiff to get punitive damages from the collector, a unit of West Corp., and Bank of America, which is the second largest U.S. bank by deposits. A civil jury will determine the size of the award next year.

The companies declined to comment on the latest ruling. Judge Kyle didn't return calls for comment.

The case could set a precedent across the U.S. and discourage lenders from using collectors to get money from surviving relatives on debts left behind by the deceased, according to other state-court judges.

Bank of America and other major U.S. lenders hand over accounts of the deceased to firms specializing in death-debt collection. The collection firms then zero in on family members who they think might agree to pay some of what the dead person owed even though they have no legal obligation to do so.

-Dec. 28, 2011-

---

FDIC To Cover Losses On $75 Trillion Bank of America Derivative Bets

http://problembanklist.com/fdic-to-cover-losses-on-trillion-bank-of-america-derivative-bets-0419/

---

Bank Of America Derivatives Timebomb Shows System Is Corrupt To The Core

http://problembanklist.com/bank-of-america-derivatives-timebomb-shows-system-is-corrupt-to-the-core-0426/

(PBL) The Federal Reserve recently allowed Bank of America to move its massive derivative positions from the bank holding company to its banking subsidiary which is an FDIC insured depository institution. By allowing this transfer, the Federal Reserve has allowed Bank of America to shift the risk of loss on speculative derivative contracts from the non-bank affiliate. A failure of Bank of America could result in huge losses for the FDIC which would ultimately be passed on to the taxpayers.

The most noteworthy aspects of this remarkable event include the following:

(1) The disclosure of the derivatives transfer to Bank of America’s FDIC insured depository was apparently leaked by the FDIC which opposed the move due to the huge amount of risk being transfered to the FDIC and bank depositors.

(2) In allowing the transfer, the Federal Reserve apparently violated Section 23A of the Federal Reserve Act which was supposed to keep the risks of investment banking activities at the bank holding company level.

(3) The notional value of the Bank of America derivative contracts is $75 trillion. The request for the derivatives transfer was initiated by counterparties of the contracts with Bank of America who were alarmed over the credit downgrade of Bank of America.

(4) The transfer of the derivatives from Bank of America’s holding company to the FDIC insured depository institution has received remarkably little mainstream press coverage. The quick approval by regulators at the Federal Reserve to protect the bank holding company indicates that the Federal Reserve is corrupt to the core and more interested in protecting the banks than the American public.

Bill Black, a former banking regulator, who exposed the corruption of banks and politicians during the savings and loan crisis, harshly criticizes the Fed’s actions in his recent article “Bank of America’s Death Rattle“

Now here’s the really bad news. First, this transfer is a superb “natural experiment” that tests one of the most important questions central to the health of our financial system. Does the Fed represent and vigorously protect the interests of the people or the systemically dangerous institutions (SDIs) – the largest 20 banks? We have run a real world test. The sad fact is that very few Americans will be surprised that the Fed represented the interests of the SDIs even though they were directly contrary to the interests of the nation. The Fed’s constant demands for (and celebration of) “independence” from democratic government, combined with slavish dependence on and service to the CEOs of the SDIs has gone beyond scandal to the point of farce. I suggest organized “laugh ins” whenever Fed spokespersons prate about their “independence.”

Bank of America's Death Rattle

(((Video))) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NYTtfQVw1c&feature=player_embedded

If regulators were doing their jobs properly, banks would not be allowed to engage in massive speculation through derivatives trading. The near meltdown of the financial system in 2008 has resulted in thousands of pages of new regulations but has done nothing to reign in “too big to fail banks” or reduce systemic risk in the financial system.

---

Not with a Bang, but a Whimper: Bank of America’s Death Rattle

http://neweconomicperspectives.blogspot.com/2011/10/not-with-bang-but-whimper-bank-of.html

(By William K. Black ) .....there are two truly scary parts of the story of B of A’s acquisition of Countrywide that have received far too little attention. B of A claims that it conducted extensive due diligence before acquiring Countrywide and discovered only minor problems. If that claim is true, then B of A has been doomed for years regardless of whether it acquired Countrywide. The proposed acquisition of Countrywide was huge and exceptionally controversial even within B of A. Countrywide was notorious for its fraudulent loans. There were numerous lawsuits and former employees explaining how these frauds worked.

B of A is really “Nations Bank” (formerly named NCNB). When Nations Bank acquired B of A (the San Francisco based bank), the North Carolina management took complete control. The North Carolina management decided that “Bank of America” was the better brand name, so it adopted that name.

The key point to understand is that Nations/NCNB was created through a large series of aggressive mergers, so the bank had exceptional experience in conducting due diligence of targets for acquisition and it would have sent its top team to investigate Countrywide given its size and notoriety. The acquisition of Countrywide did not have to be consummated exceptionally quickly.

Indeed, the deal had an “out” that allowed B of A to back out of the deal if conditions changed in an adverse manner (which they obviously did). If B of A employees conducted extensive due diligence of Countrywide and could not discover its obvious, endemic frauds, abuses, and subverted systems then they are incompetent. Indeed, that word is too bloodless a term to describe how worthless the due diligence team would have had to have been.

Given the many acquisitions the due diligence team vetted, B of A would have been doomed because it would have routinely been taken to the cleaners in those earlier deals.....

(((Read the -entire- article Here))) http://neweconomicperspectives.blogspot.com/2011/10/not-with-bang-but-whimper-bank-of.html

---