NY judge rules on motions in gold price fixing case
roadrunner
Posts: 28,303 ✭✭✭✭✭
NY judge rules of motions in gold price fixing scheme by big banks
The quick summary is the last 2 pages of the 73 page report issued on Oct 3rd. Basically some claims were dismissed. But the judge ruled against dismissing the claims of price fixing/price manipulation, and anti-trust restraint of trade from 2006-2012 can go forward in further litigation. What did you say Virginia? There is price manipulation and fraud in the leading precious metal's markets?
Involves the fixing banks:
UBS AG and UBS Securities LLC (together, "UBS");
The London Gold Market Fixing Ltd. ("LGMF");
the five LGMF fixing banks during the Class Period:
The Bank of Nova Scotia ("BNS")
Barclays
Deutsche Bank
HSBC
Société Générale (collectively, the "Fixing Banks").
Per the document UBS has been dismissed from this litigation. And supposedly DB has reached a settlement agreement with the plaintiffs. Typically, these have worked out to be paying a fine worth 1-5% of the theft.
The quick summary is the last 2 pages of the 73 page report issued on Oct 3rd. Basically some claims were dismissed. But the judge ruled against dismissing the claims of price fixing/price manipulation, and anti-trust restraint of trade from 2006-2012 can go forward in further litigation. What did you say Virginia? There is price manipulation and fraud in the leading precious metal's markets?
Involves the fixing banks:
UBS AG and UBS Securities LLC (together, "UBS");
The London Gold Market Fixing Ltd. ("LGMF");
the five LGMF fixing banks during the Class Period:
The Bank of Nova Scotia ("BNS")
Barclays
Deutsche Bank
HSBC
Société Générale (collectively, the "Fixing Banks").
Per the document UBS has been dismissed from this litigation. And supposedly DB has reached a settlement agreement with the plaintiffs. Typically, these have worked out to be paying a fine worth 1-5% of the theft.
0
Comments
Where's Wikileaks when you need them
Allowing the litigating to go forward from a decade ago. That's fair and speedy.
It took the CFTC 5 yrs to determine that JPMorgan was not manipulating the silver market. In this sector they like to see things move slowly so that maybe people will forget, give in, regulator's terms in office end, or the guilty pass away before they can be prosecuted.
The Complaint in these consolidated cases, which involve the alleged manipulation and
suppression of gold prices during the period from January 1, 2004 to June 30, 2013 (t
he “Class Period”)
If the class period ends on June 30, 2013 how do you figure this particular case has been around for a decade? A judge can only rule on what's presented to them. At least during the silver rise from 2003-2011 profits could be made being long silver. But I suppose after silver crashed, and JPM was exonerated, it gave more reason to bring this case forward. Let's not forget the combined JPM/BSC silver derivatives position in July 2008 was approx $200 BILL....or 13 yrs of world silver production at that time. That's quite a bit more than a "production hedge."
The bankers are always hedging , like bookmakers. They're gambling with the people's money.
I knew it would happen.
Count me as extremely skeptical that the banks will be brought to heel or that the plaintiffs will ever be made whole.
I agree with that. But it gives the little people hope and they think the regulators and govt are actually doing something to combat financial crimes. In the end, the usual 1-5% of the total loot taken over the years would be a typical fine if they are found guilty.
I knew it would happen.