ForumGarden

Why is the justice department getting 688m? Is that to cover costs? Yikes!!

The US government said that S&P's ratings encouraged financial institutions around the world to buy and sell what proved to be "toxic" financial products in their trillions.

It also accused S&P of failing to warn investors that the housing market was collapsing in 2006 because doing so would have hurt its business.

......

S&P will pay $687.5m to the Justice Department and a further $678.5m to the 19 states that had brought lawsuits against it.

S&P will also pay $125m in a separate settlement with the California Public Employees' Retirement System.
BBC News - S&P to pay $1.4bn to regulators in sub-prime debt case

flopstock;1473476 wrote: Why is the justice department getting 688m? Is that to cover costs? Yikes!!



BBC News - S&P to pay $1.4bn to regulators in sub-prime debt case


Well if the States are getting their cut then the Federal Government won't want to be left out will they

How come these characters are not on trial at the very least they were accessories to fraud. Those who sold the bonds knew they were duff so did S & P it was collusion on a grand scale in a grand rip off that we are all suffering for. They were talking about these in the last century it in the warnings of what would happen that were given when GW bush started de-regulating financial services.

As to our side of the pond anyone remember this wanker?

Let's see: the companies make trillions on the backs of people who aren't "financial wizards" regarding real estate; invests all that money in the stock market and make lots more on it and is then fined probably less than what the investment netted it. Wow, they really got screwed, didn't they.

hange 'fined' to 'taxed' & there's no real difference.