SEC settles fraud case against Anchor BanCorp, former CFO
Source: Wisconsin State Journal
Just two days after Anchor BanCorp Wisconsin announced a plan to recapitalize through a bankruptcy reorganization, the company and its former chief financial officer were accused of fraud Wednesday in a civil lawsuit brought by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The suit has been tentatively settled.
At issue is the accuracy of information disclosed in a quarterly financial report filed four years ago by Anchor BanCorp, parent company of Madison-based AnchorBank.
“This is a financial fraud case,” the 17-page complaint, filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., begins. It says Anchor and its then-CFO Dale Ringgenberg “intentionally or recklessly made misstatements” in the report filed in August 2009 for the bank company’s finances during the three months that ended June 30, 2009.
The four-year delay in filing the complaint is not surprising, said UW-Madison professor of finance Mark Ready, formerly a chief economist for the SEC.
Read more: http://host.madison.com/wsj/business/sec-settles-fraud-case-against-anchor-bancorp-former-cfo/article_6f870b3c-1f94-50fb-8d47-e88fa8ea8fec.html
- -
We must take issue with this case (and quite frankly, most cases {especially LACK thereof} ) by the SEC.
Though I posted the first 3 paragraphs of the Wisconsin State Journal story and could have left it alone at that point, it just seems noteworthy to point out the obvious. Hence, I jumped down the page a bit and wish to reiterate now - the following;
This is a TellTale remark!
[br][hr][br]
- - While I'll reserve my judgment until becoming more informed of him, on the bias of Mr. Mark Ready (what a quaint name for the "chief economist for the SEC"
- the fact of the matter remains that his {re}marks, no matter what may be the true mindset of Mr. Ready - is a troubling matter of national significance and importance.
Unfortunately, I'm about to engage in a teleconference call on our eToys/Romney/ Goldman Sachs matter; and therefore I'm afforded little time to research the issues more thoroughly. Be that as it may, it is a serious matter that the SEC took four (4) years to do anything about the bad faith acts transpiring.
- - It is also plausible that the only reason they did so now, is to head off the bankruptcy case. It is a specious timing at best. One can only hope that the federal justice presiding over the SEC "settlement" case will take the stance of Judge Rakoff in NY and his on going battle with the SEC. Whereas Judge Rakoff flatly REFUSED to rubber stamp an SEC settlement with Citi Bank.
The SEC brought forth litigation to challenge the authority of Judge Rakoff to say no!
- - Can we have our enforcement agencies (and I'm alleging that they are really [lack of] enforcement entities) - demanding a justice simply agree with their wants and desires to sweep everything under the rug quietly?
I say No - HELL NO - Kudos to His Honor Rakoff and the many others who have followed his mindset.
- - Time is the enemy of justice and equity. Bankruptcy courts have Code & Rules that mandate Chapter 11 bankruptcies present a "PLAN" of reorganization within 180 days. After that time, the creditors can then bring forth their own plan and request the courts approval. For the last decade or more, this common sense principal has been expunged through arbitrary & capricious abuse of process for the sake of "good ole boy" firms sucking up as much in bankruptcy fees as possible.
In this particular case (which I plan to investigate this weekend) - there's a chance we are all being snowed!
-------------------------------------------------------------- What do you think?
[br][hr][br]
= new reply since forum marked as read
