Get 40% Off
These stocks are up over 10% post earnings. Did you spot the buying opportunity? Our AI did.Read how

Eight big banks must face US cities' bond collusion claims

Published 09/21/2023, 12:49 PM
Updated 09/21/2023, 04:41 PM
© Reuters. A sign for the Royal Bank of Canada in Toronto, Ontario, Canada December 13, 2021.  REUTERS/Carlos Osorio

By Jonathan Stempel

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A U.S. federal judge on Thursday said American cities may pursue class-action claims accusing eight large banks of driving up interest rates they paid on a popular municipal bond.

U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman in Manhattan rejected efforts by Bank of America, Barclays, Citigroup (NYSE:C), Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase (NYSE:JPM), Morgan Stanley, Royal Bank of Canada and Wells Fargo to require cities to pursue claims individually, likely reducing potential recoveries.

Cities led by Baltimore, Philadelphia and San Diego accused the banks of colluding to raise rates on more than 12,000 variable-rate demand obligations (VRDOs) from 2008 to 2016.

They said this reduced available funding for hospitals, power and water supplies, schools and transportation, and likely caused billions of dollars in damages.

Once a more than $400 billion market, VRDOs are long-term bonds with short-term rates that typically reset weekly. Banks must remarket VRDOs that investors redeem at the lowest possible rates.

Cities accused the eight banks of conspiring not to compete for remarketing services, and artificially inflating rates by sharing information about bond inventories and planned rate changes.

In opposing class certification, the banks said differences among the bonds would require many thousands of individualized examinations into whether rate inflation occurred, making a single class-action lawsuit unwieldy.

But in a 33-page decision, Furman said two financial markets specialists who the cities hired as expert witnesses established that the alleged collusion could have a class-wide impact.

"Of course, it remains an open question whether, assuming plaintiffs paid supra-competitive interest, that payment was caused by defendants' allegedly anti-competitive behavior," Furman wrote. "Whatever the answer to this question may be, however, it is a common question."

3rd party Ad. Not an offer or recommendation by Investing.com. See disclosure here or remove ads .

Barclays, Citigroup and JPMorgan declined to comment. The other banks and their lawyers did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Dan Brockett, a lawyer for the cities, said they were gratified by the decision.

The VRDOs market shrank to $72 billion by the end of 2022, according to the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board.

The case is Philadelphia et al v Bank of America Corp (NYSE:BAC) et al, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 19-01608.

Latest comments

Risk Disclosure: Trading in financial instruments and/or cryptocurrencies involves high risks including the risk of losing some, or all, of your investment amount, and may not be suitable for all investors. Prices of cryptocurrencies are extremely volatile and may be affected by external factors such as financial, regulatory or political events. Trading on margin increases the financial risks.
Before deciding to trade in financial instrument or cryptocurrencies you should be fully informed of the risks and costs associated with trading the financial markets, carefully consider your investment objectives, level of experience, and risk appetite, and seek professional advice where needed.
Fusion Media would like to remind you that the data contained in this website is not necessarily real-time nor accurate. The data and prices on the website are not necessarily provided by any market or exchange, but may be provided by market makers, and so prices may not be accurate and may differ from the actual price at any given market, meaning prices are indicative and not appropriate for trading purposes. Fusion Media and any provider of the data contained in this website will not accept liability for any loss or damage as a result of your trading, or your reliance on the information contained within this website.
It is prohibited to use, store, reproduce, display, modify, transmit or distribute the data contained in this website without the explicit prior written permission of Fusion Media and/or the data provider. All intellectual property rights are reserved by the providers and/or the exchange providing the data contained in this website.
Fusion Media may be compensated by the advertisers that appear on the website, based on your interaction with the advertisements or advertisers.
© 2007-2024 - Fusion Media Limited. All Rights Reserved.