« July 2009 | Main | September 2009 »
Posted at 09:58 AM in Commercial Insurance, Current Affairs, Data Privacy, Financial Institutions, Professional Liability, Errors & Ommissions, E&O, Web/Tech | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Technorati Tags: albert segvec gonzalez, bank, cliff rudolph, credit union, cyber hackers, cyber liability, cyber thieves, data privacy, financial institutions, ftc, goal financial, hackers, heartland payment systems breach, insurance, lawsuit, lawsuit, personal data, red flag rules, tjx breach, unauthorized access
Many of you may have heard about the SEC civil complaint alleging a massive ponzi scheme operated by Stanford Financial WSJ Article . Recently, plaintiffs filed a class action law suit against Willis Group, a UK-based insurance broker, and other defendants. The suit is filed on behalf of defrauded Mexican depositor clients of Houston based Stanford Financial Group and alleges Texas securities law violations by Willis and the co-defendants in the massive investment fraud scheme perpetrated by Stanford Financial Rueters Article.
The latest case is Canabal v. Willis of Colorado et al, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Texas (Dallas), No. 09-01474 and also names Mr. Robert S. Winter. Mr. Winter is a Bond Specialist with Bowen, Miclette & Britt and was elected to the Board of Directors of Stanford International Bank in 1998. He was also the primary insurance broker for all policies held by Stanford International Bank and its affiliated companies.
It is alleged that "safety and soundness" letters from Bowen, Miclette & Britt were signed by Robert Winter without disclosure that Mr Winter was on the Board of Directors for Stanford International Bank news video from fox. Furthermore, the lawsuit filed in Dallas, states that 'Willis agreed to Stanford's request to provide "safety and soundness" letters, and that "the clear intention" was for the letters to be used in Stanford's marketing to help retain and attract clients." Rueters Article . These "safety and soundness" letters reportedly were sent to Stanford's agents identifying the insurance policies supposedly underlying Stanford International Bank's operations. The allegations are that Willis would provide these letters to Stanford, and at times, directly to investors, with the understanding that investors would rely on the letters in deciding whether or not the investment was safe and insured.
I've never understood why Organizations do not see the conflict of interest when having their insurance broker appointed to the Board of Directors. In many cases, an insurance broker is paid a commission, a percent based on the total premium that the insured organization pays. Under this model, as the insured organizations exposure grows, so does the insurance brokers compensation. As you can see, this could result in a conflict of interest. Furthermore, in the Stanford Case, the broker was sending out letters that investors perceived as an independent assesment of the financial institutions Risk Management. Obviously this was not the case.
Work with an independent broker that will advocate on your behalf (for that matter, it doesn't make sense to work with a Publicly traded broker in the first place- at a publicly traded firm, who's best interest does your broker have? yours or his shareholders? There is a reason why CPA's and attorney's are not publicly traded, but that is for another blog.). Insurance Brokers BOD duties should be restricted to Non Profits (where they often know many influential people and are great at fundraising) and to their own firms or associations. What ever the case, an insurance broker does not belong on the BOD of a client of the firm, whether or not that the insured is an individual client of the broker.
Cliff RudolphPosted at 04:09 PM in Commercial Insurance, Current Affairs, Directors & Officers, Management Liability, D&O, Financial Institutions | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Technorati Tags: bowen, insurance broker, miclette & britt, robert winter, stanford, stanford financial group, stanford international bank, willis
As reported in the Seattle Times by Jennifer Sullivan. A local Seattle bank teller, Jim Nicholson, at Key Bank was recently fired for chasing down a would-be bank robber.
Termination seems pretty harsh considering Jim not only prevented a bank robbery, but actually held the man down until the police arrived. Obviously, he may have been injured or injuries to others could have occurred as a result of his actions. I imagine Key Bank has a standard operating procedure for handling a bank robbery, and Jim did not follow those procedures, putting others at risk. But I'm still finding it hard to believe that termination was the right move for Key Bank. Let's keep in mind that regardless of Jim, the would-be bank robber endangered lives when he walked into the bank and demanded money.
I've read many comments from readers about how monies and securities lost due to a robbery are insured through the FDIC. First, securities are not insured by the FDIC, only deposits. Currently, savings, checking and other deposit accounts, when combined are generally insured to $250,000 per depositor in each bank or thrift that the FDIC insures. Secondly, the FDIC does not typically get involved in a bank robbery. The role of the FDIC is to protect depositors in the event that a bank or thrift were to fail. You can read more about the FDIC here.
Losses that a financial institution incurs due to a robbery are generally insured by a financial institution bond. The typical financial institution bond will cover "loss of property resulting directly from robbery, burglary, misplacement, mysterious unexplainable disappearance, damage to or destruction of... The Definition of Property includes, money, securities, negotiable instruments, certificates of deposit, etc.
Finally, I can't imagine that Jim will remain terminated by Key Bank for long. Considering an already tough consumer/financial institution environment this can't be the type of publicity Key Bank is looking for.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
added 8/4/09:
Lori Matsukawa of KING 5 has done a follow up interview here.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 8/5/09 two more Seattle area Key Banks were hit by robberies:
One in W. Seattle: http://westseattleblog.com/blog/?p=19565
Another in Auburn: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2009607296_webbankrobbery.html
Posted at 10:24 AM in Employment Practices Liability, EPL, Management Liability, Financial Institutions | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Technorati Tags: bank robber, bank robbery, FDIC, fired, Jim Nicholson, Key Bank, robbery, seattle, terminated