Fed
Approves
Capital One -
ING After
Delay &
Data Dump,
Reconsideration?
By
Matthew
R. Lee
SOUTH
BRONX,
February 14,
updated --
Some
Valentine: the
day after the
Federal
Reserve for
the second
time postponed
decision on
the Capital
One -
ING bank
merger, a Fed
legal staffer
called Inner
City Press at
5:15 pm on
Valentine's
Day to say the
deal was
approved, but
not in
the normal
way.
Inner
City Press
asked for an
explanation of
the February 8
postponement,
and the
February 13
deferral of
decision, but
none was
provided.
Reconsideration
will be
requested.
One of the
Fed's sleights
of hand is in
footnote 27,
where after
reciting Inner
City Press'
objections the
Fed says "the
Board has
determined in
a separate
action that
ING Groep
would not
control
Capital One as
a result of
this proposal.
See Board
letter to Mark
Menting, Esq.
(February 14,
2012)."
So a major
contest issue
was confined
to a side
letter on the
same day at
the approval.
Footnote 10 of
the Fed's
approval order
says
"One
commenter
expressed
concern about
ex parte
communications
and the
opportunity
for the public
to rebut all
information
that was
provided by
Capital One.
On review, the
Board found
that the
public had a
full
opportunity to
provide the
Board with any
information
related to the
factors that
the Board must
consider in
acting on the
notice. The
information
submitted by
Capital One,
and the
release of
that
information to
the public,
was in
accordance
with the
Board’s
regulations
and policies.
The Board
confirmed that
all contacts
between
Capital One
and staff were
in accordance
with the
Board’s rules
on ex parte
communications."
Consider:
on the night
of
February 7,
the Fed issued
a document
dump of some
1040 pages
responding to
a Freedom of
Information
Act request
Inner City
Press
filed in
October.
Among
the
1040 pages
provided (more
than 200 have
been withheld
in full,
from ICP and
other
commenters,
NCRC and
others), some
show an
irregular
process
tainted by ex
parte
communications
and a
disturbingly
pervasive
resolving
door. Some
examples, from
a single
one of the
files dumped
on ICP on
February 7,
and which ICP
commented
on to the Fed
in the run-up
to its
February 13
meeting:
Former
Federal
Reserve legal
staffer Andy
Navarrete, now
Senior Vice
President of
Capital One,
improperly
reached out to
Scott Alvarez
on
August 25,
2011;
On
November
7, 2011,
Patricia A.
Robinson at
Capital One's
law firm –
presumably the
same Pat
Robinson who
was in the
Federal
Reserve
Board’s Legal
Division
working on
applications
-- wrote to
Michael
Sexton and
Stanlyn Clark
at the Federal
Reserve:
"It
was
great talking
to you last
week, Mike.
Stanlyn, I am
sorry that I
missed you but
hope to catch
up very soon
(now that my
one-year
'cooling off'
period has
expired).
As
ICP
commented, it
is troubling
that Capital
One could hire
and use an
attorney who
personally
knows and
worked with
all of the Fed
attorneys
reviewing the
application.
This led to a
November 21,
2011,
call about,
among other
things, the
HSBC credit
card
portfolio,
with
3 OCC
officials on
the call --
tainting that
process as
well. On
November 18,
2011, Ms.
Robinson was
at the OCC,
8:45 to 10:45
AM.
There was
another call
on December 9,
2011.
The
Fed
is
increasingly
abusing and
evading FOIA
and this must
be not
only reversed,
but explained
and
accountability
imposed in
response
to ICP's
pending
appeal.
For
the
reasons of
record, and as
argued by
NCRC, the
Federal
Reserve
should
reconsider the
ING approval
and Capital
One's
related
proposal to
buy the
ex-Household
predatory
lending
platform
from HSBC.
Watch this
site.
, 
