Park
National Bank
Settled
Redlining Case
with DOJ As
Federal
Reserve Rubber
Stamps Mergers
By Matthew
Russell Lee, Patreon Maxwell
book
SOUTH BRONX,
March 1 –
Park
National Bank
discriminates,
the Department
of Justice has
belatedly
concluded, and
fined the bank
$9 million.
Too little,
too late.
The Federal
Reserve and
other
regulators
have rubber
stamped
mergers by
this bank, and
others like
it.
In
2015, Inner
City Press /
Fair Finance
Watch told the
Federal
Reserve and
other
regulators
about the
problems at
City National
Bank. And the
Fed(s) did
nothing.
Here's from
that time:
Royal
Bank of Canada
and
affluent-focused
Los
Angeles-based
City National
Bank, has
since April
been the
subject of a
Community
Reinvestment
Act challenge
by Fair
Finance Watch.
Back on
April 11, Inner City
Press submitted a
Freedom of
Information Act
(FOIA) request to
the Federal Reserve
for it communication
with and about RBC
and City National.
Only on September
30, more than five
MONTHS later, did
the Fed response. In
the spirit of
transparency, we are
putting the FOIA
response online
here.
It
shows among many
other things that
RBC was meeting with
the Federal Reserve
well before the
public announcement
of its City National
proposal; it has
many redactions
which we will be
appealing, for
example “When you
have a chance,
please put a note in
our files indicating
that we asked
Charles Fleet about
[REDACTED] (b)(5) .
Thanks.”
FOIA: On
Royal Bank of Canada-CNB, Here's Federal
Reserve's Response to ICP On FOIA Five Months
Ago by Matthew
Russell Lee
The
LA Times has reported
on the "letter from
the Fed [which] asks
the banks to respond
to questions raised
in written comments
by [FFW]. Spokesmen
for the banks
declined to
comment.... Fair
Finance Watch, a New
York advocacy group
for minorities,
questioned a deal
between the banks in
a June 11 comment
letter to the Fed."
Inner
City Press first put
that Fed
letter online,
here; then
Canada's National /
Financial Post
reported without
credit it had
"obtained" it.
By
contrast, in another
pending proposal, CBSI
- Oneida, the
Syracuse
Post-Standard disclosed
that "Inner City
Press forwarded the
letter to news
outlets. Some of the
Fed's questions
focus on whether
Community could
improperly control
matters at Oneida in
advance of the
acquisition. Community
is working on Fed's
questions, said Hal
Wentworth,
Community's senior
vice president for
retail banking."
One
common theme is that
non-control (and
therefore antitrust)
laws are being
violated. One
difference is that
CBSI does comment to
the media -- if only
to blame
the messenger --
while larger RBC and
CNB do not.
Arrogance?
On
CBSI's blaming the
messenger, FFW has
commented to the Fed
that it will "will
comment again when
CBSI has provided a
copy of its response
to the FRS'
questions of July
13. Beyond the CRA
and impermissible
“control” questions
raised therein, we
wish at this time to
raise the issues
that, in a public
response to ICP's
comments, CBSI's SVP
for retail banking said
the following,
in a prepared
statement no less:
'In a
statement today, Hal
Wentworth,
Community's senior
vice president for
retail banking, said
that Inner City
Press is not a local
group and pointed
out that letter was
the only one filed
on the Oneida deal.
"This activist does
not do business with
either Oneida or
Community Bank."'
If it would
be inappropriate for
CBSI to comment on
or disclose
information about
its customers, in
this context the
same applies to the
above-quoted, which,
separately, is
reminiscent of human
rights abusing
countries
emphasizing where
the rights groups
who study and report
on them are based."
On
June 6, FFW submitted
into the record
before the Fed:
"RBC,
City National off
to friendly start
ahead of $5.4B
takeover Globe
and Mail, May 26,
2015, quoted from
below.
Now
the Federal Reserve
has asked RBC:
"A commenter
alleged that in May
2015 RBC and CNB
collaborated to
extend credit to a
customer of
CNB. Please
address this claim.
In your response,
discuss in detail in
detail whether RBC
exercises a
controlling
influence over the
management or
policies of CNC or
CNB without prior
approval of the
Board. In addition,
discuss whether,
since entering into
the proposed
transaction, RBC and
CNB have
collaborated, or
plan to collaborate,
on extending credit
to any other
borrower, and
describe the nature
and circumstances of
those
collaborations."
There
are other problems,
including RBC's
non-compete
agreement with PNC
Financial Services.
But this gun-jumping
should be fatal to
the proposed merger.
FFW put
this into the
record before the
Fed:
“Royal Bank
of Canada won’t
complete its
$5.4-billion (U.S.)
purchase of Los
Angeles-based City
National Bank for
months, but the two
banks are already
getting a jump on
doing business
together.
City National chief
executive officer
Russell Goldsmith
got a call earlier
this month from a
long-time customer
who wanted speedy
approval of a loan
worth hundreds of
millions of dollars
to do an
acquisition.
“But he was familiar
with RBC, knew about
the merger and asked
whether RBC could
help get this
done.”“The client
knew it was an
amount of money
beyond what we would
normally lend,” the
65-year-old
Harvard-educated
lawyer said in an
interview.
Working closely with
Blair Fleming, head
of RBC’s U.S.
capital markets
unit, the two banks
signed off on the
loan within 72
hours.
'It’s typical of
what we do,”
explained Mr.
Goldsmith, whose
grandfather
co-founded City
National in 1954 and
whose father, Bram,
is chairman
emeritus. “We have a
relationship [with
the client]. …We
already had the
financial
information. So we
could do what we
needed to do. On top
of it, having RBC
Capital Markets come
into it meant we
could do it with
greater scale.'”
FFW
has told the Fed:
This is entirely
inappropriate and
the FRB must act,
publicly. The
Federal Reserve sent
the letter.
Royal Bank
of Canada Is Asked About Jumping the Gun by
Federal Reserve After Fair Finance Watch
Complaint by Matthew
Russell Lee
Please note
that RBC's belated
release of some
documents it
improperly sought
confidential
treatment for does
not resolve ICP's
FOIA request - we
are awaiting an FRB
ruling in order to,
if need be, appeal.
The comment period,
including for the
reasons set forth
above, must be
extended and on the
current record, the
application must be
denied and
enforcement
action(s) taken.
The Federal Reserve
Board granted FFW an
extension of the
comment period on
the proposed merger,
through June 11, FRB
letter here,
due to RBC
improperly
withholding
information which
was subsequently
released after a
Freedom of
Information Act
(FOIA) request by
Inner City Press.
FFW comment on June
11 - but submitted
to the Fed an
objection dated June
6 noting the two
banks admitted they
are already working
together on
transactions,
without any
authorization.
***
Your
support means a lot. As little as $5 a month
helps keep us going and grants you access to
exclusive bonus material on our Patreon
page. Click
here to become a patron.
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
SDNY Press Room 480, front cubicle
500 Pearl Street, NY NY 10007 USA
Mail: Box 20047, Dag
Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017
Reporter's mobile (and weekends):
718-716-3540
Other, earlier Inner City Press are
listed here,
and some are available in the ProQuest
service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright 2006-2023 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com
|