by William D. Cohan

October 28, 2012

from Bloomberg Website




William D. Cohan is the author of the recently released "Money and Power: How Goldman Sachs Came to Rule the World" and the New York Times bestsellers "House of Cards" and "The Last Tycoons."





Illustration by Pete Gamlen



Remember Richard Bowen?

He is the former senior executive at Citigroup Inc. (C) who in November 2007 issued a clarion call to his colleagues and Citi’s board that a major credit-quality problem loomed for the bank.




Report Video Issue
2008 Financial Crisis and Citigroup Subprime Mortgages

Day 1, Panel 1
April 7, 2010

from C-SpanVideo Website






Bowen was the chief underwriter in the business unit that bought some $50 billion annually in home mortgages from third parties that were then bundled up and sold as securities to investors the world over.


On Nov. 3 he sent an “urgent” e-mail to executives including Robert Rubin, the former U.S. Treasury secretary who was then chairman of the bank’s executive committee, and Gary Crittenden, the chief financial officer, raising concerns about,

“breakdowns in internal controls and resulting significant but possibly unrecognized financial losses existing within our organization.”

Bowen wrote that he had been “agonizing for some time” about the problem, especially since his direct superiors at the bank, whom he had warned repeatedly since he first discovered the problem in mid-2006, had done little or nothing to remedy it.


What he had discovered was that 60 percent of the home mortgages that Citigroup had bought from third parties, or $30 billion, were “defective,” meaning that they didn’t meet Citigroup’s underwriting criteria.


Nevertheless, they were still packaged up - defects and all - and sold as securities.





Almost Nothing


You know where this is going. The Citigroup executives did next to nothing.


Rubin, who left the company in January 2009, told the federal Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission on April 8, 2010, that,

“either I or somebody else sent it to the appropriate people, and I do know factually that that was acted on promptly and actions taken in response to it.”

Commission Chairman Phil Angelides asked Rubin to follow up with his commission and explain precisely what actions Citigroup took in response to Bowen’s e-mail.


A few months later, Rubin’s attorneys sent a letter stating that the,

“e-mail was subsequently passed on to the appropriate personnel at Citigroup” and that “Citigroup should be able to provide a description of its response to Mr. Bowen’s concerns.”

A Nixonian response if ever there was one.


Citigroup’s attorneys, in turn, wrote to the commission in November 2010 that the bank had responded to Bowen’s e-mail by firing “the head of the group” responsible for evaluating the credit quality of the purchased mortgages - actually, Bowen had done that already - and by putting in place a bunch of new “processes.”


Yet according to a July 2012 article in Bloomberg Markets magazine by Bob Ivry about Sherry Hunt, who worked for Bowen,

“There were no noticeable changes in the mortgage machinery as a result of Bowen’s warning.”

By the time of Rubin’s FCIC testimony, of course, Citigroup had been bailed out with $45 billion in cash from the American people, along with another $306 billion in guarantees from the federal government for a pot of the very same toxic home mortgages that Bowen had warned about.


Rubin pocketed $126 million in his 10 or so years at the company. Bowen, who was stripped of his responsibilities at Citigroup soon after writing the infamous e-mail, left the company two weeks after Rubin.


He now teaches accounting at the University of Texas at Dallas.





Warning Ignored


As horrific as it was for Rubin, Crittenden and others to ignore Bowen’s explicit warning, that’s not the end of the story.


As part of blowing the whistle on Citigroup’s bad behavior, Bowen also alerted the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the bank’s main regulator, hoping it would thoroughly investigate the “breakdowns of internal controls” and take legal action against those responsible.


Before the bailout of Citigroup, he gave the SEC two long depositions and 1,000 or so pages of documents, some of which were taken from the Internet, detailing the extent of Citigroup’s problems and Bowen’s attempts to rectify them. Importantly, he said he also gave his permission for the SEC to release to the public his depositions and the revealing documents.


Naturally, the SEC did nothing to pursue Bowen’s claims before billions of taxpayer dollars were used to rescue Citigroup.


But it must abide by the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), which allows the public to gain access to documents such as those Bowen provided. It has a horrendous track record of fulfilling FOIA requests in anything like a timely manner. My experience has been that the agency begrudgingly gives out the bare minimum long after I really needed it.


Earlier this year, Bloomberg’s Ivry filed a FOIA request with the SEC to get copies of Bowen’s two depositions and the 1,000 pages of documents.


Ivry wanted to know just what Bowen had discovered about Citigroup’s bad behavior in the years leading up to its bailout. Initially, the SEC stonewalled, claiming that the Bowen cache amounted to Citigroup “trade secrets.”


When Ivry finally got his FOIA documents back from the SEC, he was underwhelmed.

“It was a discussion about nothing and it was heavily redacted, including Bowen’s name,” Ivry told me via e-mail.

Needless to say, he was unable to get any additional insight into what Bowen had uncovered and was unable to inform the rest of us.





Unreleased Documents


When I told Bowen, earlier this week, that the SEC had failed to release his documents and his testimony about Citigroup to Ivry, he was flabbergasted. For legal reasons, Bowen said, he can’t share the information directly, but he fully expected the SEC to make it available to journalists and the public.


He also expected the SEC to investigate the wrongdoing.

“I’m outraged, quite frankly,” Bowen told me.


“I had been told that once the investigations were concluded that my material would be available to the public via FOIA. And to hear now that the SEC has made the decision that no, it cannot be available, I know nothing about the legal side of this, but quite frankly, I’m totally outraged.”

Last week, I filed my own FOIA request for Bowen’s documents and testimony.


On Oct. 22, I received an acknowledgement letter from the agency. My tracking number is 13-00937-FOIA. Trust me, I’ll let you know if the SEC gives me anything more than it gave Ivry.


But I won’t be counting on it...