April 16, 2024

DealBook: Report Faults ‘At All Costs’ Attitude at Barclays

Robert E. Diamond Jr., the charismatic American behind the international expansion of the British bank Barclays, was named chief executive in 2010.Dylan Martinez/ReutersRobert E. Diamond Jr., a former chief executive of Barclays, helped transform the British bank.

LONDON – The push to change Barclays from a predominantly British retail bank to a global financial giant over the last two decades created a culture that put profit before customers, according to a report released on Wednesday.

The independent review, which was ordered by the bank’s top management in the wake of a rate-rigging scandal last year, highlighted an “at all costs” attitude, particularly within the firm’s investment bank, that was reinforced by a bonus system that encouraged taking risks over serving clients.

“Barclays became complex to manage,” said the report, which was overseen by Anthony Salz, former head of the law firm Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer. “The culture that emerged tended to favor transactions over relationships, the short term over sustainability and financial over other business purposes.”

The conclusions represent a criticism of the strategy of a former chief executive of Barclays, Robert E. Diamond Jr., who helped transform the British firm into one of the world’s largest investment banks.

Mr. Diamond, who stepped down last year in the aftermath of the scandal involving manipulation of the London interbank offered rate, or Libor, ran the bank’s investment banking operations until taking over as chief executive in 2011.

The report released on Wednesday said the push to increase profits across the British bank’s operations led to potentially risky behavior that had a direct effect on the firm’s overall reputation.

Last year, the British bank was the first global financial institution to admit wrongdoing in the rate-rigging scandal.

Barclays agreed to a $450 million settlement with American and British authorities after some of its traders and senior managers were found to have manipulated Libor.

The British bank has also been implicated in the inappropriate sales of complex financial and insurance products to small businesses and retail customers that has led the entire British banking sector to pay out billions of dollars collectively in compensation.

The new chief executive, Antony P. Jenkins, announced a plan this year to improve the bank’s culture and profitability, including the closing of a controversial tax planning division and the elimination of 3,700 jobs, mostly in the firm’s unprofitable European retail and business banking unit.

Antony Jenkins, chief of Barclays.Justin Thomas/VisualMedia, via Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesAntony P. Jenkins, chief of Barclays.

Mr. Jenkins also outlined efforts to end aggressive risk-taking at Barclays. In an internal memorandum to employees, he told staff members who were unwilling to buy into the British bank’s push to rebuild its reputation to leave the bank.

Yet despite the move to improve how Barclays operates, it continues to experience cultural problems, particularly related to banker bonuses, according to the independent review released on Wednesday.

“Many senior bankers seemed still to be arguing that they deserved their precrisis levels of pay,” the report said. “A few investment bankers seemed to lose a sense of proportion and humility.”

While total employee compensation at Barclays has fallen as a result of the financial crisis, pay for the bank’s top management has remained above the industry average, the report added.

In 2011, for example, compensation for the bank’s top 70 managers was 17 percent higher than that of peers at rival banks. The disparity was a result, in part, of executives moving from the investment banking unit to less well-paid jobs in the bank’s other operations, without an adjustment in pay to reflect their new positions, according to the independent review.

“The report makes for uncomfortable reading in parts,” the bank’s chairman, David Walker, said in a statement. “We must learn from the findings.”

Article source: http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/04/03/report-faults-at-all-costs-attitude-at-barclays/?partner=rss&emc=rss

DealBook: British Panel Castigates Ex-UBS Officials at Hearing

Marcel Rohner, former chief of UBS, leaving a parliamentary hearing in London on Thursday. I did the best I could, he told lawmakers.Tal Cohen/European Pressphoto AgencyMarcel Rohner, former chief of UBS, leaving a parliamentary hearing in London on Thursday. “I did the best I could,” he told lawmakers.

LONDON — Several former senior executives at UBS were labeled negligent and incompetent on Thursday for failing to detect illegal activity that caused the Swiss bank to pay a $1.5 billion fine to global regulators.

On the second day of hearings at the British Parliament related to the recent rate-rigging scandal, Marcel Rohner, the former chief executive of UBS, and a number of former heads of the firm’s investment bank were questioned about whether they were aware that some 40 people had altered major benchmark interest rates for financial gain.

The executives, who no longer work at the Swiss bank, denied any knowledge of the illegal activity, and said they had found out only when UBS officially confirmed in 2011 that investigations into the firm were being conducted by the Justice Department, Commodity Futures Trading Commission and international authorities.

“What we have heard are appalling mistakes that can only be described as gross negligence and incompetence,” said Andrew Tyrie, a politician who leads the Parliament’s commission on banking standards that is investigating wrongdoing at the firms operating in London. “The level of ignorance seems staggering to the point of incredulity.”

UBS agreed to pay the $1.5 billion fine in late 2012 to settle allegations that some of its traders had altered the London interbank offered rate, or Libor, and the euro interbank offered rate, or Euribor, to increase their own profits. The benchmark rates underpin trillions of dollars of financial products, including mortgages, worldwide.

Some UBS senior managers also tweaked the bank’s submissions to present the Swiss bank in a better financial position than it actually was, according to regulatory filings.

Libor Explained

Mr. Rohner, who led UBS from 2007 to 2009, a period when the bank wrote down around $50 billion of sophisticated credit products, said he was embarrassed and ashamed by the misconduct related to Libor.

“I did the best I could,” said Mr. Rohner, who appeared taken aback by the angry questions from the British politicians, who repeatedly called his actions incompetent and negligent.

Mr. Rohner said the firm’s operations had become too complex before the financial crisis and that had made it difficult to keep track of potential illegal activity by some of its employees.

The parliamentary hearing focused on speculation at the beginning of the financial crisis that highlighted banks’ so-called lowballing of rates. The practice involved submitting lower Libor numbers in an effort to portray the firms as being in strong financial health despite a severe cut in lending.

Mr. Rohner and three former chiefs of UBS’s investment bank — Huw Jenkins, Alex Wilmot-Sitwell and Jerker Johansson — all denied being aware of the rate submissions during 2007 and 2008 when the bank raised billions of dollars of new capital to bolster its own finances.

“I had the responsibility to actively seek out information about things that concerned me,” Mr. Johansson, who ran UBS’s investment bank from 2008 to 2009, told the parliamentary hearing on Thursday. “I failed to recognize this Libor issue as being one of these issues.”

Yet British politicians refused to believe that senior executives at the Swiss bank had not known about the Libor submissions at a time when the financial markets were focused on the problems of the world’s largest banks.

“You are stretching belief to its limit to get us to believe that you were completely unaware,” Andrew Love, a politician on the parliamentary committee, told the former UBS executives.

The hearing also questioned several current and former senior members of the Financial Services Authority, Britain’s financial regulator, about their actions leading to the fine against UBS, the largest financial penalty so far levied against a bank in the continuing Libor investigation.

British regulators said that only nine out of the 40 individuals involved in the UBS rate-rigging scandal had worked in the country’s financial services industry, and that authorities were continuing to investigate a number of firms and individuals.

“This is not the end of the Libor story,” said Tracey McDermott, director of enforcement and financial crime at the Financial Services Authority.

Article source: http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/01/10/former-ubs-executives-are-grilled-over-libor/?partner=rss&emc=rss