Click here to Search This Site   -- For or with more information, contact us.

September 28, 2020

  So how did the Federal Reserve keep rubber stamping for the banks now being exposed for failing to asked on FinCen SARs? We'll have more on this.

September 21, 2020

  What a scam: now Banco Bradesco, in a response they want partial withheld, argues that its "pecuniary contribution" in Brazil is not really a fine. Really?

September 14, 2020

Why doesn't the Federal Reserve's OMWI report address the way the Fed's work impact, and often short changes, communities of color and minority and women owned businesses? We'll have more on this. https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/March-2020-Report-to-the-Congress-on-the-Office-of-Minority-and-Women-Inclusion.htm

September 7, 2020

Federal Reserve Amid Covid Asks Banco Bradesco of BCB Fine cc Fair Finance Watch

By Matthew R. Lee, Exclusive

SOUTH BRONX, SDNY, Sept 4 – Amid escalating attacks on the U.S. Community Reinvestment Act, Inner City Press / Fair Finance Watch back in August filed comments under the CRA opposing Banco Bradesco's application to acquire BAC Florida, see below.

 Amid the Coronavirus pandemic, it has continued to appear that the Federal Reserve is churning forward to try to rubber stamp a bank merger. On April 7 the Fed asked Banco Bradesco's New York law firm to supplement the record with how it is dealing with current economic situation. On April 24 the bank's law firm Shearman & Sterling sent an answer to the Fed - with the entire Covid section, as sent as required to Fair Finance Watch and Inner City Press, entirely redacted. Inner City Press FOIA-ed that, then was asked to narrow the request.

 So S&S submitted another filing, with even the name of the exhibits redacted. As of June 7, the Fed has simply extended its time to reply.

  Next the Fed telephoned Bradesco to ask about the impact of the US travel ban on Brazil on the proposed transaction and integration. The question was not conveyed to Inner City Press until Bradesco's entirely redacted answer. This is Orwellian. Inner City Press has written to the Fed: "This is a FOIA request for the all withheld portions of the additional information submitted by Banco Bradesco on or about May 29, 2020 as part of its challenged but still being processed amid the COVID-19 pandemic to aquire BAC including but not limited to the redaction of the entire answer to the Fed's telephonic question (not otherwise provided to ICP) about the effect of the travel ban on Brazil on the proposed transaction. This follows up on our previous and still outstanding FOIA request which we voluntarily narrowed on April 30 in response to the inquiry by Katrina Allen-Austin of the Legal Division dated the same date and the FOIA after that. Note: processing of this application should be suspended until COVID-19 restrictions, which continue in New York after June 8, are lifted."

  Now on September 4, the Fed has asked this: "We refer to the application filed on behalf of Banco Bradesco, S.A., Lecce Holdings S.A., Fundação Bradesco, BBD Participações S.A., Nova Cidade de Deus Participações S.A., and Cidade de Deus Cia. Commercial de Participações, (“Bradesco”) all of Osasco, São Paulo, Brazil, to become bank holding companies by acquiring substantially all of the shares of BAC Florida Bank, Coral Gables, Florida, pursuant to Section 3 of the Bank Holding Company Act, as amended (“BHC Act”).  Based on our review of the current record, we request the following additional information. Please also respond to the questions in the Confidential Annex. Supporting documentation should be provided, as appropriate.  1. Describe any situations in which the Central Bank of Brazil (“BCB”) has imposed fines  higher than the contribution payment made by Bradesco under the Termo De Compromisso (“Termo”) with the BCB on May 29, 2020.  2. Please confirm whether any of the transactions or activity addressed in the Termo relate  to USD transactions transmitted through financial institutions in the United States.  Please provide your response addressed to the undersigned within 8 business days of the date of this letter. Any information for which confidential treatment is desired should be so labeled and separately bound in accordance with Section 261.15 of the Board's Rules Regarding Availability of Information. In addition, in accordance with the Federal Reserve's ex parte procedures, provide a copy of the public portion of your response (together with any attachments) directly to the commenter." Watch this site.

August 31, 2020

  So the Fed correctly sent to the board a challenged application by First Illinois Bancorp - while on a policy setting sell-out application by Varo, it confined it at Federal Banks of SF to rubber stamp. This is a scam.

August 24, 2020

At the Federal Reserve, FOIA appeals used to be handled by a Governor, for a time, Governor Powell. Now it's just one staff member rubber stemping the withholdings of another: Inner City Press this week got this: "Based on a de novo review of the Deputy Secretary’s decision, and upon the recommendation of counsel regarding the legal issues involved, I affirm the Deputy 2 See 5 U.S.C. §§ 552(b)(1)-(9). 3 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(4). 4 Food Mktg. Inst. v. Argus Leader Media, 139 S. Ct. 2356, 2366 (2019).  3  Secretary’s decision to withhold information contained in Banco Bradesco’s May 29 response to an additional information request from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and the Board, pursuant to exemption 4. If you believe that the Board is withholding information from you contrary to your legal rights, you may seek judicial review of my decision in an appropriate United States District Court pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B). Additionally, if you have any questions regarding the processing of your request, you may contact the Board’s FOIA Public Liaison, Ms. Candace Ambrose, at 202-452-3684 for assistance.5  Sincerely, (Signed) Ann E. Misback Ann E. Misback Secretary of the Board."

August 17, 2020

The regulators, even amid the COVID-19 pandemic, have shown a willingness to rubber stamp applications including the Federal Reserve on a "delegate" / approval-only basis as they did with Varo's application to become a bank holding company.   Inner City Press / Fair Finance Watch immediately wrote in appeal to the Board - and still no answer...

August 10, 2020

Federal Reserve Rubber Stamp of Varo Bank Protested to Chair Powell Collusion With OCC

By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon
BBC - Guardian UK - Honduras - CJR - PFT

South Bronx, Aug 3 –  How corrupt has the Federal Reserve become using the COVID-19 pandemic as ground cover? Well, despite rules that substantively challenged applications can only be approved by the Board of Governors in DC, on July 28 the Fed rubber stamped on a delegated basis fintech Varo's application to form a bank holding company. It is an unprecedented now low - but happens while the Federal Reserve withholds under FOIA all information about the impact of COVID-19 on the application by Brazil-based Banco Bradesco. Something has gone dreadfully wrong on C St.

  Here's the Fed's - Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco's - July 28 letter, sent to Inner City Press: "Dear Mr. Walsh: The Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (“Reserve Bank”), acting under authority delegated by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“Board”), and having considered the relevant statutory factors, hereby approves the subject application. In consideration of this filing, reliance was placed upon all the representations and the commitments made by or on behalf of Bancorp. No significant changes in the transaction should be made prior to consummation without our approval. Approval of the application is subject to the Board’s authority to require reports by and make inspections and examinations of BHCs and their subsidiaries, and to require such modification or termination of activities of a holding company or any of its subsidiaries as the Board finds necessary to ensure compliance with the BHC Act. Approval of the application is also subject to receipt of all other required regulatory approvals, non-objections, or consents with this transaction. The proposed transaction may be consummated upon approval. 1 Please notify the undersigned in writing when the transaction is consummated."

August 3, 2020

Federal Reserve Rubber Stamps Varo Into Banking On Delegated Basis As Denies FOIAs

By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon
BBC - Guardian UK - Honduras - CJR - PFT

South Bronx, July 28–  How corrupt has the Federal Reserve become using the COVID-19 pandemic as ground cover? Well, despite rules that substantively challenged applications can only be approved by the Board of Governors in DC, on July 28 the Fed rubber stamped on a delegated basis fintech Varo's application to form a bank holding company. It is an unprecedented now low - but happens while the Federal Reserve withholds under FOIA all information about the impact of COVID-19 on the application by Brazil-based Banco Bradesco. Something has gone dreadfully wrong on C St.

  Here's the Fed's - Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco's - July 28 letter, sent to Inner City Press: "July 28, 2020 Via Electronic Mail Mr. Colin Walsh Varo Money, Inc. 222 Kearny Street, 9th Floor San Francisco, California 94108 RE: Varo Money, Inc., San Francisco, California (“Bancorp”), to become a bank holding company (“BHC”) through the acquisition of 100 percent of the voting shares of Varo Bank, N.A. (In Organization), Draper, Utah, pursuant to Section 3(a)(1) of the Bank Holding Company Act (“BHC Act”) Dear Mr. Walsh: The Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (“Reserve Bank”), acting under authority delegated by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“Board”), and having considered the relevant statutory factors, hereby approves the subject application. In consideration of this filing, reliance was placed upon all the representations and the commitments made by or on behalf of Bancorp. No significant changes in the transaction should be made prior to consummation without our approval. Approval of the application is subject to the Board’s authority to require reports by and make inspections and examinations of BHCs and their subsidiaries, and to require such modification or termination of activities of a holding company or any of its subsidiaries as the Board finds necessary to ensure compliance with the BHC Act. Approval of the application is also subject to receipt of all other required regulatory approvals, non-objections, or consents with this transaction. The proposed transaction may be consummated upon approval. 1 Please notify the undersigned in writing when the transaction is consummated."

July 27, 2020

Filed with the Fed: "This is a FOIA appeal of the Deputy Secretary's July 17 denial in full of my and Inner City Press' June 7 FOIA request for the withheld portions of the additional information submitted by Banco Bradesco on or about May 29, 2020 as part of its challenged but still being processed amid the COVID-19 pandemic to aquire BAC including but not limited to the redaction of the entire answer to the Fed's telephonic question (not otherwise provided to ICP) about the effect of the travel ban on Brazil on the proposed transaction.    It is an outrage that every single word in this bank's response about this PUBLIC HEALTH emergency is being withheld by the Federal Reserve.  Note: processing of this application should be suspended until COVID-19 restrictions, which continue in New York, are lifted."
July 20, 2020

It took the Fed SIX WEEKS to issue this denial in full: "This is in response to your email message dated June 7, 2020, received by the Board’s Information Disclosure Section on June 8. Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552, you request:  all withheld portions of the additional information submitted by Banco Bradesco on or about May 29, 2020 as part of its challenged but still being processed amid the COVID-19 pandemic to aquire [sic] BAC including but not limited to the redaction of the entire answer to the Fed’s telephonic question (not otherwise provided to ICP) about the effect of the travel ban on Brazil on the proposed transaction. Staff searched Board records and located information that is responsive to your request. I have determined, however, that the redacted portions of the May 29 letter and the confidential exhibits consist of confidential commercial and financial information (e.g., business plans and strategies; financial statements). This information is subject to withholding and will be withheld from you pursuant to exemption 4 of the FOIA, 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(4). I have also determined that the information should be withheld because it is reasonably foreseeable that disclosure would harm an interest protected by an exemption described in subsection (b) of the FOIA, 5 U.S.C. § 552(b). The responsive documents have been reviewed under the requirements of subsection (b) and all reasonably segregable nonexempt information will be provided to you. The document being provided to you will indicate the amount of information that has been withheld and the applicable exemption. In addition, approximately 30 pages of information will be withheld from you in their entirety.  2  Accordingly, your request for the withheld portions of Banco Bredesco’s May 29 submission is denied in full for the reason cited above."

July 13, 2020

The Fed asks for more time - so it can't just rubber stamp for Bradesco, can they? "FOIA Request No. F-2020-00240     Dear Mr. Lee:     On June 8, 2020, the Board of Governors (“Board”) received your correspondence dated June 7, pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552, for, “all withheld portions of the additional information submitted by Banco Bradesco on or about May 29, 2020[.]”     Pursuant to section (a)(6)(B)(i) of the FOIA, we are extending the period for our response until July 20, 2020, in order to consult with two or more components of the Board having a substantial interest in the determination of the request.     If a determination can be made before July 20, 2020, we will respond to you promptly.  It is our policy to process FOIA requests as quickly as possible while ensuring that we disclose the requested information to the fullest extent of the law."

July 6, 2020

From the Federal Reserve: "Barclays Bank PLC, London, England and Barclays Bank PLC New York Branch, New York, New York Cease and Desist Order, dated May 20, 2015 Terminated June 25, 2020" - but not announced until a full week later on July 2 - why?

June 29, 2020

From the Fed, after a long day, this: "Staff searched Board records and located the letter dated April 24 that is responsive to the first part of your request. I have determined, however, that the redacted portions of the letter contain confidential commercial and financial information (e.g., pro forma financials; projected asset quality and capital ratios; and business plans and strategies). This information is subject to withholding and will be withheld from you pursuant to exemption 4 of the FOIA, 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(4). I have also determined that the information should be withheld because it is reasonably foreseeable that disclosure would harm an interest protected by an exemption described in subsection (b) of the FOIA, 5 U.S.C. § 552(b). The responsive document has been reviewed under the requirements of subsection (b) and all reasonably segregable nonexempt information will be provided to you. The document being provided to you will indicate the amount of information that has been withheld and the applicable exemption." All information about the impact o COVID-19 redacted. UNacceptable.

June 22, 2020

Varo Dodges on CRA and Covid Outage When Challenged on Federal Reserve Application For Banking

By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon
BBC - Guardian UK - Honduras - CJR - PFT

South Bronx, June 15 –  With fintechs pushing to get into banking, through now ex-Comptroller Joseph Otting who after trashing the Community Reinvestment Act left and immediately joined fintech Black Knight, and through the PPP, on June 10 Fair Finance Watch with Inner City Press on FOIA submitted timely comments to the Federal Reserve opposing Varo's application, pointing for example at Varo's service interruption in October 2019, including declined debit card transactions, which they tried to blame on their processor Galileo. See here. 

  Now on June 15 Varo's CEO Colin Walsh, as submitted by outside counsel Mitchell S. Eitel at Sullivan & Cromwell has passed the buck again on its service disruption, and sought to hide behind the OCC of Otting and Brooks, which has no credibility: "Varo Money, Inc. (“Varo”) hereby responds to the comment letter submitted by Mr. Matthew Lee of Inner City Press/Fair Finance Watch (the “Commenter”) on June 10, 2020... We strongly disagree with the Commenter’s suggestion that Varo itself was the cause of a “service interruption in October 2019, which [Varo] tried to blame on [Varo’s] processor Galileo.” On October 16, 2019, Galileo Processing experienced an impact to their systems, and it was reported that the customers of Chime, another Galileo client principally discussed in the article cited by the Commenter, were prevented “from making purchases and accessing cash"... we note that as it transitions to a bank, Varo Bank will use Visa DPS, not Galileo, as its processor after a brief transition period.... Varo has filed its Strategic Plan with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and believes that it will be approved in the near future. Varo respectfully submits that the OCC process is the ap- propriate forum for his comments.   Finally, with respect to the Commenter’s request that “all comment periods” for applications before the Federal Reserve be extended until “at least Phase Two of the Coronavirus restrictions in New York”, Section 262.25(b)(2) of the Federal Reserve’s Rules of Procedure state that the Secretary of the Federal Re- serve may grant a brief extension of the comment period in cases where a commenter for good cause is una- ble to send its comment within the specified comment period upon “clear demonstration of hardship or other meritorious reason for seeking additional time” to comment. In general and as it relates to Varo’s Application, we believe that the Commenter’s request is overly broad and that there is no basis to extend the com- ment period. The Comment Letter vaguely references the “COVID-19 pandemic” and “Coronavirus restrictions” without providing any clear or definite demonstration as to how such pandemic or restrictions have interfered with the Commenter’s ability to meet the specified comment period or given rise to any hardship to Commenter or other meritorious reason to extend the comment period, or how the arbitrarily chosen “Phase Two” of such restrictions would alleviate any such unsubstantiated causes for delay. To the contrary, by virtue of the scope and content of the Comment Letter itself, the Commenter has clearly demonstrated his ability to comment within the specified comment period."

June 15, 2020

Varo Challenged on Federal Reserve Application For Banking After Service Outage and CRA Dodge