Posted: Thursday, 27 August 2009 @ 11:43
A couple of stories have broken this week suggesting that the calls for transparency in the banking sector are going unheeded.
The first appeared in the Times on Monday and concerned the resurrection of the practice adopted by banks in the last recession of selling repossessed properties to their own subsidiaries to avoid having to mark down their value by selling in the open market.
You can read Karl Denninger's typical forthright views on this practice here:
The second story revolves around a freedom of information act request made by Bloomberg to require the Federal Reserve to publish details of the identity of the banks receiving bailout funds and the amount of those funds. Having lost the case, the Fed is now seeking to delay the deadline for producing the information on the basis that it could have a disastrous effect on the banking system. Presumably, the reason it would have such a disastrous effect is that it would show clearly which institutions are effectively insolvent. You can read more here:
Steve Petty, Commercial Property Solicitor
This blog is not intended to constitute legal advice, nor is it intended to be a complete and authoritative statement of the law, and what we say might be out of date by the time you read it. You should always seek legal advice to confirm whether or how any information in this article applies to your particular situation. We offer a free telephone consultation
to discuss your particular circumstances.