Whatever the legal result of Barclays' (NYSE: BCS) lawsuit against Bear Stearns (NYSE: BSC) over hedge fund losses, the UK bank should have know better.
Much of the current problem related to mortgage-related securities bought and held by big financial companies is why the "due diligence" was so thin.
According to Reuters, "Barclays Bank Plc accused Bear Stearns Co Inc on Wednesday of loading one of its hedge funds with about $500 million in troubled assets just weeks before it collapsed with another fund."
Barclays has a case if Bear Stearns simply dumped risky securities into the fund without any warning. But the UK bank certainly knew the overall asset mix of the pools and was still making a bet that mortgage-related securities would do well.
Did Bear Stearns lie to Barclays? Did it mislead the big bank? Perhaps. But the greed that drove big banks to invest in these instruments was not limited to Barclays. Neither was the lack of understanding about how the securities worked, or what their risks were.
Barclays can blame itself on those counts.
Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 247wallst.com.
Entrepreneur's Journal: Putting together a solid sales contract
The week in preview: Earnings from Walmart, Macy's, and other retailers
Six top trades for the rest of 2009
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
12-20-2007 @ 11:12AM
DERICK MULUBWA said...
Now this is an interesting case .Where does this leave the fund managers? Did they do a good analysis . We all expect banks to carry out risk /return assessment on the funds of their clients.Surely a bank of a reputation like Barclays should know the upside as well as the downside of such investment vehicles.They cannot surely claim to have been duped by a fellow bank.Where does this then leave the ordinary customer?We will await to hear the outcome
by Derick Mulubwa - http://www.demcat.info/