Wednesday, September 7, 2011

IG Report: Ethic Breaches Played a Role in Certified FCU's Failure

The Inspector General (IG) found that Certified FCU failed because of weak internal controls, weak board oversight, and inadequate risk management practices. The failure of Certified FCU resulted in a loss of $9 million for the National Credit Union Share Insurance Fund.

The IG report found that improprieties and fraud played a major role in the credit unions failure. According to the IG report, allegations of fraud and improprieties first surfaced through anonymous telephone calls to the NCUA in April and May of 2005. However, a 2005 investigation by NCUA found no evidence to substantiate the fraud allegations, although they determined the CEO had abused his position to enrich himself personally at the credit union’s expense and potentially engaged in money laundering. The report notes that NCUA officials failed to take decisive action about these ethical breaches and the CEO stayed in his position until May 2010.

A 2010 forensic review found evidence that there was a breach in the fiduciary duties by the CEO, including check kiting and receiving "potential kick backs from vendors and from loan origination fees and commissions paid to one of the Credit Union’s loan officers."

For example,

"The CEO had a consulting company, which contracted for a 20 percent share of commissions paid to the loan officer’s mortgage servicing business. The loan officer generated low quality loans with high origination fees, which were then approved by the CEO. The loan origination fees were paid by Certified in the form of commissions to the loan officer’s company, which then paid the CEO’s consulting business its 20 percent share."

Additionally, the report notes that the credit union failed to manage liquidity risk. High cost nonmember deposits, which I've previously written about with respect to other credit union failures, rose to 18 percent of total deposits increased the liquidity problems confronting the credit union, especially given its heavy concentration of fixed rate real estate loans.

Additionally, the IG report found that NCUA examiners failed to:

1. adequately assess the management component of CAMEL rating system;

2. adequately consider external audit findings and reviews when developing their examination procedures; and

3. appropriately apply remedies when their fraud investigation unearthed serious safety and soundness concerns due to the CEO’s business practices and ethical behavior.

Read the IG Report.

1 comment:

  1. I LOVE these stories. For nearly 100 more, go to:

    http://www.fdicoig.gov/mlr.shtml

    Required reading for the media.

    ReplyDelete

 

The content is provided for educational purposes only, with the understanding that neither the authors, contributors, nor the publishers of this site are engaged in rendering legal, accounting or other expert or professional services. If legal or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought.

Comments appearing in response to articles appearing on this site do not necessarily reflect the views of the ABA. ABA makes no representations regarding the truth or accuracy of commentary or opinions that may be posted in response to the articles that appear on this website.

The inclusion herein of any link to a website, either in the text of an article or in a comment, does not denote any approval, sponsorship, or endorsement by the ABA, and ABA is not responsible for the content or opinions expressed on those linked websites or related commentary. This content is not licensed to third parties sites and is not affiliated with any third party site. Any reference to the author or this content on any third party site on the Internet is not authorized by the ABA.

It is the policy of the American Bankers Association to comply fully with all antitrust laws. Certain discussions should be considered off-limits, including those that contain competitively sensitive data such as price and cost information, or statements that could be construed as reflecting an attempt or desire to control or influence a particular market or markets. Future pricing or other prospective competitive information should never be shared.