Wednesday, November 23, 2016

Rep. Mulvaney Troubled by $1 Billion in Legal Fees Paid by NCUA

Representative Mick Mulvaney (R - SC) wrote National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) Chairman Metsger on November 21 that he was troubled by the $1 billion in legal fees paid by the agency on $4.3 billion in recoveries associated with lawsuits over the sale of faulty mortgage-backed securities to five failed corporate credit unions.

Rep. Mulvaney wrote that "[m]ore prudent action in this matter may have saved the credit union industry millions of dollars."

Rep. Mulvaney has requested answers from the agency to three questions within 30 days:
  • Why did the agency pursue these cases under contingency fee arrangements?
  • What was the original analysis of why this was the better approach?
  • Has there been a post-settlement analysis to see if this was actually the best approach financially given the outcomes?
I will be very interested in the agency's response.

Read the letter below (click on image to enlarge).


  1. "I will be very interested in the agency's response".
    Yes, so will I...but I wonder about all the other credit unions.
    And CUNA.
    And nafcu.
    That this agency approved contingency against executive order and then went out and paid 23% fee to Robert Fenners friend is preposterous yet, for this agency typical.
    There would have been no need for lawsuits had NCUA done its job with wescorp and us central.
    There would have been no lawsuits if NCUA had not ignored treasury warnings about the problems in the CCU system.
    Then the non tax paying credit unions needed a taxpayer bailout.
    That we aren't all screaming at congress to deal with this agency is embarrassing.
    They owe our members.
    And we should all have disaffiliated by now.
    Glad we did.

  2. What the heck does the NCUA care about the $1B shakedown by the lawfirm? It is not the NCUA money. It is the credit union's money. The NCUA does not care about saving money for the credit union's. That is why we continue to experience NCUA assessments. And the NCUA will keep the $3B recovery and not refund or rebate it back to the natural person credit unions. The NCUA is running a criminal enterprise.



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.