JPMorgan ordered to comply with probe of Madoff

Fri Jan 4, 2013 2:50pm EST

Commuters are reflected in stone as they walk past the JP Morgan headquarters in New York May 22, 2012. REUTERS/Eduardo Munoz

Commuters are reflected in stone as they walk past the JP Morgan headquarters in New York May 22, 2012.

Credit: Reuters/Eduardo Munoz

(Reuters) - The Treasury Department watchdog ordered JPMorgan Chase & Co (JPM.N) to work with U.S. regulators seeking documents in connection with a probe into the bank's relationship with convicted Ponzi schemer Bernard Madoff, in a warning letter dated December 21.

The letter from Treasury Inspector General Eric Thorson to JPMorgan's general counsel, Stephen Cutler, which was reviewed by Reuters on Friday, revealed that the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency has been unable to get documents it requested.

JPMorgan has argued it does not have to turn over certain kinds of documents to the OCC because it would impinge on its attorney-client privilege rights, according to the letter.

Thorson told the bank his office would not accept that argument and ordered JPMorgan to tell his office by January 11 how it would resolve the dispute with the OCC.

"The OCC could not do its work and carry out its authority under its examination statute...if that statute was interpreted or operated to bar access to bank records for which a claim of privilege was made," Thorson said in the letter, which was first reported by Bloomberg.

Thorson said the OCC referred the matter to the inspector general's office to determine whether JPMorgan was impeding the regulator's national bank oversight program. The OCC is an independent regulator within the Treasury Department.

The letter did not say what kinds of documents the OCC is seeking or give more detail about the bank regulator's investigation into JPMorgan.

A spokesman for the OCC declined to comment on Friday.

"This dispute does not go to the merits of the matter," said JPMorgan spokeswoman Jennifer Zuccarelli. "But it does raise an important issue of principle: whether we and other banks - large and small alike - have the fundamental right, long recognized in this country, to communicate freely with and seek confidential guidance from their lawyers.

"We will of course continue to work together with our regulators on this matter," Zuccarelli said.

Madoff was convicted in 2009 of defrauding thousands of investors and is serving a 150-year prison sentence.

Irving Picard, a trustee for Madoff's victims, has accused JPMorgan of ignoring warning signs that Madoff's business was a fraud and has attempted to sue the bank.

A judge found that the trustee lacked power to bring claims against the bank for harm to former Madoff customers, tossing out all but $425 million of Picard's $19.9 billion lawsuit against JPMorgan.

The bank has said there was no showing that anyone there knew of Madoff's elaborate scheme.

Picard is in the process of appealing the ruling.

(Reporting By Emily Stephenson and Sarah N. Lynch; additional reporting by Douglas Palmer; Editing by Leslie Adler)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (3)
AlkalineState wrote:
“JPMorgan has argued it does not have to turn over certain kinds of documents to the OCC because it would impinge on its attorney-client privilege rights, according to the letter.”

Good theory. Didn’t work for Madoff either. JP Morgan is a sell.

Jan 04, 2013 3:50pm EST  --  Report as abuse
garilou wrote:
I hate to say that – as crook as JPM can be, the news doesn’t seem to have bothered investors who seem to be – by definition – amoral.
If anything can bring money, it’s good.

I hope this time this won’t get a slap on the hand: Madoff’s pundit was a criminal case, and if some accomplices are found they also deserve jail.
After all, didn’t they “hold the bag” that Madoff was filling?

But are JPM CEOs to rich to jail?

Jan 04, 2013 5:13pm EST  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:
JP Morgan’s assertion that because their in-house attorneys were complicit in the crimes, all documents held by JP Morgan are protected under attorney-client privilege is bold…. but ultimately laughable. This should be used in law schools as an example of how attorney-client privilege does NOT work. Didn’t work for the mob, didn’t work for Madoff, didn’t work for JP Morgan. All it did was pretty much prove that you’re hiding something good.

Any moron still holding this stock a year from now, gets what they deserve. This ship is going down.

Jan 04, 2013 5:46pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.

A tourist takes a plunge as she swims at Ngapali Beach, a popular tourist site, in the Thandwe township of the Rakhine state, October 6, 2013. Picture taken October 6, 2013. REUTERS/Soe Zeya Tun (MYANMAR - Tags: SOCIETY) - RTR3FOI0

Where do you want to go?

We look at when to take trips, budget considerations and the popularity of multigenerational family travel.   Video