Can I sue Barclays

Gentoo365

o.k. I posted something different in the other thread, but this is an actual case of a mortgage linked to LIBOR.

Now you *could* make a claim. However what if it turns out that LIBOR should have been higher? would you accept backdating your mortgage to the new rates? As that would be the fair solution for your lender?

....and arguably LIBOR should have been higher.

Gentoo365

...oh and LIBOR is not a market rate index. You cannot buy/sell at LIBOR. It is just a few phone calls made and an average.

Gentoo365

Damning emails that regulators released on Wednesday make clear that traders and the "submitters" tasked with reporting daily rates worked together for years to make the rates submitted suit the traders' and the bank's purposes.
In some cases, submitters set themselves reminders on their calendars to submit low rates on certain dates, according to the emails. In others, traders expressed overwhelming gratitude for low submissions that protected them from losses.
Around when the market for short-term debt known as commercial paper seized up in the fall of 2007, top Barclays treasury executives held a conference call with the desk responsible for submitting Libor, according to the CFTC order.
The person responsible for posting Barclays' borrowing rate said in a November 2007 phone call that if the bank submitted a correct rate, it would be higher than other banks and cause "a !!!! storm." According to the CFTC order, "The supervisor asked that the issue be taken ‘upstairs,' meaning that it should be discussed among more senior levels of Barclays' management."
Ultimately, the bank provided a lower rate that was the same as a competing bank.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/06/27/uk-barclays-libor-idUKBRE85Q0PM20120627

Brock_and_Roll

Cannot defend what Barclays traders did, but in financial terms this was just tiny "tinkering" in the libor rate UP and DOWN to suit the positions that their own colleague had in deriviatives contracts.

I would expect that even if anyone did have a mortgage/loan linked to Libor, then any gain or loss would be absolutely negligible. And in any event, Barclays are only one of 16 banks that contrribute rates towards Libor.

Anyway, you are being compensated - Barclays have been fined millions of pounds which will go to the government and, all things being equal, benefit us as taxpayers.

brit1234

revolu wrote: »

I have a consumer mortgage with db mortgages which is uk 3 month libor +2.5% since 2006.
Now since barclays have been fined for manipulationg this can I sue them, maybe something similar to a ppi claim?

So in real terms you benefited from this LIBOR adjustment. Now the question is are you going to pay back the money you should of paid on the low LIBOR rate to help out the shareholders?

Maybe the share holders could sue you if you didn't return it?

:eek::eek::eek::eek:

revolu

brit1234 wrote: »

So in real terms you benefited from this LIBOR adjustment. Now the question is are you going to pay back the money you should of paid on the low LIBOR rate to help out the shareholders?

Maybe the share holders could sue you if you didn't return it?

:eek::eek::eek::eek:

Time to drop the barclays torch my friend

Trader F: “Pls set 3m libor as high as possible today”
Submitter: “Sure 5.37 okay?”
Trader F: “5.36 is fine”

brit1234

revolu wrote: »

Time to drop the barclays torch my friend

Trader F: “Pls set 3m libor as high as possible today”
Submitter: “Sure 5.37 okay?”
Trader F: “5.36 is fine”

BBC And between 2007 and 2009, during the height of the banking crisis, the staff put in artificially low figures, to avoid the suspicion that Barclays was under financial stress and thus having to borrow at noticeably higher rates than its competitors.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18622264

revolu wrote: »

I have a consumer mortgage with db mortgages which is uk 3 month libor +2.5% since 2006.

Why does everyone one want to sue everyone. Why can't we have an economy based on hard work and honesty.

revolu

brit1234 wrote: »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18622264


Why does everyone one want to sue everyone. Why can't we have an economy based on hard work and honesty.

Is this for me or bob diamond.

Can you not read man, they set it higher too

grey_gym_sock

if you want to sue for damages, you have to (among other things) be able to estimate your losses. do you even know whether you've lost or gained?

what ought to happen is that anybody who appears to have committed fraud faces criminal prosecution. and that those responsible (even if not quite criminally responsible) are dismissed for gross misconduct (not allowed to resign with a nice pay-off). and barclays should sue its (then former) employees to recover the fine it's paid, and for any other losses it incurs.

i don't see why individuals with mortgages should be able to sue barclays unless there's a demonstrable loss.

revolu

grey_gym_sock wrote: »

i don't see why individuals with mortgages should be able to sue barclays unless there's a demonstrable loss.

my mortgage was DIRECTLY LINKED to libor.
Thing is back in 2006-2007 libor spiked and I really struggled with cash and got some defaults, now if my mortgage was a few pounds less, who knows!!! I'm blaming barclays anyhows