Nomura: Last Time We Checked, It Wasn't Against The Law To Offer A Completely Bullsh*t Opinion About The Riskiness Of A Loan
Apparently the Federal Housing Finance Agency (and the judge presiding over this case) missed the week in law school where they taught you that as long as you say something is just your opinion, you can lie to people's faces with impunity.
Nomura, the Japanese bank fighting allegations it duped the Federal Housing Finance Agency during the 2008 financial crisis, told a federal court judge on Thursday that it didn’t need to have an “honestly held view” of the risky home loans underlying the securities it sold to Uncle Sam. Because the bank expressed only an opinion that the underlying home loans weren’t risky — rather than stating it as a fact — it should be judged by a more lenient legal standard, David Tulchin, a Nomura lawyer, told Judge Denise Cote. Tulchin’s argument seems to stump Cote — who interrupted him during his summation to make sure she understood his argument. “I must find not only that the representation was false but also that Nomura understood it to be false?” she asked “Correct,” Tulchin said. “That Nomura did not believe the statement that’s set forth there, that view expressed was not an honestly held view,” Tulchin said during the summation.
So...we cool?
Japanese bank says it only gave an ‘opinion’ on risky home loans [NYP]
