S. bank, make known trading losses from investment verdict made by its Chief Investment Office (CIO) of $5. 8 billion. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) was provided falsified first quarter reports that concealed this enormous loss. The duty of the U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission is to protect investors, uphold fair, organize, and efficient markets, and facilitate capital formation. Obligatory public companies to disclose meaningful financial information to the public is an effective move toward the SEC takes in order to assure the securities of this nation (U. S.
Securities and Exchange Commission). These assist investors prevent high-risk gambles and allows them to make the right decisions when deciding on which companies to invest in. The Commodity Future Trading Commission regulates the product futures and options markets. Its target includes the promotion of competitive and efficient futures markets and the protection of investors against manipulation, abusive trade scheme and fraud (U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission). Both the SEC and the CFTC played a role in investigating the massive trading losses in the case of JPMorgan Chase.
The SECs investigation could only focus on the suitability and completeness of JPMorgan Chase financial reporting and other public disclosures. However; SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro stated that her agencys investigation is limited, because the trades happened in divisions of the banking giant that arent subject to SEC regulation (CNN Money). The leader of CFTC, Gary Gensler, give an opinion that JPMorgans losses are worth looking into, because as a U. S. bank, it is an entity with direct admission to the Federal Reserves discount window and federal deposit insurance (CNN Money).
Determine the elements of a valid contract, and discuss how consumers and banks each have a duty of good faith and fair dealing in the banking relationship. A contract is a legally obligatory promise or set of promises (Bagley, C. 2013). If this promise is broken, either party involved can be legally responsible and take the other party to court. There are four basic elements in the creation of a valid contract. The first consist of an agreement between the parties involved, by an presented offer and acceptance.
The second states that the parties promises must be supported by something of worth, known as consideration. The third advises both parties must have the ability to enter into a contract. The fourth element states the contract must have a legal purpose (Bagley, C 2013). The duty of good faith and good dealing is implied in every contract. In recent years the mortgage industry has been seen as a prime example of how consumers and banks need to better understand and adhere to duty of good faith and good dealings.
Consumers had the responsibility of understanding the contracts involved in borrowing the money needed for their homes. Banks had the responsibility of knowing who they should lend money to, and the conditions of the rates involved on the loans provided. Relationships between banks and consumers could have been avoided if the duty of good faith and good dealing was implemented on contracts granted between the banks and consumers. Compare and contrast the differences between intentional and negligent tort actions
A tort is a body of rights, and obligations that is applied by courts in civil proceedings to provide relief for persons who have suffered harm. Tort means civil wrong resulting in injury to a person or property (Bagley, C. 2013). An intentional tort action is when there is intent to cause harm to a person or property . Intentional torts include things like assault and battery, slander, false imprisonment, libel, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. These torts are often, but not always, the case that an intentional tort is also a criminal act (Bagley, C. 2013).
A negligent tort action is when a person is careless to his or her own actions and did not intend to cause harm to a person or property. Even though that person is negligent, he or she is still held legally responsible because of their careless actions. To illustrate the difference between negligence and an intentional tort, lets look at an example with two different scenarios. The plaintiff is a woman named Ramona, and in both cases, she is suing because of a broken leg. state of affair #1: Ramona is walking down the aisle of Wal-Mart store when she slips and falls on a puddle of cooking oils.
The owner of the store was negligent for not cleaning up the spill. Even though the store owner did not intend for Ramona to get hurt, he is still liable for her broken led because his negligence lead to her injury. Scenario #2: Molly is walking to her car when she is assaulted by a man who wants to steal her wallet. The assailant shoves her to the ground, and she breaks her wrist as a result of the attack. The police later catch the assailant, and Molly sues him for her injuries. In both cases the end result is the same; Ramona end up with a broken leg.
Both defendants can be held liable for Ramona injuries, but for different reasons. The store owner is liable because he failed to clean up the spilled of oils, which a reasonable person would have done. The assaulter is liable because they intentionally caused harm to Molly by pushing her. Discuss the tort action of Interference with Contractual Relations and Participating in a Breach of Fiduciary duty and, if the bank youve chosen were to behave as JP Morgan did, would you be able to prevail in such a tort action.
The interference with contractual relations defends the right to enjoy the benefits of legally binding agreements (Bagley, C 2013). The existence of a contract at the time of the assumed interference is what separates tortuous interference with contract from the more complicated to establish tortuous interference with prospective contractual relations. If good grounds exist for the interference, such as the case with JP Morgan, then the defendant would not be liable. With the advent of mobile banking, discuss how banks have protected the software that allows for online transaction to occur through automation.
The majority banks inform consumers that they are protected by the Online Banking Security Guarantee, which covers the security of your information and bank accounts. Banks hold a liability of making sure the consumers security is protected, and if dishonored most banks will guarantee up to a 100 percent against theft of your funds from online banking services. While many worry about online banking, theres good news that mobile banking is to some extent secure just for the reason that there are so numerous variations of banking apps and methods in the market. A thief has no way of predicting which technique a possible victim might use.
Cited Work U. S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission. (n. d. ). Retrieved March 1, 2013, from U. S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission: http://www. cftc. gov/index. htm CNN Money (n. d. ). Retrieved March 1, 2013, from http://money. cnn. com/2012/05/22/news/economy/jp-morgan-senate/index. htm U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission. (n. d. ). Retrieved March 1, 2013, from U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission: http://www. sec. gov/ Bagley, C. (2013). Managers and the Legal Environment: Strategies for the 21st Century, 7th Edition. Mason: South-Western, Cengage Learning.