Wednesday, April 13, 2016

Europe is heading into an industrial slowdown

Europe is heading into an industrial slowdown

Europe is entering an industrial slowdown, with industrial production in the eurozone dropping in February.
According to the latest data released by Eurostat, the European statistical authority, industrial production across the single currency area dropped by 0.8% in February, down from a 1.9% increase in January, and a quicker fall than the 0.7% drop expected by economists.
Here's how that looks:
eurozone ind prod feb 2016Eurostat
On a year-to-year basis, production increased by 0.8% from February 2015. That was also lower than expected. Forecasts had priced a 1.2% increase from the same period last year.
Individually, the countries in Europe where production is struggling the most are Ireland, Greece, and Croatia. Production in those countries dropped 10.5%, 4.4%, and 1.6% respectively. 
Not all countries struggled this month, with Lithuania, Slovakia, and Malta seeing the biggest increases in production.
On a sector-to-sector basis so-called non-durable consumer goods — stuff like cosmetics and cleaning products, food, fuel, beer, cigarettes, and medication — were the worst performing, dropping 1.8%. Production in the energy sector fell 1.2%.
Eurostat's figures follow on from a disappointing set of UK manufacturing production data.The ONS' figures came in far below expectations in February, and signalled worrying times for manufacturing in the country. Manufacturing production fell by 1.1%.

China's exports surged in March

China's exports surged in March

tianamen childChinaFotoPress/ChinaFotoPress via Getty Images
Chinese trade data for March has come in mixed with a surge in exports partially offset by continued weakness in imports. 
According to China’s customs department, exports grew by 11.5% in US dollar denominated terms from March 2015, easily beating expectations for an increase of 2.5%. 
The gain — following a 24.5% collapse in the 12 months to February which was the steepest decline since May 2009 — marked the fastest annual growth seen since February 2015. It was also the first time since June last year that a year-on-year increase was reported.
While exports outperformed, imports continued to disappoint, falling 13.8% from 12 month earlier. The contraction, unchanged from February, missed expectations for a smaller decline of 10.2%. 
Despite the rebound in exports reported during the month, the national trade surplus narrowed to $29.86 billion, the smallest seen since March 2015. It was slightly below expectations for a decrease to $30.85 billion.
The chart below tracks the annual change in imports and exports, along with China’s monthly trade balance.
China trade data March 2016Business Insider Australia
Read the original article on Business Insider Australia. Copyright 2016. Follow Business Insider Australia on Twitter.

Tuesday, April 12, 2016

The EU has revealed its true nature: a federalist monster that will not stop until nations are abolished

The EU has revealed its true nature: a federalist monster that will not stop until nations are abolished

Migrants and refugees reach through a fence to try to grab clothes and handkerchiefs at their makeshift camp at the Greek-Macedonian border village of Idomeni, on April 5, 2016
Those who back Remain in the Britain's EU referendum can no longer pretend that they don't know what we're getting into CREDIT: BULENT KILIC/AFP
At the entrance to the Visitors Centre of the European Parliament, there is a plaque with these words: 
“National sovereignty is the root cause of the most crying evils of our times….The only final remedy for this evil is the federal union of the peoples.”   
They were written by Philip Kerr, later the Marquess of Lothian, who was a British diplomat and arch-appeaser in the build up to the Second World War. Like the modern Europhile zealots, he never dropped his doctrinaire outlook. Even on the eve of the Battle of Britain in 1940, he was urging Winston Churchill’s Government to reach a peace deal with Hitler’s regime.
His addiction to federalism is shared by the EU today, hence the special place give to his chilling utterance.  The destruction of national sovereignty is the ideological driving force behind the Brussels oligarchs as they plot to build their federal superstate.  
That explains why they are so obsessed with free movement, mass immigration and cultural diversity. Those are all instruments for smashing traditional nationhood and creating a new common European citizenship. As the EU’s rulers know only too well, a country without any borders or identity is not a country at all.
Most other organisations would have been humiliated or broken by a failure as spectacular as the current migrant crisis. The EU’s catastrophic decision to open the floodgates led to the arrival of more than 1.1 million migrants, most of them fit, young men. Amidst mounting social disintegration and division, this anarchic policy has fuelled the import of violent misogyny, welfare dependency and jihadist extremism. Earlier this week the EU border agency Frontex admitted that “the Paris attacks in November 2015 clearly demonstrated that irregular migratory flows could be used by terrorists to enter the EU.”
But, utterly unembarrassed, the Brussels federalists see the migration crisis as a perfect opportunity to pursue their agenda of political unification. Under the guise of sorting out the mess, they aim to grab more power, thereby further reducing the members states to the status of provinces in their empire.
First migrant deportations from Lesbos under EU-Turkey dealPlay!00:23
That reality shines through the proposals presented this week by the European Commission to establish a new migration policy. Under the present rules, known as the Dublin Regulations, refugees are required to claim asylum in the first country they reach. But that system, dating back to the 1990s, comprehensively broke down last summer when German Chancellor Angela Merkel, in a fit of virtue-signalling Teutonic superiority, declared that all asylum seekers would be welcome in her country. It was a move eagerly cheered on by Europe’s ruling elite, even as chaos descended.
Inevitably, nothing in the EU plans involves bringing back internal borders or strengthening external frontiers. Essentially there are two options, both involving more central control. One is to keep the existing Dublin scheme, but introduce a “corrective mechanism” so that refugees could be redistributed around the EU at times of crisis to take the pressure of the Mediterranean states like Italy and Greece. The second more radical option is to scrap the Dublin rules and instead impose a mandatory scheme for redistributing migrants, through quotas based on the wealth and population of each member state. 
In accordance with federalist dogma, both schemes involve a massive increase in EU power and a further erosion of national sovereignty. The migration crisis might be a nightmare for the peoples of Europe, but it is a dream for the federalists. They cannot even disguise their delight at the prospect of a tightening grip on the members states. “We need a sustainable system for the future, based on common rules ad a fairer sharing of responsibility,” says the Commission's First Vice President, Frans Timmermans. The Belgian politician and federalist fanatic  Guy Verhofstadt goes even further, demanding a “fair distribution scheme” that will “put in place a much needed collective European response to the refugees crisis.”
The direction of EU policy is absolutely clear.  The march towards the superstate is accelerating. For decades, the Europhile brigade has tried to pretend that we stay in the EU and keep our national integrity.  Indeed, when Ted Heath’s Tory Government signed us up to the Common Market in 1973,  they claimed that the move would involve “no essential loss of sovereignty”. But, after the migration crisis, the deceit cannot go on.
The Remain camp will no doubt claim that the new EU migration policy will have little impact on Britain because we have an opt-out, but that is just another deception. For a start, the EU could bully us into accepting quotas by threatening not to accept any deportations of EU migrants from Britain or by imposing fines. Or the EU could just ignore our opt-out, as it so often does with policies it does not like. That would especially be true if the Referendum vote is to Remain. In that case, Britain will have absolutely no leverage, no bargaining power. And whatever the formal rules, the fact is that EU migration has a massive impact on Britain;  in the year to December 2015, no fewer than 630,000 EU migrants were issued with National Insurance numbers here.
The Commission’s decision on refugee policy is bound to have a profound impact on the Referendum debate. The choice is now more stark than ever: we either regain control of our own national borders, or we become sucked further into a system that dictates how many foreigners are allowed to settle here. The Remain camp likes to present the two alternatives as either a “leap into the known” or the reassuring stability of the status quo under Brussels rule. But there is nothing remotely certain about the EU’s future.   
The current migration looks certain to worsen, especially once the EU fulfils its goal of enlargement by giving membership to Turkey and Bosnia, with their 80 million-strong Muslim population. Some EU supporters even want enlargement to extend to the strife-torn, Islam dominated countries of North Africa. This would be “the most effective policy tool that Europe possesses to deal with instability on its borders,” claims one pro-EU analyst.
The real leap into the unknown lies in our continued membership. Brexit would be a return to a known position that existed for centuries before 1973, when Britain was a successful, independent nation.

Facebook is playing a dangerous game with Apple

Facebook is playing a dangerous game with Apple

Facebook has finally unleashedMessenger Platform, letting developers build chatbots — intelligent software that lets you get stuff done just by sending text messages.
It's a big moment for chatbots, which tech luminaries likeMicrosoft CEO Satya Nadella and former Evernote CEO Phil Libinpraise as the next big thing in computing. And investors are pouring cash into startups that promise to ride the wave.
Which makes it even weirder that Facebook's introduction of the Messenger Platform feels a little tepid.
Rather than follow in Microsoft's footsteps and pitch chatbots as a transformational shift that will change the future of computing, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg is billing them as a better way to interact with businesses and go shopping. There's not even an app-store-like listing of available bots to see them in one place.
Facebook has proven over the years that it's not stupid, so you can rule out the possibility that Zuckerberg and company simply haven't realized the potential that chatbots have to make computing more accessible to the masses.
The real answer looks to be a little more complicated. With Messenger Platform, Facebook Messenger gets to be a little bit more like an operating system. Libin even called chatbots themost exciting thing since the iPhone.
That means Facebook has to be very careful about how it promotes its new Messenger platform, given its reliance on Apple — which makes the iPhone. And it makes diplomacy crucial: Facebook needs Apple and the iPhone to keep growing Messenger, even as it's demonstrating the potential to be a major rival.

A bite from Apple

Apple's strategy to date has been massively successful, but it hinges on a series of interdependencies.
Most of Apple's record-breaking revenues come from sales of the iPhone. People like the iPhone in large part because of the App Store, the only legitimate way to get iPhone apps. And Apple takes a 30% cut of all App Store purchases.
It gives the App Store a unique gravity that makes it the center of the universe for developers, who need it to sell their apps, and users, who need it to get apps.
F8 Mark ZuckerbergBusiness InsiderFacebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg at F8 2016.
Once people have a bunch of iPhone apps, they're more likely to upgrade to another iPhone rather than start from scratch on an Android phone or any other wannabe upstart phone platform. It's in Apple's best interest to keep the App Store strong and well-stocked.
Chatbots, like those debuted by Facebook today, present an alternate path for users and developers. At risk is Apple's stranglehold on the world of apps, and maybe over the smartphone market itself.

Chatbots abide

To hear Nadella tell it, the appeal of chatbots is that they can make it much easier for normal, nontechnical humans to interact with web services. Our first experiences with Facebook's chatbots don't really bear that out, but oh well.
From Facebook's perspective, it's a way to get you to spend even more time in Messenger and the social network's other apps. It combines shopping and communication — two of the biggest reasons people use the internet in the first place. Better yet, it all lives inside the Messenger app, no additional downloads required.
Operator in Messenger.001OperatorThe Operator app in Messenger lets you search for things to buy, make orders, and track deliveries.
It means that Messenger becomes a Swiss army knife: In theory, a useful bot can replace any app. If you're on a slow data connection, or simply don't want to download another app just to shop at a particular store or to try a new service, a chatbot is ideal.
But "replacing an app" is exactly what Apple doesn't want.
If people start to use Facebook's chatbots instead of apps, then suddenly the Apple App Store gets a lot less central to the conversation. And Apple has shown little expertise in either advanced cross-platform messaging or artificial intelligence, meaning that an Apple-created competitor to Facebook's chatbot play may be far off, if it happens at all.
Developers may like the fact that the chatbots they build for Messenger can work across all types of devices, whether it's an iPhone, an Android phone or, really, anything with a browser. That eliminates the need to build different versions of apps for different operating systems, saving time and effort.
And if a Facebook Messenger chatbot works on literally everything, and users love Facebook Messenger, then why bother going through the Apple App Store at all?
1 800 flowers bot for Messenger 1Facebook
Without the App Store as an anchor, Apple's strategy loses an important advantage.
Which could explain Facebook's trepidation to call the Messenger Platform a revolution. Facebook Messenger still needs the iPhone — and Android — to grow, thanks to that same App Store through which new users download the core Facebook and Messenger apps.
Too much chatbot hype, and Apple might suddenly have cold feet about continuing to promote Facebook, in the App Store and through its integrations with iOS. But keeping it low-key means that people can come to it in their own time. And maybe the revolution will come before Apple even fully realizes it's happening.

Monday, April 11, 2016

Battery Powered Homes (Video)






Battery Powered Homes





Battery Powered Homes
An Australian-produced documentary for ABC television, Battery Powered Homestakes a peek into a not-so-distant future where clean and renewable energy can alter the way of life for countless millions.
Not too long ago, the notion of a battery-powered home seemed a distant hope. But in the past few years, advanced technology has made this dream a reality for over one million residents in Australia; a number that's expected to grow exponentially over the next five years. The film introduces us to several of these homeowners who have embraced the energy revolution from its earliest incarnations.
There's Josh Byrne, the congenial host of the popular television program Gardening Australia, the battery he's using to power his home is complimented by an energy management system. Josh and his family, like most users of these technologies, expend most of their power needs at night. The management system regulates itself to recharge during the day as his solar panels take over to fulfill his power needs. The system then distributes the majority of its stored power during the evening. Any excess power is then fed back into the grid for modest compensation. Utilizing this method, Josh pulls only 3% of his total power from the grid.
The obstacles to full implementation of these energy sources are quickly vanishing. For example, the price of these systems will continue to drop as they become more widely used. In the last year alone, costs have plummeted by as much as a third. The traditional power companies, which have long relied on the use of fossil fuels, are now faced with a challenge. They must find ways to implement clean renewable energies into their business model, or their services will become obsolete. Meanwhile, the South Australian government has offered $5,000 rebates to any resident who invests in battery power for their home.
The film also introduces us to the scientists and researchers who stand on the front line of these emerging technologies. They're working to create more efficient and durable batteries that can run longer and create a full charge in a matter of minutes.
Battery Powered Homes is an eye-opening and inspiring look into a future that can have a positive impact upon all of us.

Wells Fargo just agreed to pay $1.2 billion to settle 'shoddy' mortgage practices

Wells Fargo just agreed to pay $1.2 billion to settle 'shoddy' mortgage practices

Wells Fargo just agreed to pay $1.2 billion for improper mortgage-lending practices.
The US Department of Justice (DOJ) on Friday announced that it had settled civil mortgage-fraud claims against the San Francisco-based bank related to residential home-mortgage loans it sold between 2001 and 2008.
The claims were also against Wells Fargo executive Kurt Lofrano.
According to the DOJ statement, Wells Fargo certified that certain loans were eligible for Federal Housing Administration insurance, when in fact they were not.
That meant the government wound up having to pay insurance claims when some of those loans defaulted.
"Today, Wells Fargo, one of the biggest mortgage lenders in the world, has been held responsible for years of reckless underwriting, while relying on government insurance to deal with the damage," said US Attorney Preet Bharara for the Southern District of New York. "Driven to maximize profits, Wells Fargo employed shoddy underwriting practices to drive up loan volume, at the expense of loan quality."
"Today's court filing details a previously announced agreement in principle that resolves not only the pending lawsuit filed by the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, but also a number of other potential claims going back as far as 15 years in some cases," said Franklin Codel, president of Wells Fargo Home Lending. "It allows us to put the legal process behind us, and to focus our resources and energy on what we do best — serving the needs of the nation’s homeowners."
Wells Fargo will report first-quarter earnings on Thursday.
Morgan Stanley in February agreed to pay $3.2 billion over charges that it misled investors on the quality of mortgage loans it sold.
Goldman Sachs in January announced that it would pay a $5 billion settlement related to residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) sold between 2005 and 2007. That nearlywiped out fourth-quarter earnings for the firm.
Here is the press release:
WASHINGTON — The Department of Justice announced today that the United States has settled civil mortgage fraud claims against Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (Wells Fargo) and Wells Fargo executive Kurt Lofrano, stemming from Wells Fargo’s participation in the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) Direct Endorsement Lender Program. In the settlement, Wells Fargo agreed to pay $1.2 billion and admitted, acknowledged and accepted responsibility for, among other things, certifying to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), during the period from May 2001 through December 2008, that certain residential home mortgage loans were eligible for FHA insurance when in fact they were not, resulting in the Government having to pay FHA insurance claims when some of those loans defaulted. The agreement resolves the United States’ civil claims in its lawsuit in the Southern District of New York, as well as an investigation conducted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York regarding Wells Fargo’s FHA origination and underwriting practices subsequent to the claims in its lawsuit and an investigation conducted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of California into whether American Mortgage Network, LLC (AMNET), a mortgage lender acquired by Wells Fargo in 2009, falsely certified and submitted ineligible residential mortgage loans for FHA insurance.
The settlement was approved today by U.S. District Judge Jesse M. Furman for the Southern District of New York.
“This settlement is another step in the Department of Justice’s continuing efforts to hold accountable FHA approved lenders that unlawfully submitted false claims at the expense of American homeowners and taxpayers,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Benjamin C. Mizer, head of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “In addition to today’s resolution with Wells Fargo, the department has pursued similar misconduct by numerous other lenders, returning more than $4 billion to the FHA fund and the Treasury and filing suit where appropriate. We remain committed to protecting the public fisc from all who seek to abuse it, whether they do business on Wall Street or Main Street.”
“This Administration remains committed to holding lenders accountable for their lending practices,” said Secretary Julián Castro for HUD. “The $1.2 billion settlement with Wells Fargo is the largest recovery for loan origination violations in FHA’s history. Yet, this monetary figure can never truly make up for the countless families that lost homes as a result of poor lending practices.”
“Today, Wells Fargo, one of the biggest mortgage lenders in the world, has been held responsible for years of reckless underwriting, while relying on government insurance to deal with the damage,” said U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara for the Southern District of New York. “Wells Fargo has long taken advantage of the FHA mortgage insurance program, designed to help millions of Americans realize the dream of home ownership, to write thousands and thousands of faulty loans. Driven to maximize profits, Wells Fargo employed shoddy underwriting practices to drive up loan volume, at the expense of loan quality. Even though Wells Fargo identified through internal quality assurance reviews thousands of problematic loans, the bank decided not to report them to HUD. As a result, while Wells Fargo enjoyed huge profits from its FHA loan business, the government was left holding the bag when the bad loans went bust. With today’s settlement, Wells Fargo has finally resolved the years-long litigation, adding to the list of large financial institutions against which this office has successfully pursued civil fraud prosecutions.”
“Misconduct in the mortgage industry helped lead to a destructive financial crisis that spanned the globe,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Brian Stretch for the Northern District of California. “American Mortgage Network’s origination of FHA-insured loans that did not comply with government requirements also caused major losses to the public fisc. Today’s settlement demonstrates the Department of Justice’s resolve to pursue remedies against those who engaged in this type of misconduct.”
“This matter is not just a failure by Wells Fargo to comply with federal requirements in FHA’s Direct Endorsement Lender program — it’s a failure by one of our trusted participants in the FHA program to demonstrate a commitment to integrity and to ordinary Americans who are trying to fulfill their dreams of homeownership,” said Inspector General David A. Montoya for HUD.
According to the second amended complaint filed in Manhattan federal court, the government had alleged:
Wells Fargo has been a participant in the Direct Endorsement Lender program, a federal program administered by FHA. As a Direct Endorsement Lender, Wells Fargo has the authority to originate, underwrite and certify mortgages for FHA insurance. If a Direct Endorsement Lender approves a mortgage loan for FHA insurance and the loan later defaults, the holder or servicer of the loan may submit an insurance claim to HUD for the outstanding balance of the defaulted loan, along with any associated costs, which HUD must then pay. Under the Direct Endorsement Lender program, neither the FHA nor HUD reviews a loan for compliance with FHA requirements before it is endorsed for FHA insurance. Direct Endorsement Lenders are therefore required to follow program rules designed to ensure that they are properly underwriting and certifying mortgages for FHA insurance and maintaining a quality control program that can prevent and correct any deficiencies in their underwriting. The quality control program requirements include conducting a full review of all loans that go 60 days into default within the first six payments, known as “early payment defaults”; taking prompt and adequate corrective action upon discovery of fraud or serious underwriting problems; and disclosing to HUD in writing all loans containing evidence of fraud or other serious underwriting deficiencies. Wells Fargo failed to comply with these basic requirements.
First, between at least May 2001 and October 2005, Wells Fargo, the largest HUD-approved residential mortgage lender, engaged in a regular practice of reckless origination and underwriting of its FHA retail loans, all the while knowing that it would not be responsible when the defective loans went into default. To maximize its loan volume (and profits), Wells Fargo elected to hire temporary staff to churn out and approve an ever increasing quantity of FHA loans, but neglected to provide this inexperienced staff with proper training. At the same time, Wells Fargo’s management applied pressure on its underwriters to approve more and more FHA loans. The bank also imposed short turnaround times for deciding whether to approve the loans, employed lax underwriting standards and controls and paid bonuses to underwriters and other staff based on the number of loans approved. Predictably, as a result, Wells Fargo’s loan volume and profits soared, but the quality of its loans declined significantly. Yet, when Wells Fargo’s senior management was repeatedly advised by its own quality assurance reviews of serious problems with the quality of the retail FHA loans that the Bank was originating, management disregarded the findings and failed to implement proper and effective corrective measures, leaving HUD to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in claims for defaulted loans.
Second, Wells Fargo failed to self-report to HUD the bad loans that it was originating, in violation of FHA program reporting requirements. During the period 2002 through 2010, HUD required Direct Endorsement Lenders to perform post-closing reviews of the loans that they originated and to report to HUD in writing loans that contained fraud or other serious deficiencies. This requirement provided HUD with an opportunity to investigate the defective loans and request reimbursement for any claim that HUD had paid or request indemnification for any future claim, as appropriate. During this nine-year period, Wells Fargo, through its post-closing reviews, internally identified thousands of defective FHA loans that it was required to self-report to HUD, including a substantial number of loans that had gone into “early payment default.” However, instead of reporting these loans to HUD as required, Wells Fargo engaged in virtually no self-reporting during the four-year period from 2002 through 2005 and only minimal self-reporting after 2005.
In his capacity as Vice President of Credit-Risk — Quality Assurance at Wells Fargo, Lofrano executed on Wells Fargo’s behalf the annual certifications required by HUD for the Bank’s participation in the Direct Endorsement Lender program for certain years. Lofrano also organized and participated in the working group responsible for creating and implementing Wells Fargo’s self-reporting policies and procedures. In contravention of HUD’s requirements, that group failed to report to HUD loans that Wells Fargo had internally identified as containing material underwriting findings. Moreover, Lofrano received Wells Fargo quality assurance reports identifying thousands of FHA loans with material findings — very few of which Wells Fargo reported to HUD.
*          *          *
As part of the settlement, Wells Fargo has admitted, acknowledged and accepted responsibility for, among other things, the following conduct: During the period from May 2001 through, on or about Dec. 31, 2008, Wells Fargo submitted to HUD certifications stating that certain residential home mortgage loans were eligible for FHA insurance when in fact they were not, resulting in the Government having to pay FHA insurance claims when certain of those loans defaulted. From May 2001 through January 2003, Wells Fargo’s quality assurance group conducted monthly internal reviews of random samples of the retail FHA mortgage loans that the Bank had already originated, underwritten, and closed, which identified for most of the months that in excess of 25 percent of the loans and in several consecutive months, more than 40 percent of the loans, had a material finding. For a number of the months during the period from February 2003 through September 2004, the material finding rate was in excess of 20 percent. A “material” finding was defined by Wells Fargo generally as a loan file that did not conform to internal parameters and/or specific FHA parameters, contained significant risk factors affecting the underwriting decision and/or evidenced misrepresentation.
Wells Fargo also admitted, acknowledged and accepted responsibility for the following additional conduct:  Between 2002 and October 2005, Wells Fargo made only one self-report to HUD, involving multiple loans.  During that same period, the Bank identified through its internal quality assurance reviews approximately 3,000 FHA loans with material findings. Further, during the period between October 2005 and December 2010, Wells Fargo only self-reported approximately 300 loans to HUD. During that same period, Wells Fargo’s internal quality assurance reviews identified more than 2,900 additional FHA loans containing material findings that the Bank did not self-report to HUD. The government was required to pay FHA insurance claims when certain of these loans that Wells Fargo identified with material findings defaulted.
Lofrano admitted, acknowledged, and accepted responsibility for, among other things, the following matters in which he participated: From Jan. 1, 2002, until Dec. 31, 2010, he held the position of Vice President of Credit Risk — Quality Assurance at Wells Fargo; in that capacity, he supervised the Decision Quality Management group; in 2004, he was asked to organize a working sub-group to address reporting to HUD; in or about October 2005, he organized a working group that drafted Wells Fargo’s new self-reporting policy and procedures; and during the period October 2005 through Dec. 31, 2010, based on application of the Bank’s new self-reporting policy and by committee decision, Wells Fargo did not report to HUD the majority of the FHA loans that the Bank’s internal quality assurance reviews had identified as having material findings.
*          *          *
Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Mizer thanked the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of California for their diligent pursuit and successful resolution of this matter and the Commercial Litigation Branch, HUD’s Office of General Counsel and HUD’s Office of Inspector General, for their extraordinary support.
The case settled by today’s settlement is captioned United States v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., et. al., 12-cv-7527 (S.D.N.Y.)

728 X 90

336 x 280

300 X 250

320 X 100

300 X600