Los Angeles Personal Injury Lawyer - UBS

Phil Gramm's Mortgage Meltdown Denial, McCain Disappointed

Paul Kiesel — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 21:29:05 GMT

Former Senator Phil Gramm told the Washington Times that he does not think the economy is doing as poorly as the general media reports. In fact, Gramm suggests that the country is not in a recession, rather, the country is in a "mental recession" and that America is a "nation of whiners."

These non-sensical statements come from a man who not only helped propel the current mortgage meltdown back in 2000 with his Commodity Futures Modernization Act (helping deregulate the lending industry), but from an individual who claims the nation's economic struggles are imaginary. Because gas prices aren't 50% higher than they were seven months ago, right? Foreclosure rates? A weakened dollar?

And to his assertion that we're a "nation of whiners," maybe Phil Gramm should go on John McCain's "Straight Talk Express" tour and elucidate to all the hard working Americans that have come to hear John McCain speak about how he's going to FIX the economy and explain to them that they're just a bunch of whiners with wild imaginations. He should also inform them of his role at UBS, a big player in the game of Collateralized Debt Obligations (which through the purchasing of CDO's as packaged subprime mortgage securities helped accelerate an eventual subprime fallout), and how he would execute his philosophies and pontifications (as told to the Washington Times) as Treasury Secretary in a McCain administration. (Not to mention the irony of Gramm complaining or "whining" to the Washington Times about other people whining.)

It's nice to see that McCain tried separating himself from Gramm's statements today, but in reality, it would behoove McCain to find another economic adviser that is more compassionate to Americans who were misled into teaser rate mortgages (TILA fraud) and, at the same time as trying to keep current with their mortgage, are hoping they won't have to break the bank to buy groceries and gas in the coming months, as both have been escalating in price. I know Gramm is McCain's "guy" because he helped rescue McCain's struggling presidential campaign last summer, but McCain, if he truly wants to fix the economy, needs to begin fixing the economic priorities of his own campaign first, and the people who are non-sensically purveying those priorities, before he's even able to attempt to fix the entire economy.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Paul Kiesel

UBS Misled Customers

Paul Kiesel — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 16:32:54 GMT

Two subsidiaries of the Swiss bank UBS, earlier today, were accused of misleading investors about how safe auction rate securities were. The complaint was filed by William Galvin, Massachusetts' top securities regulator, and he accuses UBS Securities and UBS Financials Service of aggressively selling the instruments to customers at a time when large money managers were losing faith in them and a top UBS executive was dumping them from his personal holdings.

There are many similarities in UBS's business practices as there were at Countrywide, as both companies pushed the sales of "products" without telling their customers of their vulnerabilities or the amount or risk attributed to each product (i.e. Countrywide in proliferating subprime mortgages; UBS in pushing "cash alternatives" when employees were dumping them).

According to the New York Times, Mr. Galvin, "is seeking to get the UBS units to return investors' money and reimburse who had to sell at a loss."

Also, former senator Phil Gramm, who was a key player in the surge of subprime mortgages and CDOs, and who also worked as lobbyist for UBS, has yet to speak on either Countrywide's pending legal matters, it acquisition by Bank of America, or the trouble UBS faces (financial and legal) in the coming months. Mainly, Mr. Gramm has remained quiet in reagrds to the foreclosure/credit crisis, as he continues to advise Senator McCain on his presidential campaign's economic policies/initiatives.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Paul Kiesel

The Subprime Mess and Phil Gramm: An Experiment in Deregulation

Paul Kiesel — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 16:12:58 GMT

In 1933, a few years following the stock market crash, Congress passes the Glass-Steagall Act, in hopes that regulating banks will help prevent market instability, particularly amongst Wall Street banks. The purpose of the act is to separate commercial banks that focus on consumers from investment banks, which deal with speculative trading and mergers.

The Glass-Steagall Act provided the proper oversight and entity separation that would prohibit banks and other financial companies from merging into giant trusts (conflict of interests) -- giant trusts or corporations being more powerful, naturally, and having the seemingly limitless capital to lobby their corporate interests, however, with a very myopic scope (particularly when it comes to factoring in potential losses -- most banks, as seen in contemporary times, chose not to anticipate losses in the mortgage market; they presumed home prices would continue to appreciate).

In 1999, former Senator Phil Gramm (who is, incidentally, Senator John McCain's economic adviser and cochairs his presidential campaign) set out to completely gut the Glass-Steagall Act, and did so successfully, replacing most of its components with the new Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act: allowing commercial banks, investment banks, and insurers to merge (which would have violated antitrust laws under Glass-Steagall). Sen. Gramm was the driving force behind the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, as he had received over $4.6 million from the FIRE sector (Finance, Insurance and Real Estate donations) over the previous decade, and once the Act passed, an influx of "megamergers" took place among banks and insurance and securities companies, as if they had been eagerly awaiting the passage of Gramm's Act. Everything in between Glass-Steagall and Gramm-Leach-Bliley (i.e. Savings and Loan crisis/bust) was, in large part, the incubation period for what would take place over the nine years that would follow the passage of Gramm's Act: an experiment in deregulation.

Shortly after George W. Bush was elected president, Congress and President Clinton were trying to pass a $384 billion omnibus spending bill, and while the debates swirled around the passage of this bill, Senator Phil Gramm clandestinely slipped a 262-page amendment into the omnibus appropriations bill titled: Commodity Futures Modernization Act. It is likely that few senators read this bill, if any. The essence of the act was the deregulation of derivatives trading (financial instruments whose value changes in response to the changes in underlying variables; the main use of derivatives is to reduce risk for one party). The legislation contained a provision -- lobbied for by Enron, a major campaign contributor to Gramm -- that exempted energy trading from regulatory oversight. Basically, it gave way to the Enron debacle and ushered in the new era of unregulated securities. Interestingly enough, Gramm's wife, Wendy, had been part of the Enron board, and her salary and stock income brought in between $900,000 and $1.8 million to the Gramm household, prior to the passage of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act.

In 2003, Gramm left the Senate to join UBS, which had acquired investment house PaineWebber due to his deregulation bill. At UBS, Gramm lobbied Congress, the Fed and the Treasury Department. During Gramm's tenor at UBS and as a lobbyist, Congress passed the Responsible Lending Act, billed as an anti-predatory-lending measure, but was called the "Loan Shark Protection Act" by consumer advocates, as it was designed to preempt stronger state laws against anti-predatory lending. The Fed largely ignored the underlying and growing problems within the subprime mortgage/housing markets, as Bernanke famously acknowledged the housing market in April, 2007 as, "[showing] signs of softening," but said that a "sharp slowdown," is unlikely. Then, according to Mother Jones magazine, Henry Paulson became the Treasury Secretary in July, 2007, when, "In 2005, [at] Goldman [he] securitized $68 billion in residential mortgages and $23 billion in 'other assets' primarily related to CDOs," (Mother Jones, August, 2008). With such self-interest, and a lack of the nation's interest, we can see how this subprime mess was allowed to escalate to such great proportions.

Some justice was served, however, this spring, as UBS became one of the subprime debacle's biggest losers, having to write down $37 billion -- the same amount as their previous four years of profits combined. UBS also made the public aware that two-thirds of its losses were due to reckless investing in collateralized debt obligations (CDOs).

Now, Gramm has a second chance of extending his out-of-touch and ill-performing policies, as Senator John McCain appointed Gramm to be his "economic expert" and cochair of his presidential campaign, last year. Also, it is likely that if Senator McCain were to win in November, Gramm would be our next Treasury Secretary, which means more of the same deregulatory mess and the continuation of failed and insidious economic policies.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Paul Kiesel

Countrywide Takes Away Home-Equity Credit Lines

Paul Kiesel — Tue, 06 May 2008 20:04:52 GMT

Countrywide is freezing the home-equity credit lines of almost all its Las Vegas customers and will proceed in doing the same to its customers in the Chicago and Los Angeles markets, which both cities have been hammered by the subprime mortgage crunch.

This news comes after Bank of America announced yesterday that it was planning on ending its bid to acquire Countrywide; both companies posted greater losses than expected for the first quarter of this year.

Bank of America, IndyMac and Washington Mutual is also following Countrywide's lead and is suspending over 600,000 equity credit lines nationwide.

According to Bloomberg News:

U.S. lenders had $1.1 trillion in home equity loans outstanding as of last year, up 89 percent since 2003, based on the Federal Reserve's Flow of Funds data.

Amid flashing neon signs along the Vegas Strip, residents are losing access to credit that might have financed businesses or bought cars and other goods.

As many as 15,000 people in Las Vegas, or 5 percent of the total homeowner population, had credit lines suspended by Countrywide and other lenders, said Brad Henderson, president of Henderson, Nevada-based mortgage banker and broker Evofi One.

Jerry Tao, a part-time lawyer and spokesman for Evofi One's parent company, lost access to his $50,000 Countrywide line despite earning more than $500,000 last year and having a credit score he says was between 750 and 770.

In other mortgage news, UBS will be laying off 5500 employees and Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae might need a Bear Stearns bailout if their numbers continue to trend on a precipitous declivity. More details to come in my next blog.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Paul Kiesel

$7 Million Awarded to Mesothelioma Victim

Miriam Schimmel — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 14:22:09 GMT

Asbestos manufacturer, Georgia Pacific Corp., was ordered by a San Francisco jury to pay in excess of $7 million to plaintiffs, Joan and Daniel Mahoney. Plaintiffs sued Georgia Pacific claiming that Mrs. Mahoney developed terminal cancer from exposure to asbestos fibers released during her work in a home remodeling business with her husband.

Her husband testified that she was exposed to the asbestos fibers from using Georgia Pacific joint compound to fill cracks in sheetrock while working their part-time remodeling business in the late 1960s. Mrs. Mahoney was diagnosed with mesothelioma, which is a type of lung cancer believed to be caused primarily by exposure to asbestos fibers.

Plaintiffs asserted that Georgia Pacific continued to manufacture the joint compound well after they knew that asbestos could cause cancer and after other companies had found substitutes.

Defendant's lawyers argued that Mrs. Mahoney's frequency of use and amount of exposure, as well as the type of asbestos fibers in the subject joint compound, were not sufficient to have caused her illness or injuries.

Mrs. Mahoney is living in pain from the disease while also caring for her husband who suffered a stroke last year.

The $7million award represents only Georgia Pacific's assigned responsibility - i.e., 30% of the total $20 million award, which is one of the largest verdicts in an asbestos case. The rest of the award will likely go unpaid.

Georgia Pacific intends to appeal.

Kiesel, Boucher & Larson, LLP has a demonstrated history of success representing individuals who developed mesothelioma due to asbestos exposure.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Miriam Schimmel

British Petroleum to be Fined for Explosion

Lance Rubin — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 17:23:16 GMT

The 2005 explosion at British Petroleum's Texas City plant killed 15 people and injured more than 170 others. Civil suits filed by the injured people and the families of those killed have been mostly resolved, but BP is being fined for its wrongdoing.

The explosion at the Texas City plant about 40 miles southeast of Houston occurred after a piece of equipment called a blowdown drum overfilled with highly flammable liquid hydrocarbons.
The excess liquid and vapor hydrocarbons then were vented from the drum and ignited as the isomerization unit -- a device that boosts the octane in gasoline -- started up. Alarms and gauges that were supposed to warn of the overfilled equipment did not work properly.

Though the fines that BP must pay could be up to $3.2 billion dollars, BP and prosecutors are trying to cut a deal whereby BP would only pay $50 million in fines. That sounds like a lot, but not when you compare it to the billions of dollars in profit BP makes every year. This sweetheart deal benefits nobody but BP.

Over 4,000 suits were filed against BP for injuries that occurred after the explosion. About half have been resolved to date.

After a refinery explosion or burst pipe, it's not only those who were directly injured that may have claims. Toxic chemicals are often released in a "plume" of hazardous gasses that can affect those who were near the refinery at the time. People who inhale these toxic fumes often develop lung or other respiratory problems, asthma, headaches, watery eyes and other symptoms.

Kiesel Boucher Larson has experience suing refineries for personal injuries that occur after explosions or pipe ruptures. The firm was successful in bringing claims for hundreds of injured people against ARCO, Tosco and Unocal.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Lance Rubin

CA Consumers May Sue Grocery Stores to Enforce State Labeling Laws

Shehnaz Bhujwala — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 11:19:25 GMT

Last week, California's Supreme Court unanimously ruled that a federal food labeling law does not preclude California citizens from using state consumer laws to enforce an identical state labeling law. The High Court's ruling means consumers may sue grocery store chains to enforce a state law requiring labeling of dyes added to farm-raised salmon.

Do you recall a time in the not-too distant past when salmon was touted by experts as a superfood? With its high Omega-3 fatty acid content and myriad benefits for the heart, brain function and cellular renewal, salmon was the veritable darling of restaurants in the early 2000s, with US restaurants reporting record sales of salmon entrees by customers.

Then came a few cautionary reports about farm-raised salmon, raising public concern over the toxins and dyes found within the fish. Environmental groups also warned about overfishing of wild species and its effects on the environment. More recently, consumers have learned about the excessive mercury levels in many different types of seafood, including salmon; the NRDC and other respected organizations have issued advisories to consumers, asking us to limit our consumption of certain types of seafood, including salmon.

Navigating seafood options has truly become an extraordinary feat, but as always, our choices are better and a little easier with the right information. The U.S. Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act and California's Sherman Food, Drug and Cosmetic Law both require labeling of artificial dyes used in food. This is fantastic consumer protection in theory, but what about practice? Many grocery store chains allegedly fail to label farm-raised salmon to inform consumers of the dyes added to the fish. Clearly, these laws must be adhered to and enforced in order to be effective!

Thankfully, a recent Supreme Court ruling will enable California consumers to sue grocery store chains to enforce compliance under California law. The High Court issued its ruling in San Francisco last week in a case consolidating lawsuits filed by individual consumers in Los Angeles, Alameda and Monterey counties to require grocery chains to label farm-raised salmon as containing dyes. The lawsuits allege that two petrochemical-based dyes, astaxanthin and canthaxanthin, are added to farm-raised salmon to make it appear the same pink color as wild salmon. Without the dyes, plaintiffs' have alleged, the farm-raised salmon would be grayish in color. The lack of pink coloring in farm-raised salmon may also indicate lowered Omega 3 fatty acid content.

The decision overturns prior rulings in which a Los Angeles Superior Court trial judge and the state Court of Appeal in Los Angeles declared the lawsuits violated federal preemption laws. In the opinion, Justice Carlos Moreno wrote that the federal labeling measure explicitly allows states to pass identical state laws. He said there is no indication in the U.S. law that Congress "intended to limit the scope of remedies states might choose to provide for violations of those laws."

Kevin Golden, a lawyer with the Center for Food Safety in San Francisco, told CBS News: "[T]he decision means citizens have a right to know what's in their food and sends a strong message that California citizens can enforce state food safety laws as a matter of state law." The food safety group filed a friend-of-the-court brief supporting plaintiffs in the case. Craig Spiegel, a lawyer for the consumer plaintiffs, said his clients don't want to ingest the chemical dyes and said, "People have the right to determine whether to put artificial dyes in their bodies."

Another friend-of-the-court brief supporting the consumer plaintiffs was filed by the Los Angeles city attorney and the district attorneys of 12 counties, including Alameda, Marin, Monterey, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Solano and Sonoma counties.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Shehnaz Bhujwala

Potential New Threat to Children?

Miriam Schimmel — Fri, 08 Feb 2008 16:56:28 GMT

Phthalates are chemicals which are used to stabilize fragrances and make plastics flexible. They are typically found in many products including cosmetics, toys, vinyl flooring and medical supplies.

A recent study suggests their presence in baby shampoos, lotions and powders may expose infants to chemicals that have been linked with possible reproductive problems.

The study, which is published in the February issue of the journal Pediatrics, revealed elevated levels of phthalates in the urine of babies who'd been recently shampooed, powdered or lotioned with baby products. Researchers studied 163 babies, between 2 months to 28 months old, in California, Minnesota and Missouri and measured levels of several phthalates in urine from diapers. Information about the babies' mothers' use of various baby products in the preceding 24 hours was obtained, and the results revealed detectable levels of at least one phthalate. Most had levels of several more, and the highest levels were linked with shampoos, lotions and powders and were most prevalent in babies younger than 8 months.

However, there is currently no direct evidence from human studies to show that harm.

While experts are currently undecided as to what dangers these chemicals may pose, if any, there are environmental advocacy groups which believe they do pose a danger. Further, although there are no restrictions or regulations of phthalates by the federal government, California does limit their use. In October 2007, Governor Schwarzenegger signed Assembly Bill AB 1108 which restricted use of certain phthalates and banned others in infant and children's products as of January 1, 2009.

The slight catch to the legislation, however, is that these chemicals often don't appear on product labels because there is no requirement to list individual ingredients of fragrances, which are a common phthalate source. One suggestion is to seek products which are labeled "phthalate-free," or check labels for common phthalates, including DEP and DEHP.

Industry researchers and advocates agree more research is needed, but at the very least, parents should be made aware of the issue so that they can decide whether or not to take protective action on behalf of their children.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Miriam Schimmel

Los Angeles to Drain Two Reservoirs Due to Cancer Risk

Jenny Albano — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 15:39:05 GMT

Two reservoirs in Los Angeles that supply drinking water to residents had to be shut down after officials found the water to be contaminated with high levels of a cancer causing chemical, bromate.

The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power intend to drain 600 million gallons of water from Elysian and Silver Lake reservoirs early next year, a process that will leave them out of action for three to four months amid drought conditions, the department said in a statement.

City officials stated that because they are in the middle of a drought, they would try and use the water for non-consumption purposes, such as irrigation. But the rest of the water will be dumped into the Los Angeles River, which flows into the Pacific Ocean.

According to DWP spokesman Joseph Ramallo, the bromate "formed unexpectedly when the water in the reservoir, combined with groundwater, was treated with chlorine and exposed to sunlight." He also stated that there is no immediate health risk to citizens.

For more information on this subject, please refer to our section on Toxic and Hazardous Substances.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jenny Albano

Slow Response for Mercury Spill on Los Angeles Subway

Shannon Weidemann — Mon, 26 Feb 2007 11:39:10 GMT

Los Angeles's subway stations are unattended and monitored only by closed circuit television cameras. In December a man spilled mercury on the platform at one of the stations and contacted the Metro Transit Authority on what he had done. It took 8 hours before anything was done to clean up the spill. In the meantime several passengers of the subway came in contact with the hazardous substance.

There is growing discussion among MTA board members and other local officials about a major overhaul of how the stations work -- adding barriers and possibly gate attendants as well as more security officers. Some officials say the mercury incident proves that the agency's reliance on closed-circuit cameras to show what's going on underground is inadequate.
"If we go to gates, we would have a station attendant there all the time," said Roger Snoble, the agency's chief executive officer, who plans to present a report on the issue in the coming weeks. "They would be there to help keep an eye on things."

MTA is weighing the costly proposal to decide if the costs outweigh the benefits. If they hire 500 workers to staff the subway stations it will cost $24 million annually.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Shannon Weidemann