The Limited Times

Now you can see non-English news...

USA: Citigroup bank wins lawsuit over wrong transfer

2022-09-08T21:54:43.469Z


Full credit transferred instead of interest: The major US bank Citigroup has won an appeal against creditors of the cosmetics giant Revlon. The bank's image remains tarnished because of the mega breakdown.


Enlarge image

Human error: Citigroup gets their money back, but the disgrace will remain

Photo: Mark Lennihan/AP

The major US bank Citigroup has prevailed in the legal dispute over the reimbursement of around half a billion dollars that was accidentally transferred.

A Manhattan appeals court overturned the lower court's verdict and ruled that the financial group was entitled to the money.

The recipients should have been aware that the transfer was a glitch, the judges reasoned.

Several US media reported on the case.

The wrong transfer caused a stir in August 2020: On behalf of the cosmetics manufacturer Revlon, Citi accidentally paid in full a loan of almost 900 million dollars that was actually only due in 2023 with creditors – hedge funds and other professional investors.

Interest payments of only $7.8 million would have been due.

Since only some of the lenders returned the money, a legal battle ensued for around $500 million.

Embarrassing company chapter

Citigroup can breathe a sigh of relief after the appeal verdict, but the mishap should be remembered as an embarrassing chapter.

The bank blamed human error, but the mishap brought it a lot of ridicule and malice, and not just on Wall Street.

In the first instance, Citi suffered a defeat.

At the time, the judge ruled that it was irrational to assume that a highly developed financial group would make a bad transfer of this magnitude.

atb/dpa

Source: spiegel

All life articles on 2022-09-08

You may like

News/Politics 2024-04-03T14:38:26.393Z

Trends 24h

Latest

© Communities 2019 - Privacy

The information on this site is from external sources that are not under our control.
The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.