It’s All Good in comments pointed me to a press release that states that the Comptroller of the Currency has just entered into a consent order with William Anderson, who was a vice-president and branch manager of the First National Bank of Pontotoc for a little more than a decade until he was fired in May of 2004. The consent order recites:
While employed at the Bank, from at least February 1993 until his employment was terminated in May 2004, Respondent violated ECOA and the FHA. Respondent discriminated against female applicants for credit, female borrowers and female accountholders by subjecting them to severe, pervasive, and unwelcome sexual harassment in connection with credit transactions and real estate-related transactions.
For this, Anderson agrees that he is to be banned for life from having anything to do with managing the affairs (including owning any voting interest) of a federally insured institution. In 2006, the Comptroller filed a civil suit against the bank and Anderson alleged that his conduct included: “offensive and unwanted verbal sexual statements; offensive and unwanted sexual touching; offensive and unwanted solicitations for sex; and offensive and unwanted requests or demands for sexual favors in return for favorable action on his part with respect to residential real estate-related and/or other credit transactions.” This suit was settled with a $300K payment to victims and $50K to the United States as a civil penalty.
A banking industry blog has questioned the timing of the announcement of Anderson being banned for life:
Given the extreme severity of the charges, the timing of the order is welcomed news for the OCC. On Tuesday, the Supreme Court will decide in Cuomo v Clearing House Association LLC, whether state officials are prohibited by the OCC from enforcing state consumer protection laws, specifically discrimination measures.
Enforcement actions can typically take years to complete. But the offending banker was terminated in May 2004, so did it really take five years for regulators to prove these actions? And did that investigation just happen, by coincidence, to be completed the day before the OCC is set to defend, before the Supreme Court, its record as the sole enforcer of rules for national banks?
Here’s the SCOTUS blog description of Cuomo v. Clearing House Association LLC, posted to describe what’s being argued before the Supreme Court today.
Update: Bank name corrected based on first comment.
One correction to your post NMC: it was the “First National Bank of Pontotoc” and not the “Bank of Pontotoc”.
And I was amazed to find out this was the first prohibition order based on violation of the Fair Housing Act and Equal Credit Opportunity Act. All those little signs and stickers in the banks are just for show obviously.