Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

JP Morgan fined by SEC for deleting email records

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 254 posts

Re: JP Morgan fined by SEC for deleting email records

#181

Post by toth »

justrealist wrote: post #152
kris_lujanovic wrote: post #72

As someone who worked in finance I call b.s. When you need to do any infrastructure change not to mention data manipulation it takes million signatures and meetings. Like 13 meetings to deal with one ex employee corporate cloud folder. Unless they end up in court. Then somehow million things happen on their own in their benefit.

Yes it takes a million meetings, but at the end of the day it's just one IT guy making the change. It's exponentially expensive to eliminate the base-rate of a "whoops", and not everyone has NASA-level money to waste on IT.

Maybe not everyone, but if JPM doesn't then who does?

Re: JP Morgan fined by SEC for deleting email records

#182

Post by zackmorris »

So UBI, unions and social safety nets are bad because they encourage people to be lazy and become dependent on handouts? But a company can lose millions of potentially legally damaging emails and pay a paltry fine that's a rounding error of its profits.

I wonder when democracy will arrive in America. Where people overpower concentrated wealth through overwhelming majority the way we did when we broke from England. Collectively voting to break up monopolies, tax the wealthy and imprison the corrupt.

I'm seeing ads on TV now for Vanguard and BlackRock, the companies perhaps most responsible for sending rents into the stratosphere and killing the dream of home ownership for millions of people. The American Dream.

Re: JP Morgan fined by SEC for deleting email records

#183

Post by JumpCrisscross »

gmd63 wrote: post #180
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Don't get stuck on the word "fine'. The fines cans be judgment at court. All fines are subject to court supervision. This sentence makes no sense. > cost of doing business this way must go up, way up We want regulators thinking of the public, not randomly increasing the cost of business. This seems more motivated by hatred for a thriving industry than claims to specific damages. Regulators who pursue this path are…

Regulators are not thinking of the public when they allow corporate sociopaths to neglect societal best interest while market fixing / mismanaging records / etc., activities that have demonstrably siphoned wealth from the lower class and moved it increasingly to the ivory towers of companies that do not deserve the influence that makes them "too big to fail". The wealth inequality gap is widening and it's due to puss…

> wealth inequality gap is widening

You can’t fine a business just to reduce inequality. Any jurisdiction that starts ruling that way fails basic definitions for rule of law. (This is in part what ruined Argentina.)

Also, in what universe would larger fines for banks decrease income inequality? The history of enforcement is capricious penalties increase incentives for cover-ups. If a record retention mistake means personal bankruptcy, you have zero incentive to correct mistakes. In practice, this leads to corruption among regulators, who are now the de facto commanders of private business.

> due to pussyfooted enforcement on white collar crime

Where is the crime here? The SEC investigated and found no wilful wrongdoing. Those twelve private plaintiffs are going to win judgements, as will everyone else who brings claims which could reasonably by covered by the missing records.

Re: JP Morgan fined by SEC for deleting email records

#184

Post by rossjudson »

Cpoll wrote: post #131
kris_lujanovic wrote: post #72

As someone who worked in finance I call b.s. When you need to do any infrastructure change not to mention data manipulation it takes million signatures and meetings. Like 13 meetings to deal with one ex employee corporate cloud folder. Unless they end up in court. Then somehow million things happen on their own in their benefit.

As someone who has done support for finance's IT departments, the "this was broken for years and no-one noticed" idea sounds bang-on. I've watched the millions of signatures and meetings, but none of that matters when someone screws up the implementation (but not badly enough that anyone cares to complain).

So many people want to be "the person who orders the thing be done" and not "the person who does the thing".

Dysfunctional organizations have (somebody-else-is-doing-it / im-doing-it) ratios that get way out of control. There's also (talking-about-doing-it / doing-it), where dysfunctional orgs lose the ability to experiment.

Re: JP Morgan fined by SEC for deleting email records

#185

Post by gmd63 »

kris_lujanovic wrote: post #72

As someone who worked in finance I call b.s. When you need to do any infrastructure change not to mention data manipulation it takes million signatures and meetings. Like 13 meetings to deal with one ex employee corporate cloud folder. Unless they end up in court. Then somehow million things happen on their own in their benefit.

JP Morgan and other similarly acting agents in finance have become literal economic cancer tumors, attracting undue angiogenesis and convincing the body that excision is fatal all while leading it to its demise.

We haven't figured out how to cure cancer in humans because we turn a blind eye to it when we create it ourselves.

Re: JP Morgan fined by SEC for deleting email records

#186

Post by JoshuaEN »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #165
BowBun wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

JP Morgan is the very definition of 'too big to fail'. Any actions against them to that degree would be self-sabotaging by any country. I'm not saying it's a good thing, but that's the reality right now.

> JP Morgan is the very definition of 'too big to fail' If the government revoked the license for a local lawn care company on the basis of a records retention mistake, I’m fairly sure they’d have a case for reversal in the courts. I get we’re technically minded, and so technical mistakes rank up with mortal sins, but let’s keep a sense of perspective.

JP Morgan is not a local lawn care service, they have the funds to not make mistakes like this. Larger companies should be held to a higher standard because their actions have a wider impact.

Re: JP Morgan fined by SEC for deleting email records

#187

Post by Libcat99 »

justrealist wrote: post #152
kris_lujanovic wrote: post #72

As someone who worked in finance I call b.s. When you need to do any infrastructure change not to mention data manipulation it takes million signatures and meetings. Like 13 meetings to deal with one ex employee corporate cloud folder. Unless they end up in court. Then somehow million things happen on their own in their benefit.

Yes it takes a million meetings, but at the end of the day it's just one IT guy making the change. It's exponentially expensive to eliminate the base-rate of a "whoops", and not everyone has NASA-level money to waste on IT.

JP Morgan does, though.

They likely spend all of it on the million meetings full of people who wouldn't actually be executing the change, next to none of it on the team and infrastructure where the change will be made, and then fire the team who made the change.

Re: JP Morgan fined by SEC for deleting email records

#188

Post by JumpCrisscross »

JoshuaEN wrote: post #186
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> JP Morgan is the very definition of 'too big to fail' If the government revoked the license for a local lawn care company on the basis of a records retention mistake, I’m fairly sure they’d have a case for reversal in the courts. I get we’re technically minded, and so technical mistakes rank up with mortal sins, but let’s keep a sense of perspective.

JP Morgan is not a local lawn care service, they have the funds to not make mistakes like this. Larger companies should be held to a higher standard because their actions have a wider impact.

> Larger companies should be held to a higher standard because their actions have a wider impact

Sure. My point is this has nothing to do with too big to fail.

Also, what is the impact of these records being deleted? If you have a claim that reasonably involves them, it is basically cashable due to the error. If nobody can show damages, it’s hard to argue this mistake had a wide impact.

Re: JP Morgan fined by SEC for deleting email records

#189

Post by cirgue »

Cpoll wrote: post #131
kris_lujanovic wrote: post #72

As someone who worked in finance I call b.s. When you need to do any infrastructure change not to mention data manipulation it takes million signatures and meetings. Like 13 meetings to deal with one ex employee corporate cloud folder. Unless they end up in court. Then somehow million things happen on their own in their benefit.

As someone who has done support for finance's IT departments, the "this was broken for years and no-one noticed" idea sounds bang-on. I've watched the millions of signatures and meetings, but none of that matters when someone screws up the implementation (but not badly enough that anyone cares to complain).

Seconding this. You can have all the meetings you want, but at the end of the day the core competency of bank management is managing money and not managing IT, and banks suck at managing IT when it isn’t directly in the critical path of cash flow, and even then they get it wrong more often than anyone wants to admit.

Re: JP Morgan fined by SEC for deleting email records

#190

Post by JumpCrisscross »

nashashmi wrote: post #154
wongarsu wrote: post #113

So the story is basically: 1. data that has to be retained for legal reasons can't be deleted by normal deletion processes 2. data that should be deleted didn't delete properly 3. to fix (2) they manually ran delete requests for times up to about the current date (back in 2018), relying on (1) to protect data 4. turns out somebody forgot to configure (1) for emails send to domains belonging to Chase (at that point th…

How many other lawsuits does this also affect?

There were “at least 12 civil securities-related regulatory investigations, eight of which were conducted by the Commission staff” [1]. No doubt, more will be filed.

[1] Fourth paragraph

Post reply on HN