续7:
(f) There Is Evidence to Support a Colorable, But Not Strong,
Claim That JPMorgan Breached the Implied Covenant of
Good Faith and Fair Dealing by Demanding Excessive
Collateral in September 2008.............................................................1210
(i) Legal Standards Governing Implied Covenant of Good
Faith and Fair Dealing.................................................................1211
(ii) There Is Sufficient Evidence To Support a Colorable, But
Not a Strong, Claim That JPMorgan Violated the Implied
Covenant by Demanding Excessive Collateral .......................1214
(iii) A Trier of Fact Will Likely Have to Resolve a Waiver
Defense ..........................................................................................1220
c) Lehman’s Dealings With Citigroup..............................................................1224
(1) Facts.............................................................................................................1224
(a) Citigroup Provided Continuous Linked Settlement Service
and Other Clearing and Settlement Operations to Lehman.........1224
(i) Background Information on the Continuous Linked
Settlement Service Citi Provided to Lehman...........................1224
(ii) Other Clearing and Settlement Services That Citi
Provided to Lehman....................................................................1227
(iii) Citi’s Clearing and Settlement Exposure to Lehman,
Generally.......................................................................................1229
(iv) The Terms of Lehman’s CLS Agreement with Citi.................1231
(b) Lehman Provided a $2 Billion Cash Deposit with Citi on
June 12, 2008 To Support its Clearing Needs..................................1233
(i) The Market Environment and Other Circumstances
Surrounding Citi’s Request for the $2 Billion Cash
Deposit on June 12 .......................................................................1235
(ii) The Parties Did Not Share the Same Understanding of
the Terms of the $2 Billion Cash Deposit .................................1242
a. What Lehman Understood the Terms of the Deposit
To Be..........................................................................................1243
b. What Citi Understood the Terms of the Deposit To Be.....1245
c. The Exact Terms of the “Comfort Deposit” Are
Unknown Because the Terms Were Not Reduced to
Writing......................................................................................1250
(iii) Citi Knew the “Comfort Deposit” was Included in
Lehman’s Liquidity Pool ............................................................1250
(c) Collateral Pledge Discussions Between Lehman and Citi
Began in June 2008 and Continued Until September 2008 ...........1251
(i) The Unexecuted Pledge Agreement: the Parties Agreed
to Negotiate the Terms but Not Execute the Agreement
Until It Was Needed....................................................................1251
(ii) Citi Had Difficulty Pricing the Collateral Offered by
Lehman as a Substitute for the Cash Deposit..........................1254
(iii) The Guaranty Amendment Was Signed in a “Fire Drill”
on September 9, 2008...................................................................1261
a. Events Prior to the Signing of the September 9
Guaranty Amendment from Citi’s Perspective..................1263
b. Events Prior to the Signing of the September 9
Guaranty Amendment from Lehman’s Perspective..........1265
c. Negotiations Between Lehman and Citi Personnel
Regarding Which Lehman Entities Were To Be Added
to the Parent Guaranty by the September 9 Guaranty
Amendment.............................................................................1268
(iv) September 12, 2008: A Lehman Collateral Account at Citi
was Activated After Two Months of Discussion, and
Lehman Signed an Amendment to the Direct Custodial
Services Agreement .....................................................................1273
(d) Lehman’s Clearing Environment at Citi During the Week of
September 8, 2008................................................................................1276
(i) Citi Required Lehman To Operate Under Lower
Daylight Overdraft Limits..........................................................1276
(ii) Lehman Deposited Amounts in Excess of the $2 Billion
Deposit at Various Times in 2008 With Citi.............................1279
(iii) Citi Endeavored To Help Lehman in September 2008,
Prior to the Bankruptcy Filing ...................................................1281
(iv) Lehman’s Accounts at Citi Closed on Friday September
12 With Funds in Excess of the $2 Billion Deposit..................1284
(e) Citi’s Participation in “Lehman Weekend” Events........................1285
(f) Citi’s Actions Toward Lehman After Lehman Filed for
Bankruptcy Protection........................................................................1287
(i) Citi Continued to Provide CLS Services for Lehman, But
Not in an Entirely Uninterrupted Manner...............................1287
(ii) Prior to Lehman’s Bankruptcy Filing, Citi Set Off a
Portion of the Cash Deposit .......................................................1290
(2) Analysis of Potential Colorable Claims .................................................1291
(a) Validity of the September 9 Guaranty Amendment......................1291
(i) Economic Duress..........................................................................1291
a. Legal Framework ....................................................................1292
b. The Evidence Does Not Support the Existence of a
Colorable Claim Against Citi for Economic Duress ..........1293
(ii) The Failure of Consideration......................................................1297
a. Legal Framework ....................................................................1298
b. The Evidence Does Not Support the Existence of a
Colorable Claim Against Citi for Failure of
Consideration ..........................................................................1298
(b) Breach of the Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing in
Connection With the CLS Services Agreement ..............................1300
(i) The Evidence Does Not Support the Existence of a
Colorable Claim Against Citi for Breach of the Duty of
Good Faith and Fair Dealing in Connection With the
CLS Services Agreement.............................................................1301
d) Lehman’s Dealings With HSBC....................................................................1303
(1) Overview of HSBC’s Relationship With Lehman ................................1305
(a) HSBC Provided CREST Clearing and Settlement Services to
Lehman.................................................................................................1306
(b) Overview of the Operative Agreements..........................................1309
(2) The Examiner’s Investigation of Particular Transactions ...................1311
(a) HSBC Cancelled a $1 Billion Intraday Credit Facility ...................1311
(b) Lehman Maintained a $1 Billion Segregated Deposit with
HSBC.....................................................................................................1312
(c) Lehman Deposited $750 Million with HSBC on June 24...............1314
(d) Lehman Committed $25 Million on August 15 to HSBC’s
Syndicated Lending Facility..............................................................1315
(e) Lehman Pledged $6 Million to HSBC as Collateral for Letters
of Credit................................................................................................1317
(f) Other Significant Exposures..............................................................1318
(3) HSBC Required Lehman to Provide Approximately $1 Billion in
Collateral While Quietly Ending Their Relationship...........................1319
(a) HSBC Determined to End Its Relationship with Lehman.............1319
(b) HSBC Demanded Collateral for Intraday Credit ...........................1322
(c) HSBC Agreed To Accommodate Lehman at Quarter End ...........1325
(d) Lehman Deposited the Cash Collateral With HSBC......................1326
(e) Lehman Negotiated New Terms and Executed the Cash
Deeds ....................................................................................................1327
(i) Lehman Secured Concessions in the U.K. Cash Deeds..........1327
(ii) Lehman Executed the Hong Kong Cash Deed Late on
September 12 ................................................................................1329
(f) HSBC and LBHI Stipulated To Setoff and Return Some of the
Funds Covered by the U.K. Cash Deeds .........................................1332
(4) Other Issues Stemming from HSBC’s Collateral Demand..................1333
(a) Lehman Included the Deposits Covered by the Cash Deeds
in Its Reported Liquidity Pool...........................................................1333
(b) HSBC Considered Withholding Payments or Requiring
Prefunding of Trades in the Asia‐Pacific Region Prior to
Lehman’s Bankruptcy ........................................................................1336
(5) The Evidence Does Not Support the Existence of Colorable
Claims Arising From HSBC’s Demand That Lehman Provide
Cash Collateral and Execute Cash Deeds in Order for HSBC to
Continue Providing Clearing and Settlement Services .......................1336
(a) The Parameters of the Examiner’s Analysis....................................1336
(b) The Facts Provide Little to No Support for Invalidating the
U.K. Cash Deeds..................................................................................1339
(i) Analytical Framework ................................................................1339
|