Search Site

Citigroup Whistleblower Won’t Give Up

Whistleblower Richard M. Bowen III told The New York Times he plans to “leave this country better off than the way I found it.” He refuses to be muzzled about the financial fraud that led to the multibillion dollar taxpayer buyout of Citigroup.  “There’s no question that Richard was censored,” says Steve Kardell, Bowen’s attorney and a partner at the Dallas law firm of Clouse Dunn LLP.

Bowen, while responsible for Citigroup’s mortgage unit’s quality control from 2002 to 2006, discovered that 60 percent of the approximately $50 billion of prime mortgages the bank traded were defective. Citigroup’s credit policies were routinely ignored. Mortgage loan decisions were reversed from “denied” to “approved” and applications were accepted without policy-required documents.   “Sub-prime” mortgage investments were resold to investors as credit-worthy.

Concerns Bowen expressed to Citigroup management between June 2006 and November 2007 went unanswered.  Bowen then emailed the chairman of the bank’s executive committee, former U.S. Treasury Secretary Robert E. Rubin. Company lawyers stonewalled Bowen and reduced his duties. Bowen filed an OSHA complaint that Citigroup had retaliated against him for whistleblowing, a violation of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.  His SOX claim was subsequently settled.

The Securities and Exchange Commission heard Bowen’s testimony in July 2009, but took no action other than filing over 1,000 pages of documents Bowen provided as Citigroup “trade secrets,” rendering them inaccessible.

Bowen presented oral testimony and a 28-page written statement to Congress’ Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission (F.C.I.C.) in April 2010. Mr. Kardell told Bowen that he thought the F.C.I.C. was “catching some serious, serious heat…from Citi.” Bowen was directed to delete any suggestion from his statement that Citigroup may have “materially misrepresented its certifications of internal controls, which require corporate officers to certify the accuracy of their financial statements under Sarbanes-Oxley.”

Bowen’s F.C.I.C. testimony is sealed until 2016. The statute of limitation for fraud is five years.  While the F.C.I.C. denies claims of pressure, Bowen’s testimony coincided with the Treasury’s announcement of its intention to sell 7.7 billion shares of Citigroup stock in 2010.

Anyone with knowledge of fraud is urged to consult a qualified and experienced whistleblower attorney who will look out for your—and the taxpayers’—best interests.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Awards & Honors
Our Office
  • Dallas Office
    4514 Cole Ave
    Dallas, Texas 75205
    Phone: 214-306-8045
    Fax: 469-729-9926
As Seen In
In his new book, "Standing Up to China: How a Whistleblower Risked Everything for His Country," former client & Author, Ashley Yablon, quotes Attorney Steve Kardell about Whistelblower Law.
  • "Steve Kardell was terrific in representing me in some very adversarial discussions with Citigroup and also later represented me in my testimony before the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission."  -Richard Bowen, Citigroup Whistleblower

  • "Incredible knowledge of employee related concerns and equally brilliant knowledge of health care regulations, standards of practice. I would recommend this firm to anyone."  -V.B.

  • "Reaching out to Steve Kardell was the best decision I made. His ability to provide immediate insight and direction was very powerful, and a huge relief during a very stressful time period. For anyone struggling with a whistleblower situation, I would highly recommend at least speaking with Steve. After a 10 minute call with him, I had a better understanding of what I was dealing with. Even better, he gave me some immediate hope. In the end Steve did a better job than I thought was possible. Steve was able to get in contact with people in my organization, that I didn’t have access to. Because of his years of experience, he already has contacts in many organizations in Dallas. The entire situation was handled peacefully. I was impressed by his ability to “keep the peace”–rather than creating a battle with the organization. The reason I didn’t reach out to a lawyer initially, was because I thought it would mean an immediate end to any hope of a positive relationship with the company. Steve was able to address my concerns, and in the end I was able to continue to work for them."  -KS

  • "Never thought my career would end like it did after 30 years of service. I was part of the first round of the so called reduction of force. I asked myself how can I be part of this with 30 years of seniority. How did they pick these 90 plus employees? Now, the culture of this organization made you question every decision they made. It wasn’t what you knew it’s was a culture of who you know. Nonetheless, I did not accept their severance package. I immediately starting looking for an attorney who would take on my case. After the initial call to Steve I had hope again. He was open and honest about everything and reassured me he would do his best for me, and he did. I had an awesome outcome. Thanks Steve you’re the best."  -S.S.