The Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) has settled the smallest securities fraud suit that remained of the 18 it had filed back in 2011, regarding mortgage-backed securities sold to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

First Horizon National (NYSE: FHN) on Tuesday agreed to pay $110 million, which is about 12.5 percent of the face value of the securities involved. After this settlement, four suits remain in full.

The largest is against Royal Bank of Scotland (NYSE: GS), which involves about $11 billion in mortgage-backed securities. Third is HSBC at $6.2 billion in securities. Fourth is Nomura Holdings at $2 billion.

Related: Goldman Sachs and Others Still Face FHFA Suits

What can investors learn about these remaining suits from the First Horizon settlement? The claims are all similar, although the facts differ. Still, past settlements' percentage discount off the securities face value is a strong suggestion about future settlements.

Previous Settlements

Some of the other suits FHFA filed settled for similar percentages to First Horizon: JPM Chase (NYSE: MS) for 11.8 percent. Deutsche Bank (NYSE: DB) was slightly higher at 13.6 percent.

Some settlements, including the settlement announced on April 24th with Barclays, were for significantly less. Barclays settled for $280 million, a bit less than six percent of the total $4.9 billion of securities in the suit.

Three others settled for less than 10 percent of the face value of the securities: Credit Suisse at 6.3 percent, Citigroup at 7.1 percent, and Societe General at 9.4 percent.

Bank of America's situation is unique. While it paid $9.5 billion to resolve all claims relating to its own securities, those from Countrywide and those from Merrill Lynch, that $9.5 billion includes $3.2 billion that repurchased securities at their current face value. As a result, the cost of the settlement to Bank of America unclear -- is it $6.3 billion, or $9.5? Will it actually get $3.2 billion in value from the securities it purchased, more or less?

From FHFA's perspective, it got 16.5 percent of the sued-over securities value; from Bank of America's, it's possible it only paid 11.0 percent.

The FHFA's settlement with UBS seems shockingly high in comparison to these others, at 19.7 percent of the securities' face value.

Applying the Math to the Pending Cases

If each of these settled for 12 percent, as did First Horizon, then RBS would owe $3.6 billion; Goldman $1.3 billion; and HSBC $744 million. If they settled for a Barclays-like 6 percent, those numbers would be cut in half.

Of course, some settlements involved other law enforcers as well, like JPM Chase's. If any of these three involve other regulators then the settlement total would be even higher.

One striking feature of the settlement agreements made public--they haven't all been--is that they exclude claims based on LIBOR manipulation. Excluding such claims allows FHFA to bring such suits going forward. Will it?

If the FHFA brings a new round of suits alleging LIBOR harms, the banks' mortgage woes are not over.

Using Private Lawyers Makes A Big Difference

The FHFA settlements have been much higher value, like 10-to-1, than cases brought by the Department of Justice and Securities and Exchange Commission, Columbia Law School professor John C. Coffee tells Benzinga, because the FHFA used private counsel on a type of contingency fee basis to bring the case.

When bringing such complex cases with the intention of being able to try them, "You need 40 or more lawyers assigned to the case," Coffee explained. "You need to do hundreds of depositions. Public enforcement agencies just cannot throw that manpower at it."

What the SEC and others generally do, Coffee said, was tell companies they intend to bring charges -- and then immediately initiate settlement negotiations. By bringing private counsel, the government gets the capacity to really take the cases forward, which results in bigger settlements.

Coffee noted the FHFA wasn't the only government agency to use private counsel this way. Private counsel hired by the FDIC won a $168 million verdict against three IndyMac executives. And the FDIC's private counsel won a $12 million settlement with IndyMac's former CEO, Michael Perry, who resolved the SEC's similar claims for a mere $80 thousand.

Related Articles
  1. Budgeting

    Plated Review, Is It Worth It?

    Take a closer look at the ready-to-cook meal service, Plated, and learn how the company can help you take the hassle out of home cooking.
  2. Investing News

    How China's Economy is Now Like America's

    China's economy could take the global economy down with it; why that might be good news in the grand scheme.
  3. Investing News

    A 2016 Outlook: What January 2009 Can Teach Us

    January 2009 and January 2016 were similar from an investment standpoint, but from a forward-looking perspective, they were very different.
  4. Fundamental Analysis

    South Korea - King of Exports

    Read about one the most important and successful exporting countries in the world, and learn more about the types of products it exports.
  5. Investing News

    Volatility Vexed? See What the Experts Are Saying

    Volatile times lead to a diversity of opinions on where the market is headed. Here are takes from five investing luminaries.
  6. Investing Basics

    The January Barometer: Is it Still Relevant?

    The January Barometer has been historically accurate. Will that be the case in 2016?
  7. Investing News

    The 8 Highest Grossing Movies of 2015

    Count down the most popular films at the American box office in 2015, and learn how much they earned in the domestic and worldwide markets.
  8. Economics

    Why the Chinese Economy Impacts the U.S. So Much

    Here's how the Chinese economy, the second-largest in the world, impacts the United States.
  9. Investing News

    Why You Should Be Buying Stocks, Not Going to Cash

    Hedge fund managers are buying up the shares of big companies. What do the managers know that we don't?
  10. Economics

    Why Commodities Aren't to Blame for Market Malaise

    Commodities are taking the brunt of the blame for poor investment performance. Are they the real villain?
RELATED FAQS
  1. What is the long-term outlook of the metals and mining sector?

    An industry agency council was established by the World Economic Forum in 2014 to serve as an advisory board on the future ... Read Full Answer >>
  2. What is the railroads sector?

    The railroads sector is comprised of publicly traded stocks for companies that operate railroad tracks and/or trains. Railroad ... Read Full Answer >>
  3. Who are Amgen Inc.'s (AMGN) main competitors?

    Biotech giant Amgen Inc (AMGN) bills itself as one of the first biotechnology firms. It was founded in 1980 and has grown ... Read Full Answer >>
  4. What's the most expensive stock of all time?

    Back in late August 2012, Apple’s (AAPL) stock price reached nearly $700 per share. The stock has since split but has yet ... Read Full Answer >>
COMPANIES IN THIS ARTICLE
Trading Center