A judge has refused Goldman Sachs' request to dismiss a lawsuit alleging that it misrepresented the underwriting standards of millions of dollars in mortgage-backed securities
Goldman Sachs will have to face a lawsuit alleging that it misled investors about the quality of mortgage-backed securities it sold, a federal judge has ruled.
Goldman had moved for the suit, filed by Detroit’s police and firefighters’ pension fund, to be dismissed, according to a Reuters report. The suit accused Goldman of misrepresenting the standards it used to qualify mortgage borrowers whose loans were bundled into securities and bought by the fund, Reuters reported.
The pension fund bought about $1.8 million of the securities. Offering documents from Goldman said lenders reviewed borrowers’ financial health, when in reality mortgages pooled into the fund had been issued without proper financial vetting, according to the lawsuit.
The lawsuit also claimed that lenders exaggerated borrowers’ incomes and that appraisers inflated property values, according to Reuters.
Goldman argued that its underwriting policies were merely guidelines and that lenders were free to deviate from them, Reuters reported. But U.S. District Judge Miriam Cedarbaum ruled that Goldman’s offering documents were “affirmatively misleading” and that making occasional exceptions to underwriting standards was not the same thing as abandoning them altogether.
Goldman had moved for the suit, filed by Detroit’s police and firefighters’ pension fund, to be dismissed, according to a Reuters report. The suit accused Goldman of misrepresenting the standards it used to qualify mortgage borrowers whose loans were bundled into securities and bought by the fund, Reuters reported.
The pension fund bought about $1.8 million of the securities. Offering documents from Goldman said lenders reviewed borrowers’ financial health, when in reality mortgages pooled into the fund had been issued without proper financial vetting, according to the lawsuit.
The lawsuit also claimed that lenders exaggerated borrowers’ incomes and that appraisers inflated property values, according to Reuters.
Goldman argued that its underwriting policies were merely guidelines and that lenders were free to deviate from them, Reuters reported. But U.S. District Judge Miriam Cedarbaum ruled that Goldman’s offering documents were “affirmatively misleading” and that making occasional exceptions to underwriting standards was not the same thing as abandoning them altogether.
