Banking and financial services. Standard Chartered employs 38,000 people in 950 locations in more than 50 countries in the Asia Pacific Region, South Asia, the Middle East, Africa, the United Kingdom and the Americas. Standard Chartered is one of the worlds most international banks, with employees representing 80 nationalities. It serves both Consumer and Wholesale Banking customers. Consumer Banking provides credit cards, personal loans, mortgages, deposit taking and wealth management services to individuals and small to medium sized enterprises. Wholesale Banking provides corporate and institutional clients with services in trade finance, cash management, lending, securities services, foreign exchange, debt capital markets and corporate finance.

Red = 25 day moving average. Green = 200 day moving average.

cynic we are not concerned about the unproven allegations more interested in making "a bob or two" on the rebound.

cynic made a nice day trade profit... isn't that the name of the game?

And Oooops again :-

Exclusive - U.S. regulators irate at New York action against Standard Chartered

NEW YORK/LONDON | Wed Aug 8, 2012 5:34am BST

(Reuters) - The U.S. Treasury Department and Federal Reserve were blindsided and angered by New York's banking regulator's decision to launch an explosive attack on Standard Chartered Plc over $250 billion (160.1 billion pounds) in alleged money laundering transactions tied to Iran, sources familiar with the situation said.

By going it alone through the order he issued on Monday, Benjamin Lawsky, head of the recently created New York State Department of Financial Services, also complicates talks between the Treasury and London-based Standard Chartered to settle claims over the transactions, several of the sources said.

Berenberg upgrade the stock from sell to hold. Up over 6% in early trading.

Is no-one trustworthy in Finance? Or is it a Big Game to those involved - like a day at the Funfair, when Auntie is paying?

Next we'll read that UK Gov has sold our Gold reserves, just when the price was low.

Oh Deary.

cynic did you catch the bounce?

In finance, money speaks not trust or human! everything is ignored as usual.... like politics

translation required?

*DJ US Regulators Are Said to Assert NY Regulator May Have Overstated Case Against Standard Chartered -CNBC >STAN.LN

hi hali ..... no, wouldn't even have wanted to attempt it ..... in fact, have taken a modest amount of money off the table by banking a decent profit on dow long ...... very much to my surprise, dow has now recovered strongly, but for sure there'll be a bad day sooner rather than later, and may get back in then

cynic every day the election draws closer..... high hopes!

nothing to stop me buying in at a higher level than that at which i sold ..... i have no hang-up for so doing if it looks right

Finished up 7% on the day, fair bit of mileage in this one to go before it settles.

Standard Chartered begins fightback on Iran allegations

WASHINGTON/LONDON | Thu Aug 9, 2012 6:39am BST

(Reuters) - Cowboy local regulator or the exposer of lax federal bureaucrats?

That's the key question being asked about New York banking regulator Benjamin Lawsky after his explosive charge that London's Standard Chartered bank abetted $250 billion (159.48 billion pounds) of money-laundering transactions with Iran.

Standard Chartered won help Wednesday from Britain's central bank governor, who portrayed Lawsky as marching to his own tune, and marching out of step with federal regulators in Washington. "One regulator, but not the others, has gone public while the investigation is still going on," the Bank of England's Mervyn King said at a news conference in London.

Tempted to enter, but still not sure on this one yet.

Then don't. If the U.S. can prove their accusation and revoke their banking licence in the U.S. then STAN will lose more than 50% of their current value, imo. A huge amount of STAN's business is based on commercial transactions in $, so losing their U.S. licence would cripple them. Of course the U.S. are litigation crazy and are likely to settle out of court, but until that cloud disappears, STAN are high risk at present, imo.

Once again, given the rebound in the share price -- and strong denials of wrongdoing by the bank's management -- it wasn't much of a surprise to discover that Standard Chartered (Xetra: 859123 - news) was the single-most popular buy among private clients of stockbroker TD Direct Investing between the market's opening and 12 noon.

Having had £11 billion wiped off its value on Tuesday as the allegations broke, the bank's management is now robustly pointing to a mere 300 transactions, worth just $14 million, that were in breach of American anti-Iran legislation. At that level, the loss of a banking license is most unlikely -- and so is the likelihood of a large fine.

Now down less than 10% against the FTSE 100 (Euronext: VFTSE.NX - news) (UKX) over the week -- as opposed to 24% on Tuesday -- Standard increasingly looks like a successful crisis play for those investors bold enough to have bought in at the bottom on Tuesday.

Standard Chartered's Peter Sands takes the fight to Wall Street

From the above link :-

Bank sources have told The Sunday Telegraph that after several settlements with other banks in relation to similar issues – most notably Lloyds' $350m settlement in 2009 over breaching US sanctions on Iran – Standard Chartered began a detailed review of all U-turn payments from 2001-2007.

The analysis was completed at the end of 2011, and Standard Chartered's counsel have been involved in discussing next steps – a global settlement – with five regulators, one of which was the DFS.

The process has also involved interviews of senior and other executives, believed to include Sands himself and Lord [Mervyn] Davies, who was chief executive at the time the transactions took place.

The analysis covered 150m separate transactions, and under the bank's analysis, it found "a little under 300", totalling $14m in value, which were invalid U-turn payments.

"That's clearly wrong, we're sorry those mistakes occurred," Sands admitted last week. But what he refutes is that, as Lawsky alleges, there was a systematic attempt to circumvent sanctions. "The immediate question you ask is how do you get to $250bn?" Sands continued. "It's a figure which we don't completely recognise, but it is of the order of the total amount of U-turn payment transactions processed by Standard Chartered New York in the period 2001 to 2007.

"To conclude they were all invalid or in breach is to conclude everything we did in the U-turn mechanism was wrong."