Ryan & Maniskas, LLP (www.rmclasslaw.com/cases/bcs)
announces it has filed a class action lawsuit in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all
persons who purchased the sponsored American Depository Receipts
(“ADRs”) of Barclays PLC (“Barclays” or the “Company”) (NYSE:BCS)
between July 10, 2007 and June 27, 2012, inclusive (the “Class Period”).
For more information regarding this class action suit, please contact
Ryan & Maniskas, LLP (Richard A. Maniskas, Esquire) toll-free at (877)
316-3218 or by email at email@example.com
or visit: www.rmclasslaw.com/cases/bcs.
During the Class Period, Barclays issued materially false and misleading
statements and omitted to state material facts that rendered their
affirmative statements misleading as they related to the Company’s
financial performance, financial condition and internal operational
controls. As a result of these materially false and misleading
statements, the price of the Company’s securities was artificially
inflated during the Class Period. As the truth of the Company’s
materially false and misleading statements entered the market, the
Company’s stock plummeted.
The London Inter-Bank Offered Rate (“Libor”) is a tool to measure risk
within the banking system as a whole and it may be more surgically
applied to test a particular bank’s creditworthiness. When a bank lends
to a customer (in this case another bank), it fixes the interest rate
and other terms premised on an assessment of the borrower’s ability to
repay the loan. The greater the risk, the higher the rate the bank will
charge to assume the risk. The opposite is true: the lower the credit
risk, the lower the rate the bank will charge to take on the risk.
The Complaint alleges that Defendants did not act fairly, transparently,
and try in good faith to fix Libor rates at levels that accurately
reflected the inherent and actual risk in the market place. Defendants,
instead, admittedly participated in an illegal scheme to manipulate the
Libor interest rates for the benefit of Barclays’ traders and to make
Barclays appear financially healthier than it was during the Class
The Complaint further alleges that apart from participating in an
illegal scheme to manipulate Libor rates in a way that would allow
Defendants and other bankers to exploit borrowers and make even more
money, the Defendants made material misstatements to the Company’s
shareholders about the Company’s purported compliance with their
principles and operational risk management processes and repeatedly told
shareholders that Barclays was a model corporate citizen even though at
all relevant times it was flouting the law.
On June 27, 2012, Barclays was found by US and UK regulators to have
manipulated or “fixed” its Libor rate submissions. Barclays’ top
management essentially admitted to the Bank’s malfeasance. In an open
letter to the chairman of the Treasury Select Committee, Defendant Bob
Diamond, chief executive of Barclays, explained that the authorities had
highlighted two issues: First, a number of individual traders had
attempted to influence the bank’s interest rate submissions in order to
boost their own trading desk’s profits - operating purely for their own
benefit; Diamond said this conduct was wholly inappropriate. Second,
during the recent credit crisis, Barclays reduced its Libor submissions
to protect the reputation of the bank from negative speculation, which
arose as a result of Barclays’ higher rate submissions in comparison to
other banks – i.e. the bank wanted to make itself look financially
stronger relative to other banks in order to keep its borrowing costs
down and market reputation up.
These revelations caused the Company’s ADRs initially to fall by 12%,
from $12.33 per share to $10.84 per share on over 22 million shares
traded and then an additional 5% on over 14 million shares traded.
If you are a member of the class, you may, no later than September 10,
2012, request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff of the class.
A lead plaintiff is a representative party that acts on behalf of other
class members in directing the litigation. In order to be appointed lead
plaintiff, the Court must determine that the class member's claim is
typical of the claims of other class members, and that the class member
will adequately represent the class. Under certain circumstances, one or
more class members may together serve as "lead plaintiff." Your ability
to share in any recovery is not, however, affected by the decision
whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. You may retain Ryan &
Maniskas, LLP or other counsel of your choice, to serve as your counsel
in this action.
For more information about the case or to participate online, please
or contact Richard A. Maniskas, Esquire toll-free at (877) 316-3218, or
by e-mail at firstname.lastname@example.org.
For more information about class action cases in general or to learn
more about Ryan & Maniskas, LLP, please visit our website: www.rmclasslaw.com.
Ryan & Maniskas, LLP is a national shareholder litigation firm. Ryan &
Maniskas, LLP is devoted to protecting the interests of individual and
institutional investors in shareholder actions in state and federal