What the Fake-Account Scandal Could Cost Wells Fargo

The transcript discusses the ongoing issues and potential penalties faced by Wells Fargo due to the creation of unauthorized accounts. It highlights the uncertainty in the final cost of these penalties, with current settlements and remediation efforts in place. The discussion also covers the historical context of the issue, dating back to 2002, and the challenges in reviewing older data due to quality concerns. The merger with Wachovia in 2009 is noted as a significant point in the timeline, influencing the scope of the review.

What is the main reason for the uncertainty in the total penalties Wells Fargo might face?

• The bank has already settled all claims.

• The bank has refused to pay any fines.

• There is no final number due to ongoing settlements and remediation.

• The penalties are fixed at $180 million.

What year did the investigation extend back to during the review process?

• 2009

• 2015

• 2012

• 2002

When were the initial concerns about account practices first identified?

• 2002

• 2009

• 2005

• 2010

Why did Wells Fargo choose not to extend the review back to 2002?

• The data quality declines over time.

• They had already reviewed that period.

• The penalties were already paid for that period.

• The bank was not operational in 2002.

What significant event in 2009 influenced the review's starting point?

• The introduction of new banking regulations.

• A change in leadership.

• The merger with Wachovia.

• The financial crisis.