Each depositor insured to at least $250,000 per insured bank


Home > Regulation & Examinations > Bank Examinations > FDIC Enforcement Decisions and Orders





FDIC Enforcement Decisions and Orders



ED&O Home | Search Form | Text Search | ED&O Help


{{09-30-05 p.12428.1}}

[12,428] In the Matter of J. Donald Weand, Jr., Connecticut Bank of Commerce, Stamford, Connecticut, Docket No. 02-161c&b (7-8-05).

A cease and desist order was issued, based on findings by the FDIC that it had reason to believe that respondent was engaged in unsafe and unsound practices.
{{09-30-05 p.12429.1}}

In the Matter of
J. DONALD WEAND, JR.,
individually and as a former institution-affiliated party of
CONNECTICUT BANK OF COMMERCE
STAMFORD, CONNECTICUT
(Insured State Nonmember Bank—In Receivership)

ORDER FOR RESTITUTION

FDIC-02-161c&b

J. Donald Weand, Jr. ("Respondent") has received a NOTICE OF CHARGES AND OF HEARING ("NOTICE") issued by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ("FDIC") detailing the unsafe or unsound practices, violations of law and regulations, and violation of a condition imposed in writing by the FDIC in connection with that granting of an application by Connecticut Bank of Commerce, Stamford, Connecticut ("Bank"), for which an ORDER FOR RESTITUTION ("ORDER") may be issued, and has been advised of his right to a hearing on those charges under section 8(b) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act ("Act"), 12 U.S.C. §1818(b), and the FDIC Rules of Practice and Procedure, 12 C.F.R. Part 308. Having waived his right to a hearing, Respondent entered into a STIPULATION AND CONSENT TO THE ISSUANCE OF AN ORDER FOR RESTITUTION ("CONSENT AGREEMENT") with a representative of the Legal Division of the FDIC, whereby solely for the purpose of this proceeding and without admitting or denying any unsafe or unsound practices or violations, Respondent consented to the issuance of an ORDER by the FDIC.

The FDIC considered the matter and determined it had reason to believe that:

    (a) Respondent, as an institution-affiliated party of the Bank, has engaged in unsafe or unsound practices, violated laws and regulations, and violated a condition imposed in writing by the FDIC in connection with the granting of an application by the Bank.

    (b) Such violations and practices involved a reckless disregard for the law and applicable regulations; and

    (c) Respondent should be required to make restitution to the FDIC as receiver for the Bank to correct or remedy the condition resulting from such violations and practices.

The FDIC, therefore, accepts the CONSENT AGREEMENT and issues the following:

ORDER FOR RESTITUTION

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, pursuant to sections 8(b)(1) and 8(b)(6) of the Act, 12 U.S.C. §§ 1818(b)(1) and 1818(b)(6), that Respondent shall pay restitution in the amount of $76,500 to the FDIC as receiver of the Bank in the time and manner set forth in the CONSENT AGREEMENT.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent is prohibited from seeking or accepting indemnification from the Bank or from any other insured depository institution for the restitution paid under the terms of this ORDER or for any other expenses, including attorney fees and disbursements, incurred by Respondent in connection with this matter.

This ORDER shall be effective immediately upon its issuance by the FDIC. The provisions of this ORDER shall remain effective and enforceable except to the extent that, and until such time as, any provision of this ORDER shall have been modified, terminated, suspended, or set aside by the FDIC.

Pursuant to delegated authority.

Dated this 8th day of July, 2005.



ED&O Home | Search Form | Text Search | ED&O Help






Last Updated 11/10/2005 legal@fdic.gov