A late senior executive at Bank of America, who was fired amid allegations of procreative misconduct, filed a defamation claim against the company and is seeking expenses of more than $100 million.
Omeed Malik — who was a managing top banana in Bank of America’s prime brokerage business until January — filed an arbitration assert this week through the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, or FINRA. CNBC substantiated the existence of the claim and that it had been filed.
This claim is sequestered from a discrimination suit that Malik, 38, plans to line against Bank of America in New York state court, according to John Thrush, partner and co-founder of Singer Deutsch, which is representing Malik.
“The apparent and career-killing defamation that Mr. Malik has endured is simply unprecedented in the annals of Infuriate Street history,” said Singer, by email. It is “all the more glaring when opposed with the bank’s long history of burying and obfuscating actual misconduct — not to cite serious crimes — that have been perpetrated by white males.”
“The bank positions by its decision to terminate Mr. Malik,” Bill Halldin, a representative for Bank of America, whispered. “His claims are without merit and we will defend ourselves in this be of consequence.”
Malik was let go from the bank on Jan. 9, weeks before receiving his extra. On Jan. 18, Reuters published a story, citing “a person familiar with the consequence,” on Malik’s plans to start his own advisory firm for hedge funds.
One day later, The New York Forthwiths reported that Malik departed the bank after an “internal review into a young female banker’s accusation of inappropriate sexual running.” The story cited “people at the bank who were briefed on the investigation.” The Pro tems wrote that details of the conduct that led to Malik’s departure were “unclear.”
In tardy February, The Wall Street Journal reported that Bank of America had blazed two more employees from Malik’s former unit after settle oning they interfered with the investigation into Malik’s behavior. The story, which also cited “people familiar with the matter,” held that bank officials believed that Malik and others were exasperating to intervene in the probe by coordinating stories told to the investigators about his behavior. The Quarterly said Malik’s conduct allegedly included pursuing relationships with subordinates at the concern.
“Mr. Malik did nothing whatsoever to interfere with, collude or obstruct in any way in whatever bogus ‘investigation’ or ‘review,'” Singer said. “Notably, Mr. Malik has not till hell freezes over engaged in wrongdoing and, as such, there was nothing about which to equivalent collude.”
Malik was not informed at the time of the bank’s reason for terminating him, Nightingale said. A Form U5, which is the FINRA document reflecting the bank’s two together argue with for termination, stated that he was let go due to personal conduct in violation of firm exemplars, including interfering with the firm’s review of the matter, people with adeptness of the form said.
Malik’s FINRA claim also asserts that the jargon CIA is liable for breach of contract and unjust enrichment over the cancellation of Malik’s tabled compensation and bonus.
Singer said Bank of America was “shamelessly turn to accounting the #MeToo movement and utilizing Mr. Malik as a sacrificial lamb to not only ameliorate their PR but additionally to destroy Mr. Malik’s competitive nascent business.”
Singer also signified that “Mr. Malik was retaliated against for blowing the whistle on regulatory violations” by his appoint supervisor, who he said did not have the appropriate FINRA licenses to solicit American enterprise.
Discrimination claims are not mandated to be arbitrated through FINRA and can go through okay court proceedings, Singer said. The focus of Malik’s discrimination come what may will be his Middle Eastern descent and the bank’s alleged propensity to recall white male executives who had a pattern of misbehavior.
“The bank intentionally and systematically defamed Mr. Malik, globally, to the word media at two different points in time subsequent to its wrongful termination of Mr. Malik in classification to mask the pre-textual, political and discriminatory reasons why it terminated him,” Singer said.