What evidence in the case indicates Sherry Hunt and Richard Bowen’s values? Do you think their values affected their decision to blow the whistle?
There are a number of evidences in the case, which show the moral values of Richard Bowen and Sherry Hunt. Sherry Hunt used to work hard and always prided herself on following the rules and built a successful and long career in the mortgage business. Hunt was the only one, whodid not approve of the credit policies at Citigroup. For example, when the document called HUD-1 was created had to be signed and approved by FHA for each loan, which had been approved.
The guidelines of the government stated that every loan, which misses HUD-1, should be rejected. However, the quality rebuttal committee overruled Hunt by saying that HUD-1 did not determine that whether a loan was bad and they approved the file for FHA insurance. As a result of this she felt ignored and disrespected and it shows that she had set values in her life which stopped her from making decisions which are not moral and ethical(Lanyon, 2016). She also did not like the way in which the compensation system worked and bonuses were paid on the number of the loans approved or processed. She always wanted to address the root problems at Citigroup. She also began to study the Dodd Frank Act on how she might report the violations she was witnessing.
On the other hand, Richard Bowen was also a person with set values in life. He first became the business chief underwriter for the correspondent channels of REF. Bowen was told that the credit policy of the bank stated that there should be minimum 95% accepted decisions. However, when he came to know that more than half of the 95% agreed rate comprised of contingent agreed files and all of these files were missing the required documentation. He terminated Connie in 2006 and took immediate actions to correct all the defects.
Bowen found Hunt’s personality sharp and he liked her values therefore, he promoted her. Bowen was also frustrated with refusals to authorize overtime and hiring freezes. His values always encouraged him to correct what was wrong and dangerous for Citigroup. He was also strong enough to warn Robert Rubin, the new chairman of Citigroup, about the problems that were prevailing at the bank. All these moral and ethical values of Bowen and Hunt had a strong impact on their decisions to whistle blow and uncover the problems at Citigroup.
If you were Hunt at the end of the case, what course of action would you pursue? What person or what entity would you tell, how (e.g., by email, in person) and why? By mindful of what motivates different stakeholders and therefore, the resistance with which they may respond.
If I was Hunt’s shoes,I would have filed a whistle blower lawsuit against Citigroup and the Citigroup parent,rather than caving in to pressure. I would claim that the mortgage lender deliberately ignored fraud and errors in the government insured mortgage programs. I would convince the US department of Justice to join in the suit and send them the details of all the errors and frauds through an email……………..
This is just a sample partical work. Please place the order on the website to get your own originally done case solution.