JPMorgan sued by currency trader
The details matter. Any good editor or proofreader will tell you that.
Bloomberg reports on the case of Kai Herbert, a Switzerland-based currency trader who has sued JPMorgan for about $920,000. His original contract apparently said his annual pay would be 24 million rand ($3.1 million).
"JPMorgan blamed the mistake on a typographical error and said the figure should have been 2.4 million rand."
Herbert was no doubt thrilled to get the job. He resigned from UBS in June 2010 after he got the offer from JPMorgan. He "didn't report for work after discovering the discrepancy and JPMorgan rescinded the employment offer in December 2010."
The trader must be seriously delusional to think that the bank really intended to pay him that much. Common sense would inform most people that the 24 million figure was a mistake. But how will a judge see all this? Is a contract a contract? Should JPMorgan been held liable for their mistake by being forced to honor the terms?
This recalls the case of Goldman Sachs' typo-marred warrant contract, which detailed a crucial formula, but mistakenly used multiply sign instead of a divide sign, with costly implications. Upon the noticing the typo, the bank tried to buy contracts back, but the buyers held fast, insisting the letter of the contract be honored. For Goldman Sachs, the cost of the typo was tens of millions of dollars.
- here's the Bloomberg article
Typo costs Goldman Sachs $45 million