Settlement without admitting wrong-doing

If big banks get to settle with the SEC without admitting or denying any wrongdoing, what good does a settlement do in the end?

By Eleanor Bloxham, CEO of The Value Alliance and Corporate Governance Alliance

FORTUNE -- To admit or deny -- that is the question -- or one of them anyway, that the SEC will have to address when they respond to Judge Jed S. Rakoff's review of the regulator's recent settlement with Citigroup. Although Citi has agreed to pay $285 million and make minor reforms, the bank is neither admitting nor denying that they failed to properly disclose the risks of mortgage-related investments to clients in the run up to the housing crisis.

http://management.fortune.cnn.com/2011/11/07/big-bank-sec-settlements-toothless-face-savers/?section=money_topstories&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fmoney_topstories+%28Top+Stories%29

My comment: At least this is one step better than Singapore, where wrong doings go unchallenged - due to lack of regulatory action.