Citing e-mail messages in which Mr. Mozilo referred to Countrywide loan products as “toxic” and  “poison,” S.E.C. officials said that he had misled investors about growing risks in the company’s lending practices from 2005 through 2007. During this time he also generated $140 million in profits by selling stock in the company, the S.E.C. said.  “This is the tale of two companies,” said Robert Khuzami, enforcement director at the S.E.C. “Countrywide portrayed itself as underwriting mainly prime-quality mortgages, using high underwriting standards. But concealed from shareholders was the true Countrywide, an increasingly reckless lender assuming greater and greater risk.” At a news conference announcing its filing of the suit, the most prominent against an executive involved in the mortgage crisis, Mr. Khuzami said the S.E.C. had made it a priority “to pursue cases at the root of the financial crisis.” As the nation’s largest mortgage lender, Countrywide helped fuel the housing boom by offering loans to high-risk borrowers. See Related Feature: Rise and Fall of Predatory Lending and Housing

Enlarge This Image

Jay Mallin/Bloomberg News

Angelo R. Mozilo, then the chief executive officer of Countrywide Financial Corporation, testifying on Capitol Hill in March 2008.

Citing e-mail messages in which Mr. Mozilo referred to Countrywide loan products as “toxic” and “poison,” S.E.C. officials said that he had misled investors about growing risks in the company’s lending practices from 2005 through 2007. During this time he also generated $140 million in profits by selling stock in the company, the S.E.C. said.

“This is the tale of two companies,” said Robert Khuzami, enforcement director at the S.E.C. “Countrywide portrayed itself as underwriting mainly prime-quality mortgages, using high underwriting standards. But concealed from shareholders was the true Countrywide, an increasingly reckless lender assuming greater and greater risk.”

At a news conference announcing its filing of the suit, the most prominent against an executive involved in the mortgage crisis, Mr. Khuzami said the S.E.C. had made it a priority “to pursue cases at the root of the financial crisis.” As the nation’s largest mortgage lender, Countrywide helped fuel the housing boom by offering loans to high-risk borrowers.

Carl W. Tobias, a law professor at University of Richmond, said he expected to see more such cases brought by the S.E.C. “The S.E.C. would like to have back the reputation that many feel it has lost as an aggressive enforcer,” Mr. Tobias said. “I wouldn’t be surprised to see other cases.”

The suit also said that David E. Sambol, former president of Countrywide, and Eric P. Sieracki, its former chief financial officer, hid from investors the high-risk nature of the loans the company was making. Countrywide needed to maintain its position as the leading lender in a white-hot mortgage market, the S.E.C. said, and underwrote increasingly dangerous loans, all the while assuring investors that its loans were top quality.

Lawyers for the three men said they would defend themselves vigorously against the suit. “The lawsuit filed today by the S.E.C. does not reflect a balanced or fair consideration of the facts or the law,” said David Siegel, a lawyer at Irell & Manella who represents Mr. Mozilo. “Mr. Mozilo acted properly and lawfully at all times as the C.E.O. of Countrywide.”

A lawyer for Mr. Sambol said that the S.E.C.’s case was baseless and that it disregarded public statements Mr. Sambol made detailing the liberal lending practices at Countrywide.

Mr. Sieracki’s lawyer also said that the regulator’s case had no merit. “Mr. Sieracki did not violate any securities laws and committed no fraud on anyone,” said Nick Morgan, a lawyer at DLA Piper in Los Angeles. He added that his client did not sell shares in Countrywide and even purchased them during the period cited by the S.E.C.

Mr. Mozilo’s up-by-the-bootstraps background and entrepreneurial success earned him accolades and outsize pay during the mortgage industry’s heyday. But he became a lightning rod for criticism in 2007 when subprime loans started to go bad and foreclosures escalated.

The S.E.C. brought its case against the former Countrywide officials on its own; Justice Department officials did not file criminal charges simultaneously with the commission, as is often the case. But a securities law expert said this did not guarantee that Mr. Mozilo and his former colleagues were clear of being charged by criminal authorities.

“It could mean that the Justice Department does not yet have a case proving the highest standard, beyond a reasonable doubt,” said Lewis D. Lowenfels, at Tolins & Lowenfels in New York. “They may want to see what facts come out in the discovery in the S.E.C. case and there might be other people they are interested in. Moreover, the S.E.C. is under so much pressure from Congress, they may want to move quickly and not wait for anybody.”

Among the e-mail messages written by Mr. Mozilo and cited by the S.E.C. was one from April 13, 2006. In it, Mr. Mozilo told Mr. Sambol and Mr. Sieracki that loans had been written by the company without regard for its processes and guidelines. He went on to describe as “poison” subprime second mortgages, a product from Countrywide that required no down payment from a borrower.