Last checked at 
By Jonathan Stempel
NEW YORK, Nov 25 (Reuters) - Barclays Plc hasagreed to pay $14 million to settle litigation by holders of itsAmerican depositary shares that it conspired with rivals to rigthe Libor benchmark interest rate, causing its share price to beinflated.
The preliminary accord filed in Manhattan federal court onTuesday evening resolves claims that Barclays "turned a blindeye" before and after the financial crisis when its tradersmanipulated Libor to boost profits, and that senior managementcondoned the deception to enhance Barclays' reputation in themarketplace.
Barclays denied wrongdoing in agreeing to settle withplaintiffs led by the Carpenters Pension Trust Fund of St. Louisand the St. Clair Shores Police & Fire Retirement System inMichigan. The class period runs from July 2007 to June 2012, andthe settlement requires court approval.
A bank spokesman, Mark Lane, declined to comment.
Libor, or the London Interbank Offered Rate, is used to setrates on hundreds of trillions of dollars of transactions,including for credit cards, student loans and mortgages. Banksuse it determine the cost of borrowing from one another.
Tuesday's settlement was disclosed 11 days after Barclaysagreed to pay $120 million to resolve similar manipulationclaims by "over-the-counter" investors that transacted directlywith banks comprising a panel to determine Libor.
Barclays also reached $453 million of settlements over Liborin June 2012 with U.S. and British regulators, and agreed lastmonth to pay $94 million to end litigation claiming it conspiredto rig Euribor, which is Libor's euro-denominated equivalent.
The bank's ADS price fell 12 percent on the day after theregulatory settlements were announced. Regulators and investorshave accused many other major banks of conspiring to rig Libor.
Law firms for the shareholders, led by Robbins Geller Rudman& Dowd, plan to seek fees of up to 30 percent of the settlementfund, plus up to $1.2 million for costs, court papers show.
The case is Gusinsky et al v. Barclays Plc et al, U.S.District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 12-05329. (Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; Editing by CynthiaOsterman)
