BoA loses class action lawsuit over O/D fees

[Detwa]

I'm only posting this because it was a topic on the old board, and there was some disagreement over whether banks- specifically BoA- were really being fraudulent in their policies or whether or not people were just being irresponsible. Looks like there was a class action lawsuit over this, and this isn't the first, there was also one in 1999 and 2005 that BoA also lost. So its not in our imaginations!!!

I suggest everyone pay attention and try to get in on the next lawsuit if need be! I wish I had known abuot this myself because they got me for $350 and all I could do was be mad about it and close my account.

http://www.clossonsettlement.com/
http://www.wsbtv.com/video/19761656/index.html

What happened to the lady in the video is exactly what happened to me! They reordered my purchases so the one that overdrew the account would go first, thus bouncing every single purchase thereafter. So instead of owing $35, I would then owe $350!

[Bigb23]

God forbid we have Government oversight on business and banking practices. We're liable to drive them to a better business climate, like maybe Shanghai or Madagascar. How would you feel then, if all the executives and account managers had to relocate to offices in a dismal little city halfway around the world ?

Yeah - how would you feel ?

[DetroitDad]

I would betrayed, angry, and wonder why the U.S. people are okay with this kind of garbage so long as it isn't in their backyard, and encourage the people in Shanghai and Madagscar to get on board! Viva worldwide revolution! :D

[ccbatson]

You are far worse off in government's hands. For instance, if your teacher's union invested in hedge funds that had holdings in GM, or Chrysler, Our government strong armed you into taking the smallest return as a secured investor while they, and the Unions took the biggest pieces.

[Bigb23]

For instance, if your teacher's union invested in hedge funds that had holdings in GM, or Chrysler

Well let them offshore their holdings like everybody else has, to bring this great country a little farther down on it's knees. (If that's possible). That's the conservative way, to maximize profit, and then run off for a comfortable retirement.

[Sstashmoo]

Quote: "to bring this great country a little farther down on it's knees. (If that's possible)."

Things are not that bad right now. Even compared to the late 70's here in the D, the economy is still moving along for the most part. Nationally, It's headed in a bad direction and it could be turned around, but they won't for some reason, but we're a long way from a "it can't get any worse" condition.

On the same vein with the BOA draft shuffle scam. Costco is an class action suit right now cheating people out of months of their membership. I have been a member with them and renewed annually, I did notice every year, the expiration came sooner. What they were doing is if your membership expired in June, and you renewed in May, the following year your membership expired in May. What they do/did, when you came to the checkout, the cashier would say "You're getting close to renewal, want to pay for it now?" And the new 12 months would commence.

[ccbatson]

You want to encourage outsourcing investments BigB?

While that is the effect of corporate and individual taxation, the result you describe is not considered desirable by anyone.

[Bigb23]

You want to encourage outsourcing investments BigB?

When have I ever said that Cc ? You seem to cruise the threads to leave your wisdom every minute or so, without reading the posts. Just post 25 times a night instead of 50. Maybe ?

[1KielsonDrive]

For starters - NEVER trust a bank, unless it's very small (there are few of those left), and you know the branch locations and officers. A very rare find today. I knew the owners and the officers of the banks and S&L's I grew up using. I could walk in and be greeted by any number of people I knew personally and exchanged business with. I started an account with a credit union in my hometown when I got out of high school. I'm still a member and I still know a lot of people working there, including the director, who was my neighbor for many years. Their credit cards aren't the most competitive but they have NEVER screwed me. They have good loan policies and services. I use PAL (phone access line) for most transactions and occasionally access my account on the internet. They have the Credit Union CoOp Services which I use for deposits, withdrawals and ATM. I had a bank, NBD, for a past business. They were pretty good because I knew managers and employees at the branches I used. I only used them for checking and currency exchange. No credit or debit cards, loans or other services. Banks and insurance companies will SCREW you. In a minute! They are, for all practical purposes, one and the same.

[Bigb23]

It all started with the ATM. Hey - we can reduce our overhead, if you use this machine. Now, they charge $3.00 per transaction, for putting a teller out of work. Same with the utilities, they charge up to $7.00 for the convenience of getting their money directly over the phone, via EFT. Just get it over with, and charge us for breathing.

[Bobl]

It all started with the ATM. Hey - we can reduce our overhead, if you use this machine. Now, they charge $3.00 per transaction, for putting a teller out of work. Same with the utilities, they charge up to $7.00 for the convenience of getting their money directly over the phone, via EFT. Just get it over with, and charge us for breathing.

Yes, the banks did push the use of ATM cards by telling us that they would make operations "efficient". Now, after laying off tellers, they efficiently pocket our fees instead of paying employees.
I suspect we will have solar powered utilities as soon as someone finds a way to patent and meter sunlight.

[ccbatson]

As long as both parties agree to the terms, and there is no unfair advantage to either, then it is legitimate. If the consumer doesn't like it, they take their business elsewhere.

[mjs]

So loan sharking, gambling, prostitution, and selling your children should all be legalized? They're all agreed upon contracts.

Hundreds of Harvard MBA's and Yale Attorneys with Congressmen on the payroll versus a high school grad doesn't sound to you like one side has an unfair advantage? The biggest problem is that the contracts are intentionally confusing and the terms are ever shifting and changes are reported to the consumer in equally intentionally confusing ways. Most of the Credit Card Reform Act, which passed by the way, does nothing more than require banks to keep the terms as they were when they entered the contract: rate changes require a six month notice, universal default isn't allowed, and over the credit limit fees are denied unless specifically authorized by the card holder. You think most people negotiated with these assholes to pay $25 to $75 as self-punishment for forgetting what the account limit was changed to this month? You really believe people will agree to a $75 fee on a $60 purchase and then pay 39%?

I contracted with MBNA for a credit card 15 years ago and another 12 years ago. They weren't accepting enough high risk loans, leveraging high enough, making secret confidentiality agreements with scammers, or being big enough pricks, so Bank of America bought them out figuring they could do a better job squeezing us. They immediately raised my rates and lowered my credit to just above my balance and did it again when they lost their ass so I cancelled one of them. Because of that, my credit score went down and I can't move my second line of credit to a much more deserving bank. I didn't contract with B of A, I never contracted for their outrageous fees and rates, and I sure as hell nver suggested they skip due diligence so they could go on more golf outings. I had to pay the most incompetent they have large bonuses and in return, they set me up to pay more for future loans. We should have let the small town bankers scavenge those bastard's corpses.

[ccbatson]

Loan sharking? Must be defined for me to answer. Prostitution? Probably would be better if it were legalized whereby both parties are protected by law. Selling children? No way, innocent victims galore.

[edgewood]

You are far worse off in government's hands. For instance, if your teacher's union invested in hedge funds that had holdings in GM, or Chrysler, Our government strong armed you into taking the smallest return as a secured investor while they, and the Unions took the biggest pieces.

This makes no sense and seems to contradict itself.

[Lorax]

I closed three Bank of America accounts recently due to interminable lines here in Florida, where you couldn't even ask a question without signing a sheet and sitting with 30 other people in a line that could take hours.

No drive thru ATM

No drive thru window open on weekends

Fees for everything, even established account holders like me

Never built new branches when hurricanes blew out old ones, so the lines at existing ones were 100 people deep or more.

This coupled with the lousy customer service and loan shark rates, BofA gets what they deserve, and I don't mean a bailout!

[mjs]

Loan sharking? Must be defined for me to answer.

Ok, you got me. The big banks, uh . . . I mean Congress, has decided there is no such thing as a usary rate or illegal method to collect a debt. Short of murder and battery that is. The bank extortion, uh . . . I mean bailout isn't the first time Congress voted on a bank written bill that virtually none of them read.

[mjs]

Lorax, see how much closing those accounts hurt you credit score. Yet, people like batson still claim its a fair system. How does closing accounts with dogshit terms really mean a person is a higher risk to not pay back their rational loans?

While were at it, has anyone see how Chase is screwing unemployment folks with their BS credit card fees? Withdrawal fees for more than two withdrawalas a month? Burn in hell Chase and Granholm cronies! God forbid Michigan give that business to a Michigan company that doesn't think a withdrawal is an undue burden on them. If they can't allow free withdrawals, replace them with someone that can make money by simply loaning at a rate higher than the zero percent they're paying on the accounts. Do I owe Chase my first child as well for the wonderful job they do screwing my neighbors?

[ccbatson]

Irresponsibility on the part of the borrower is the problem. Rotating payments, spending beyond available means, etc. If the individual wouldn't do those things, then all of this would be irrelevant. My practice has been to use credit cards as a convenience and pay in full each month (therefore not spending more than I can pay out month to month). No interest, no cancellations, no damage to credit ratings...etc. Blaming it on the lender is a misplacement of said blame and a dead end as far as resolving your problem.

[Lorax]

mjs, I hear you, really! I'm too afraid to look and see how closing those three accounts impacted my credit, but I reopened them at TD Bank, which is here in Florida, but not in Michigan- yet. It's also known as Toronto Dominion Bank in Canada, and has TD Ameritrade as their stock & commodities trading branch.

I have to say, it's a breath of fresh air being with this bank, which is first of all SOLVENT, secondly, friendly, fast, open 7 days, till 7 or 8 pm, and without bogus fees.

Your issues with Chase, as well as what is happening in the credit markets is disgusting.

We are all suffering due to the laws, written by the industries they are suppose to regulate. This is why we find ourselves in this position nationally.

FICO scores will hopefully become meaningless in the future, as there are too many companies able to detrimentally impact someone's score.

I have an ongoing feud with both Avis and Enterprise car rental agencies which say I owe them money, when in fact, I don't. I have been blackballed by all other rental companies except U-Haul, and cannot rent a vehicle EVER due to their mistakes.

They all share information to keep me from renting vehicles, just as insurance companies share info to deny people coverage.

It really is a corporate conspiracy to destroy the American consumer, and I have given up, and will not participate in the system, best to my ability.

And all of this is because a Chrysler dealership doing insurance repair work on my car, failed to report the Enterprise loaner as covered under my insurance, and a year later when I went to rent another vehicle from Enterprise I was told I owed them some ungodly amount of money. I protested, and they said, sorry, no rental for me EVER unless I want to pay up. The dealership went out of business, and my insurance company knows nothing of it, and could care less.

Am I going to sweat it, or fight it endlessly, no. I could care less. When I need to rent a car, I find an independent company that does not require my social security number to rent, or I don't rent. U-Haul's pickup trucks have come in handy!

The less we have to rely on loans from anyone the better.

Try even getting car isurance quotes these days without handing out your social security number.

If they ask for it, I decline. I tell them I'm not taking out a loan, just asking for a quote, and they respond by saying in effect, I am taking out a loan, since my creditworthiness is being sold to the highest bidder, for which the insurers are getting paid in six month chunks up front, on the gamble that I'll be a good credit risk.

No one asked me if I wanted my credit score gambled with, and now I refuse to play.

If all we are to the corporatists is a gambling risk, then screw them. Maybe cars, furniture, food, houses, should be cheap enough for all of us to pay cash, and get away from this socially backwards way of doing business in this country.

Let me keep my current wages, just bring the costs of all material goods down to earth.

[ccbatson]

It sounds like your issues are not systemic and can be resolved within the existing structure. A lawyer would be advisable.

[Lorax]

Problem is, my issue is only one example amongst millions. I personally know of dozens of people who have had similar experiences.

My lawyer wouldn't touch it, since it's a loser in court. Once you hand over a credit or debit card, you have in fact, given authorization for any company to charge, continue to charge, and even make mistakes while using it.

Read the fine print. I did, and it's really amazing what's in there.

The onus is on you to correct it, do a chargeback, whatever it takes to correct it, but in the end, the companies usually win.

You're lucky if they reverse charges, admitting mistakes, but by that point you're so frustrated at having spent hours in banks, on the phone, trying to correct the mistake.

It's no different than a large government bureaucracy. If you can't get easy access to a person to correct the problem, they just hope you'll give up. Most people do, since they just don't have the time to devote to straightening out the mess.

Citibank in particular should have been allowed to go under, since every person I know who has accounts there has had major problems including bogus charges appearing on their cards, account balances lower than they should be, arbitrarily raising interest rates whenever they feel like it, etc. etc.

This is a systemic problem in all major businesses which rely on personal credit scoring in order to do business. It has been happening for over 20 years, and is now really out of control.

Now that credit has dried up, which is a good thing in my view, people will have to learn to live within their means. This will drastically change the face of America as we know it, and discretionary spending will remove much retail from our landscape, which can only help right this sinking ship in the long term.

[ccbatson]

I don't believe there are millions of cases of miscommunication like yours.

On a separate note, and as a rare occurrence, I agree with you that failing companies should be allowed to fail. Out of character for you to take this position, isn't it?

[Lorax]

Well, there are. Just look to any blog which serves as a sounding board to any large bank, insurance company, etc.

A good one for you to look at is PayPal, the unregulated bank owned by Ebay, which has all the government sanctioned benefits of being a bank, without the regulations.

I had a major run-in with them as well, and don't allow access to my accounts as a result, and have denied access by any firm that wants to "make it easier" to pay my bills by having their hands on my money. A stamp and an envelope will still do the trick, and I'm even charged more for this "privileged" way of paying. Really fascist the way things work these days.

Oh, and I'm all for Citibank or any other large lender going under. Banks should be locally owned and operated. If they have more than a half dozen branches locally they they're too big as far as I'm concerned.

But unlike you, I don't favor losing companies that actually employ people like GM or Chrysler. Big banks don't represent enough jobs to worry about, big manufacturing does, and needs the unions and the protection of government when banks go bad.

[mjs]

I don't believe there are millions of cases of miscommunication like yours.

Neither do I. No bank this incompetent can stay in business long and its amazing how often they're lucky enough to have the mistake in their favor. Its definently intentional.

If I had stayed in law, I was going to try to specialize in Lemon Law, Michigan Consumer Protection, ID fraud, and creditor harassment, but I didn't want to have to explain to my clients why even winning feels like you're losing. If you feel a company supplied you with a crappy product but thinks you won't fight it, tell them you'll file under the MCPA where the minimum award is $250 plus attorney fees so jacking you on $5 will be worth your time and cost them a thousand or so in their and your attorneys. If a company operator says they have some idiotic right because its in the contract, tell them to point it out to you. If it says it may not apply in some states, it usually means it applies in none and its just in there to trick unsophisticated consumers. And if they claim you agreed to something, make them send you proof or tell them you'll make them prove it to a judge. Lots of times they don't have it because you never agreed to what they claim. Bluff and call their bluff on these things, but don't risk money on them without consulting an attorney.

[Lorax]

I would have had the same reaction until I began doing research on just how many customer service issues amongst large banks, and corporations in general go unresolved.

Most of these firms operate with impunity since they are so large and have so many customers, they can afford a certain amount of dissatisfaction. In fact, when it comes to banks, the passbook savings account holder represents the smallest depositor block to most of these institutions, as they are geared toward assisting large corporations or other businesses as their preferred customer.

The attitude you get with large banks is how worthless you are as a customer to them, since they cater to the needs of corporate clients whose deposits, loans and other "financial products" pump up the bottom line, whereas the individual depositors represent an annoyance that they tolerate due to government regulations mandating them to do so.

My three accounts amounted to little more than 300k when I withdrew them from BofA, and they made a half-hearted attempt to keep me, by promising to "do better" with their customer service. At that point, having already closed the accounts, I got up to leave, and left the bank with a wad of gum stuck to my backside.

I laughed about it...later, and realized I had made the right decision. If they can't clean the gum off the seats at BofA, then they need a cleaning service more than they need my business.

[Detroitej72]

Irresponsibility on the part of the borrower is the problem. Rotating payments, spending beyond available means, etc. If the individual wouldn't do those things, then all of this would be irrelevant. My practice has been to use credit cards as a convenience and pay in full each month (therefore not spending more than I can pay out month to month). No interest, no cancellations, no damage to credit ratings...etc. Blaming it on the lender is a misplacement of said blame and a dead end as far as resolving your problem.

So how do you defend Chase charging non customers a fee to cash their unemployment checks?

I closed my Comerica account awhile ago because they were going to charge me a monthly fee because I didn't have direct deposit. I explained to them that my employer refused to offer it, and they basically told me oh well. Comerica is hardly the only bank that charges these fees.

I had a smiler problem as the ones mentioned above. Huntington Bank cashed three checks I wrote in reverse order and I was 80 cents overdrawn. They then proceeded to rack up a $25 fee for being overdrawn, as well as $7 each day I was over my limit which I didn't know about until after four days, when I finally got a letter in the mail.

That left me paying $53 for an overdraft of 80 cents. I told the teller those were loan shark rates, and she gave me a number to call in the corporate office. I explained the situation, and she was adamant that I must pay or else it would go to collections. I got a bit steamed, and told her I was closing my account, and she finally agreed to remove the per day fee. I ended paying the $25 overdraft fee and called it a day.

How anyone can defend these actions used by banks is beyond me, if Guido or Ray Ray on the corner were caught using this system, they would be sent to prison. When the suits in their ivory towers do it, their seen by conservatives as being good capitalists.

[Lorax]

So how do you defend Chase charging non customers a fee to cash their unemployment checks?

I closed my Comerica account awhile ago because they were going to charge me a monthly fee because I didn't have direct deposit. I explained to them that my employer refused to offer it, and they basically told me oh well. Comerica is hardly the only bank that charges these fees.

I had a smiler problem as the ones mentioned above. Huntington Bank cashed three checks I wrote in reverse order and I was 80 cents overdrawn. They then proceeded to rack up a $25 fee for being overdrawn, as well as $7 each day I was over my limit which I didn't know about until after four days, when I finally got a letter in the mail.

That left me paying $53 for an overdraft of 80 cents. I told the teller those were loan shark rates, and she gave me a number to call in the corporate office. I explained the situation, and she was adamant that I must pay or else it would go to collections. I got a bit steamed, and told her I was closing my account, and she finally agreed to remove the per day fee. I ended paying the $25 overdraft fee and called it a day.

How anyone can defend these actions used by banks is beyond me, if Guido or Ray Ray on the corner were caught using this system, they would be sent to prison. When the suits in their ivory towers do it, their seen by conservatives as being good capitalists.

The woods are full of stories like these, and much worse.

People need to withdraw from the system, stop borrowing, stop using credit cards, and force the system to bend to the will of the people who use it, or face bankruptcy.

Unlike Batts who blames the individual in all cases, the corporations are like little governments, accountable to no one, and immune from prosecution. They can afford to be bad business people, since there is little consequence in doing so. No regulation worthy of the name, cavalier attitudes toward their customers, and a general disdain for anything but corporate deposits and lending, which is the focus of all banks, not the individual.

Obama should have let the banks go belly-up. This was a mistake. Nationalization of the banks with new boards, would send a clear message that this rape of the public trust won't happen again.

[Jimaz]

I told the teller those were loan shark ratesNo kidding. I saw this coming in 1980 when the usury laws were effectively revoked by the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depository_Institutions_Deregulation_and_Monetary_ Control_Act) which
Allowed institutions to charge any interest rates they chose.I recall at the time thinking it unconscionable that anyone would be so bold as to erase the very defining distinction between loan sharks and legitimate lenders without so much as an attempt to whitewash the change. It was blatantly obvious that corruption was afoot. Since then I've avoided debt like the plague. My current usurer-defined "credit score" might suck but I'm doing okay and have the peace of mind of not having done business with the corporate equivalent of Guido The Arm Twister.

I picture these bozos overconfidently pleading in court: "Your Honor, I'm not a banker. I'm a legitimate businessman."

[Gistok]

You want to encourage outsourcing investments BigB?

While that is the effect of corporate and individual taxation, the result you describe is not considered desirable by anyone.

Neither is the fact that millions of Information Technology jobs have been outsoruced to India et al... and yet the software that is produced there comes back to the USA is untaxed at every level...

But that's OK... the folks who are making the big bucks in this scenario (stockholders) don't mind making up the difference...:rolleyes:

[Jimaz]

And I hope everyone is watching how little interest Chase is now paying on savings and checking accounts. It's merely percents of a percent! Remember when it was a customary 5¼ percent? The same thing happened after the Savings&Loan fiasco. Today crooks evade prosecution by simply wearing suits. It's so much easier than robbing banks or <gasp> being honest.

[Lorax]

And I hope everyone is watching how little interest Chase is now paying on savings and checking accounts. It's merely percents of a percent! Remember when it was a customary 5¼ percent? The same thing happened after the Savings&Loan fiasco. Today crooks evade prosecution by simply wearing suits. It's so much easier than robbing banks or <gasp> being honest.


How true. Amen!

[ccbatson]

Gistok, do you see the self evident solution to this problem in your comment? Eliminate corporate taxes to diminish the incentive to outsource.

[ejames01]

If corporations don't pay taxes, who is going to pay for the infrastructure that they need to conduct business?


Gistok, do you see the self evident solution to this problem in your comment? Eliminate corporate taxes to diminish the incentive to outsource.

[Detroitej72]

If corporations don't pay taxes, who is going to pay for the infrastructure that they need to conduct business?

Us little people, the (shrinking) middle class who support the majority of the tax burdens.

[ccbatson]

First, shrink government down to its' proper size (and cost). Already, you have eliminated your individual tax concerns. Then establish a voluntary tax placed on the contractual utilization of said limited government services (law, defense) for those partaking in said services...the rest of what is yours, remains yours.