Chase is among as many as 10 large banks being investigated for misleading investors the sale of collateralize debt obligations (CDO’s) where.
If you don’t understand the previous sentence, WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN THE LAST TWO YEARS?
CDO’s are group of mortgages that were chopped up into different classes so that they could garner higher ratings from Moody’s, Fitch, and Standard and Poors to be sold to investors as high-grade investments.
According to this post, while a woman was undergoing cancer treatment, her son, who had power of attorney on her Chase account, owed Chase $6,000 on a car loan in which the card had been repossessed. So Chase went and took the money out of the mothers account, even though the son only had power of attorney.
I think Chase is taking this debt collection thing a bit too far.
This chase-sucks.com forum post is interesting. What started out as Chase deducting charges for an old debt they claim to have found, ended with Chase posting a $9,999,999.00 (yea, almost $10 million) charge so that the customers account would be brought SO negative they could never access any of their funds. Then the filed a restraining order to prevent the customer from entering the local branch. Really bizarre stuff.
As reported here, we can only wonder why in the world would a Chase ATM show a positive balance when an account is overdrawn, unless you consider that Chase would happily give you money at an ATM so they can charge you an overdraft fee.
Customer has first and second with Chase, negotiates a short sale, Chase agrees to zero out remaining balance and sends the customer a letter. But then:
My property’s escrow closed in November 2009 – and instead of carrying out their promise – Chase sent the remainder of my balance with them to collections ($264,000) – and I was contacted by an aggressive debt collector.
All attempts to rectify the situation seem to fall on deaf ears.
This situation is not surprising. Chase’s left hand often doesn’t know what the right hand is doing.
According to this very enlightening post on the Complaints Board, one way Chase is trying to circumvent the requirement in the Credit Card Reform Act of 2009 that automatic overdraft protection only be applied to accounts that specifically opt-in is to create a card that automatically enters the pin numbers instead of the customer doing it themselves, which technically circumvents the requirement that overdraft protection. They are enticing customers to use this new card by changing their rewards program so that it only applies to this new card type.
Apparently their letters to account holders trying to scare them into signing up for overdraft protection aren’t working well enough.
Chase was recently awarded a WonderMark award (as in “I wonder what they were thinking”) for the lack of clarity in their recent letter to account holders announcing changes to their accounts. For example:
If we do not receive any Minimum Payment within 60 days of the date and time due, the Penalty APR will be applicable to all otustanding balances and future transactions on your Account. However, if we receive six consecutive Minimum Payments by the date and time due beginning with the first payment due after the effective date of the increase, we will stop applying the Penatly APR to transactions that occured prior to or within 14 days after we provide you notice of the APR increase. For balances that we stop applying the Penatly APR to, we will apply APRs that would have applied at that date if the Penalty APR had never been applicable.
Clearly they are still playing games trying to deceive customers.
I’ve often heard people from New York City claim that it is the center of the universe, and perhaps that is the thinking behind a Chase customer service rep from NYC calling someone at 6am in another time one, or perhaps, like many other things with them, they just can’t figure time zones out.
Were it that a 6am call was the only infraction, but it is not so. Chase apparently closed all the customers checking accounts when he wouldn’t switch to a higher fee version.
Bad bad Chase, Legal & regulatory | admin May 17, 2010 | 
Comments (0) 
