My bank requires copious and thorough documentation upon the opening of a business bank account and I am certain they check my state’s public entity database to confirm basic information about a legal entity before they will open an account.
Chase on the other hand, appears to skip some crucial steps in the confirmation process as is claimed in this lawsuit.
“Chase Bank assisted Salzman and Weiss in opening these bank accounts at Chase Bank, account numbers *4054 and *5990, and, upon information and belief, without conducting any due diligence whatsoever – but, regardless, manifestly inadequate due diligence – therefore egregiously violating and recklessly disregarding the ‘know your customer rule.’ A simple review of the Partnership Agreement for Freed & Weiss LLC, and/or the filings that were made by Freed & Weiss LLC with the Illinois Secretary of State, that were publicly available online at that time, would have shown the falsity of the representations made by Saltzman and Weiss.”
How safe does this story make you feel about the contents of your Chase safe-deposit box?
A cache of counterfeit currency was discovered at a Chase bank branch when an elderly customer opened the wrong safety deposit box, the Daily News has learned.
The bizarre incident began innocently enough last Thursday when the longtime customer requested access to his box at the Huntington, L.I., bank branch, according to papers filed in Brooklyn Federal Court.
Accompanied by an assistant manager, the customer was escorted to the bank vault, where he attempted to open Box No. 142 with his key, but it didn’t fit, say court papers.
The assistant manager noticed the key was marked for Box No. 304 and opened that box instead. It contained two large packages of what appeared to be funny money.
“(The customer) stated he was confused . . . and claimed he did not know how that much money got into his safety deposit box,” according to court papers.
The puzzled customer — described as an “elderly gentleman” — returned the next day with two keys to two boxes — No. 142 and No. 304 — and was accompanied this time by a pair of U.S. Secret Service agents whom JPMorgan Chase had contacted.
First the customer used the key marked No. 142 and found legal documents bearing his name and several thousand dollars in genuine currency. Box No. 304 contained $112,000 in fake Federal Reserve Notes.
The branch manager solved the mystery when he noticed the customer’s key for the box containing the stash of counterfeit money was enclosed in an envelope marked “Bank of New York.”
The Chase branch had previously been a Bank of New York, and the elderly customer apparently had closed out his safety deposit box No. 304 without returning the key.
JPMorgan Chase apparently did not change the boxes’ locks when it took over the branch and gave box No. 304 to a new customer — who has some explaining to do to the Secret Service .
The current safety deposit box holder, a Huntington resident, has not yet been charged.
A piece of tape wrapped around the counterfeit notes was marked with the current box holder’s initials, authorities said.
The Chase occupation in Seattle in November 2011 resulted in 5 arrests. You can follow the plight of the 5 arrestees on their blog.
JPMorgan Chase Accused Of Fabricating Paperwork, Imposing Extra Costs On Borrowers
In a case that suggests the financial crisis far from marked the end of big bank misconduct, JPMorgan Chase is facing a potential class action lawsuit over claims that it manipulated thousands of mortgage documents in order to gain a financial advantage in bankruptcy cases.
The lawsuit, led by plaintiff Ernest Michael Bakenie, has yet to be recognized as an official class action filing in the California district court where it’s taking place, according to the blog Naked Capitalism. Still, the accusation is a major one: It alleges JPMorgan Chase increased profits by methodically fabricating paperwork in part to impose extra costs on borrowers over the course of thousands of bankruptcy cases dating back to 2009.
The charges are particularly serious given the national outcry over mortgage fraud and robo-signing in recent years, and a general atmosphere of increased scrutiny on mortgage activity since the housing crisis, which critics allege was caused in part by unethical mortgage practices on the part of big banks and lenders.
News of the case arrives amid what is already shaping up to be another season of setbacks for JPMorgan, with the bank’s profits falling by nearly a quarter in the past three months. In addition, the bank has halted its efforts to collect on consumer debts in multiple cities across the country.
The suit also comes just a few months after JPMorgan agreed to pay $153 million to settle another fraud case with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, this one based on accusations that JPMorgan was negligent in providing important details to investors about a mortgage transaction — claims that JPMorgan neither admitted nor denied.
It’s not yet clear whether something similar will happen with the California case, although the SEC settlement, reached in June 2011, wasn’t the first nor the last time that JPMorgan agreed to pay out a major sum in order to bring legal charges to a speedy conclusion.
JPMorgan isn’t the first big bank to be hit with a suit alleging mortgage misconduct in recent months. Firms including Bank of America, Allied Home Mortgage, Wells Fargo, Citigroup and Morgan Stanley are either fielding legal accusations related to mortgage misconduct or in the process of reaching major settlements on the topic.
Read more …
It is a known fact that Chase runs daily account holder debits and credits to maximize fee revenue. Running larger checks first results in many more smaller bounces if an account becomes overdrawn.
Have they extended this practice to accepting post-dated checks before they are supposed to, or do they just now know how to read?
I have used bill pay for two years to pay the rent to a new yorker. The check from my branch in virginia was dated Jan 5.2012. It was deposited into his account on Jan.3,2012. So then it was marked insufficient funds and returned to my bank. Why are checks dated. They charged him funds for a returned check. He in turn is trying to charge me funds for giving him an electronic fund transfer to get the money back to him quickly. Late fees of $100, 12.50 insufficient funds and $15.00 wire transfer when I already paid my bank $20 to transfer him the money. Is this how chase makes its money. I see why he banks there. They are out to get whatever they can.
Ineptitude | admin February 28, 2012 | 
Comments (0) 
