As featured in The Wall Street Journal, Money Magazine, and more!

Search: class-action

A group of fresh, unemployed lawyers have banded together to sue law schools. 73 alumni have filed at least fifteen class-action lawsuits, alleging the schools inflated employment figures and salary data to attract students and increase rankings. The real goal of the lawsuits seems to be to effect systemic change in the education industry and associations that accredit law schools, like the American Bar Association.

Schools are in the business of generating alumni, and to a great extent, use as many marketing tricks that any company uses in order to influence public opinion. It’s true that a 90% graduate employment rate looks better than a 75% rate on paper, and I’d be more inclined to choose a school with a higher employment rate, with all other factors being equal. But a 90% graduate employment rate doesn’t guarantee that I would receive the job I want after graduation, even if I were in the top 10% of the class.

Furthermore, I’ve come to the conclusion over the years that any statistic used for marketing purposes is subject to manipulation in an attempt to further the goals of marketing. Hard numbers give the impression of fact. From an early age, we’re trained to believe that one plus one equals two, in all circumstances, and numbers are truth. Statistics can be misleading in many ways, and are used more often to try to convince others of a point of view rather than quantify facts in reality.

Law school graduationThe group of lawyers probably can’t prove that the blame for their unemployment situation rests with the law schools. There are many factors that contribute to unemployment, including the overall economy, local job markets, and the effort, skills, and self-marketability of each alumnus. It doesn’t appear as if the former students are suing to have the schools compensate them for the lack of expected income from working, but they are suing to enlighten the public to the issue of misleading statistics throughout the educational industry.

Mutual funds must advertise that “past performance does not guarantee future results.” Even if a graduate employment rate were perfectly measured and accurately reflected exactly what a potential student understood the number to be, a good rate today is no indication that the rate will continue to be high by the time the school awards a degree or certification. If my index mutual fund returned 12% last year and lost 8% this year, I can’t sue the fund manager or the stock market for not providing the dividends I was hoping for. If fraud was involved, it might be a different situation. Perhaps misleading statistics like graduate employment rates are somewhat fraudulent, but I don’t see a parallel as schools do not typically promise that students will be employed at the level they’d like after graduation — and in the case of lawyers, after passing the bar exam.

There might be better ways of raising the issue of misleading statistics in the marketing endeavors in which institutes of education engage. Using the courts to make a point is only one tool that’s available to increase awareness of an issue. When you’re a hammer, though, everything looks like a nail.

Several years ago, while I was completing my Masters in Business Administration degree, I considered attending law school. Ultimately, I decided not to pursue a law degree and to focus my energy on my business instead. I think I made the right decision.

Photo: CubanRefugee
WNYC

{ 15 comments }

Bank of America is settling the overdraft fee class-action lawsuit that alleges the bank knowingly manipulated customers’ deposits and withdrawals in order to maximize the fees they would receive. Although the banks aren’t completely to blame for the proliferation of overdraft fees, policies were so much of a problem that the government and regulators needed to step in. As a result of new regulations brought on by the Credit CARD Act of 2009, banks now require customers to opt in for overdraft protection, which about 90 percent of customers do. Those who do not would suffer the embarrassment of a declined debit card or, perhaps worse, the expense of a bounced check.

While limited by new regulations, banks are constantly looking for ways to increase profits, and when they can’t earn money by lending out deposits as much as they have in the past, they turn to increasing fees. According to recent research, banks project earning $38.5 billion from overdraft fees alone in 2009, up from $24 billion in 2008. In 2010, profit from overdraft fees set a new record, but due to a variety of fiscal accounting years in the industry, I don’t have the number on hand yet. 90 percent of these fees come from only ten percent of customers, so it would be fair to say that it’s more common to see a serial offender than a one-time offender.

You may find that it has been more difficult for those one-time offenders to talk their way to a reversal of a fee through customer service. In times like these, when the banks want to protect their money as much as possible, it makes sense for consumers to avoid overdraft fees in the first place.

If you follow these suggestions, there should be no reason for you to be charged an overdraft fee unless you make a mistake.

Nickel and Dime1. Balance your checkbook. There is a disconnect between the checking account balance according to the bank and how much money you have to work with. If you have a traditional personal checking account, the bank doesn’t know when you write a check. It’s your responsibility to know how much money you have available at any one time. The best way to do this is to keep a register. Start with your opening balance, and subtract from it every time you write a check and add to it every time you make a deposit.

2. Don’t forget about your debit card. It gets difficult to balance your checkbook if you also use a debit card to get cash or to pay for purchases. When you sit down at your desk to write checks to pay your bills, all of your financial information is in front of you and you can easily enter the check amount in your register. But when you use a linked debit or ATM card, you need to hold onto your receipts so you can enter the transaction into your checkbook at a later time. If you remember.

3. Access your checking account online. Online banking is one of the greatest benefits of the internet. Rather than waiting for your monthly statement in the mail, you can log onto your bank’s website and check your recent transactions at any time. If nothing else, checking the bank’s records for your account more than once a month helps you become familiar with the transactions that flow through your account and how low you like to keep your balance.

4. Keep your balance well above the minimum. Some checking accounts charge a fee if your balance dips below a certain minimum, but almost all will charge a fee if that minimum is $0. Give yourself a buffer. If you withdraw an average of $2,000 each month for your mortgage and other bills, don’t let your bank account float below $2,000. This way, you always have a month’s worth of expenses ready to protect you from $0. Since checking accounts often offer lower interest rates than savings accounts, particularly high-yield savings accounts, you will be giving up a small amount of interest income, but the protection might be worthwhile.

5. Link your checking account to a savings account. Many banks offer the option of linking a checking account to a savings account. In the even that your checking account dips below $0 due to a cashed check for which you have insufficient funds or a charge on your debit card, the bank automatically transfers money from your savings account to cover the withdrawal. Some banks will charge a fee for this service, but the fee is often lower than an overdraft fee.

6. Link your checking account to a line of credit. If you have good credit, this is a legitimate option. Rather than withdrawing funds to cover your overdraft from a savings account, the bank taps your line of credit. You will owe interest on the amount you borrow from your credit line, and you may owe an annual fee for use of the credit line, but the total fees could be substantially lower than a typical overdraft fee.

7. Ask to remove overdraft protection. Banks believe overdraft protection, even for a fee, is a service customers want. In many cases, that is true. If you send your mortgage or rent payment, you might prefer the large check not to bounce. Bounced checks cause problems for the recipient and the sender; overdraft protection eliminates this hassle. If it is not likely that you will bounce a major payment, it might make sense to ask your bank to remove the overdraft protection feature for your account. Keep in mind that you will still be charged a “returned check” fee if you bounce a check.

8. Track your finances electronically. There are many tools now that let you connect directly to your bank’s databases to download and list your transactions automatically. My current favorite is the desktop version of Quicken, but even with its robustness, this type of software may be more than what is necessary for avoiding overdraft fees in a checking account. I suggest signing up for a free service like Mint to monitor all your financial accounts in one place.

9. Create reminders and notifications. Many banks continue to improve their technological offerings for checking accounts. I know of at least one bank that will, if you enable this feature, send you a text message if your bank account decreases to a balance you define. For example, you might receive a notice when a cashed check reduces your balance to $95, five dollars below your established warning minimum of $100. If your bank doesn’t offer this feature, one of your linked services will. Although I don’t use this service often, I receive an email from Mint when my Wachovia personal checking account balance dips below $2,000.

10. Look for free overdraft protection. Some credit unions offer checking accounts with free overdraft protection. You can start at the Credit Union National Association’s credit union finder.

Overdraft fees happen to the best of us because we are all human and make mistakes. The best thing we can do is reduce the occurrence of these fees to a point at which it will be much easier to talk with the bank when the mistakes do happen. Opening a line of communication can help, and if you maintain a good conversation with customer service representatives, you may be able to convince banks to make an occasional overdraft fee disappear.

This negotiation works best when you have a positive history with the bank. The more overdrafts you have on your record, the less likely the bank will be willing to forgive your fees. If you prove yourself to be a good customer, you have a better chance of being rewarded.

{ 12 comments }

If you’ve been reading the financial news today, you might have heard that veteran investor and market-mover Warren Buffett invested $5 billion into the battered Bank of America. For this $5 billion investment, Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway receives preferred shares, a type of investment that’s beyond the reach of most other investors. These shares come with a 6 percent dividend each year compared to the much lower dividend available with common shares.

Buffett’s investment could be seen as a significant endorsement in the future of Bank of America, a bank that is still in the process of settling a class-action lawsuit pertaining to overdraft fees and whose common stock price is down more than 40% this year.

The bank was willing to pay for this endorsement, offering the preferred shares at a $1.4 billion discount. In addition, when Buffett wants to redeem these shares, Bank of America will pay a 5% premium over valuation. Buffett’s standing put him in a powerful to negotiate the terms of the investment, and the bank could easily decide the size of the discount it would be prepared to offer in order to win Buffett’s endorsement.

This could be an opportunity to ride the wave, if you believe as Warren Buffett does that the government will never let Bank of America fail and that the long-term prospects of the bank’s profitability are secure. Just don’t expect to receive the same benefits Warren Buffett does for his investment. We average investors must settle for common shares and no special deals.

I’m not chasing Warren Buffett’s investment, but I would if I could get a 6% dividend and the other extras that come with preferred stock.

Update: Preferred stock is available for average investors. Morningstar explains how to set up a structure similar to, though not on the same terms as, Warren Buffett’s investment.

Bloomberg

{ 12 comments }

If you qualify for the Bank of America overdraft lawsuit settlement, you may have already received a postcard in the mail from the bank. Here is information on the overdraft lawsuit, only one of many class action lawsuits against Bank of America. If you recently received a check from Bank of America for about $98, you have received a benefit from an earlier class action lawsuit pertaining to the bank’s debit cards. This article pertains to a later lawsuit regarding overdraft fees.

December 2011 update: While the judge has approved Bank of America’s settlement related to the overdraft class action lawsuit and has ordered Bank of America to pay $410 million, a member of the settlement class who objected to the settlement has filed a notice to appeal the ruling. With an appeal filed, it could take at least a year for the issue to be resolved. If the appeal is denied, customers may still be disappointed. With 13.2 million affected customers in the class and fees to be paid from the settlement fund to the lawyers and class representatives, the benefits each customer will receive are sure to be less than the value of a refund of even one overdraft fee.

Any compensation to affected customers is on hold until the judge enters the settlement and any appeals are filed.

Like many banking institutions, Bank of America processes debit transactions not at the time they occur, but in a batch, from largest to smallest. If they don’t still take this approach currently, they did in 2009 when a class-action lawsuit combined several other legal actions. 24 other banks in the United States and Canada were named in the class-action lawsuit, including Citigroup, Chase, and Wells Fargo.

The banks say that by ordering debits from largest to smallest benefits customers. For example, mortgage or rent payments are generally the largest debits, so they should receive priority and should be the first to be paid. This is not how it works in practice, however. The system is designed to make more money in fees, particularly from the paycheck-to-paycheck class of customers.

For example, five debits may be scheduled to post on a Monday:

  • $800 mortgage payment (check)
  • $200 purchase at the grocery store (debit card)
  • $100 withdrawal at a different bank’s ATM
  • $25 purchase at the book store
  • $4 coffee

That’s the order the funds will be taken from this person’s account. If there is $900 in the bank account, the mortgage payment will be processed, but the four other transactions will generate overdraft fees, one for each, likely totaling more than $100. If the debits were processed from smallest to largest, only the mortgage payment would cause a problem, and the check will bounce. This could cost the account owner less money, but a bounced mortgage payment could be troublesome.

In the more likely event that there is only $500 in this checking account, ordering debits from largest to smallest ensures nothing will go through without generating a fee. However, ordering the debits from smallest to largest, only the mortgage payment would bounce, and there would be no overdraft.

Bank of America will be paying $410 million to settle the class-action lawsuit, which also notes that the banks did not tell customers they could waive overdraft protection, allowing certain transactions to fail rather than paying a fee. Not every bank handles activity posting the same way.

The deadline to opt out of or object to the settlement was October 3. The official website for the settlement is bofaoverdraftsettlement.com.

Photo: Wonderlane
Reuters

{ 975 comments }

Citibank Changes Overdraft Procedure: Fewer Fees

by Flexo

At the end of March, Fifth Third Bank changed its procedure for dealing with overdraft fees. When a customer has many debits (withdrawals) posting on the same day, and they are not real-time debits, banks often start with the largest amount. Ordering the debits from largest to smallest ensures that customers who do not have ... Continue reading this article…

6 comments Read the full article →

Chase Adding Annual Fee Out of the Blue

by Smithee

Updated March 31, 2009: Chase has been ordered by NY Attorney General to refund the money gathered from the process described below. I’ve always thought that credit cards with annual fees were a ridiculous notion. Other than having a credit history which requires you to get a secured card (been there), it’s usually no problem ... Continue reading this article…

16 comments Read the full article →

How to Get Money Back From Airborne

by Flexo

I mentioned yesterday that the makers of Airborne are being sued for $23.3 million for false advertising. This is a class-action lawsuit, so some of that $23.3 million will go back to customers who purchased the product and failed to see cold relief. If you purchased an Airborne product between May 1, 2001 and November ... Continue reading this article…

8 comments Read the full article →

Credit Cards at T.J. Maxx Hacked, Checked My Credit Report

by Flexo

A few weeks ago, I heard the news that credit card numbers were stolen from T.J. Maxx computers. Coincidentally, I had shopped at that store recently. In fact, it was the first time I had shopped there in many years. This was a good reminder for me to check my credit report. Last night, I ... Continue reading this article…

10 comments Read the full article →