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

Search: countrywide


Many Consumerism Commentary readers have written in to let me know that they recently received a check for about $98 from Bank of America. This check is not a result of the Bank of America overdraft fee class action lawsuit, but it is the result of a similar lawsuit. First of all, the overdraft lawsuit has only recently entered an appeal process. It could be another year or more before customers see any benefits from this latest class action.

The check is the benefit that customers are receiving due to an earlier class action lawsuit, Closson v. Bank of America. Customers who are eligible had a Bank of America, Fleet Bank, LaSalle Bank or U.S. Trust Company debit card and paid an insufficient funds fee, overdraft fee or similar fee before December 31, 2007. In order to receive a benefit, customers would have needed to file a claim form before May 1, 2009. The deadline to receive any benefits has long since passed, so even if you fit this description, it is too late to become a member of this lawsuit.

This is one of many class action lawsuits against Bank of America, some of which pertain to companies that were purchased by the bank, like Countrywide Financial.

  • Ross, et al. v. Bank of America, et al. This lawsuit pertains to the bank’s forcing of customers into mandatory binding arbitration, much like Wells Fargo is doing today. This is a new class action lawsuit.
  • Closson v. Bank of America. This is the class action lawsuit I described above. Bank of America encouraged its customers to use debit cards that were designed to increase the number of fees. If you received a check in or around December 2011, and if the amount is $98, it is likely a result of this lawsuit.
  • Bank of America overdraft lawsuit. Over 1,000 Consumerism Commentary readers have offered their thoughts about Bank of America’s processing of customers’ debits in a certain order that ensured that they could maximize fee revenue from overdrafts. Read more here.
  • Homeowner lawsuits. Class action lawsuits in several states, including California and Washington, allege that Bank of America or its related companies withheld taxpayer money designed to help homeowners facing foreclosure.
  • Foreign currency conversions. Bank of America was one of many defendants (also including Visa, MasterCard, Chase, Citibank, and more) in a class action lawsuit regarding a conspiracy to set fees for foreign currency conversions, eliminating competition in this particular aspect of business.

Class action lawsuits are usually settled by the defendants, often without admitting any wrongdoing. As a result of settlement, affected customers often only receive a small award while the lawyers representing the class receive significant payments for their work and time. For example, in the overdraft fee settlement, lawyers will receive $123 million, or 30% of the settlement fund, unless the verdict is successfully appealed. At the same time, each affected customer will only receive a portion of the overdraft fees paid. That could be $35 or less per individual.

Are you included in a Bank of America class action lawsuit? Have you received a check in the mail from Bank of America without knowing why?

{ 32 comments }

February 14, 2012 update: The change in terms described here goes into effect tomorrow. It’s not too late to switch banks.

If you enter into an agreement with a company, and that company does something to wrong you, most of the time you can avail yourself of the American judicial system to correct the problem. This happens frequently, with both individual lawsuits and class action lawsuits. For example, Bank of America is dealing with several lawsuits stemming from shady fee practices and other policies enacted by Countrywide Financial, a company Bank of America acquired.

In order for bank to protect themselves from problems and major expenses like these is to take away their customers’ rights to a trial with a jury or a judge. This is legal, and you don’t even need to sign these rights away. Companies can change these terms of your banking agreement, and your continued patronage implies that you agree and are willing to waive your rights for the benefit of remaining a customer.

Wells FargoI make it a point to thumb through the mailed statements because banks will occasionally update terms and change fees, and it’s easy to miss this information if I were to only check my account online or in my Quicken software. A few days ago, I received my statement from Wells Fargo in the mail, and discovered a notice informing me that by remaining a customer at Wells Fargo beyond February 15, 2012, I would never be able to be included in a class action lawsuit or sue the bank myself. Any disputes would go through a binding arbitration process.

Binding arbitration has its benefits. It is often less costly, and businesses can generally get a sense for the result before moving forward. The benefits, plainly one-sided, end there.

Binding arbitration is usually detrimental to consumers. The costs for an individual often outweigh the potential reward, and potential rewards are low because binding arbitration often favors the large company over the individual, unlike juries and most judges. It’s easy to see why arbitrators favor big businesses; arbitration is a business, and if they favor a large corporation, that corporation will likely bring more business to the arbitrator.

A consumer initiating arbitration through the American Arbitration Association, the administer Wells Fargo identifies in its new terms, would be subject to fees, such as:

  • $250 for telephone consultation if the claim is less than $75,000, higher otherwise
  • $750 for in-person consultation of the claim is less than $75,000, higher otherwise
  • Up to $125 in additional fees if the claim is less than $10,000, up to $375 if the claim is less than $75,000, higher otherwise

The business would be subject to fees higher than those listed above for the consumer, but the total expense for a corporation could still be considerably less than dealing with a lawsuit. Not every arbitration organization follows the same pattern for fees, though. In some cases, the consumer could spend more money initiating arbitration than filing his or her own suit.

Also a detriment to the consumer, arbitrators are not required to follow an established process. This uncertainty can limit the consumer’s ability to argue. For example, arbitration does not include a discovery process, making it difficult for consumers to present evidence to support their cases. Also, the consumer does not have the ability to choose the arbitrator. The business selects the arbitrator, so it’s clear that this could easily be a biased approach to settling a disagreement.

Binding arbitration is reviled so much that Congress has been inspired to take action to determine whether binding arbitration clauses can be considered legal — in cellular phone contracts, only. So far, this effort has failed to produce any results beneficial for the consumer.

Bank of America and other banks have been the subject of a class action lawsuit alleging they have forced customers into mandatory binding arbitration agreements. The Supreme Court has ruled 5 to 4 in favor of companies’ options to put binding arbitration into customer agreements.

What a consumer can do about binding arbitration clauses

I’ve been a customer of Wells Fargo or its predecessors for most of my life. I’ve had my primary checking and savings accounts at this bank. But with this change, I am not wasting any more time in moving my money out of this bank. It’s not that I anticipate having any problems that require a lawsuit or arbitration, and if I am included in any class action lawsuit, I don’t expect to gain much.

Businesses and employers force binding arbitration on customers when the customers or employees are in a weaker position than the larger entity. For example, with unemployment high, many Americans feel lucky to have jobs. They’re willing to waive rights in order to be employed, and most do. Most customers will be unaware that by continuing to hold their accounts they waive their rights. Others will be aware and not consider this to be an issue worthy of going through the process of closing their accounts. Very few will use this as an incentive to move money elsewhere.

Banking institutions are everywhere, however, and customers have choices. For example, I could move all of my money held at Wells Fargo to Chase Bank. At one point, Chase included binding arbitration in its customer contracts for credit cards but has recently abandoned this approach. There is always a danger that the terms will change, particularly as more big banks want to protect the revenue they earn from fees. With a Chase branch within walking distance to me, this move makes sense, but it still isn’t a perfect solution.

I would prefer to switch to a credit union, but I’ve researched my options many times, and there are no credit unions convenient for me. Additionally, one of the largest and most popular credit unions, USAA, is as bad as Wells Fargo when it comes to members’ rights: USAA requires customers to waive their rights to a trial by judge or jury, just like the bank I intend to leave.

I’ll be moving my money out of this bank as soon as possible.

If you decide to move your business to a company that does not limit your rights, be sure to let the company know exactly why it is lowing your business. Unfair fee practices and binding arbitration could be only two of many reasons you’d be better off being a customer elsewhere.

Read the entire Wells Fargo notice below. Read the full article →

{ 34 comments }

Bank of America can’t catch a break. A whistleblower, Eileen Foster, brought fraud at Countrywide Financial Corp. to the attention of Countrywide’s Employee Relations Department shortly after Bank of America acquired the company. Bank of America then allegedly fired the whistleblower in retaliation, although the bank claims the termination was due to the employee’s management style, not the fact she led an investigation that uncovered fraud.

The U.S. Department of Labor says Bank of America must reinstate the employee and pay her $930,000 for lost income, interest, damages, and attorney fees.

Countrywide specialized in subprime loans, and the employee’s investigation uncovered wire, mail and bank fraud at the company, as a matter in the course of doing business. Countrywide used predatory lending tactics and falsified loan documents.

As a result of the investigation, six branches of Countrywide in Boston closed. After the closings, Countrywide agreed to pay $3.1 million to Massachusetts and $3 billion in loan modifications. According to the Department of Labor, also as a result of the investigation, Bank of America retaliated by firing Foster.

From the Wall Street Journal:

Countrywide then initiated an investigation into allegations of harassment and misconduct by Foster, the report says. The report says Foster wasn’t initially informed of the investigation but several employees were interviewed for it. One employee who was interviewed went to the general counsel and the chief operating officer of Bank of America to express concern Foster was unfairly targeted, the report says.

An employee told the Department of Labor the investigators asked “leading questions and had a profoundly biased view” of Foster.

Foster was fired in September 2008. An executive said she engaged in “inappropriate and unprofessional conduct with your staff and displaying poor judgment as a leader,” according to an email cited in the government’s report.

Bank of America will repeal the Department of Labor’s decision.

Despite protections for whistleblowers, many who believe they witness unethical activities in an organization may not raise the issue to the appropriate authorities. The culture of an organization plays a larger role in decisions to go against co-workers and superiors than documented protections. Even though retaliation is not permitted, the fear is great enough to keep most people silent. Particularly when the unemployment rate is high, employees are willing to stay silent and keep their jobs. The Department of Labor is charged with ensuring that employees are not afraid to speak out when there is evidence of wrongdoing.

In addition to this issue for employees, consumers should also pay attention. While Countrywide Financial (Bank of America Home Loans) is not the same entity that provides savings accounts and credit cards within Bank of America, it is part of the larger organization. Interest rates and customer service tend to be the biggest drivers for the choice of banks, but the attitude of the larger corporation can legitimately play a role in these decisions, as well.

While Bank of America may not be continuing any possible retaliation, they are appealing the decisions. Of course, this is the only possible course of action because in the end, the company must answer to its shareholders who expect the company to avoid any unnecessary expenses if possible. When shareholders’ priorities are different than customers’ priorities, it may be time to consider alternatives, like credit unions and mutual insurance companies.

Wall Street Journal

{ 9 comments }

The White House is proposing a realignment of the financial regulation that failed to prevent the latest recession, but will the proposals help protect consumers? There is a long way to go between the President’s proposal and the enactment of a law, but here are the highlights as the plan stands today.

The Financial Services Oversight Council, run by the Treasury, will “help fill gaps in regulation, facilitate coordination of policy and resolution of disputes, and identify emerging risks in firms and market activities.” They will have the power to gather information from any financial firm to identify risks. The Council will be composed of one leader from each of the federal financial regulators.

Not only banks will be regulated. Any company whose size allows its instability to threaten the stability of the economy will be within the scope of the increased regulation.

There will be no more federal thrifts.

Hedge funds and other private pools of capital will be required to registers with the SEC.

The government will create the Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA). This agency stands to be one of the strongest in terms of ability to create and enforce regulations throughout the financial industry. The organization will focus on transparency, simplicity, fairness, accountability, and access.

Along with the elimination of federal thrifts, the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) will also disappear or be incorporated into other regulatory agencies. Interestingly, this is the one regulator bankers like. In the current environment, financial companies can often shop around for their favorite regulator, and the OTS has often been chosen thanks to their hands-off approach. OTS was the supervisor of choice for the failed companies IndyMac, Countrywide, Washington Mutual, and AIG. Other regulators were not immune, however.

Just like the FDIC helps banks fail in an organized manner rather than allowing the failure to spur chaos, the new regulatory system would do the same for all other large financial companies.

Penelope Wang from CNN explains how these regulations might affect consumers.

  • Consumers will have access to “plain-vanilla” mortgages with simple terms and pricing. In my opinion, these are almost guaranteed to be more expensive thanks to the simplicity premium.
  • Brokers will not be encouraged to “suggest” customers choose unaffordable mortgages.
  • Some overdraft loan changes will require customers to opt in to overdraft protection.
  • Regulators would enforce fair lending laws so more low-income families would have access to financial services.

New Foundation, New Stability, Jesse Lee, The White House, June 17, 2009
How Obama’s Financial Watchdog Could Protect You, Penelope Wang, CNN, June 17, 2009

{ 3 comments }

Tax Rebate Calculator Updated (and Blog Roundup)

by Flexo

I’ve updated the economic stimulus tax rebate calculator. The old version, taken from PBS Newshour, did not take into account changes included by the Congress before passing the bill. The complete details of the economic stimulus package are provided at the Library of Congress. Take a look at the new calculator to find out how ... Continue reading this article…

16 comments Read the full article →

Searching for a CD as the Rates Plummet

by Sasha

Ah, hindsight. Although I’m glad I got a 5.65 percent CD when I did, of course I wish I’d invested more and for a longer term than 6 months. But it’s not too late to still lock in a CD at an okay rate. Or so I’d hoped. Recently, it seems the pickings are slim. Emigrant ... Continue reading this article…

18 comments Read the full article →

Grabbing the Last of the 5.65 APY CDs

by Sasha

Now that the Federal Reserve Board lowered the interest rate, it looks like we’re seeing the last of the 5.3 percent APY savings accounts, which appear to be a dying breed. I personally expect even these to disappear shortly; after all, why offer rates in the 5s when other banks are touting rates in the 4s ... Continue reading this article…

20 comments Read the full article →

Countrywide to Bail Out Overextended Borrowers

by Flexo

Countrywide, the country’s largest mortgage lender, is stepping in to “rework” 82,000 loans totaling about $16 billion. I believe that the lenders and the borrowers are both partly to blame for the mess. Lenders offer risky loans, and customers, happy to hear they can afford more than they anticipated, sign up without realizing they can’t ... Continue reading this article…

14 comments Read the full article →
Page 1 of 212