61–70 of 261 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They would say "we had no choice, it was a court order. The sheriff's department is responsible for the mistake."
Obviously bank didn't even validate SSN: “Is the last four digit of your SSN not 5189 (not the actual digits)?” Sounds like brunt of this mistake lies with the bank.
They have failed to pay back billions, much less $3k. Do not do business with any organization on this list: https://projects.propublica.org/bailout/list
It looks like the list items are there for different reasons, not all because they're big lenders who got bailed out. I clicked on Greater Kinston Credit Union[1]. Its reason for being on there is the 'Community Development Capital Initiative'[2].
Excerpt from [2]: 'designed to provide cheap financing to Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFI): banks, thrifts or credit unions that operate in markets underserved by traditional financial institutions. The idea was that the banks would then lend that money to small businesses in their areas.'
That one sounds pretty benign (i.e. it's not "bailing out Too Big To Fail companies for crappy practices"--GKCU is a small credit union), so I think the list you posted is more nuanced than crappy Too Big To Fail bailout companies.
[1] https://projects.propublica.org/bailout/entities/936-greater... [2] https://projects.propublica.org/bailout/programs/13-communit...
As far as I know, the only correct action is to write a letter detailing the entire situation to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency in Washington DC. I'm surprised no one has mentioned this yet.
What I don't get: Why would he pursue some court order he's not a party to? The only logical counterparty to this dispute is BoA. They gave away your money without proper title. That shouldn't hold up in court? That they gave some money to the LA Sheriff’s Department, that would be BoA to recoup.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In theory: the blog's author would counter argue that BoA didn't perform due diligence in checking that the order mentioned the correct person, and even then, they didn't send the notification on time. The court rules against BoA, and it's up to their lawyers to recoup the money. In practice: BoA pays straight out of their pocket, sends those $3.4K to losses, and shuts this down before the media finds out. And based…
Absolutely correct. This is pocket lint to Bank of America. The big banks operate at an absolutely mammoth scale; BoA has 208k employees. More consequential mistakes than this happen by the thousands every day. There is, quite literally, a budget for it. It is an unfortunate reality for the US that you have to present as a savvy professional, but as soon as BoA is institutionally aware that there is a savvy professio…
Not sure if you have small claims court in America. In Canada for losses under 10000$ process is fairly straightforward. You should file and follow the process. If they don't give money back, go to the court and execute writ of seizure. One guy did this. http://business.time.com/2011/06/06/homeowner-forecloses-on-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Obviously bank didn't even validate SSN: “Is the last four digit of your SSN not 5189 (not the actual digits)?” Sounds like brunt of this mistake lies with the bank.
Or who ever drafted the legal order to the bank. Could have been a typo there, and the bank is just following orders.
Not sure if you have small claims court in America. In Canada for losses under 10000$ process is fairly straightforward. You should file and follow the process. If they don't give money back, go to the court and execute writ of seizure. One guy did this. http://business.time.com/2011/06/06/homeowner-forecloses-on-...
Small claims court is actually mentioned in the Constitution. However, the actual guarantee in the Constitution is for claims of less than $20. All states also allow you to file for larger amounts, usually something like $5000.
> "In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law."