iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Naomi Wolf

Naomi Wolf

Posted: August 23, 2010 12:19 PM

Like most consumers, I had always assumed that banks and customers are united in wanting to curtail bank fraud. Unfortunately, I have learned that in fact bank fraud is a big and profitable business -- for the banks themselves; and that changes in electronic banking, combined with the power of lobbyists to sustain the status quo that is stacked against ordinary account holders, mean that if consumers' accounts are corrupted, they can face systemic stonewalling by the banks themselves -- and have little recourse.

In 2005 I started to notice irregularities in a checking account I held with WaMu; but the irregularities were ambiguous. I sought at various times over the course of the next two years to go over all my statements -- but had trouble getting all my records from both online banking and from my branch itself. A busy working parent, I was certainly not as proactive as I should have been -- and, like many consumers of bank services, since we had family accounts and two mortgages at WaMu for many years, and had good relationships with our local branch, I also made the mistake of trusting the bank.

I noticed eventually that checkbooks were missing from my home, and finally my accountant got enough of the records to see an unmistakable pattern of fraud, and called my attention to it. I filed a police report and alerted WaMu to the fraud. For months thereafter, as you can see in the lawsuit that attorney David Fish and I have filed against J P Morgan Chase, now owner of WaMu, that is up on TheSmokingGun.com, I complied with what the WaMu bank officials directed me to do -- which was to leave the accounts open so they could investigate, they said, the fraud. If the fraud is reported within six months of confirmation of fraud, it is liable for the loss.

Then the same officials who had directed me to keep the accounts open, disappeared -- systematically, for just over six months. When I sought to talk to the fraud department, I still could not get records -- including my own missing bank statements -- even to see the full extent of my losses. The bank officials who had directed me to keep my accounts open were unavailable at the branch -- over the course of many attempts to speak with them. The police at the Sixth Precinct needed to see the missing documents, but even they could not force WaMu to hand over their -- my -- records. (WaMu's own internal emails cite a $300,000 figure for my loss from fraud -- I still did not have enough of my records to identify the loss. It is illegal, by the way, to withhold from an account holder his or her own records).

At eight months after the fraud discovery was confirmed -- eight months of trying to communicate with officials and a fraud department who were oddly unavailable or unresponsive -- I received a form letter from the WaMu Fraud Department advising me that according to the regulations, I had had a six month window for taking action; and (since WaMu had played out the clock for eight months) the letter asserted that I had waited 'too long' and my case was closed.

Inadvertently, subsequent to that, a WaMu bank official handed me the wrong file -- wrong from his point of view; illuminating from mine, and from any consumer's. It contained emails, some of which you can see at TheSmokingGun.com, from WaMu bank officials to one another -- and including emails from and to their counsel, PR department and and the fraud department -- that take as given that stonewalling a client with a fraud claim on the bank is standard practice; and yet one freaked-out bank official in the emails warns his colleagues that if their mechanisms in this regard became known, their practices would be all over the newspapers.

I was stunned by what seemed from the emails to be a systemic practice. Why would a bank want to perpetuate bank fraud rather than fight it?

As I researched the issue and spoke to other consumer bank account holders whose accounts had been corrupted by fraud, and to consumer advocates, I learned how systemic experiences such as mine -- and worse experiences -- are becoming. I heard from consumers across the country from all walks of life who had also been misdirected by their banks, or told that for various technical reasons their corrupted accounts could not be closed, and then faced difficulty reaching fraud departments or officials once the fraud was confirmed.

As Geoff Kischuck, an actuary in California whose business account was corrupted by fraud, and who then had to go daily to Bank of America for four months before he could successfully close the account, explained, there is a great deal of profit being made by banks with this situation. 'The shift from paper checks clearing physically, to electronic bank transactions, benefits the banking industry immensely,' he notes. The reason? It generates interest on the 'float time' that is still reckoned by the time that paper takes physically to clear, even while the electronic transaction is instantaneous; so it is in the interest of the banking industry to have as much electronic banking as possible. But electronic banking is much easier to hack -- and identity theft and bank fraud have skyrocketed accordingly; but the bank benefits a second time with every case of bank fraud and identity theft -- because of the immense fees -- overdraft fees, bad check fees, that can amount to hundreds or even thousands of dollars with each corrupted account -- racked up by the corrupted accounts. The longer it takes to close the corrupted account, the more difficult it is for the customer to have accountability with the bank's fraud department -- the more revenue for the bank. The bank freezes your ability to address the roblem -- but continues to charge you fees for the corrupted account. `Because of the fees that get drained out of an account, banks actually profit from bank fraud,' explains Kischuk.' Multiply this by the number of times across the country a consumer account faces identity theft or bank fraud -- and you see a mini-industry.

Customers assume that banking regulation and Congressional oversight means that if they find fraud on their checking accounts, there is accountability -- which is not in fact the case; strong bank lobbyists translate into weak protections for consumers and, as you can see from the emails, the bank's reasonable assumption that most customers in this situation will not be able to hold them accountable. And indeed, since legal action is time-consuming and expensive, most defrauded bank customers do eventually give up and go away.

I am certainly shocked by my own experience -- but even more disturbed after learning that such things and even worse have happened and continue to happen to people from all walks of life -- immigrants, retirees, people on disability -- who have experienced loss of savings, retirement accounts, college fees, mortgage payments and so on through bank fraud -- and who do all the things their banks direct them to do, only to find they have no actual recourse. They do not understand -- as I did not -- that a bank's fraud investigation department is actually likely fraudulently representing itself as the customer's, rather than solely the bank's, advocate. Banks such as WaMu -- and now Chase, which bought WaMu -- expect such people to simply go away. They -- and we -- should, rather, reach out to our elected representatives for wholesale reform -- and put each and every such case online, so consumers can see the worst offenders for themselves, and, with the power of the internet and their own consumer choices, protect themselves and demand accountability.

 
 
 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 297
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (10 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Pamela Grundy
Freelance writer & blogger.
01:45 PM on 09/25/2010
My last job was as a CSR in the phone center of a huge regional midwest bank than failed in late 2008. The failure was disguised by Treasury this way: The bank I worked for asked for TARP funds. Treasury refused (because of the insolvency issue) and gave the funds to another regional bank nearby on the condition it buy out my failing employer. Many bank failures were hidden in this way--on our dime. Treasury just moved the losses around with taxpayer money to keep everyone calm.

Anyway, I worked there from April '07 through October '08 and it was easily the worst, most stressful job I ever had, no contest. We had regular meetings on new schemes to GENERATE penalty fees and were not allowed to refund any fee even when it wasn't the customer's fault. When people called with legitimate problems we had to sell them another bank product in less than 3 minutes while NOT SOLVING THEIR PROBLEM.

All entry level CSRs had sales goals. Mine was $100k per month when I started and less than two years later had increased to $750K. That's what I had to sell just to not get fired. That way, they kept up a steady turnover, kept wages low, didn't have to pay unemployment benefits. I made $10/hr. What a racket.

No one should use these banks. We need to organize a national strike. We need to bring them down ASAP.
04:16 PM on 09/02/2010
Bank of America stole my money. I made some withdrawals from Bank of America ATMs on a weekend . Bank of America admits that I had sufficient funds to cover these withdrawals when they were made. On Monday after the weekend I wrote a rent check which they claim was not covered by a deposit made that day . Even if they are right that the deposit came in after the rent check , there is no excuse for them charging me several overdraft fees for the ATM withdrawals I made over the weekend .I think they are harkening back to the days when people wrote checks instead of using ATM machines to get cash, in which case they could argue that since the checks were written over the weekend they don't know which was written first because the bank was closed. ATm withdrawals , in contrast , are instantaneous and if I did not have funds to cover the withdrawals , the ATM machine would not have given me cash.When I dealt with B of A employees and the 800 customer bad service number , I was told to read the rule book to see why they charged the overdraft fees . I read the book at it did not deal with my situation in any way and even if it did B of A still commited fraud . They also committed theft by taking my money.
03:50 PM on 08/31/2010
I was the victim of bank robbery . The bank that robbed me is Bank of America. I made several withdrawalls from Bank of America ATMs between Friday and monday of one week . I had more than adequate funds to cover these withdrawalls , a fact B of A admits. On Monday a deposit was made into my account and I wrote a rent check . They claim that the rent check came in before the deposit. B of A retroactively bounced the ATM withdrawalls I had made over the weekend and charged me overdraft fees for these withdrawalls. It doesn't make sense to charge overdraft fees for ATM withdrawalls because if I did not have money to cover these withdrawalls , the ATM machine would not have given me any money . Even if I did not yet have funds cleared to cover my rent check , they stole my money when they charged me fees for my prior ATM withdrawalls. I think they are trying to pretend that we are back in the days before ATMs when we wrote checks and the checks were not processed by the bank until Monday so the bank would not know which check was written first . In contrast ATM withdrawalls are automatic and instantaneous 24/7 so there is no excuse for B of A's bank fraud . Can we put them in jail with Madoff ?
03:31 AM on 08/31/2010
oh, i dunno.

howsabout:
my accountant: not filing my taxes for four years, selling a house w/o my signature.
my brokerage: refusing to send me a print-out i desperately needed {"we already sent you two copies"}, putting all my money on margin when i was deathly ill & my bipolar spouse was having a SERIOUS year & a half long breakdown. by the time it BEGAN to wind down not only all his money, but all mine was gone}.

there's so much more.

my mother told me that my job was not my family. neither is yr bank! lots of times yr family doesnt act like yr family! {the lust for} money makes people NUTS. i'm not a reductivist but, so help me, it is certainly the root from whence its own evil flowers.

if you want more celebrity themed monetary-institution[al] evil read janis ian's biography. that's the IRS--specifically, one IRS agent--but it's the same kind of thing.

YES i believe naomi wolf's bank would do whatever she said they did. YES i believe they would try to discredit her as the everlovin cherry on top. i KNOW. it happened to me.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Snwbnny9
All I can say is that my life is pretty plain
07:29 PM on 08/29/2010
If they would have the temerity to treat Naomi Wolfe like that if makes you wonder what kind of awful underhanded stuff they pull on average people.
03:27 PM on 08/29/2010
A house just across the way from me was able to get a cash out refi for hundreds of thousands of dollars, this was right before the "08 crash. Naturally the homeowner and coincidentally the bank loan officer both decided to skip town. But shouldn't this loan officer's boss been aggressively looking out for this type of fraud? Why should we taxpayers have our money used for schemes like this when the gov't is not making the management, somebody, people that can stop this, criminally liable?
01:40 PM on 08/29/2010
Dear Naomi...

WaMu, your bank of choice recently admitted along with Wells Fargo Bank their parent bank to laundering 378.4 Billion dollars for Mexican Drug Cartel…you know the guys in Mexico that killed over 22,000 people…

The DOJ, was so tough on them it was astounding…they made WaMu and Wells Fargo promise not to do it again until at least 2011…

So while we all understand that you are upset and think they are crooks, they were really just busy moving money around in the fraud department of WaMu for the Mexican drug cartel…now that they are on a break until 2011, maybe you can get better results…
08:41 AM on 08/29/2010
Maybe you shouldn't be banking with national banks. Dur.
The EXACT same thing happened to my family recently. We, unlike this author, moved our money to the local bank down the road a few years ago. We got a statement from the bank saying the account was overdrawn by over a thousand dollars. So the bank looked at what had happened, said "yep, that was fraud," and returned not only the fees that had been charged, but the money that was stolen as well. (FDIC insures all money in banks up to a certain amount, so the bank HAS to give your money back if it's stolen)
It took three days. Two twenty minute phone calls.
Seriously, MOVE YOUR MONEY!!!!!!!!! Now you should definitely know better.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cherie King
03:08 AM on 08/29/2010
I paid for a service to fix the viruses on my laptop, they didn't fix it. Microsoft on the other hand spent 5 to 8 hours with me and actually fixed it, for FREE. my credit union did nothing to be my advocate and sided with the company they never spoke too. I contacted the company and after them telling me 4 different stories and a complaint to the BBB, I got my money back.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:04 AM on 08/29/2010
So are smaller, local banks any better? And, if so, why should anyone continue to do business or hold accounts at the larger consumer banks? Free market advocates would say that these banks will fail on their own accord as customers go elsewhere... With the recent "largest item clears first" airing of Wells Fargo and Bank of America practice I can't see why an educated populace wouldn't shun these companies. It wouldn't take everyone to bring them down a notch... but don't wait to withdraw your funds!
12:37 PM on 08/25/2010
Isn't it possible the assistant was intercepting the bank statements? While the bank might have been somewhat negligable, I'd say Wolfe was asleep. Busy working parent--don't make me laugh. RICH busy working parent. The rest of us know where our money is because we don't have very much.
10:17 AM on 08/25/2010
I have a smaller version of this story, one time someone cashed a check I had written to someone else. They signed the back of the check and put their drivers license number on it (probably for whoever cashed the check). The bank and the police had a direct path right to the criminal's door, but said there was nothing they could do. I was out the money because I had written the check.
07:43 AM on 08/25/2010
Surprise, surprise.
11:01 PM on 08/24/2010
I discovered a pending fraudulent transaction on my BOA card on 07/25, notified them, and received the following letter:

"Thank you for being a valued customer. Based on our conversation it has been determined that we were not able to process a fraud claim regarding the transaction(s) on your credit card account. As a result, we will not be taking any further action regarding the transaction(s) at this time, and you will be held responsible for the charge(s)."

When I called cs I was told it was in dispute, and received a dispute form dated the 4th on August 12th: at the bottom it read:

"If this information is not received by August 13, 2010, we will close our investigation(s) as we will not have the necessary information we need to pursue your dispute(s) further. If this occurs, the balance will be owed in accordance with your Credit Card Agreement".

Within the dispute form itself (also in bold ink) is the clause: "Please do not modify the wording of the statement because the specific wording is necessary to support your claim." (in other words I can't delete the August 13th clause before I sign it)

I faxed the form in time but plan to close my platinum signature account and end my 8 year relationship with Bank of America as soon as the dispute is resolved.
Peabodies
We are the Many. They are the Few.
10:13 PM on 08/24/2010
Funny, but 2004 is when I tried to close an account (the only one I had) with CitiBank. It became an epic battle. I lost no money (the only amount in question was less than $20) but they fought me tooth and nail to NOT CLOSE the account. I wonder why. They were a sinking ship already, and perhaps having "one more account still on the books" would make them look good? It took two years, many visits to the branch, many phone calls, etc. until they finally left me alone. I have been puzzled about the experience ever since.