Your GUIDE to
Conference Calls, Videos, and information about the
speculation
and
possible
increase in the value of the
Iraq Dinar (IQD), other Currencies, Global Currency Reset (GCR), Wealth
Transfer
and beyond... We report the good and the bad news not
just the hype.
11/24/2019 Midnight Ride: Financial Meltdown - The Horsemen of the
Apocalypse Ride
The FALL Of Wells Fargo! - The COLLAPSE Of The Banking System
Breaking: Wells Fargo "Blackhawk Helicopter Extracts
Computers In Los Angeles Raid"
Guess Which Bank Just Froze My Funds
Notes From The Field By Simon Black
June 28, 2018 Bogota, Colombia
Guess which bank just froze my funds over a simple transfer
What I�m about to tell you is a true story that highlights just how pathetic the
banking system has become.
A few months ago I was presented with a compelling opportunity to invest with a
prominent, well-established private business based in the UK.
And, after extensive due diligence, I decided to make the investment� around $4
million.
Because this particular investment happened to be denominated in US dollars,
though, the funds were routed through the United States via one of the major
Wall Street banks.
We�ve talked about this before-- the vast majority of global trade and commerce
is denominated in US dollars and clears through the US banking system.
...
As an example, the agriculture company that I founded in Chile a few years ago
is rapidly becoming one of the largest blueberry producers in the world.
We sold blueberries to a big wholesaler in Ireland this season-- and they paid
us in US dollars. Their payment was routed from their bank in Ireland, through
the US banking system, to our bank in Chile.
Nothing about that deal had anything to do with the United States. But
regardless, the money still had to pass through a US bank. And that�s how the
global financial system has functioned for 70+ years.
Yet over the past decade, banks in the US have really started to abuse their
status as critical financial intermediaries.
A big part of this is because banks are under intense pressure from the federal
government to stamp out money laundering, terrorist financing, tax evasion, and
any criminal activity they can find.
These are reasonable objectives to pursue� but their execution has been dismal.
Unable to tell for certain whether that $5,000 wire transfer to Aunt Sally was
for legitimate purposes or part of some grand tax evasion scheme, banks have
defaulted to being suspicious of everyone and everything.
Deposit or withdraw a few thousand dollars in cash to/from your own account?
Suspicious.
Make an investment in a private business they�ve never heard of? Suspicious.
Transfer funds to an account overseas? Suspicious.
Raise money from investors to launch a new business? Suspicious.
In my case the bank thought sending money to the UK was suspicious; apparently
these guys think London is the hotbed of financial terrorism.
(I�d rather not say exactly which bank was giving us so much trouble since
they�re basically all the same� but to give you a hint, the name begins with �Wells�
and ends with �Fargo.�)
That�s the part that really gets me.
It�s not like the money was being sent to ISIS in Syria or Jihadis-R-Us in
Afghanistan.
This transfer was coming from an impeccable source and going to a
well-established, regulated business in one of the most advanced countries in
the world.
It would have taken a five-year old about 30 seconds to Google everything and
realize, �Oh right, this all makes sense.�
Yet instead some munchkin-brain in the bank�s compliance department decided he
�wasn�t comfortable with the transfer� (as we were told).
And so, without any actual reason or evidence, Mr. Rock Star Compliance Guy
denied a perfectly legitimate transaction. And then, just to be extra certain
that he was saving the world, froze the funds.
I had to put one of my staff on a plane and fly her 8 hours to the United States
just to get the money unstuck� a completely ridiculous waste of time and money.
It�s one thing to be vigilant against terrorism. It�s entirely another to
constantly work against your own customers without exercising any common sense
or basic professionalism.
It didn�t used to be this way. There once was a time when bankers were
sophisticated business people and shrewd investors who understood the needs of
commerce� and the customer.
But banks are no longer run by bankers. They�re run by oblivious bureaucrats who
scrutinize every transaction looking for any excuse to say NO, forcing
legitimate businesses to walk around on egg shells just to conduct simple
transactions.
A big cause for this is that banks don�t need to do any real business anymore to
make money.
They get to borrow practically unlimited funds nearly interest-free from the
central bank, and then loan that same money right back to the federal government
at a higher rate of interest.
They provide mortgages to home buyers� then flip those mortgages to one of the
federal government housing agencies like Fannie Mae, essentially guaranteeing
the bank a zero-risk profit.
They get to milk their customers with all sorts of unnecessary fees, paying a
whopping 0.02% interest on deposits in return.
They even get to steal from their customers through outright fraud-- fraud
which, despite all their compliance and scrutiny, conveniently fails to be
detected by internal watchdogs.
And ultimately, when they screw it all up, they get to whine about how they�re
too important to fail and demand a taxpayer-funded bailout.
With all of these guaranteed profits and safety nets, banks don�t actually have
much incentive to do any real banking business anymore aside from multi-billion
dollar deals with Apple and AT&T.
So it�s much easier and lower risk for them to adopt a
guilty-until-proven-innocent attitude and be an obstacle to business and
commerce.
Mine is just one small example of their financial barbarism� and far from an
isolated case. These things happen countless times each day.
And it�s a good reminder to not keep all of your eggs in one basket� including a
bank.
Remember that any money you deposit at a bank technically becomes the bank�s
money. It�s their asset, and they�ll do whatever they please with it, including
restricting your most basic transactions.
So it�s a reasonable idea to keep a month or two�s worth of living expenses
denominated in physical assets like cash and gold in a secure place. This is a
form of savings that�s 100% under YOUR control.
The good news is that cryptofinance technology could rapidly make banks obsolete
faster than anyone realizes. More on that tomorrow.
To your freedom, Simon Black, Founder, SovereignMan.com
Wells Fargo has proven they can NOT be
trusted.
Wells Fargo fined by SEC over investment sales
misconduct
Jonathan Stempel, Imani Moise
(Reuters) - Wells Fargo & Co (WFC.N) will pay more than $5.1 million to settle
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission charges it improperly pushed retail
customers to actively trade complex investments in order to generate higher
fees.
The SEC on Monday said the payout includes a $4 million civil fine, plus the
return of ill-gotten gains and interest, over misconduct by the Wells Fargo
Advisors brokerage in its sale of so-called market-linked investments.
Wells Fargo was accused of reducing investor returns by encouraging customers to
actively trade the investments though they were intended to be held to maturity,
and despite an internal policy prohibiting �short-term trading� and �flipping.�
The San Francisco-based bank did not admit or deny wrongdoing, but has taken
steps to address sales practices that occurred from January 2009 to June 2013,
the SEC said.
Wells Fargo said in a statement it has made policy and management changes
related to the SEC charges, and is committed to helping customers achieve their
investment goals.
Wells Fargo has been plagued for nearly two years by scandals over how it
treated its customers, including by selling them products they did not need to
meet internal sales goals.
It has overhauled management and is trying to regain trust, including through an
ad campaign saying that Wells Fargo was established in 1852 and �re-established�
in 2018.
Market-linked investments are fixed-maturity products whose interest rate is
determined by the performance of a particular asset or market measure, such as
equity and commodity indexes.
source
Wells Fargo Crashes After Fed's Shocking Crackdown
Bans Bank From Growing
2/2/2018 Wells Fargo may be Warren Buffett's favorite
bank, but the endorsement of America's favorite benevolent plutocrat hasn't
spared it from an unusually severe punishment: two hours after markets closed on
Janet Yellen's last day in office, the Fed announced unexpectedly harsh
sanctions against Wells for a host of consumer and oversight abuses dating back
to its infamous cross-selling scandal, barring the bank from growing
until it fixes its criminal culture.
11/6/17 Wells Fargo Now Expects To Pay $130 Million To
Customers Affected By Auto Insurance Scandal
Wells Fargo now projects it�ll pay $50 million more than previous expected to
people affected by a widespread auto insurance scandal, bringing the total to
$130 million, according to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The practice involved selling auto insurance to about 800,000 customers who
didn�t need the coverage.
In July, the San Francisco-based bank admitted that as many as 800,000 people
bought auto insurance from Wells they didn�t actually need. Wells required
customers who obtained an auto loan to provide proof of insurance; if they
didn�t Wells would purchase coverage for them.
When customers received a loan from Wells to purchase a car, their information
would be sent along to National General, the company that provided insurance for
Wells to customers that didn�t provide proof of insurance. The insurer was
supposed to confirm if an owner already had coverage�and if they didn�t, the
collateral insurance would be immediately added to their account.
The issue, Wells said at the time, was that a failure of internal controls led
to a significant number of people improperly paying for additional coverage. As
many as 25,000 people had their cars wrongly repossessed as a result of the
fiasco.
At the time the scandal emerged, Wells said that a review of the collateral
insurance program began in June 2016, following several customer complaints. A
few months later, the program was discontinued. The company said on Friday that
it began sending refund checks in August to affected customers who received
policies between Jan. 1, 2012 and Sept. 30, 2016.
Customers from as far back as October 2005 may be eligible for a refund, Wells
said in the filing.
The company said it now expects to provide $100 million in cash remediation, up
from a previous estimate of $64 million, as well as $30 million in account
adjustments, up from $16 million.
Among the myriad scandals and allegations ensnaring Wells, the company also said
in the filing Friday that a former employee has accused it of retaliation for
speaking up about the auto insurance practice.
When CNN asked about the retaliation claim, Wells declined to comment.
source
How Wells Fargo Screwed $80 Million Out Of Customers Using
Unnecessary Car Insurance
A week after New York resident Juan Thomas bought a 2004 BMW 745i, in December
2012, the bank that financed the purchase�Wells Fargo�contacted him to say that
he needed additional auto insurance for the vehicle. This was a bit odd, mainly
because the car was already insured. �It didn�t sound right to me,� Thomas said.
A month later, he heard again from a Wells Fargo representative, who again
claimed his car wasn�t insured. Soon after, he received a bill and found that
Wells had placed a collateral protection insurance policy on his account.
�From then on, my [cost] just kept going up going up,� Thomas said in an
interview. He repeatedly spoke with Wells Fargo representatives, sent along
proof of his insurance, but nothing changed. With the insurance, Wells increased
his monthly payment from $413.48 to about $600, at first, to, eventually,
$1,000.
�It seemed like I was never going to get out of debt for this car,� Thomas said.
Regulators Are Going After Wells Fargo For An Auto Insurance Scandal Impacting
500,000 Consumers
Last week, Wells Fargo announced it would reimburse $80 million to 570,000
people who may have been �
Thomas, 55, is one of roughly 800,000 people who were affected by a scheme from
the bank that involved forcing customers to purchase auto insurance they didn�t
need. The San Francisco-based company has since apologized, but only after the
scandal was revealed in July by The New York Times, which obtained a 60-page
internal report on the situation that was prepared for Wells Fargo executives.
The four-year period that was covered by the report found the scheme impacted
hundreds of thousands of consumers, and interviews and court records reviewed by
Jalopnik recently show just how much of an emotional toll it has taken on them.
Wells has previously said that a review of the collateral insurance program was
launched in June 2016, following a string of customer concerns, and the program
was discontinued a few months later. But revelations of the scheme didn�t emerge
until the Times report was published. A spokesperson for Wells declined to
provide a copy of the report and Oliver Wyman, the consultant firm that prepared
the review, didn�t respond to a request for a copy.
The four-year period that was covered by the report found a scenario that
impacted thousands of consumers, according to the Times, with an estimated
274,000 becoming delinquent on their account, while around 25,000 vehicles were
wrongfully repossessed. In addition, some 60,000 customers who live in states
where banks must inform consumers if insurance is imposed were never properly
notified.
Wells has since disputed its own numbers cited by the Times. The bank has said
it later determined that 570,000 customers may qualify for a refund, and that
the insurance scheme led to only about 20,000 repossessions.
Yet, those are still huge numbers, and Wells has said it plans to reimburse $80
million in total for remediation.
For Thomas, that relief isn�t enough. Five years on, he�s still making payments.
�The credit that they�re giving me, it doesn�t add up to the money that I sent,�
he said. Thomas filed a lawsuit last week against the company in federal court.
A Wells Fargo spokeswoman declined to comment on the suit, and described the
Oliver Wyman report as a �preliminary� step toward determining �who was going to
be a part of the remediation.�
�We shared our remediation approach with regulators and we continue to engage
with them,� the spokeswoman said. �We are continuously reviewing our accounts
and reviewing the issue as its an ongoing remediation.�
�This was a breakdown in internal controls,� she added.
�What Are You Talking About?�
The trouble for Thomas started soon after he bought his BMW in late 2012.
The 7 Series caught his eye while surfing the Internet one day, he said. Thomas
called the dealership in New Jersey listing the car, and, soon after, he was
cleared to purchase it.
�So me and my brother rode up there to see if it�s true,� Thomas said. Sure
enough, the car was his with a $2,500 downpayment. He signed a contract for a
48-month loan that was financed through Wells Fargo Dealer Services, with a
monthly payment of $413.48 beginning in February 2013. All in all, not a
terrible deal for a used flagship BMW sedan.
A week later, Thomas said, the frustrating calls began.
�I got the car registered and all that kind of stuff,� he said. But the bank
told Thomas he needed collateral insurance. �I was like, �Well, I have
collateral insurance, what are you talking about?��
In the intervening months, Thomas said he spoke with innumerable Wells Fargo
reps and sent proof of his insurance, to no avail. Thomas felt the
bank-purchased policy was bogus and refused to pay the additional amount for the
insurance, according to his lawsuit.
By not paying the additional cost, late fees racked up. Thomas said the 48-month
terms have been extended by years, costing him above and beyond what he was
initially supposed to pay, all the while hurting his credit score.
And if Thomas wasn�t calling the bank to try to resolve the issue, Wells tried
to chase him down to get the full payment, he said. Calls came at all hours of
the day.
�It was like they were playing games,� he said.
How It Worked
Contracts that customers sign for an auto loan with Wells require them to
maintain �comprehensive and collision physical damage insurance,� the company
said in a July statement. If Wells found there was no evidence that a customer
already had insurance, the bank was contractually allowed to purchase collision
protection coverage for them.
The insurance was provided through the company�s Dealer Services unit, which
says that Wells has more than four million auto finance customers. The dealer
unit makes it plain in writing what a customer should expect if Wells purchases
auto insurance on their behalf: the coverage �may be considerably more expensive
than insurance� obtained elsewhere.
The lender-placed insurance began in early 2006, and National General Insurance
underwrote the policies. Wells is unusual among major financial institutions for
providing lender-placed insurance, the Times reported. Bank of America and JP
Morgan Chase, for instance, don�t offer similar policies.
When customers bought a car through Wells, their information would be sent along
to National General, the Times reported. The insurer was supposed to confirm if
an owner already had coverage�and if they didn�t, the collateral insurance would
be immediately added to their account.
If a customer called the bank to ask about why they were receiving a redundant
charge, and had proof of adequate insurance, the policy was supposed to be
canceled, the Times reported. Wells then should�ve provided a credit to their
account.
But, for whatever reason, in many cases this didn�t happen, and it was a
situation that wreaked havoc on customers who automatically had their payments
deducted from a bank account, as many might not have been aware that their
payments were rising at all. The internal report found that many customers
didn�t contact Wells about the extra insurance.
It�s also unclear why the situation was prolonged for so many years. Wells said
the internal review found that �certain external vendor processes and internal
controls were inadequate,� leading to extra premium charges for insurance that
consumers didn�t even need.
A spokesperson for National General didn�t respond to a request for comment.
Under The Microscope
In recent days, Wells has increasingly taken heat for aggressive sales tactics
linked to a separate scandal involving millions of fraudulent accounts that were
opened for customers without authorization. The Wells spokeswoman said the auto
insurance situation is entirely separate and attributed it solely to a breakdown
in internal controls.
But lawmakers in the U.S. Senate said the auto insurance scandal appears �eerily
similar� to the fake account scheme that was revealed last year. In a letter to
the bank�s CEO and chairman, a group of senators�including Democrat Elizabeth
Warren�demanded answers to a series of questions about why the insurance
situation played out for so many years.
�The practices uncovered by this report raise myriad questions about Wells
Fargo�s business practices, risk management structure, and willingness to hold
responsible parties accountable,� the letter said.
Whether it was outright, purposeful negligence that�s customary to Wall Street,
or simply a failure of the bank�s day-to-day procedures, Wells now finds itself
in the crosshairs of regulators and consumers who�ve filed a litany of lawsuits
in recent weeks.
New York state regulators issued subpoenas to the company early last month. (The
spokeswoman declined to comment on the subpoenas.) Days later, a separate issue
emerged, when the company admitted it had failed to refund guaranteed auto
protection, or GAP, insurance money to people who paid their car loans off
early.
Complaints filed to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau show that Thomas
isn�t alone with issues over Wells purchasing insurance and placing it on
consumer loans.
In one complaint filed with the bureau in September 2016, an unnamed customer
from Florida said he was hit with a significant additional auto insurance policy
on his Toyota Prius that he hadn�t authorized.
�Earlier this year they tagged my auto loan with an extra {$2,000.00} additional
car insurance even though we fax the policy to them numerous times,� the
complaint said. �They declined to respond until I reached out to CFPB.�
Lingering Damage
Kaylani Ross and Dee Lenz didn�t have as much luck. In May 2014, the pair
purchased a 2009 GMG Envoy with a loan from Wells Fargo. At the time, according
to a lawsuit filed last month, Ross and Lenz obtained auto insurance from Geico.
When the policy ended, Wells placed a collateral protection insurance policy on
their account.
Later, the pair obtained auto insurance on their own and told Wells to stop
billing them for the lender-placed policy. According to the complaint, Wells
never did.
Ultimately, the Envoy was repossessed. The bank�s internal report found that
some customers had their vehicles repossessed multiple times, according to the
Times.
�The victims of this scandal not only lost their cars, in some instances, but
they were also left with damaged credit that is still not repaired,� said Kellie
Lerner, partner at Robins Kaplan LLP and counsel for Ross and Lenz.
�Wells Fargo is clearly under the microscope now after it has disclosed one
scandal after another in recent months.�
source
10/23/17
Ex-HSBC executive found guilty of fraud in $3.5 bln currency trade
A U.S. jury on Monday found a former HSBC Holdings Plc
executive guilty of defrauding Cairn Energy Plc in a $3.5 billion currency trade
in 2011.
The verdict was read in federal court in Brooklyn, where Johnson
was on trial for nearly four weeks.
U.S. prosecutors have said that Johnson, formerly head of HSBC's global foreign
exchange cash trading desk, schemed to ramp up the price of British pounds
before executing a trade for Cairn, making millions for HSBC at Cairn's expence.
source
----------------------
9/1/2017 Wells Fargo says 3.5M fake accounts involved in scandal
NEW YORK -- The scope of Wells Fargo's fake accounts scandal grew significantly
on Thursday, with the bank now saying that 3.5 million accounts were potentially
opened without customers' permission between 2009 and 2016.
Wells Fargo also acknowledged that roughly half a million of the newly
discovered accounts were missed during the original review of the years 2011 to
2015 when the bank admitted the scandal nearly a year ago.
After Wells Fargo said last year that its employees under pressure to meet
aggressive sales targets had opened up to 2.1 million accounts between 2011 and
2015 without getting customers' permission, evidence quickly appeared that the
bank's sales practices problems dated back even further.
So Wells Fargo last year hired an outside consulting firm to do an analysis of
165 million retail bank accounts opened between 2009 and 2016.
The firm found that, along with the 2.1 million accounts originally disclosed,
981,000 more accounts were found in the expanded timeline of 2009 to September
2016, Wells said. And roughly 450,000 accounts were found in the original
window.
Of the 3.5 million accounts potentially opened without permission, 190,000 of
those incurred fees and charges, Wells said. That's up from 130,000 that the
bank originally said. Wels Fargo will refund $2.8 million to the affected
customers, in addition to the $3.3 million the bank already agreed to pay.
MORE: Wells Fargo details sales scandal findings, seizing $75M in compensation
from 2 former execs
In addition, Wells admitted that 528,000 customers were likely signed up for
online bill payment without authorization as well. The bank will refund $910,000
in fees to those affected customers.
"To rebuild trust and to build a better Wells Fargo, our first priority is to
make things right for our customers, and the completion of this expanded
third-party analysis is an important milestone," Wells Fargo CEO Tim Sloan said
in a statement.
Wells Fargo has been trying to repair its reputation since the admission about
the possibly fake accounts last fall. The company ended up paying $185 million
to regulators and settled a class-action suit for $142 million.
Bottom Line: wells fargo bank is a
Fraudulent bank they Cheat, Lie and Steal and they finally
got caught for some of many illegal unethical shenanigans.
They should be shut down and CEO should be in Jail but no he
resigns and gets 150 million dollars of the victims stolen
money
and wells fargo allowed to continue doing business.
WHY WOULD ANYONE USE
THEM?
Wells Fargo commits more FRAUD on it's
depositors, account holders and customers
July 28,2017 More than 800,000 people who took
out car loans from Wells Fargo were charged for auto insurance they did not
need, and some of them are still paying for it, according to an internal report
prepared for the bank�s executives.
The expense of the unneeded insurance, which covered collision damage, pushed
roughly 274,000 Wells Fargo customers into delinquency and resulted in almost
25,000 wrongful vehicle repossessions, according to the 60-page report, which
was obtained by The New York Times. Among the Wells Fargo customers hurt by the
practice were military service members on active duty.
Wells Fargo, one of the largest banks in the United States, is struggling to
repair its image after a scandal in which its employees created millions of
credit card and bank accounts that customers had never requested. That crisis,
which came to a head last year, toppled Wells Fargo�s chief executive and led to
millions of dollars in fines.
The bank also stands accused of having made improper adjustments to the terms of
the home loans of customers who were in bankruptcy, which Wells Fargo denies.
Asked about the findings on auto insurance, Wells Fargo officials confirmed that
the improper insurance practices took place and said the bank was determined to
make customers whole.
�We have a huge responsibility and fell short of our ideals for managing and
providing oversight of the third-party vendor and our own operations,� Franklin
R. Codel, the head of consumer lending at Wells Fargo, said in an interview. �We
self-identified this issue, and we made the right business decisions to end the
placement of the product.�
The report, which was prepared by the consulting firm Oliver Wyman, looked at
insurance policies sold to Wells customers from January 2012 through July 2016.
The insurance, which the bank required, was more expensive than auto insurance
that customers often already had obtained on their own.
National General Insurance underwrote the policies for Wells Fargo, which began
to require the insurance on auto loans as early as 2006. The practice continued
until the end of September.
Wells Fargo�s headquarters in San Francisco�s Financial District.
Christine Worley, a spokeswoman for National General, declined to comment.
For borrowers, delinquencies arose quickly because of the way the bank charged
for the insurance. Say, for example, that a customer agreed to a monthly payment
of $275 in principal and interest on her car loan, and arranged for the amount
to be deducted from her bank account automatically. If she were not advised
about the insurance and it increased her monthly payment to, say, $325, her
account could become overdrawn as soon as Wells Fargo added the coverage.
The report tried to determine how many Wells Fargo customers were hurt and how
much they should be compensated. It estimated that the bank owed $73 million to
wronged customers.
State insurance regulations required Wells Fargo to notify customers of the
insurance before it was imposed. But the bank did not always do so, the report
said. And almost 100,000 of the policies violated the disclosure requirements of
five states � Arkansas, Michigan, Mississippi, Tennessee and Washington.
Wells Fargo took issue with some of the figures in its own report. In a
statement, Jennifer A. Temple, a bank spokeswoman, said the bank determined only
570,000 of its customers may qualify for a refund and that just 60,000 customers
in the five states had not received complete disclosures before the insurance
placement. Finally, she said, the bank estimated the insurance may have
contributed to 20,000 wrongful repossessions, not 25,000.
�We take full responsibility for these errors and are deeply sorry for any harm
we caused customers,� Ms. Temple added.
Requiring borrowers to be insured is common in the mortgage arena, where banks
expect customers to carry enough homeowners� insurance to protect the property
backing their loans. The term for the practice is �lender-placed insurance.�
Pressing such insurance on auto borrowers, however, is not as common:
Representatives of Bank of America, Citibank and JPMorgan Chase said they did
not offer the policies, though some smaller banks do.
In the Wells Fargo arrangement, National General receives all of the commissions
on the insurance it sold to the bank�s borrowers. But for a time the bank shared
in those revenues. Wells stopped sharing in the commissions in February 2013,
according to the report.
Asked about the bank�s insurance practices, Bryan Hubbard, a spokesman for the
Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Wells Fargo�s regulator, said, �I
cannot comment on specific ongoing supervisory matters or potential pending
actions pertaining to a particular bank.�
Wells Fargo borrowers sustained financial damages beyond the costs of the
insurance, the report said. The harm also included repossession costs, late
fees, charges for insufficient funds and damage to consumers� credit reports.
Missteps and Scandal
From sham accounts to releasing client data, Wells Fargo has drawn negative
attention several times over the past year.
Client Data Mistakenly Released �There are thousands of documents in here that
the public should never see,� said a former Wells Fargo employee.
Improper Mortgage Changes �When I realized it was a pattern of filing false
documents with the federal court, that was appalling," said a lawyer who assumed
the bank had made a clerical error.
$185 Million Fine for Sham Accounts Regulators said the illegal practices, first
reported in 2013, reflected serious flaws. The bank fired 5,300 mostly low-level
employees.
Ex-Workers File Suits �These are the people who have been left holding the bag,�
said a lawyer for the workers who did not create improper accounts and did not
meet sales goals.
�Lions Hunting Zebras� In opening those accounts, the bank targeted immigrants
who spoke little English and older adults with memory problems, ex-workers said.
Scrutiny for U5 Files �It�s like being blackballed,� said a lawyer who
specializes in Finra arbitration. �It can be a showstopper for a career.�
Smothering Customer Lawsuits The bank is killing lawsuits by moving them into
private arbitration. �It is ridiculous,� said a woman suing over sham accounts.
In recent years, consumers have complained to federal regulators about
lender-placed insurance on auto loans, the Consumer Financial Protection
Bureau�s database shows. Many complaints identified Wells Fargo. In one example,
an unidentified Wells Fargo customer reported providing proof to the bank on
three occasions that the car was already insured and the new insurance was
unnecessary, only to continue receiving calls from bank employees demanding
payment of insurance charges.
Wells Fargo automatically imposed the insurance through its Dealer Services
unit. Its website says it has more than four million customers and provides a
variety of banking services to 14,000 auto dealers around the nation. It says
the company�s lender-placed auto insurance �may be considerably more expensive
than insurance you can obtain on your own.�
Such policies typically cost more than $1,000 a year, not counting interest.
(Customers could pay them in full or finance them over time.) If a car was
repossessed, the bank might charge a reinstatement fee of as much as $500, so a
borrower could face $1,500 in charges.
Here is how the process worked: When customers financed cars with Wells Fargo,
the buyers� information would go to National General, which was supposed to
check a database to see if the owner had insurance coverage. If not, the insurer
would automatically impose coverage on the customers� accounts, adding an extra
layer of premiums and interest to their loans.
When customers who checked their bills saw the charges and notified Wells Fargo
that they already had car insurance, the bank was supposed to cancel the
insurance and credit the borrower with the amount that had been charged.
The Oliver Wyman report indicated that many customers appear not to have
notified Wells Fargo of the redundant insurance. This may have been because
their payments were deducted automatically from their bank accounts and they did
not spot the charges.
According to documents on a Wells Fargo website titled �understanding your auto
loan,� the bank had strict rules about the order in which it would apply a
customer�s car payment to costs associated with the loan: First to be deducted
from a payment would be the interest owed on the car loan. Then the bank would
deduct interest charged on the lender-placed insurance. The third deduction
would be principal on the loan, followed by the amount of premium owed on the
insurance.
This payment structure had the effect of increasing the overall interest
borrowers paid on their loans, the Oliver Wyman report noted, because fewer
dollars went to reducing the principal outstanding.
Wells Fargo was also aggressive in repossessing vehicles: Some customers endured
multiple repossessions, the report said.
Last fall, Wells Fargo Dealer Services had a run-in with regulators, and it
agreed to pay $4 million in a settlement with the Justice Department over
illegally repossessing cars of military service members. Since that settlement,
three top executives have left the Dealer Services division.
source
------------------------
Wells Fargo Gets Regulatory Questions After
Data Breach -
By Laura J Keller July 22, 2017
Bank�s lawyer mistakenly releases data on 50,000 accounts
Mishap follows last year�s costly fake-account scandal
Wells Fargo & Co., already in the regulatory spotlight because of last year�s
fake-account scandal, is drawing renewed scrutiny after a lawyer�s
unauthorized release of sensitive client details for tens of thousands of
accounts belonging to wealthy customers of its brokerage unit.
Regulators have started asking questions about the breach, according to a person
with knowledge of the matter, after the data was mistakenly provided to an
attorney as part of a lawsuit involving two brothers, one a Wells Fargo employee
and the other a former employee. A person briefed on the matter said Wells Fargo
has determined the accounts were all from one brokerage branch in the Northeast.
Representatives of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority informally
contacted at least one of the attorneys involved in the dispute for information
about how the breach occurred and how Wells Fargo failed to detect it, said the
person, who asked not to be identified because the matter isn�t public. Lawyers
for the bank are taking steps to contact regulators about the data breach,
according to another person with knowledge of the matter. The person didn�t
specify which agencies.
Ray Pellecchia, a spokesman for Finra, which licenses and supervises Wall Street
workers including financial advisers, didn�t have an immediate comment. Judith
Burns, a spokeswoman for the Securities and Exchange Commission, declined to
comment. Representatives for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the
Office of the Comptroller of the Currency didn�t immediately respond to messages
seeking comment.
�Thoroughly Investigate�
While this latest black eye may not rise to the level of the retail-bank
debacle, it further calls into question Wells Fargo�s ability to manage its
people and information.
�Wells Fargo takes the security and privacy of our customers� information very
seriously," the bank said in a statement. "We are currently taking legal action
to ensure the additional data is not disseminated, and we are requesting its
rapid return. We continue to thoroughly investigate this matter and will take
the proper steps, including corrective action, based on the outcome of our
investigation.�
The bank�s latest troubles come just 10 months after regulators disclosed that
Wells Fargo employees had been opening potentially millions of accounts in
its retail banking division without customers� permission over a half decade.
The bank�s stock valuation and reputation were tarnished, and Wells Fargo has
spent at least $520 million on fines, remediation, consultants and civil
litigation since then, including a near-final $142 million to consumers who
accused the bank of creating bogus accounts.
Insufficient Oversight
The OCC, the bank�s main regulator, said in September Wells Fargo had "failed to
provide sufficient oversight" of its sales programs and didn�t adequately
monitor employees in its retail bank. Part of the consent order the OCC forced
the bank to carry out afterward included beefing up internal controls and risk
management.
The recent data breach began with a financial spat between a pair of brothers
over less than $1 million. Gary Sinderbrand, a former managing director at Wells
Fargo Advisors, is engaged in two legal actions against his older brother Steven
Sinderbrand, a managing director at the bank, one in New York and one in New
Jersey.
Lawyers for Gary Sinderbrand received client names, Social Security numbers and
account balances earlier this month for 50,000 Wells Fargo accounts, the New
York Times first reported, including one file with details on the holdings of a
"well-known hedge fund billionaire" with at least $23 million invested.
Protective Order
The trove of confidential client data was sent by attorney Angela A. Turiano of
law firm Bressler, Amery & Ross, who�s representing Wells Fargo in both of the
disputes. Turiano sent the information without a protective order or
confidentiality agreement between the parties.
Turiano, who indicated that an outside vendor was involved in the information
breach, asked the information be returned when Gary Sinderbrand�s attorneys
informed her of the breach this week, the New York Times reported. Turiano
didn�t return messages for comment on Saturday.
Gary Sinderbrand�s lawyers had been seeking documents related to a squabble over
allegedly unpaid fees for a consulting arrangement with his brother. Sinderbrand
alleges Wells Fargo knew about and approved of a verbal arrangement that he
provide risk-management and client-retention coaching to his brother Steven,
while Gary Sinderbrand took a two-year sabbatical from managing wealthy clients�
money.
The New York dispute is over what Gary Sinderbrand alleges is roughly $870,000
more he�s owed from 50 percent of fees his brother made managing their joint
book of client business over a period of about two years.
Andrew L. Miller and Aaron Zeisler, attorneys for Gary Sinderbrand, either
declined to comment or didn�t immediately return messages on Saturday. The
brothers didn�t return messages seeking comment.
source
Our question: WHY IS WELLS FARGO STILL IN BUSINESS & NOT IN
JAIL?
Seven Wells Fargo Managers in Board�s
Review�and Their Fates (April 11, 2017)
When Wells Fargo & Co.�s board released a 113-page report Monday describing how
staff opened bogus customer accounts, investigators aimed much of their
criticism at the bank�s former leader, John Stumpf, and the head of its retail
division, Carrie Tolstedt.
But the report also characterized the actions of more than a dozen other top
executives and subordinates who saw warnings signs, ran operations where abuses
flourished or tried to raise alarms. Here are snapshots of seven based on the
report, as well as their fates (they either didn�t respond to messages seeking
comment, or referred them to company spokeswomen who declined to comment):
Patricia �Pat� Callahan: Described by Stumpf as a confidante, she held a number
of senior posts and led Wachovia Corp.�s integration from 2008 before becoming
chief administrative officer in 2011. She was aware the community bank was
firing roughly 1,000 people annually for improper sales. After a Los Angeles
Times story cast a spotlight on sales abuses in 2013, she pushed to address the
problem and limit reputational damage, writing in an email that she hoped the
story �doesn�t become national.� Still, �Callahan did not raise sales practice
issues with the board,� the report found. She retired in 2015.
Hope Hardison: The former human resources director succeeded Callahan as chief
administrative officer. At HR, she was long aware of issues with sales
practices, but didn�t initially understand them to be pervasive, investigators
said. A subordinate sent her a report in 2013 that included a table of incidents
and terminations, but she didn�t recall reviewing it in detail. Her concern
mounted after the Los Angeles Times story, and after hearing at an April 2014
meeting about 1,000 firings, she �had a strong negative reaction� and pushed for
the community bank to do more to fix the problem.
James Strother: As general counsel, Strother kicked off a May 2015 presentation
to the board�s risk committee (the board doesn�t specify what he said), before
Tolstedt spoke. Some directors later said the meeting left them with the
impression that only 230 people had been terminated for sales abuses over the
prior two years. In reality, it was more like 2,500. The bank persuaded Strother,
65, last year to delay retirement amid the scandal�s fallout.
John Sotoodeh: While overseeing a growing number of branches, he �displayed a
high-pressure management style,� particularly in San Diego, investigators wrote.
He later oversaw Los Angeles when it became the epicenter of a type of
misconduct known as simulated funding, in which staff temporarily moved money
into bogus customer accounts. �However, multiple witnesses described Sotoodeh as
having made significant attempts to improve the sales culture,� and his area�s
metrics improved, the report found. After he rose higher, the bank demoted him
last month to run a smaller four-state region.
Lisa Stevens: The regional manager was a �vocal advocate� within the community
bank for changing sales goals and the behavior they encouraged, according to the
report. She raised concerns with senior employees outside the division including
the bank�s chief risk officer, Michael Loughlin. At one point, Tolstedt found
out and told her to stop talking with him, the authors wrote.
Michael Loughlin: He became the company�s risk chief in 2010 but didn�t have
�directive power to enforce changes� on some businesses because of a
decentralized management structure, according to the report. Still, he wrote in
2013 that he should have pushed Tolstedt to do more about sales problems. As it
responds to the scandal, Wells Fargo is shifting risk personnel to give him more
control.
Mary Mack: The report only mentions the former Wells Fargo brokerage chief one
time -- as Tolstedt�s replacement. Last month, Mack restructured the community
bank�s leadership. New Chief Executive Officer Tim Sloan told journalists on a
call Monday there isn�t �another large shoe to drop� on management changes.
An attorney for Stumpf declined to comment on the report. Tolstedt, who declined
to be interviewed for the investigation, rejected its conclusions in a statement
from her attorney.
�We strongly disagree with the report and its attempt to lay blame with Ms.
Tolstedt,� said Enu Mainigi, a lawyer with Williams & Connolly LLP. �A full and
fair examination of the facts will produce a different conclusion.�
ROTHSCHILD OWNED & CONTROLLED BANKS:
Afghanistan: Bank of Afghanistan
Albania: Bank of Albania
Algeria: Bank of Algeria
Argentina: Central Bank of Argentina
Armenia: Central Bank of Armenia
Aruba: Central Bank of Aruba
Australia: Reserve Bank of Australia
Austria: Austrian National Bank
Azerbaijan: Central Bank of Azerbaijan Republic
Bahamas: Central Bank of The Bahamas
Bahrain: Central Bank of Bahrain
Bangladesh: Bangladesh Bank
Barbados: Central Bank of Barbados
Belarus: National Bank of the Republic of Belarus
Belgium: National Bank of Belgium
Belize: Central Bank of Belize
Benin: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO)
Bermuda: Bermuda Monetary Authority
Bhutan: Royal Monetary Authority of Bhutan
Bolivia: Central Bank of Bolivia
Bosnia: Central Bank of Bosnia and Herzegovina
Botswana: Bank of Botswana
Brazil: Central Bank of Brazil
Bulgaria: Bulgarian National Bank
Burkina Faso: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO)
Burundi: Bank of the Republic of Burundi
Cambodia: National Bank of Cambodia
Came Roon: Bank of Central African States
Canada: Bank of Canada � Banque du Canada
Cayman Islands: Cayman Islands Monetary Authority
Central African Republic: Bank of Central African States
Chad: Bank of Central African States
Chile: Central Bank of Chile
China: The People�s Bank of China
Colombia: Bank of the Republic
Comoros: Central Bank of Comoros
Congo: Bank of Central African States
Costa Rica: Central Bank of Costa Rica
C�te d�Ivoire: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO)
Croatia: Croatian National Bank
Cuba: Central Bank of Cuba
Cyprus: Central Bank of Cyprus
Czech Republic: Czech National Bank
Denmark: National Bank of Denmark
Dominican Republic: Central Bank of the Dominican Republic
East Caribbean area: Eastern Caribbean Central Bank
Ecuador: Central Bank of Ecuador
Egypt: Central Bank of Egypt
El Salvador: Central Reserve Bank of El Salvador
Equatorial Guinea: Bank of Central African States
Estonia: Bank of Estonia
Ethiopia: National Bank of Ethiopia
European Union: European Central Bank
Fiji: Reserve Bank of Fiji
Finland: Bank of Finland
France: Bank of France
Gabon: Bank of Central African States
The Gambia: Central Bank of The Gambia
Georgia: National Bank of Georgia
Germany: Deutsche Bundesbank
Ghana: Bank of Ghana
Greece: Bank of Greece
Guatemala: Bank of Guatemala
Guinea Bissau: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO)
Guyana: Bank of Guyana
Haiti: Central Bank of Haiti
Honduras: Central Bank of Honduras
Hong Kong: Hong Kong Monetary Authority
Hungary: Magyar Nemzeti Bank
Iceland: Central Bank of Iceland
India: Reserve Bank of India
Indonesia: Bank Indonesia
Iran: The Central Bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran
Iraq: Central Bank of Iraq
Ireland: Central Bank and Financial Services Authority of Ireland
Israel: Bank of Israel
Italy: Bank of Italy
Jamaica: Bank of Jamaica
Japan: Bank of Japan
Jordan: Central Bank of Jordan
Kazakhstan: National Bank of Kazakhstan
Kenya: Central Bank of Kenya
Korea: Bank of Korea
Kuwait: Central Bank of Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan: National Bank of the Kyrgyz Republic
Latvia: Bank of Latvia
Lebanon: Central Bank of Lebanon
Lesotho: Central Bank of Lesotho
Libya: Central Bank of Libya (Their most recent conquest)
Uruguay: Central Bank of Uruguay
Lithuania: Bank of Lithuania
Luxembourg: Central Bank of Luxembourg
Macao: Monetary Authority of Macao
Macedonia: National Bank of the Republic of Macedonia
Madagascar: Central Bank of Madagascar
Malawi: Reserve Bank of Malawi
Malaysia: Central Bank of Malaysia
Mali: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO)
Malta: Central Bank of Malta
Mauritius: Bank of Mauritius
Mexico: Bank of Mexico
Moldova: National Bank of Moldova
Mongolia: Bank of Mongolia
Montenegro: Central Bank of Montenegro
Morocco: Bank of Morocco
Mozambique: Bank of Mozambique
Namibia: Bank of Namibia
Nepal: Central Bank of Nepal
Netherlands: Netherlands Bank
Netherlands Antilles: Bank of the Netherlands Antilles
New Zealand: Reserve Bank of New Zealand
Nicaragua: Central Bank of Nicaragua
Niger: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO)
Nigeria: Central Bank of Nigeria
Norway: Central Bank of Norway
Oman: Central Bank of Oman
Pakistan: State Bank of Pakistan
Papua New Guinea: Bank of Papua New Guinea
Paraguay: Central Bank of Paraguay
Peru: Central Reserve Bank of Peru
Philip Pines: Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas
Poland: National Bank of Poland
Portugal: Bank of Portugal
Qatar: Qatar Central Bank
Romania: National Bank of Romania
Russia: Central Bank of Russia
Rwanda: National Bank of Rwanda
San Marino: Central Bank of the Republic of San Marino
Samoa: Central Bank of Samoa
Saudi Arabia: Saudi Arabian Monetary Agency
Senegal: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO)
Serbia: National Bank of Serbia
Seychelles: Central Bank of Seychelles
Sierra Leone: Bank of Sierra Leone
Singapore: Monetary Authority of Singapore
Slovakia: National Bank of Slovakia
Slovenia: Bank of Slovenia
Solomon Islands: Central Bank of Solomon Islands
South Africa: South African Reserve Bank
Spain: Bank of Spain
Sri Lanka: Central Bank of Sri Lanka
Sudan: Bank of Sudan
Surinam: Central Bank of Suriname
Swaziland: The Central Bank of Swaziland
Sweden: Sveriges Riksbank
Switzerland: Swiss National Bank
Tajikistan: National Bank of Tajikistan
Tanzania: Bank of Tanzania
Thailand: Bank of Thailand
Togo: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO)
Tonga: National Reserve Bank of Tonga
Trinidad and Tobago: Central Bank of Trinidad and Tobago
Tunisia: Central Bank of Tunisia
Turkey: Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey
Uganda: Bank of Uganda
Ukraine: National Bank of Ukraine
United Arab Emirates: Central Bank of United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom: Bank of England
United States: Federal Reserve, Federal Reserve Bank of New York
Vanuatu: Reserve Bank of Vanuatu
Venezuela: Central Bank of Venezuela
Vietnam: The State Bank of Vietnam
Yemen: Central Bank of Yemen
Zambia: Bank of Zambia
Zimbabwe: Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe
TRUMP MEETS WITH �FED KILLER� AND THE
FEDERAL RESERVE BANKSTERS ARE FREAKING OUT
Rob Kirby-Massive Fraud 8,000 Tons of Paper Gold Dumped on Market
11/16/2016
California attorney general investigating
Wells Fargo over identity theft claims
Published time: 20 Oct, 2016
The California Attorney General�s Office has launched an investigation into
whether Wells Fargo committed criminal identity theft, in the wake of the sales
practices scandal that ousted the bank�s CEO.
A search warrant was served to Wells Fargo on October 5 and was first obtained
by the Los Angeles Times. It showed California Attorney General Kamala Harris
demanding the identities and account information of California customers who had
�any accounts, credit cards, life insurance, or other product or service,�
created without customers� authorization between May 2011 and July 2015.
The warrant also demands the names of bank employees who opened the unauthorized
accounts and identities of employees� managers, including �any and all
communications, including email referencing� the
bogus accounts.
Harris is also seeking information for customers who do not live in California.
A spokesperson for Wells Fargo said the bank is �cooperating in providing the
requested information.�
A 14-page affidavit filed with the search warrant said investigators are looking
into potential violations of state law banning impersonation of another and the
unauthorized use of personal information, the LA Times reports. Both offenses
are considered felonies and are punishable by more than a year�s imprisonment.
The warrant also demands the names of bank employees who opened the unauthorized
accounts and identities of employees� managers, including �any and all
communications, including email referencing� the bogus accounts.
Harris is also seeking information for customers who do not live in California.
A spokesperson for Wells Fargo said the bank is �cooperating in providing the
requested information.�
A 14-page affidavit filed with the search warrant said investigators are looking
into potential violations of state law banning impersonation of another and the
unauthorized use of personal information, the LA Times reports. Both offenses
are considered felonies and are punishable by more than a year�s imprisonment.
It�s not certain whether Harris, who is running for election for the US Senate
this November, is considering charges against individual bank workers,
high-level bank executives or the bank itself. The claim of �identity theft� is
also being seen as novel.
�One wouldn�t typically think of a financial institution opening an account in
the name of a customer as being an act of identity theft,� Paul Stephen, police
director at the San Diego nonprofit Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, told the LA
Times. �It�s a creative way of looking at these activities and finding them
unlawful under a statute that arguably could be prosecuted in state court.�
Wells Fargo has already agreed to a settlement for $185 million with the Los
Angeles City Attorney�s Office and federal regulators in early September over
the 2 million fake bank accounts.
During that investigation one victim, identified only as "Ms. B," said she had
declined a request by a Wells Fargo teller in late 2011 or 2012 to open new
accounts.
But sometime in late 2013 or early 2014, she started to receive notices that she
and her husband "allegedly owned on three life insurance policies held by the
bank," the affidavit says.
She also told the investigator that Wells Fargo often claimed that her accounts
had to be closed and reopened because of "problems" that it could never fully
explain. The constant changes, she added, sometimes caused her to incur fees
because her checks would bounce.
Another day, another $185mn: Wells Fargo fined for opening fake accounts
Another alleged victim, identified as "Ms. C," told the investigator she noticed
the bank was transferring money from her checking account to her savings account
in amounts that grew over time, from $50 to $150.
The bank claimed the transfers were done as overdraft protection, but it refused
to provide her bank statements when she asked to see them.
Last week, Wells Fargo CEO John Stumpf resigned a few weeks after the bank�s
board required him to forfeit $41 million in invested equity.
He still retired
with $134.1 million.
US attorneys in San Francisco, New York and Charlotte, North Carolina, have
opened their own investigations.
Wells Fargo is also under investigation by the federal Labor Department, an
outside law firm hired by the bank�s board, and two congressional committees.
source
Ohio State announces plans to stop doing
business with Wells Fargo Published 15 Oct, 2016
Ohio
Governor John Kasich became the first state-level Republican to take action
against Wells Fargo after suspending the big bank from doing business with the
state. This makes the Buckeye State the third to officially halt business with
the bank.
The Wells Fargo fraudulent accounts scandal continues to rock the bank
and jeopardize its business dealings. After allegations against the San
Francisco-based bank revealed that employees had opened up unauthorized customer
accounts to reach sales targets, the fallout resulted in Wells Fargo losing the
ability to work with state bonds.
Governor Kasich (R) said in a statement, "while Wells Fargo only does limited
retail banking in Ohio, it does regularly seek state bond business so I have
instructed my administration to seek services from other banks instead.�
"This company has lost the right to do business with the state of Ohio because
its actions have cost it the public's confidence," he added.
This could present a sizable loss to the company. In the past four years alone,
Wells Fargo has participated in about $830 million of Ohio�s state bond
offerings, according to Associated Press.
The ban against Wells Fargo is set to last a year, but it could be extended if
new Wells Fargo CEO Tim Sloan does not repair the bank�s reputation with the
public.
Ohio is not alone in their concerns that Sloan would be more of the same.
California State Treasurer John Chiang told CNBC that he was apprehensive that
the new top executive would offer anything different than former CEO John Stumpf.
On Thursday, Chiang appeared on �Closing Bell� and explained, �If we're going to
have more of the same, that's not acceptable.�
"We are beyond the point of tweaking. We want to see fundamental reform of Wells
Fargo before we make a decision," he said.
Given that California is the nation�s top issuer of municipal debt, their
sanctions could cost the bank millions.
Illinois set the trend earlier this month when
Treasurer Michael Frerichs announced his office would suspend its annual $30
billion in investment activity for one year with the potential for an extension,
USA Today reported. In a presser, Frerichs said, "Wells Fargo is a big financial
player in Illinois, and I hope to send the message that their unscrupulous
practices are not welcomed and will not be tolerated.�
However, Wells Fargo spokesman Gabriel Boehmer downplayed the ramifications of
losing Illinois contracts, telling USA Today, "Respectfully, the actual amount
in lost revenue for the company from business conducted with the Illinois
Treasurer�s office is approximately $50,000 per year.�
Wells Fargo did, however, lose a substantial bond from the city of Seattle. A
letter from Seattle Mayor Ed Murray, council president Bruce Harrell and budget
committee chair Tim Burgess explained that they would no longer work with the
bank as a lender on a $100 million bond with their city�s public utility
provider.
In their letter, the trio held Wells Fargo responsible for the practices that
led to the scandal. They wrote, �Wells Fargo's practice of opening accounts in
customers' names without their knowledge or approval is reprehensible,
particularly in that it appears this strategy was not only condoned by
management, but encouraged,� according to KIRO.
The scathing letter continued, saying, �your organization's underhanded
practices greatly harm not only the customers who have been shouldered with
bogus fees and unfairly reduced credit scores through no fault of their own, but
also your own reputation and relationship with your institutional customers,
including the City of Seattle.�
Seattle officials stressed the need for Wells Fargo to regain the public�s trust
through reforming business practices and making reparations to those affected by
the illegal practices.
Local government operations have also grown skeptical of doing business with the
bank. The New York Metropolitan Transportation Authority did not grant Wells
Fargo pre-authorization status for underwriting bonds but instead opted to
review its business practices before recommending it to the board.
Many eyes will be on Sloan as he handles the new parameters set forth by various
governments. Meanwhile, Stumpf is facing some trouble of his own. The former CEO
and chairman was found to have sold $61 million worth of Wells Fargo stock a
month before regulators announced that the bank had been fined $185 million for
its illegal practices.
As a result, Stumpf walked away with roughly $26 million in profit. While he may
have been laughing all the way from the bank, his action did sound alarms for
regulators who expressed concerns of insider trading.
source
Wells Fargo�s John Stumpf resigns, still
makes millions Published time: 14 Oct, 2016
Wells Fargo CEO John Stumpf resigns in the
wake of a massive scandal over fraudulent, unauthorized customer
accounts, but is keeping millions in compensation. Edward Harrison has the
details. Bianca Facchinei takes a look at San Francisco�s �Proposition Q,� which
will forcibly relocate the homeless if approved by voters. Ameera David reports
from Goa, India on preparations for the upcoming BRICS 2016 summit.
Eswar Prasad, Senior Fellow at The Brookings Institution and author of �Gaining
Currency,� tells Ameera of the potential pitfalls for the Chinese Yuan and what
India needs to do to keep up its stunning growth. In The Big Deal, Alex
Mihailovich breaks down the latest on the Canadian-European Union �CETA� free
trade deal, which just got a boost from Germany and Canada.
Employees, customers blew whistle over Wells Fargo fraudulent
bank accounts years ago � reports. article from sept 20, 2016
Calling
into question why Wells Fargo was only recently fined $185 million for
fraudulently opening more than 2 million accounts, the US Senate is now
hearing reports that employees and customers blew the whistle on the Wall Street
bank�s illegal activity several years ago.
After settling with regulators for $185 million over signing up its customers
for more than 2 million accounts without their knowledge and subsequently
charging them fees, Wells Fargo became the focus of a Senate Banking Committee
hearing on Capitol Hill on Tuesday.
White-collar criminologist William Black told the Real News that the hard work
exposing the bank�s practices was �done by the customers, by the employees and
by Los Angeles County, that bought the suit in 2015, building on these
whistleblowers.�
�You see almost no credit for that, in the coverage,� said Black, associate
professor of economics and law at the University of Missouri-Kansas City.
�Instead these federal agencies held absolutely not a single individual
accountable, there were no admissions, there was absolutely no admissions in the
settlement agreement. So this settlement agreement, principally negotiated by
the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau (CFPB) is disgustingly weak.�
The Senate hearing comes after five senators requested a committee investigation
into the bank�s pressure-cooker sales practices. Last week, federal and
California regulators reached a $185 million settlement package with the US�s
largest bank by market capitalization after investigating its practices that led
to the opening of more than 2 million fake accounts.
About 5,300 Wells Fargo employees were fired in connection to the
allegations.
�This is the place that absolutely refused to clean up its house and, by the
way, while it was firing over 5,000 employees, the people who were being coerced
and not only encouraged but demanded and praised Wells Fargo managers to
cheat. The person who was in charge of the entire consumer banking division
was allowed to retire. Praised as the model of what a banker should be, by the
CEO and given millions of dollars with absolutely no claw-back for the abuses,�
Black told the Real News.
Black said employees held public protests outside Wells Fargo branches to try
and warn the public of the practices.
Black said in an interview that Wells Fargo CEO John Stumpf held that �the bank
didn�t do anything wrong, that it didn�t have any perverse incentives, it was
just there happened to be more than five thousand fraudulent employees. Who
apparently got hired by somebody but not by Wells Fargo, except, of course, it
was Wells Fargo.�
�The whole story is preposterous,� Black added.
Among those scheduled to testify at the hearing are John Stumpf, chief executive
of Wells Fargo, and Richard Cordray, director of the Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau.
Some 115,000 Wells Fargo accounts had to be refunded due to overdraft and other
fees linked to these improper sales tactics.
Black was one of the regulators investigating the savings and loans crisis in
the 1980s where people were charged and convicted and went to jail.
In an interview about the savings and loans investigation, where over 1,000
loans associations failed, Black said regulators made over 30,000 criminal
referrals, which produced over 1,000 felony convictions in cases designated as
�major� by the Department of Justice.
�But even that understates the degree of prioritization, because we, the
regulators, worked very closely with the FBI and the Justice Department to
create a list of the top 100 � the 100 worst fraud schemes. They involved
roughly 300 savings and loans and 600 individuals, and virtually all of those
people were prosecuted,� Black told Moyers and Company in 2013. �We had a 90
percent conviction rate, which is the greatest success against elite
white-collar crime (in terms of prosecution) in history.�
Since the announcement of the fines against Wells Fargo, the FBI and federal
prosecutors have opened an investigation. The House of Representatives Financial
Service Committee is set to hold a hearing later this month but has already
launched an investigation and has requested documents and executive interviews
related to its banking practices.
On Friday, three residents in Utah filed a lawsuit brought by customers against
Wells Fargo. The plaintiffs are seeking class-action status on behalf of up to a
million people who may have been affected. They are seeking damages. The suit
accuses Wells Fargo of �knowing theft, engagement in a continuous
pattern of fraud, [and] conspiracy to commit fraud.�
source
-----------
Sept 2016
Wells Fargo will pay
$190 million to settle customer FRAUD case. (a pattern of
fraud, dating back to 2011)
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -
Wells Fargo has long been the envy of the banking industry
for its ability to sell multiple products to the same
customer, but regulators on Thursday said those practices
went too far in some instances.
The largest U.S. bank by market capitalization will pay $185
million in penalties and $5 million to customers that
regulators say were pushed into fee-generating accounts they
never requested.
"We regret and take responsibility for any instances where
customers may have received a product that they did not
request," the bank said of a settlement reached Thursday
with California prosecutors and federal regulators.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau will receive $100
million of the total penalties - the largest fine ever
levied by the federal agency.
"Today's action should serve notice to the entire industry
that financial incentive programs, if not monitored
carefully, carry serious risks that can have serious legal
consequences," said CFPB Director Richard Cordray.
Los Angeles officials and the Office of the Comptroller of
the Currency were also party to the settlement.
In a complaint filed in May 2015, California prosecutors
alleged that Wells Fargo pushed customers into costly
financial products that they did not need or even request.
Bank employees were told that the average customer tapped
six financial tools but that they should push households to
use eight products, according to the complaint.
The bank opened more than 2 million deposit and credit card
accounts that may not have been authorized, the CFPB said
Thursday.
Wells Fargo spokeswoman Mary Eshet said the
bank fired 5,300 employees
over "inappropriate sales conduct." The firings took place
over a five-year period, Eshet said, adding that the bank
has 100,000 employees in its branches.
Wells Fargo regularly releases numbers about how many
products it sells to customers, a practice it calls
"cross-sell." Its wealth and investment management unit, for
example, sold 10.55 products per retail banking household in
November 2015, up from 10.49 a year earlier, according to
the bank's annual 10-K financial filing.
In the second quarter, however, the bank changed how it
tallies up some of those numbers and said it was considering
more changes.
Piper Jaffray analyst Kevin Barker said he does not think
the crackdown on Wells Fargo will have much of an impact on
others in the industry.
"I think this is unique to Wells Fargo and their particular
situation and how hard they push on cross-sell," he said.
Bottom Line: wells fargo bank is a
Fraudulent bank they Cheat, Lie and Steal and they finally
got caught for some of many illegal unethical shenanigans.
They should be shut down and CEO should be in Jail but no he
resigns and gets 150 million dollars of the victims stolen
money
and wells fargo allowed to continue doing business.