Complaint Review: Bank Of America & Carla A. Jones - Sebring Florida

On the Corporate Governance that former CEO Ken Lewis signed, stating any whistleblower could report at any branch, associate Carla A. Jones could not take a complaint. That bank attorney said "stay out of it" lets take a look at the consequences eight years later:

Lehman Brothers fell two years later, signaling a Global Economic Crisis.

Ken Lewis was hauled before Congressional Investigative Committees where he said nobody saw it coming. Of course not. He violated Corporate Governance by refusing to let front line staff speak to whistleblowers, thereby allowing the Global Financial sysytem to fail under the toxic mortgage scam.

Florida has over 1 million families foreclosed on. Homeless are so thick on the streets FortLauderdale passed a law it is illegal to even feed them.

21,000 new foreclsures a month are in progress. Special Judges have been hired to clear the back log. One Judge alone had to average one foreclosure every 1.29 minutes to keep up.

This has been a global catastrophe. Despite the best efforts of years of QE, quantative easing at 85 billion a month was unable to staunch the economic tsunami. Pensions are gone. Companies are gone. Lewis was let off the hook by a good lawyer, Mary Jo that defended him now heads the SEC. Attorney General Eric Holder, a former White Collar DEFENSE attorney, has pried billions out of Bank of America Shareholders as he said the bank was too big to prosecute.

I am still whistleblowing on my own nickel. The book will be out Spring of 2015.

×

1 / 0

❮ ❯

That's all there is to it. They don't care for the little person. They'll rack up fees so that they can provide interest to the rich folk accounts.

Last Monday I sent an email via the bank website. The site stated a response would be sent within so many hours. When the required time was over, I sent notice, again through the BAC website, that I had not received a reply. Subsequently I have received two emails back. Certainly it would seem the process of reporting privacy abuse and the response are more consumer friendly than in times past. Although heartening that the older ways of reporting was akin to screaming into a black hole, once trust has been broken it is not easy to repair. An address was provided to detail the complaint in writing. In the past such was met with stony silence by the party receiving the complaint and the government regulatory agencies. It's almost like being bitten by a neighbor's rogue dog repeatedly, and the neighbor assuring you, once again, that the dog is not mean but a real sweetie. With such a long history of the words coming out of the executive suite, having a complete disconnect from their behavior towards me, it sure is puzzling. At what point in time could a customer start believing the correspondence doesn't go from the mail room to the furnace in the basement?

Evertime it is put in writing, rather than fix it, I have been retaliated against instead of helped. The CEO knew but decided to cover up. The sheriff said he was just "scared". I said he got paid too well by putting retiree and shareholder value at risk for that. The OCC at the behest of the Senater Graham, did call the bank and they said it didn't happen. Oh well, did get one call last night. Another "suicide". I am done with jumping through hoops because some arrogant CEO is too busy running around accepting awards to take care of business.

I surmise that someone has taken your money out of the bank wituout your permission. It is the bank's obligation to keep your money safe. It needn't concern you who or how it was taken, the bank has to put it back. First dispute it IN WRITING to the bank. Write a concise letter explaining what you know about the situation and make copies. Hand one copy to the branch manager and mail another one by certified mail with return receipt to the head office. Remember in banking if it isn't in writing, it didn't happen. Later, if you get no satisfaction, go to the police and write to the regulators. Stick to the issue at hand, your money was taken. If you think that someone has obtained access to your account and is merely planning to take the money, that's a lot simpler. Pull all your money out NOW and put it in another bank or under the mattress or wherever you think it'll be safe.

It's because they did, and you just won't accept it. The BoA Privacy Statements are everywhere, in their branches, and online. You have spent 1/2 Million dollars trying to get an answer for what? The bank's privacy rules? There is no ripoff here. If you ask me what my privacy policies are at my business, I'll tell you "it's none of anyone's business". That's the same basic rule everyone follows. It used to be referred to as "need to know", and if you weren't on the "need to know" list, you did not "need to know". Now, what EXACTLY are you trying to find out? It does not cost a penny to ask a question, as long as the question makes sense.

It's because they did, and you just won't accept it. The BoA Privacy Statements are everywhere, in their branches, and online. You have spent 1/2 Million dollars trying to get an answer for what? The bank's privacy rules? There is no ripoff here. If you ask me what my privacy policies are at my business, I'll tell you "it's none of anyone's business". That's the same basic rule everyone follows. It used to be referred to as "need to know", and if you weren't on the "need to know" list, you did not "need to know". Now, what EXACTLY are you trying to find out? It does not cost a penny to ask a question, as long as the question makes sense.

It's because they did, and you just won't accept it. The BoA Privacy Statements are everywhere, in their branches, and online. You have spent 1/2 Million dollars trying to get an answer for what? The bank's privacy rules? There is no ripoff here. If you ask me what my privacy policies are at my business, I'll tell you "it's none of anyone's business". That's the same basic rule everyone follows. It used to be referred to as "need to know", and if you weren't on the "need to know" list, you did not "need to know". Now, what EXACTLY are you trying to find out? It does not cost a penny to ask a question, as long as the question makes sense.

It's because they did, and you just won't accept it. The BoA Privacy Statements are everywhere, in their branches, and online. You have spent 1/2 Million dollars trying to get an answer for what? The bank's privacy rules? There is no ripoff here. If you ask me what my privacy policies are at my business, I'll tell you "it's none of anyone's business". That's the same basic rule everyone follows. It used to be referred to as "need to know", and if you weren't on the "need to know" list, you did not "need to know". Now, what EXACTLY are you trying to find out? It does not cost a penny to ask a question, as long as the question makes sense.

Thank you for the responses. The first question was how I was ripped off again. The answer is that I have tried unsuccessfully for years to receive help from bank staff. Average bank managers would be thwarted by the executive suite. I recently read the corporate governance, anti-money laundering policy, and Patriot Act compliance portions of the Bank of America Website. All signed or authorized by CEO Ken Lewis. The words were indicative that perhaps the Bank was more interested in complying with rule of law than before. The Bank website also said that all associates were to have a working knowledge of what the laws are. When I asked Ms. Jones about privacy law, she gave me the brochure and asked I call an 800 number. I said I had tried that and gotten nowhere, wasn't there some way a supplier of banking services (Ms. Jones) be able to help a customer resolve a privacy problem. I did not tell her already almost half a million dollars had been spent by me "talking to lawyers". I asked Ms. Jones if the local bank had a local attorney. She said absolutely not. One would be assigned from out of town, and they were "very busy" people. I thanked her for her time, and said I hoped to meet her again under more pleasant circumstances. I agree that we are in a legal happy environment. However, I also have come to believe the corporate attitude is the consumers are crippling business with junk lawsuits. The injury is too self-inflicted. When a customer has a simple question and lower level employees are not authorized to discuss it, that is unsafe. Dangerous to the customer and dangerous to the Bank reputation. Greedy, arrogant, hissy-fit throwing CEO's that by willful blindness force their company into litigation, instead of helping a customer find the right person to talk to, is inviting disaster. And the question I would have asked Ms. Jones, had she been authorized to discuss it, is how does a person go about finding help when a bank insider changes the bank computer records to reflect your account with them in someone else's name. Your private account, handed on a silver platter to people who did not work, sweat, or have the right to the fruits of your labor. Of course my lawyers can and probably will sue. The loss of my privacy is a violation, and bathroom privacy dictates when the doors are not locked, people feel shocked at times. Why a major financial institution wants to violate privacy, and then complain when their business is put out in public, is beyond me to comprehend. The OCC just told Congress they are capable of enforcing the law. Bull Spit. The OCC is not, and I pray the U.S. Supreme Court does not believe they are. Again, thank you for responding. It is easy to think a victim is fishing for some kind of "gotcha" trick. I was not doing so. Life is too short to play games, and when the executive suite starts earning their money and obeying the law, perhaps I will be able to resume my life and take off the "pause" button like my life is a mere DVD remote to be toyed with. It is not.

What was it that you asked? It sounds like you might have been fishing for a statement of legal position. A properly trained front-line employee of any business would know better that to give a legal opinion that a customer could then construe as the legal position of the bank. On the other hand, if you just asked 'how do you protect my privacy?', she should have been able to answer, and further, should have been able to provide you with the bank's statement on protection of privacy, and use of confidential information. They all have one.

Why wouldn't he answer that way? He is a banker, not a lawyer and you asked a legal question. I don't blame him at all, since our society has turned into such a lawsuit happy one it has put everyone on guard to what they say. The public has every right to walk into the bank if they don't feel secure doing their banking online.