The U.S. government filed a civil mortgage fraud lawsuit on Tuesday against Wells Fargo & Co, the latest legal volley against big banks for their lending during the housing boom.

The complaint, brought by the U.S. Attorney in Manhattan, seeks damages and civil penalties from Wells Fargo for more than 10 years of alleged misconduct related to government-insured Federal Housing Administration loans.

The lawsuit alleges the FHA paid hundreds of millions of dollars on insurance claims on thousands of defaulted mortgages as a result of false certifications by Wells Fargo, the fourth-biggest U.S. bank as measured in assets.

“As the complaint alleges, yet another major bank has engaged in a longstanding and reckless trifecta of deficient training, deficient underwriting and deficient disclosure, all while relying on the convenient backstop of government insurance,” said Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara.

The bank denied the allegations and said in a statement it believes it acted in good faith and in compliance with blah, blah, blah

Bharara’s office has brought similar cases in the past year, including one against Citigroup Inc unit CitiMortgage Inc, which settled the case for $158.3 million in February, and against Deutsche Bank, which paid $202.3 million in May to resolve its case.

The U.S. Attorney’s office in Brooklyn brought the biggest such case, against Bank of America Corp’s Countrywide unit, which agreed in February to pay $1 billion to resolve the allegations.

Preet Bharara rules. His track record against fraud perpetrated by bankers and financiers is rock-solid. Up to 66 convictions since he was appointed by Obama – and more coming.

Go get ‘em!



  1. bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

    “Barn being fully investigated 4 years after all the horses left on account of the fire.” /// I haven’t heard of these prior court wins. How many were sent to jail?

    Fines? You mean fines big enough to hurt or put a too big to fail bank on the ropes? ….. Conflict of terms.

    I see this as adding insult to injury.

    • stormtrooper 651 says:

      This WFC deal is a simple scapegoat/shakedown scam.
      As for the origins of the crisis, Clinton set it up with the NINJAs and dereg (“The Glass-Steagall Act is no longer relevant.”). This position was maintained by opposing all Bush reform – 3 main attempts starting with:
      http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/11/business/new-agency-proposed-to-oversee-freddie-mac-and-fannie-mae.html
      -”These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis” ”The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”-Barney Frank, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee.
      This then combined with subtle moves like the Uptick Rule change to provide what Rahm Emmanuel referred to as “a good crisis” which was not to be wasted.
      2008/09 was not only a massive bonanza for equities trading but has enormous benefits politically, and provided perfect cover for syphoning of the trillions of dollars subsequently dumped into the economy.

      • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

        You cite mostly unconnected dots and I don’t have the conspiracy mind set that may connect these facts for you.

        YES–Clinton started the ball rolling. Money like water is always seeking the lowest point.

        I’ve heard Barney talk about what BushtheRetard wanted to do with the Fannies but forget the details. I simply don’t believe BushtheRetard wanted to make it hard on banks though. The link provided below by tcc3 reveals at this time all the Banks, with WFC continuing even today with this post, guilty of REDLINING minorities. Forcing the banks to quit cheating their customers is NOT the same thing as forcing them to give liar loans. Maybe that subtlety escapes you.

        Bush the Retard had 8 years of pretty much everything he really wanted: it wasn’t Regulation in general and it wasn’t Bank Regulation Specifically.

        The money siphoned off did not come back to the economy. Lots of it went overseas to related entities. A lot went to build elevators for cars in private mansions.

        Only a criminal would not agree to REREGULATE the banks as they were during the 70 years there were no such meltdowns. We need some good Nanny State Over Sight.

        Yea, verily.

        • stormtrooper 651 says:

          “I simply don’t believe …”
          Exactly, your view is based mostly on beliefs, or more accurately, the WISH to believe in the popular narratives, the new american fairytales, and the fantasy of the dependent.

          • stormtrooper 651 says:

            And no juvenile names for clinton or barney?
            Your weak attempts at a veil of balance and impartiality seem exposed.

          • stormtrooper 651 says:

            “In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons”…”who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.” Edward Bernays
            Who is the “baddie” we must all fear? You’ve listened, you’ve learned, now just repeat it back, over and over again. Good dog.

          • stormtrooper 651 says:

            I suggest you take a long, hard look at that Time Magazine front page.

          • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

            More disconnected dots.

            “I simply don’t believe” was an admission on a point I didn’t want to look up and then I referenced tcc3 link about Banks being guilty of Redlining.

            Not a popular narrative or fairytale.

            What dots you do have are fly specks. You know what fly specks are don’t you?

  2. kerpow says:

    So where does the money from the fines go? Does it go back to the people who got screwed? I doubt it.

  3. MikeN says:

    They had to move quick. Their Big Bird ad had even liberals questioning their competence. They contrasted Big Bird and Sesame Street with Wall Street baddies, only they were people that were prosecuted by George Bush.

    Charges themselves look bogus. Banks were told to lend to more minorities or the government would come after them. They made it easier by having government pick up the tab. Now the government wants to get tough when the minorities couldn’t pay up.

    • bobbo, one true Liberal recognizing Obama is too far Right says:

      Big Bird is an excellent ad showing Rmoney to be the corporate toadie he is. Most people are however just stooges and useful tools (see Congress and idiots like you posting here) while Rmoney is the real deal. So rich for so long he thinks “hard work” is asking daddy for money.

      Lets see…. what other mormonic thing did you utter…..
      1. Who did BushtheRetard “prosecute?” or even sue?
      2. The government told the banks to create liar loans huh?

      This is just Alfie stupid.

      • tcc3 says:

        Hes been called out on this bs before in previous threads. I doubt he can defend it any better now than before.

        • bobbo, one true Liberal recognizing Obama is too far Right says:

          It is perfectly demonstrative of the Party Formerly Known as Republican to just lie and keep repeating it. It certainly polarizes those who have identified their values. Hard to believe independents/low information/don’t care voters would be swayed by this but apparently so. …. A lie “first heard” can sound pretty good.

          The nonsense that Rmoney did well at the debate is a good example. He was shit. Unfortunately, Obama was even worse by being disengaged.

          Time to Man Up.

          • McCullough says:

            Did the gubment force banks to make risky loans? Forbes says yes.

            “Yet this claim ignores that for years irrational lending standards have been forced on lenders by the federal Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) and rewarded (at taxpayers’ expense) by multiple government bodies.

            The CRA forces banks to make loans in poor communities, loans that banks may otherwise reject as financially unsound. Under the CRA, banks must convince a set of bureaucracies that they are not engaging in discrimination, a charge that the act encourages any CRA-recognized community group to bring forward. Otherwise, any merger or expansion the banks attempt will likely be denied. But what counts as discrimination?”

            http://forbes.com/2008/07/18/fannie-freddie-regulation-oped-cx_yb_0718brook.html

            And yes, it happened under the ‘tard.

          • tcc3 says:

            And Business Week says thats bullshit:

            http://www.businessweek.com/investing/insights/blog/archives/2008/09/community_reinv.html

            Banks were making overly risky loans because they were making a fortune on bundling them as investment vehicles, selling them to their duped customers and then betting against them.

            This is typical right-wing revisionism that blames the crisis on a policy they already don’t like or support.

          • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

            Nice link tcc3. Gee, I wonder who to believe: the Head of the Ayn Rand Institute or Bloomberg Business. A nut case that sees any regulation as slavery or one that just mostly views the world that way?

            Ha, ha.

          • McCullough says:

            Mayor Bloomberg quote:

            “I hear your complaints,” Bloomberg said. “Some of them are totally unfounded. It was not the banks that created the mortgage crisis. It was, plain and simple, Congress who forced everybody to go and give mortgages to people who were on the cusp. Now, I’m not saying I’m sure that was terrible policy, because a lot of those people who got homes still have them and they wouldn’t have gotten them without that.

            “But they were the ones who pushed Fannie and Freddie to make a bunch of loans that were imprudent, if you will. They were the ones that pushed the banks to loan to everybody. And now we want to go vilify the banks because it’s one target, it’s easy to blame them and congress certainly isn’t going to blame themselves. At the same time, Congress is trying to pressure banks to loosen their lending standards to make more loans. This is exactly the same speech they criticized them for.”

            http://capitalnewyork.com/article/politics/2011/11/3971362/bloomberg-plain-and-simple-congress-caused-mortgage-crisis-not-bank

            I could be wrong, but I think he owns 88% of Bloomberg Business. So, whatever bobbo.

        • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

          Excellent retorty McCullough—but I already pointed out that Bloomberg is only a shade less crazy than the Ayn Rand Institute. It certainly is true you have a snore gas borg of crazy to chose from when looking the Formerly Known as the Republican Party.

          But you make a better than grounded point. I also said I had no doubt that “things were said” and desires were made known.

          Not that hard to think a High Finance Guy would blame Congress/Feds/Fannies before blaming the BANKS. Can you think of any $$$Reason$$$$ he might do that?

          Here’s a hint: $$$$$$$$$$.

          And thats why I post only the obvious:

          RICH = CRIMINAL. Pick someone other than another rich criminal to give alibis to other rich criminals?

          Don’t waste your time trying to figure out who is guilty, or who is more guilty, or who is primarily guilty, or first guilty and all the other red herrings: THEY ARE ALL GUILTY!!! Congress, Regulators, President, Banks, Raters, Insurance Co’s, Mortgage Brokers and on up to Soros and the Bilderberg Group.

          THEY made all the $$$$$. WE got all the debt. I happen to think Banks actually are responsible for what they do—at least as much as a Welfare Queen trying to chisel society out of a wheel of cheese. So whats your point that is worth the time to discuss?

          “Oh Master Fannie May—puleaseee doan throw me into that there Briar Patch!!”

          Pull my finger.

    • Mextli: ABO says:

      You mean like this?

      “The subprime mortgage debacle refers to the credit crisis of 2008. In an effort to encourage making loans available to a broad spectrum of applicants including those with less that prime credit histories, the Federal government encouraged subprime loans, which resulted in non-performing mortgages when housing values stopped climbing and began to decline.
      http://wiki.fool.com/Subprime_mortgage_debacle

    • theaplus says:

      just because the government said to lend to more minorities, that doesn’t mean that you have more people to steal from!!! fair business to all!!! even though the government is backing any an all loan, the banks says the loan are good !! an if they go in default, the government pay the bank, so the banks have a win ,win !!! oh by the way they are also in charge of the underwriting!! so the houses had fraudulently appraisals, an high interest rates, on people that could lease afford it!! take from those who just wanted to have a house!!! if you can pay 900.00 a month rent, an you been paying your for years, why not own a home for you an your family!! at a reasonable interest rate an a honest appraisals , that’s , fair business practice!! that didn’t happen!!!! an then to bail them out!! an leave home owners to suffer!! while the banks was taking there home an putting them an their family on the street!!! while the banks was getting million in bonuses !!GREED’ GREED”

  4. McCullough says:

    Political timing pure and simple. But I’ll take what I can get.

    Shame on Obama. Maybe he should strip him of his citizenship, and have him disappeared as an economic terrorist under the NDAA.

  5. pedro says:

    Yawn!

  6. orchidcup says:

    The U.S. Attorney’s office in Brooklyn brought the biggest such case, against Bank of America Corp’s Countrywide unit, which agreed in February to pay $1 billion to resolve the allegations.

    Yet nobody goes to jail. Bank of America does not admit to any wrongdoing.

    What a privilege to be an immortal and imaginary Corporate Person!

    • msbpodcast says:

      If costs the banks even a dollar its bogative because its most likely to come out of the assets (and operations cash flow accounts,) and not the owner equity accounts, meaning that nobody who should be getting taught a lesson, like watch what the bank management is actually doing, is going to even hear about it, beyond there won’t be benefit payment this quarter.

      What they should do is throw all the loan managers and their sales staff out on their asses and force them find other lines of employment, like low-wage sanitation or parks and recreation employees.

      This will effectively accomplish two things:
      1) get the people responsible out of the economy’s way,
      2) serve as a warning to any one else in positions of responsibility.

  7. Uncle Patso says:

    Thank goodness for crusading New York prosecutors! The corruption that led to this economic collapse was so widespread that even some temp office workers I knew were aware of it and totally disgusted by it.

    This effort is ten years late, but better late than never.

  8. The0ne says:

    I’m going to have to show support by not supporting these banks. I’m already out of BOFA and should do the same for Wells Fargo. I think I’ll put my money in a small credit union bank.

    • tcc3 says:

      That’s the ticket. Better service, and you dont tacitly support “too big to fail”

    • orchidcup says:

      Credit unions are the way to go.

      My wife worked for the state of Texas, so she is a member of a state workers Credit Union.

      We can get a car loan @ 1.6% interest, if the car dealer is not offering 0% financing.

      They pay better interest than most large banks on savings accounts, and checking is free with no minimum.

      • NobodySpecial says:

        So small local credit unions are different than the small local savings and loans that triggered the banking crises before last?

        • bobbo, one true Liberal recognizing Obama is too far Right says:

          Not much different…. showing we haven’t learned a thing. Banks bigger than before the Crash and still no rules to restrict their gambling with our government guaranteed deposits.

        • tcc3 says:

          Theres nothing wrong with an S&L, just as theres nothing inherently wrong with a bank. Its the immoral, and often illegal actions of the unscrupulous ones that causes the problem.

          Might you have a problem with a local CU? Perhaps. Are there definitely problems with the way BOA does business? Without a doubt.

          My credit union does right by me and Im happy not to support BOA

          • bobbo, one true Liberal recognizing Obama is too far Right says:

            A Quibble when you say: “Its the immoral, and often illegal actions of the unscrupulous ones that causes the problem.” /// I disagree. The market place is known to have all types. Its human nature and to be expected. Money and proximity to it makes people crazy with greed. These criminals (aka = RICH) are not a problem IF they are dealt with in due course.

            So, the more germane problem is lack of enforcement of anti-fraud rules under the notion that fair play is some sort of Nanny State Interference with the Freedom of the Free Market. LIEberTARDS are often guilty of this. Just silly hoomans actually. Perhaps, actually children.

          • tcc3 says:

            You’re right, but in the absence of good (any) enforcement, all I can do is vote with my feet and not do business with bad actors.

          • NobodySpecial says:

            IIRC the S&L crisis was because these outfit worked on the borrow at %1 (from savers) loan at 4% (to mortgages) and be on the golf course by 3

            Then wall St came along and said, lend all your money to us – we will ‘invest’ it.
            If you lose the government will pay you back (and we still get our commission)

            Not a million miles different from now.

  9. dusanmal says:

    Would buy it if it was announcement that they will criminally prosecute Donor Corzine (which would be trivial according to the laws on books, it is proven that vast amount of customer money was transferred to MFGlobal accounts overseas; law as is places blame on CEO, regardless of his knowledge or not of the fact [law places burden on CEO to know]). But no, Corzine is not prosecuted despite clear and trivial case. Prosecute only enemies policy. I think I’ll enjoy BigBird head as decoration on Thanksgiving turkey.

  10. bobbo, one true Liberal recognizing Obama is too far Right says:

    Nice little kurfuffle above tween me, McCullough, and tcc3 regarding “Where the Big Banks “forced” into making bad loans to poor people thereby causing our current economic slump.” /// Tweak that statement to your preference but….. really? Banks forced to do make money they didn’t want to make?

    some arguments are so childish they strain the involuntary guffaw. So I say: BWHAHAHAHA. All of a sudden the Banks were powerless before the all powerful bureaucrats? Now–I don’t doubt for a moment that “things were said” or that preferences and desires were expressed==but the poor pityful bankers were forced to do something they really didn’t want to do?

    give me a fucking break.

    • Mextli: ABO says:

      “Proof positive anyone has nothing to contribute without a link.”

      So where is your link? LOOK, JUST LOOK! Sound familiar?

      Here is the federal stick applied to banks.

      The Feds Come After Wells Fargo… Again
      http://tinyurl.com/9r9qrc7

      “Wells Fargo must be getting used to this by now. Earlier this year, it settled, to the tune of $175 million, charges from the Department of Justice that it discriminated against more than 30,000 otherwise qualified minority borrowers in its mortgage-granting practices.”

      • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

        Nextlie—surely you don’t think every post must have a link in order for the poster/claim to be credible? I’m drawing a line under those who post the same nonsense repeatedly with never using a link. I like to think I use links liberally. Not all the time, but more than most.

        As to your point, surely you don’t mean that the government disallowing REDLINING is the same as forcing banks to make loans to unqualified people? Or is that what you and McCullough think of as “force?” Such a fine line between rank discrimination and requiring fraud. Ha, ha.

        TO BIG TO JAIL Wells Fargo is. When fines don’t make an impression…. what to do? Court appointed master to review operations would probably really get to them. I think we should do as Mpodcast recommends and pull a name at random from the Occupy Wallstreet Group and let them run Wells Fargo for a quarter or more.

        I bet that would get their attention.

      • tcc3 says:

        ” 30,000 otherwise qualified minority borrowers”

        Read your own headline. The regulators should go after racially motivated lending policy.

        I dont see anything that backs the claim that banks were “forced” to make bad loans.

        “Most of the nation’s top mortgage lenders have blood on their hands from their questionable actions during the housing boom, in which mortgages were pushed into the hands of many who didn’t understand what they were committing to, couldn’t afford the debt in the first place, or a suffered from a dangerous combination of the two.”

        Did you even read this article?

  11. sargasso_c says:

    How well should we protect the savings, businesses and investments of our own communities?

    • msbpodcast says:

      Make sure that you lend only to credit worthy entities in amounts that do not create onerous debt.

      If a bank’s collection department starts to look like a line-up at the local precinct that should serve as a trigger to the bank regulators to come investigate.

  12. bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

    Hey McCullough—I usually don’t resort to arguing from authority nor its sister defaming by same but Yaron Brook? The very worst spokesperson on any subject I could think of: “Yaron Brook (Hebrew: ???? ?????; born 1961) is the president and executive director of the Ayn Rand Institute, a non-profit organization in Irvine, California, that promotes the novels of Ayn Rand and her philosophy of Objectivism.”

    I’m sorry, but why not reference something Alfie has said? Proof positive anyone has nothing to contribute without a link. You retards know who are are. Tools. Each and every one.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yaron_Brook

    • McCullough says:

      Hey DOOFUS, I didn’t say I agree with it, or that I love bankers and don’t think they should all be breaking rocks in Gitmo…. Stop being an asshole and do some fucking RESEARCH. I am just defending MikeN’s statement. YOU are the one who fell back on Bloomberg Biz and someone is a fucking liar. Get your head out of your ass son.

      Like you say JUST LOOK!

      Mayor Bloomberg quote:

      “I hear your complaints,” Bloomberg said. “Some of them are totally unfounded. It was not the banks that created the mortgage crisis. It was, plain and simple, Congress who forced everybody to go and give mortgages to people who were on the cusp. Now, I’m not saying I’m sure that was terrible policy, because a lot of those people who got homes still have them and they wouldn’t have gotten them without that.

      “But they were the ones who pushed Fannie and Freddie to make a bunch of loans that were imprudent, if you will. They were the ones that pushed the banks to loan to everybody. And now we want to go vilify the banks because it’s one target, it’s easy to blame them and congress certainly isn’t going to blame themselves. At the same time, Congress is trying to pressure banks to loosen their lending standards to make more loans. This is exactly the same speech they criticized them for.”

      http://capitalnewyork.com/article/politics/2011/11/3971362/bloomberg-plain-and-simple-congress-caused-mortgage-crisis-not-bank

      • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

        “I am just defending MikeN’s statement.” /// Yes–and Mikey thinks the Banks were forced to make liar loans. Mikey does like Banks and you support his position. How is that not liking Bans yourself?

        Now…. maybe you do realize Banks are lying scumbags. That “should” allow you to recognize their fellow travellers like Bloomberg.

        My goodness McCullough==when you lie down with pigs don’t complain when others point out you are covered in mud.

        THEY ARE ALL GUILTY. Arguing about degrees of guilt is for shills. Try to be consistent. You are starting to sound like Rmoney.

  13. MikeN says:

    Redlining was all the rage in the mid to late 90s. Barack Obama and ACORN were even involved in some lawsuits against banks, that they weren’t lending ‘fairly’.

    Clinton Administration together with some lawsuits that got settlement decrees got banks to give more loans to minorities, who were unqualified for the loans. Then the government agreed to buy up the loans that the banks felt were unprofitable.

    • NobodySpecial says:

      So if it was just commies in the Whitehouse house forcing banks to lend to poor people of appropriate color then it won’t have had any effect on the rest of the world.

  14. slotmouth says:

    If anyone thinks it is easy to get a mortgage at WFC, walk in and try to get a mortgage. I used to work there as a private banker, meaning that I worked with clients 250k+ in liquid net worth. I tried to get loans for clients with 800 credit score, 100k income, etc. and they were denied for the smallest thing.

    What’s that? Unpaid parking ticket from 1989? Denied.

    The problem is that banks are scared shitless to make a loan because they will get sued, or the loan will get put back to them. When fannie and freddie became quasi govt organizations the whole system changed to a bizarre system of trying to make loans that conform to nonsensical guidelines in order to get unprofitably low rates. Fannie and Freddie need to go and banks need to take responsibility for their own loans. But what do I know…

    • Cap'nKangaroo says:

      You mean a bank make a loan and be forced to hold that loan until its paid off? Make a loan and actually be compelled to earn income off the continuing interest payments? And be on the hook if the mortgage goes bad and have a financial interest on getting the situation turned around instead of running away from it?

      Naw, it will never work. Not to mention this method removes the possibility of Wall Street firms skimming all the profits away.

  15. MikeN says:

    This is all moot, as Islamic law forbids charging interest.

    • slotmouth says:

      allahu akbar

    • Captain Obvious says:

      Actually it isn’t obvious how different sects of basically the same religion get all huffie about things. Jews, Christian, Muslims are all pretty much the same religion. It’s line talking to someone Spock getup and asking if they’re a “trekkie”.

      • msbpodcast says:

        At this time of year I love going up somebody in Halloween Spock Ears at parties and asking him questions about “Lord of the Rings” and pestering him if he doesn’t know the answers.

        Yeah … I know … I’m a prick, but a happy smart-ass one.

      • MikeN says:

        You should be asking different questions. People with star trek paraphernalia are more likely to be engaged in pedophilia.

    • Gwad his own self says:

      Jesus wasn’t a big fan of charging interest either, as I recall.

      Just because the ragheads are all batsheet crazy doesn’t mean that they don’t accidentally follow some reasonable standards now and then. Dietary laws, though now mostly obsolete, were essentially just decent food safety rules enforced by the imams/rabbis.

      • MikeN says:

        Muslim beliefs are the ones being catered to now. What Jesus believed is irrelevant.

  16. Cap'nKangaroo says:

    Personally, I believe Wells Fargo needs their cajones kicked repeatedly since they believe that since I dare to pay $3 or $4 dollars to access my Wells Fargo checking account at a non-WF ATM, I should have to pay an additional $2.50 to Wells Fargo.

    While WF has many branches and ATMs across the country, they have none accessible while driving a tractor-trailer. Which leaves me to the predatory truck stops and their ATM networks, only to be sh*t on again by WF $2.50 non-WF ATM fee in my bank statement.

    And furthermore, WF will not take my word that I DO NOT WANT their damn Credit Card. Every time I log on to my account I have to go thru the damn screen turning down their damn credit card. A week ago I go into my local branch to deposit a check and the teller tries to get me to sign up for that effing credit card.

  17. MikeN says:

    Wells Fargo should just call Debbie Wasserman Schultz as a witness. She said that the Obama Administration putting out wrong information on Libya ‘doesn’t mean it was false.’

  18. Yankee Doodle Depositor says:

    I don’t know why ANYONE does business with these CROOKS! I should know. I used to work for Wells Fargo (sorry). And guess what? My money was NEVER in their bank!!!

    Banks like Wells Fargo, Chase, BoA, etc. are just BEGGING their customers to GO AWAY! Banks like Wells Fargo will charge outrageous fees for the most ridiculous of reasons and financially RAPE people at every opportunity. These crooked banks have got so greedy that even large depositors sometimes can’t deposit their OWN MONEY in an account without being CHARGED to do it! So why on EARTH would ANYONE remain a customer is truly bewildering especially when there are CREDIT UNIONS or even non-affiliated local banks that DON’T do that!!!

    YOU’D HAVE TO BE A COMPLETE MORON (or an absolute lazy brain-washed mother-f-er) TO REMAIN A CUSTOMER OF ANY BANK LIKE WELLS FARGO, BANK OF AMERICA, CHASE, ETC.!

    Don’t take my advice. GO TO A LOCAL CREDIT UNION or at least a local bank which isn’t affiliated with these mega-crooks and see for yourself. And then be prepared for a little self-abuse when you slap your head so hard for allowing yourself to be someone else’s financial bitch!

    And do I even have to point out just WHO had a huge part in screwing America’s economy?! I can only speak for myself, but whenever I see a Wells Fargo, BoA, Chase, etc. customer I call them what they are — UN AMERICAN SCABS!

    • MikeN says:

      Lots of the smaller banks have abandoned free checking accounts, because of the Durbin amendment. I just go with no bank account, and I’m doing fine.

  19. energy mlm says:

    Like you I have a soft spot for cars and trucks.

  20. bignumber says:

    Eat up the bait more, all these fines say is business as usual, and it gets lapped up.