JPMorgan to pay over $125 million to settle U.S. credit card debt probes

[Ichingcarpenter]

Source: reuters

JPMorgan Chase & Co has agreed to pay at least $125 million to settle probes by U.S. state and federal authorities that the bank sought to improperly collect and sell consumer credit card debt, according to people familiar with the matter.

The settlement also includes about $50 million in restitution, the sources said.

The nation's largest bank has been accused of relying on robo-signing and other discredited methods of going after consumers for debts they may not have owed and for providing inaccurate information to debt buyers. Robo-signing refers to signing documents in mass quantities without reviewing records.

The U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), 47 states and the District of Columbia are expected to announce the settlements as soon as Wednesday, the people said.

The states will split some $95 million, while the CFPB will get $30 million, the people said. JPMorgan Chase and the CFPB did not return calls for comment.

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/08/us-jpmorgan-credit-debt-settlement-idUSKCN0PI00520150708

---

JP morgan is a criminal organization

How many billions have they been fined for illegal activity?
Yet no one goes to jail

[Sam_Fields]

1. This is just the cost of doing business sometimes...

you gotta lose some blood once in a while.

[jtuck004]

8. They aren't. Their "customers", i.e. victims, are. n/t.

[tomm2thumbs]

2. pennies to them

if that...

[merrily]

3. A corporation's repeating unlawful behavior despite fine after fine says one thing very clearly:

They consider the fines an acceptable cost of doing a business that is far more profitable than the amount of the fines.

Several things have to happen: The fines have to go up much, more more and those responsible have to be fined, too, and be subject to imprisonment.

I once met someone who was like that with lawsuits. To him, settling a lawsuit fifty cents on the dollar was still half as expensive as being an eithical businessperson to begin with. He did evil to people with less money to pay lawyers than he had, knowing he'd be sued. Stole their ideas, their software, etc. Abused taxpayers too, because a lot of his shit did end up in court. He did not explain this thinking did to me, but someone who worked with his lawyer brother did.

Some say, "How can people be that way?" Wrong question. Can we stop them and if so, how? are the right questions. Others say, "Smart. Think I'll follow in his footsteps." To them I say, "You, too, are a POS."

[Orrex]

4. Thank goodness that they don't have to admit any wrong-doing

Because isn't that the most important thing, after all?

[Human101948]

5. I believe that is necessary to avoid subsequent lawsuits...

And this week's government lawsuit against Standard & Poor's was filed in part because S&P refused to admit wrongdoing, according to the NYT. The government says S&P knowingly inflated the ratings of mortgage-backed bonds; the company says the accusations are false.

No surprise there: If S&P were to admit that it knowingly inflated bond ratings, it could face a huge wave of lawsuits.

"If you say, 'Oh, we're guilty,' then everybody in the world who ever bought a bond that was rated could come after you," Lawrence Kaplan, a lawyer who's an expert in banking regulation, told me this morning.
http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2013/02/05/171160747/when-companies-agree-to-huge-penalties-but-dont-admit-wrongdoing

[Orrex]

6. You're right, of course, but it's still galling.

A 99-percenter who commits a crime seldom gets to craft a plea deal pre-exempting him from future consequences, but it's SOP for corporations.

[Human101948]

7. A corporation is a person and should be subject to the death penalty...

Which seems flippant but that's what the Founding Fathers believed.

To say that the founding fathers supported corporations is very absurd. Its quite the opposite in fact. Corporations like the East India Trading Company were despised by the founding fathers and they were just one reason why they chose to revolt against England. Corporations represented the moneyed interests much like they do today and they often wielded political power, sometimes to the point of governing a colony all by themselves like the Massachusetts Bay Company did.

But there is more evidence that the Revolutionary generation despised corporations. The East India Company was the largest corporation of its day and its dominance of trade angered the colonists so much, that they dumped the tea products it had on a ship into Boston Harbor which today is universally known as the Boston Tea Party. At the time, in Britain, large corporations funded elections generously and its stock was owned by nearly everyone in parliament. The founding fathers did not think much of these corporations that had great wealth and great influence in government. And that is precisely why they put restrictions upon them after the government was organized under the Constitution.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/06/09/founding-fathers/