September 19, 2013
(202) 649-6870
OCC Takes Action Against JPMC to Protect Consumers and to Ensure Servicemembers Receive Credit Protections for Their Non-Home Loans
WASHINGTON – The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) today announced an enforcement action against JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., Columbus, Ohio, JPMorgan Bank and Trust Company, N.A., San Francisco, California, and Chase Bank USA, N.A., Wilmington, Delaware (collectively, the bank), for unsafe or unsound practices in connection with the bank’s non-home loan debt collection litigation practices and the bank’s non-home loan compliance with the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA).
The enforcement action requires the bank to provide remediation to affected consumers and to correct deficiencies in the bank’s practices and procedures related to the preparation and notarization of affidavits and other sworn documents used in the bank’s debt collection litigation and its SCRA compliance program. The OCC’s action also directs the bank to improve its debt collection litigation policies, procedures and practices to ensure that affidavits and other sworn documents used in connection with non-home loan debt collection litigation are accurate, based on the personal knowledge of the bank employee signing the documents, or other applicable standard, and are notarized in accordance with all applicable legal requirements.
With respect to its SCRA compliance program, the OCC requires the bank to improve its policies and procedures for determining whether servicemembers are eligible for requested SCRA-related benefits, ensuring that the SCRA benefits are calculated correctly, and verifying the military status of servicemembers prior to seeking or obtaining default judgments on non-home loans.
The OCC’s action also directs the bank to conduct a review of all non-home lending debt collection litigation at the bank from January 1, 2009 until present, and all non-home lending SCRA accounts at the bank from January 2005 until present, to identify consumers eligible for remediation as a result of the deficiencies and unsafe or unsound practices cited by the OCC. The bank must submit a plan to the OCC detailing how remediation will be made to affected consumers. OCC national bank examiners will monitor compliance with this order and the remediation required to be provided by the bank.
Related Link:
- Consent Order (PDF)
Protect service members only? The OCC sat back and let Banks drive millions of people into the ground, and here’s a rather lame recommendation for TBTF to “do a better job of it”. The OCC is Bank owned.
Incidentally, try calling the OCC and see if you are able to talk with Bryan. Like every other agency, administrative staff seems to be under a state of paranoid siege and will react with hostility to the general public.
Also,the OCC has never protected service members. It has, instead, allowed credit card pushers like Capital One to rip military members off, sometimes in addition to taking their houses.
What about protecting servicemembers and veterans from Ginnie Mae who order 50,000 foreclosure in 2009-2010 instead of modifying the loans when in fact Ginnie Mae had no financial interest in the loans.
The OCC has been made aware that by me of the Ponzi scheme that is the Ginnie Mae Mortgage Backed Securities as Ginnie Mae is the Kingpin in the RICO operation.
So we are talking about on average $100,000 in 50,000 case which was a 100% of all the VA loans applying that were in pools. The loan not even owned by Ginnie Mae but made to look as if the servicers/banks owned the loans but that is a cover to denied the military families the right to contact the right parties to deal with the situation at hand.
The OCC hand either turned a blind eye to the crimes or they are stupid as all get out and go as to Contract Law and of Criminal Law.
So credit cards v. $100,000 house?
The OCC, which has already proven thru its IFR attempted coverup for the banks’ frauds, has made the “bold” move of telling the banks to follow the LAWs (already)IN PLACE. Wow!
Rather than prosecuting a bank in violation, the tough OCC has given the banks a do-over at fluffing their paperwork to snag their uniformed prey (I guess before we send them off to the next war. [Wonder if they’ll dock their doughboy pay?])
The BANK IS TO IDENTIFY THOSE CONSUMERS ELIGIBLE FOR REMEDIATION…. Well. We ALREADY KNOW how thAT goes.
Tom Curry is just as dirty as all the rest. Despite his feigned humiliation at the OCC’s IFR scandal, he’s just signed onto the Ponzi RICO. He’s the one with the shovel and the broom.
This is just another HSBC type decision! The banking cabal makes trillions in criminal violation of the laws, citizens go to debtors prison, bankers go free.
Isn’t it great that we have regulators to protect us from being taken advantage of?