Skip to content

California Sues JP Morgan Chase for Illegal Practices

Spread the love

The NY Banks are use to controlling the courts in NYC so much so that they forgot the rest of the world does not accommodate everything they do. California’s attorney general filed suit Thursday, alleging that JPMorgan Chase & Co. used illegal tactics in its efforts to collect debts from more than 100,000 credit card holders between 2008 and April 2011.

The number one tactic used is to get rid of lawyers to prevent a defense or go after people who can not afford lawyers to ensure victory. JPMorgan Chase used this famous NY strategy in California. The complaint read:

“At nearly every stage of the collection process, defendants cut corners in the name of speed, cost savings, and their own convenience, providing only the thinnest veneer of legitimacy to their lawsuits.” It further alleges that JPMorgan Chase sued borrowers “based on patently insufficient evidence — betting that borrowers would lack the resources or legal sophistication to call defendants’ bluff.”

JPMorgan Chase engaged in what has become called “robo-signing” where they churned out lawsuits that was a practice which became widely used during the mortgage foreclosures until it was outlawed. Banks were forging signatures and pretending they had titles when the did not. JPMorgan Chase was one of the five major banks that settled with California and other states after the housing market meltdown for such practices.

This time the lawsuit concern debt-collection where once again officials similarly signed legal documents that included sworn declarations without reviewing the related files and bank records or even reading the documents. Anyone else would get 5 years in prison for such antics. JPMorgan Chase actually filed 469 debt-recovery lawsuits in a single day day alone. The company’s in-house lawyers filed an average of 100 lawsuits a day for each day the courts were open while its outside counsel filed yet another 20,000 lawsuits.

California is now seeking a permanent ban on the allegedly illegal practices as well as damages for borrowers who were harmed as the company rushed to obtain court judgments and wage garnishment orders without properly checking documents. They also are seeking a $2,500 for each violation of state law, and an additional $2,500 for every lawsuit that involved a senior citizen or disabled person.,0,6695376.story