var json_comments = new Array("

$\"user-pic\"$

pecan 3.14159265

November 27, 2009 12:13 PM

Moderate | Flag for review

Bravo to this woman for actually standing up to the BofA system, and doing what she felt was right. The cynic in me asked, \"well, do you know she has cancer?\" and also \"why isn't anyone helping the old lady with her bills?\" but ultimately, I think you just have to have a little faith in people, and whether they're lying or telling the truth, it would probably be better to help someone who didn't deserve it rather than write off someone who did deserve it.

2 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

November 29, 2009 10:30 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

thx so much for your words. im excited to see how many ppl are behind me and this cause. ppl definitely have to start taking a stand for what they believe in or banks will continue to abuse us with their usury

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 12:55 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Having faith in people seems to be a thing of the past nowadays.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

humphrmi

November 27, 2009 12:19 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

I did collections (bad checks) for years, and I too was a top performer. It's hard to hear stories from people who had problems. I did sympathize with them, and I generally gave people who had a story one chance - usually extra time to repay their bad check, or a break on the bad check fees we were legally allowed to collect. I felt that, by going above and beyond for them, they owed me the same - making an extra effort to set aside the money next month (or whenever we agreed to repayment) to pay us back. My company allowed me the flexibility to provide any incentive, as long as the end result was repayment. I could extend time, cut fees, and in some cases even knock something off of the principal. I used these incentives liberally and was eventually awarded for having the best recovery record (99.X% with a bunch of nines after the decimal). Our bad check writers became loyal customers, and continued to spend money with us - and generally did not write bad checks again.

The point is, if you treat people with respect, they will generally do the right thing, and usually a better business relationship follows. The small percentage of people who didn't represented something like 0.09% of our bad checks and an even smaller percentage of our gross sales. A small enough percentage that most companies would be envious of. All because my company let me be a fsking human.

2 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

AustinTXProgrammer

November 30, 2009 5:10 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Bad checks are different than credit cards. When people write checks they should KNOW that they have the money. Credit cards encourage people to excessively leverage themselves, and they might not dig out for several years. A life changing event could cause financial collapse.

If you were collecting for credit cards how would you feel if someone put $20k of medical bills on their 5% cards to pay off over 3 years because they had a good job and could eventually afford it, but then lost that job. Unemployment paid 25% of their previous income. It took 6 months to find a new job at a 30% pay cut? How is that person EVER supposed to dig out?

Banks take a risk loaning to consumers. The risk is priced into the interest rate. People won't always be able to repay. Not all of them are deadbeats. Get over yourself.

$\"user-pic\"$

November 29, 2009 10:32 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

i like to believe in people. im not naive enough to believe in everybody but I feel as though BOA fails to truly acknowledge the economic climate because it won't benefit them to do so. Ppl are really hurting right now and banks need to help be a part of the solution, not the problem

","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 12:21 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Double freaking kudos to this woman. If I had the money I'd loan it to her till she could find another job. BOA just like any other bank is very predatory in it's practices. All lending institutions are in it only for themselves and shareholders. Nothing they say will ever compare to their own actions.

1 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

November 29, 2009 10:36 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

i honestly dont think our shareholders understand the extent to which BOA does business. I bet if we made shareholders more aware, that would put the light under them

","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 12:23 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Wow, a $15 convenience fee just to make a payment over the phone? Don't get into debt with BoA, they really have you by the balls.

3 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

That's Consumer007 to you

November 27, 2009 7:10 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

A forced fee to pay your bill with no other way to pay it without that fee is not legal (I don't care what BOA, any other bank or anyone else says). They have to have some way for you to pay your bill without a fee.

Bravo to this woman. I wish the brianless idiots killing each other over line positions at WalMarts on Black Friday would instead start violent riots outside all the credit card company headquarters in this country over these practices and interest rates before the new laws kick in so they never even THINK of trying these things again.

$\"user-pic\"$

JiminyChristmas

November 27, 2009 8:49 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

It's not the only way to pay. Here's the scenario: You realize that your credit card bill is due tomorrow. There's no way you can mail it in on time. Thinking to yourself, Holy shit! I need to avoid the $39 late fee and 29% default interest rate. you call in to pay your bill. Then they nail you with the $15. It sucks, but not nearly as much as the consequences for your bill being late.

The sad thing about it is it hits the least savvy consumers the hardest, mainly people without the wherewithal to pay their bill online if they wait until the last minute.

$\"user-pic\"$

Preyfar

November 27, 2009 5:23 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Dell Financial Services for the Alienware Titanium account charges a $13 fee to pay by phone. They \"waive\" the fee if you pay by check, but... funnily enough, y'know, my checks just never made it there. The Alienware debit card didn't have an online system, so you've forced/suckered into paying a $13 fee every month in addition to what you owe for the \"convenience\" of knowing you paid your bill on time.

I always found that to be bullshit.

So, if the average payment takes me 3.5 minutes on the phone, and that 3.5 minutes costs me $13... how much money is Dell making whenever somebody has to pay by phone? It's ridiculous, and it's a crock.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

rekoil

November 27, 2009 12:28 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Sad part is, this will go on record as being fired for cause, which means she won't even be able to collect unemployment. I hope someone sees this and decides they *do* want someone like this working for them...

3 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

November 28, 2009 11:25 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

really depends on the state, but i know for a fact that she would qualify for unemployment in my state. 'fired for cause' would trigger a hearing with the unemployment board, but this particular cause wouldn't justify not paying unemployment. you have to f- up pretty bad not to qualify for unemployment (i.e. -> lie, cheat, steal).

$\"user-pic\"$

varro

November 27, 2009 4:22 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

\"Fired for cause\" usually means dishonesty, violence, or refusing to work. A performance issue like this (not upselling or ripping off customers) would not be \"fired for cause\" for unemployment purposes.

Not contesting the CSRs unemployment cliam would be the best thing - more money for antique commodes for B of A executives.

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 2:07 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

That's an arguable point. Most unemployment systems investigate the \"cause\" to see if it's really a true cause. She may or may not get unemployment.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 12:29 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Bank of America, like any bank, is a business and not a charity. While I respect this woman for her understanding and humanity, she unquestionably deserved to be fired because, well, she couldn't do the job she was paid to do. It was her job to collect on debts, not to help people neglect their responsibilities to make sure they can \"enjoy a trip with their child to the movies.\"

13 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

Rectilinear Propagation

November 30, 2009 10:15 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

neglect their responsibilities

Did you completely ignore the part where she explained that the program just turns the account into a loan? How is changing it into a loan they might have a chance of paying off let them \"neglect\" anything?

$\"user-pic\"$

November 28, 2009 11:49 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

it sounds to me like she was helping BOA collect on debts. in fact, if we take her word for it, she was a top performer at collecting on delinquent accounts. sounds to me like exactly the type of person you'd want working in collections.

what it really comes down to is that she wasn't collecting the way BOA wants her to. & that's their prerogative as her employer, but imho, it's a very poor business decision.

at one time, i needed assistance in bringing my debts under control & i was lucky enough to have someone like the OP work me into a plan that eliminated fees & reduced my interest rate. without that assistance, i was prepared to let the debt charge-off (i couldn't pay it). i paid that debt in full, so in the end, both the customer (me) & the lender won, didn't they? not everything's a zero-sum equation - especially not in the world of lending & collections. recovering your initial investment plus a little interest on the side is more often than not better than charging-off & seeking remedy through other channels.

$\"user-pic\"$

That's Consumer007 to you

November 27, 2009 7:24 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

And the concentration camps were a \"business\" too. Don't ask questions, don't have a heart, just follow the \"policies\" and strip the customers, and line them up for that big shower room...

$\"user-pic\"$

pecan 3.14159265

November 28, 2009 2:52 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

That's close enough - you've just violated Godwin's Law.

$\"user-pic\"$

Hogan1

November 28, 2009 1:12 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

Wow. Comparing BoA to a Nazi concentration camp was tasteless and brought to light your lack of maturity.

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 9:32 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Did you seriously just compare falling behind on the credit card and/or loans you willingly agreed to pay back to being forced into a concentration camp? You're a pathetic person.

$\"user-pic\"$

Stephmo

November 27, 2009 5:41 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Actually, official corporate apologist, collecting debts isn't even her official job.

Her official job is to do whatever would put BofA in the best position from a profit perspective. And, frankly, she probably did MORE in the long-run for them from a profit-perspective than their short-term \"grab it now\" model is doing.

This is why one of the proposals to do bonuses based on 3 or 5-year performances wasn't as crazy as it sounded. For someone who got to convert over to a loan, they'd pay off the debt in whole. Sure, at a lower rate - instead of charging off at 29.99% where BofA wants to take a gamble and hope that they won't do it in this calendar year and they can milk a few more fees or somehow manage to be afraid of the BofA collections department and keep THAT card open.

Nevermind what happens when those customers eventually have power again and can pick and choose cards - a person having to think 3-5 years down the road is suddenly panicked because those folks will remember and close accounts and leave for greener pastures. In that environment, this woman would be lauded as a picture of amazing customer service - because she was thinking about long-term customer satisfaction.

But, hey, let's all think short-term. Because everyone knows 15 bucks today is worth way more than thousands over a lifetime.

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 10:30 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

I think her official job is what BoA puts in her job description. Sure, an intelligent corporation would want to aim for long-term profit like you mentioned, but this isn't an intelligent corporation, and it's a well-known fact of the world that corporations don't like thinking, questioning peons.

$\"user-pic\"$

Stephmo

November 28, 2009 8:48 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

Fine - here's a sample job description from BofA (job #0900047271 in case you think I'm making things up). If you read through it, it sounds like she was told she was told the job was about several things, but really that whole \"assistance\" part really just meant \"only collect.\" I love the part about how one of must-have skills is \"Desire to resolve customer issues.\"

As a Collector I you would be responsible for assisting Bank of America customers who are experiencing financial difficulties. You would be responsible for assisting customers through the outbound and inbound collections calling process which frequently requires guidance on non-routine situations. Your primary responsibilities are collections, customer servicing and other loss mitigation or recovery activities. You will contacts delinquent, charged-off or high-risk customers in order to secure payment and determine reason for delinquency on active mortgage loans or credit card accounts. In the recovery area, collectors will work with customer to establish full balance repayment plans or settlements. You may also be required to works an established list of accounts on an automated collections system and/or auto dialer. The Collector I will resolve routine billing inquiries and negotiate payment arrangements to cure delinquent accounts as well as educate customers on account terms and alternate payment programs and methods.

SKILLS:

Required Skills:

* Previous customer service experience
* Excellent communication skills
* Ability to understand and discuss personal and financial difficulties
* Ability to analyze and negotiate payment arrangements
* Demonstrated ability to work in a fast paced environment.
* Strong computer skills

Desired Skills:

* Previous Collection experience
* Desire to resolve customer issues a must

$\"user-pic\"$

humphrmi

November 28, 2009 1:09 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

+1 Win

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 2:09 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Sounds like B of A has an opening in Customer Assistance that is custom made for you.

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 4:40 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Having worked in a call center where dealing with past due accounts was a frequent part of my job, let me tell you that after awhile you do become numb to the sob stories. The mother with the cancer bit that lost her mother and husband in the same week sounds like the kind of fake sob story someone would concoct to convince a collector to back off. If it is true, it's very tragic, but I just can't be sure.

I mean you can still be a nice person, but you don't get emotional when it comes to the customers.

Let's get one thing clear here: Most call centers I know of don't want creative thinkers with common sense, they want mechanical CSRs who can read scripts, quote policy and not really give a crap about you in the process.

That call center job I had really opened my eyes about what most companies consider to be \"good customer service\".

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 1:01 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

While it isn't BofA's responsibility to make sure that a family can enjoy a trip to the movie's so that they can \"neglect their responsibilities,\" I've no doubt that this isn't what the vast majority of BofA's most desperate customers are looking for. Sure, a lot of people are irresponsible with credit. But my mother works in bankruptcy and most of her clients find themselves in that situation not because of irresponsibility but because of unforeseeable changes in circumstances. Elderly and disabled people, and people with diseases whose medical bills have far exceeded what they can possibly pay. People who have been laid off a year before they were allowed to retire because the company drastically downsized or went out of business. People who have been hit with the debt or deaths or sickness of family members. These people don't deserve to be treated like this.

$\"user-pic\"$

humphrmi

November 27, 2009 12:37 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

I think it was unfortunate that she mentioned that, but there is nothing wrong with a profitable company giving people a break during a recession. Generally the company gains a lot of loyalty, and the largest percentage of people will do what's right and repay. Pushing people into bankruptcy by way of short-sighted profits doesn't do your shareholders any favors.

$\"user-pic\"$

pecan 3.14159265

November 27, 2009 12:32 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

I agree, though in certain circumstances, BofA policies really do screw with people. For instance, the woman who was denied entrance into the program because she had too much disposable income. Well, disposable income according to BofA doesn't necessarily mean you can afford all of your bills. You can't just stop turning on the lights for a month, and you can't just stop showering for a month so you can save money on the bills.

","","

$\"user-pic\"$

Shappie

November 27, 2009 12:34 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Horay for her!!! I still don't understand, why not work with people more like this woman did? People will still be paying interest on credit card debt, rather than eventually filing for bankruptcy and BoA not getting anything else from them.

I just don't get it.

","","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 12:41 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

She did the right thing. That whole \"just doing my job mentality\" is not helping us, it's hindering any type of recovery for the country in my opinion. Building relationships will keep customers coming back. humphrmi is 100 percent right.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 12:41 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

This is why I got out of the banking business! I feel sorry for her; couldn't BOA give her another job that didn't entail what she was doing?

","

$\"user-pic\"$

Munchie

November 27, 2009 12:44 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

There is a good reason why the banks act in this way. They know you are not able to pay, they don't care. They want to get the total amount you borrowed inflated to several times what the original amount is with fees and interest. Then they sell it to debt collectors for the original owed + a profit. They have just got the money they care about and got rid of the problem (you).

","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 12:46 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

I am going to print out this article and send it, along with a polite letter as a shareholder of Bank of America, to: Mr. Kenneth D. Lewis Chief Executive Officer at Bank of America Corporation
Bank of America Corporate Center 100 North Tryon Street Charlotte, NC 28255. It sounds like this lady's treatment is something upper management should be aware of.

2 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

JiminyChristmas

November 27, 2009 8:54 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Do it soon if you're going to. Ken Lewis is done at BofA as of 12/31.

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 1:17 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

I'll also be printing out this article and sending a letter - after I close all my BoA accounts this week.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

Hogan1

November 27, 2009 12:46 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

I applaud anyone who quits their jobs on moral grounds. She felt what she was doing was right but ultimately it was against the desires of the business. There are better occupations for her out there that I’m sure she would be happier in.

A bank offers a service on their terms when it offers you a credit card. People are not entitled to a credit card; it’s a privilege being offered to you, not a right. If banks started lowering rates and fees to everyone that came in with a sob story they’d never make any money. If they aren’t making money perhaps they simply won’t offer credit cards so freely to anyone anymore; then everyone will complain about that as well.

If you don’t understand credit or have a tendency to spend more then you earn, you probably shouldn’t have a credit card.

On a semi-related note; It would be nice if they brought back economics courses and added personal finance in High School as a requirement that you had to pass in order to graduate. Perhaps then more people would understand the concept of financial responsibility.

5 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

That's Consumer007 to you

November 27, 2009 7:22 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

And perhaps if corporations were financially responsible, people would be too, but corps aren't, so they aren't. You tell me what is financially responsible about credit card companies targeting people who pay on time and keep their balance paid, raising THEIR interest rates and calling them \"deadbeats\" because they aren't profitable enough! You tell me what is financially responsible about corporations having control of YOUR credit report, and more often than not posting false information on it and violating the law. You tell me what is financially responsible about taking taxpayer bailout money and then NOT starting to lend to people when you promise to? You tell me what is financially responsible about charging a fee for simply making a routine on-time payment - something NO business is entitled to levy or collect?

In case you hadn't noticed this is a PRO-consumer website, thank you.

$\"user-pic\"$

Hogan1

November 28, 2009 1:07 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

So you think the consumers shouldn’t have to be responsible UNLESS the businesses are? That's classic. Bad behavior on the part of business does not equal or warrant irresponsibility on the part of consumers in reality. In your fantasy world perhaps: but not the real world. In any case, some interesting distorted and exaggerated perceptions you have there.

Pro-consumerism is good and serves a valuable purpose. Your blend of MILITANT pro-consumerism is not and quite frankly is rather detrimental.

$\"user-pic\"$

David in Brasil

November 27, 2009 2:30 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

\"If banks started lowering rates and fees to everyone that came in with a sob story they’d never make any money\".

In principal, I agree with you. But if a bank can't make money by borrowing it at 0 -1% and selling it at 10%, they themselves should find another line of business. $15 \"convenience fees\", $40 overlimit and late fees and 30% interest are beyond the pale.

$\"user-pic\"$

Preyfar

November 27, 2009 5:29 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Here's what I don't get -- paying your bill online is the easiest convenience of all. Why isn't there a fee for paying so conveniently?

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 8:59 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

If you have a computer and internet access at home, paying a bill online is easy. It's out of reach for people who can barely keep the lights on. A computer is a luxury still.

$\"user-pic\"$

pecan 3.14159265

November 27, 2009 1:23 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

To be fair, medical expenses factor a lot into debt. So do other huge bills that come suddenly, like auto repair or home repair. Just because your hot water heater fails, doesn't mean you can simply wait to fix it. Likewise, if a tree falls into a window, you have to fix it. Some of these things can easily push people over the limit.

","","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 12:57 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Now can we get the rest of the story.

The OP was fired maybe because she has a difficult time distinguishing between the honest people and the liars.

Remember, people are stupid. And people are liars and cheats. Not everybody. But enough. Sometimes it is hard to distinguish the scum from the honest hard working folks. It was hear job to follow the company rules and distinguish between the liars and cheats and the honest people. She failed.

5 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

Rectilinear Propagation

November 30, 2009 10:17 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

The OP was fired maybe because she has a difficult time distinguishing between the honest people and the liars.

The OP was fired for not following policy. Whether or not the people she helped actually had medical problems or deaths in the family is irrelevant to BoA.

$\"user-pic\"$

November 28, 2009 2:54 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

I know that paying a loan late should have a punitive penalty (to encourage people to pay on time), but I always thought it was funny that people who were least able to pay get dinged with more penalties (because we know they are loaded right?). Whats horrible is there is evidence that the banks don't want you to pay on time either because clearly they make more money when you are down on your luck.

There is no mercy in the system sadly.

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 1:52 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

What's the harm in giving an honest sounding debtor a chance to repay? If they don't live up to the adjusted terms, it's back to ground zero and the bank can reserve their right to collect according to the original terms. Somehow I doubt that the true deadbeats are the ones asking for adjustments. The deadbeats just ignore their debts altogether. Its the well meaning, often desperate folks who Jackie would have likely have been dealing with.

$\"user-pic\"$

pecan 3.14159265

November 27, 2009 1:35 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Wow, way to completely wreck the intent of the piece itself. The point isn't whether the people she helped really deserved the help - the evidence in the form of their bank and credit card statements spoke for itself that these people did need the help. Regardless of how you came by your debt, whether it was medical bills or blatant irresponsibility, the people appealed to this woman for help - and personal feelings on who deserves it aside, it doesn't change that this woman put her job on the line to do what she felt was correct. We're so cynical when it comes to people in debt - \"you shouldn't have done that,\" or \"that's all your fault,\" or \"you don't deserve the help\" - it doesn't change that this woman chose to help people without judging them on how they obtained their financial burdens.

We could all probably learn a little from her example. Some call it gullible, and I agree that perhaps a few liars slipped through the cracks and got help with their debt at the expense of people who were rejected because she couldn't say yes to everyone, and had to maintain her job. But it doesn't change the fact that people who talk to these reps are doing so because they do have debt. People who don't have debt don't get phone calls from these people.

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 1:45 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

I guess you believe your co-workers and employees when they tell you they missed work because their mother died.

I believe them. The first time.

$\"user-pic\"$

coren

November 27, 2009 4:04 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Honestly, I don't think it really mattered in the end why people were having trouble paying. The couldn't lie about the fact that they were, cuz she could see their account information. Not paying it off is not paying it off regardless of why.

$\"user-pic\"$

pecan 3.14159265

November 27, 2009 2:35 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

If my co-workers choose to lie, that's on them. If they're harming people with these lies, that's another issue. But I don't make it a point to not believe people when they say they have a family emergency - what's going to happen if you believe them? Just be a human and take them at their word if you have no concrete reason not to.

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 6:55 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Yo dude, She gets to see SOME of their information. She doesn't have complete access to the stream of lies, dog ate my monthly statement etc crap that some of these people have been using for years.

Her bosses have heard all of the crap before and have access to the complete file. Hells Bells they might even know the lies and stories the worse of the worse are telling the other CC companies.

It is not everybody, but there are enough of them to cause problems for the slightly honest people.

PS; My business is situated at the front of an industrial complex. There are a handful of private investigators who try to sit in my parking lot to track cars entering the complex. Can ya guess why? Yep, workmans comp, insurance fraud. Oh and the occassional jerkweed that tells the CC company that he no longer works at XYZ corp. Sure, sure and for some strange reason your car goes there 5 days per week and stays for 8.5 hours.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 12:58 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Kudos to this woman for being a &@$*ing person. Jon Stewart should have her on the Daily Show to bring attention to shiesty banking practices..

I understand that banks are there to make a profit, and people should repay their debts, blah, blah, blah...

But these banks game the system to ream people for as much as they can. Their terms are not at all equitable, and no '&@$*ing person' would ever treat another person who owed them money like this. When a friend you loaned moeny too has trouble paying you, you work with them to make repayment do-able, you don't look at it as an opportunity to financially ruin them in order to line your own pockets.

","","

$\"user-pic\"$

h3llc4t, breaker of office dress codes

November 27, 2009 1:02 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

I hope she's able to find another job soon, hopefully one that will be a better fit for her skill set. She seems reasonably intelligent and articulate, and it sounds like she has a good heart.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 1:03 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Bravo!
I admire people who are willing to stand up for what they believe in and what is right despite the fact that they might lose their job over it. Too many people I know \"just deal with it\" because it's a paycheck. Maybe if more employees cared, the employer might look differently at the way they do business.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

SacraBos

November 27, 2009 1:13 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Good for you Jackie! You need to go work for George Bailey, and not Mr. Potter.

You ought to be on The Daily Show as an example of someone who knows how to be a f'ing person!

","","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 1:22 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

How does she know that any of the sob stories she heard from people are even true? This just seems like a bad fit between an individual and a job.

3 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

December 1, 2009 1:58 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Because believe it or not.. most American's would pay their bills if they had the money to do so.

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 2:06 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

What a lovely excuse you contrive in order to be cruel to people.

$\"user-pic\"$

pecan 3.14159265

November 27, 2009 1:39 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

I agree, some people were probably lying - but it doesn't change that they had debt, and needed help. It's the same way with the people who stand in the parking lots with their sob stories about being homeless, or having to feed five kids - are they lying or telling the truth? I don't know, but it takes gumption to stand in the parking lot and beg strangers for money. Maybe they're lying thieves, and believe everyone's a sucker - but maybe at some point, they'll realize the goodness people are capable of, and have a change of heart. I know it's all very Lifetime movie, but even though I'm extremely cynical of nearly every human behavior, I also know that there really are people who just want to do good and help others. Her heart was in the right place, and it shouldn't matter how these people came by their debt. The point is, she helped them, and showed them kindness, at the expense of her job.

","","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

BenChatt

November 27, 2009 1:44 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

It's quite wrong to blame the woman for obeying her conscience over the company line. Maybe BoA was right to fire her, but it was quite clearly a bit of a vengeful affair, the spilling of food on personal effects adding a \"Screw you\" to what appeared to be an otherwise normal firing.

The most interesting bit about this piece is the fact that she gives us all for certain information we otherwise just assume in the way of BoA's policies. Two things I wonder:

1) Is there any way we can verify her story? She sounds legit, and I certainly believe all those things about BoA already, but is there any way to corroborate this?

2) If it is legit, which seems likely, what will happen to those she approved despite bank policy?

","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

Bob

November 27, 2009 1:58 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Way to go Jackie. It's great to hear about someone with a heart and integrity.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 2:00 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

1) My last few BofA credit card due dates have \"conveniently\" fallen on Sundays. Convenient for them because there are no payment options on Sundays and they can catch people with late fees. Online payments must be made before noon on Friday or make a payment at a branch before noon on Saturday.

2) BofA kept sending me consolidation loan offers but when I applied I was declined and told that I already had sufficient debt. Huh?

","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 2:06 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

A lot of people may cheer Jackie, but when people aren't held accountable for their debts then those of us who are responsible and make our payments on time end up having to pay more to makeup for the irresponsible. So I'm glad it isn't the policy of most business to give irresponsible people a free pass. Jackie is probably a very nice person, but if she wants to contribute to charity she should use her own money, not ours.

2 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

h3llc4t, breaker of office dress codes

November 27, 2009 2:12 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

I think you might be misunderstanding what she did. People didn't have their debts forgiven, they were put onto payment plans that made it easier to repay the debts that they owed. Interest rates are generally decreased with these plans, and over-the-limit fees are sometimes eliminated. If your situation doesn't fit a certain set of circumstances (the specifics of which I honestly am not sure of), you won't be approved for these repayment plans. The company is still making money off of them, and it works out in the company's benefit if ultimately it results in a debt being paid back rather than charged off.

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 2:44 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

You said it...she's basically deciding who's worthy or not depending on their sob story. Financial hardship is definitely a problem in this country and will continue to exponentially explode as unemployment stays high. But a low-level, relatively unskilled employee can't be making such decisions on her own.

A person may not have money for milk and eggs, but their local bodega may give them to them for $4 instead of $5---or work out a payment plan. That's fine, of course, because the clerk is probably also the owner of the bodega.

Ms. Reynolds is not a majority shareholder or on the board, nor has she been appointed to make decisions on a business that is not hers.

","","

$\"user-pic\"$

shepd

November 27, 2009 2:06 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Like most call centers I've either worked in or my wife worked in, the easiest way to do what the company wants is to remember:

\"It's the customer's fault that they are using the company.\"

Once you get used to using this way of thinking, you can do whatever the company asks. In fact, you'll work extra hard to ensure the customers are punished just as the company wants, in the hopes that the customer realises it's their own fault they're being treated like this.

Of course, the moment you stop working there, you need to take that moral hat off the hook and start wearing it again, lest you turn into a sociopath all day long...

1 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

thebort

November 30, 2009 6:02 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

also in the hopes that the customer realizes they can get better service and prices by buying from companies that provide those things

","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 2:10 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Let's face it, you can't expect good management decisions from a company that paid good money for Countrywide Home Loans and Merrill Lynch. both of which had billions of dollars in bad assets on their books. BofA is such a lame company now that no one wants the CEO job when Lewis leaves. Maybe they should hire Jackie as Chief Exec. She sounds smarter than anyone else there.

1 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

November 28, 2009 1:42 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

She already got fired once for showing an inappropriate level of morality and humanity while still getting business done, why would she want to go through it again at the CEO level?

","","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 2:14 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

This person seems like she has good morals and truly likes to help people. Only question is, Why would she ever get a job doing collections? That is a job only certain people could ever do. BofA is such a large bank, why didn't she just find a position there that was more in line with her style of doing things?

2 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

Rectilinear Propagation

November 30, 2009 10:25 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

The job title & description may have been misleading or she may not have expected policy to prevent her from helping people experiencing hardship.

$\"user-pic\"$

pecan 3.14159265

November 27, 2009 2:22 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Maybe she got a job doing collections cause we all need jobs, and sometimes you settle?

","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 2:16 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

This should be a wake up call for all of us to break the chains of credit card debt. Bad stuff happens to people, and raising interest rates to 30% -- oh sorry 29.99% -- because someone misses a payment definitely doesn't help the situation. Yes, people who borrow money need to pay it back, but geez...when is enough enough?? Treating people like this just drives yet another nail into their financial coffins.

3 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 2:50 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Credit card debt is one of the most risky investments a bank can make. It's unsecured and available almost anyone. You can lambaste the fact that the credit is offered to you when you're just 18 years old, but what's the alternative? Ban credit cards until you're 25?

Anyway, as it has risk there has to be a higher interest rate. It's not an evil plot to make money, it's the equilibrium decided upon after years of quantitative analysis.

$\"user-pic\"$

Stephmo

November 27, 2009 5:36 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Starting Feb 22, 2010, no one under 21 can have a credit card without a co-signer who is over 21. Banks within a certain distance of a school cannot have ANY advertising for a credit card at all. (Those branches can have applications, but they can't have take ones even on the counter.)

It's a step in the right direction.

$\"user-pic\"$

November 28, 2009 10:10 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

For the many responsible ones without relatives who can co-sign, this is a step in the wrong direction. The irresponsible and regulators have to cover for the poor choices of others.

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 3:07 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

What you say is true, but when a card account goes pear shaped isn't it better management to settle with the debtor for something rather than charge off the loan altogether or carry it as non performing? There must be accounting or regulatory rules that make it disadvantageous for the bank to make an adjustment since BofA was so reluctant to do so.

","","","","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

savdavid

November 27, 2009 2:52 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Love you! You ARE a good person.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 2:55 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Here's what I don't understand: How has a company not realized that these practices are killing consumers, we all hate our CC companies, they are all being predatory, etc. etc., and started a \"fair\" credit card program that uses normal interest rates, has only a single sheet of terms that are in plain English, and uses a tool like stricter underwriting and credit limits and higher minimum payments to protect themselves from bad debt? I refuse to believe that the only way to be profitable in credit cards is to destroy your customers through deception and piling on. There is room to be a company with some humanity and be profitable (even ridiculously so).

You're telling me a company that lends money at 10% interest couldn't find a way to be profitable?

1 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 3:09 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

If all your loans were guaranteed to be paid back that would be possible for any bank. Defaults have been about 10% recently. BofA has about 150 Billion in balances. That is about 15 billion that is late or default. Someone has to pay for those who do not.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 2:58 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

This is just the sort of thing that sent me scurrying into the open arms of a local credit union. instead of being treated like a number, they treat me like a human.

3 out of 5 times that I roll in the door (I'm in a power wheelchair), the CEO/head guy/whatever you call it walks up behind me, startles me (in fun) and asks me how I'm doing today. The tellers know me by my face, and usually wave me off when I rattle off my account number. They know the routine transactions I make.

When I came in about a year ago to get a check to make a payment to a sub-prime credit card, the CEO guy caught my attention as I was leaving and said \"You know, we offer a credit card, have you thought about applying for it?\" I didn't know that, so I accepted his offer and filled an application out, handed it to the lady that does loans and credit cards, and parked in the waiting area. The CEO guy came up to me a few minutes later and said \"What's the limit on that card you have right now?\" I told him. He rattled off a number about $200 higher, and I accepted. He said \"You'll have the card this week\", and true to his word I did. No annual fees, ~14% interest rate, all in all great terms. Twice I've asked for small credit limit increases and twice I've been approved either on the spot or within 20 minutes by phone. Contrary to most people's experiences with credit cards provided by big banks in this depression, my terms have not been changed in any way unfavorable to me.

In fact, my last increase conversation was a couple of days prior to Thanksgiving. I was chatting with the loan/credit card lady about it, and she said she'd pass it on to the CEO guy and get back to my by phone. A tad surprised, I asked her if she needed my name or account number.. \"Nope\" she said. \"I know your face.\"

This credit union will have my business for a very long time.

1 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 3:00 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

And as an addendum.. This credit union is not in some tiny little town - It's in San Francisco, home to nearly 3 quarter of a million people.

","","","","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 4:25 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

This is one of the reasons I refuse to do business with Bank of America. I fell behind on some of my credit card payments, and here's been experience with each:

1. Dell -- they waived the fees and late charges if I brought my account current, which I did. Now I'm current on Dell.
2. Discover - if I agreed not to use my card for a year and make the year's payments on time, they lowered my interest to 9.99% from 29.99%. Now I'm current on that one to
3. Chase/BP - They offered to put me on a payment plan, but said it would be cheaper to just bring my account current and they waive the late fee.. which they did, and now its current
4. Citi -- same deal with Chase, offered to put me on a plan, but they just waived any fees I needed in order to bring the account current, and now I'm current and a very profitable customer of theres

","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 4:38 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

This is why I have my banking account with a credit union and not with a major bank.

","","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 4:51 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

The amount of positive responses to this article is overwhelming. Jackie you are a person of integrity and honor and BOA is NOT. I take this situation as a wake up call to take back our humanity in our professional lives as it enriches our lives and delivers us from the wasteland that corporations to often impose. Jackie you are a brave and courageous woman, I love what you stand for!!

","

$\"user-pic\"$

calchip

November 27, 2009 5:05 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

I heard on an interview (NPR, I think) with a finance analyst that Bank of America is teetering on the edge so badly that it would only take 2% of BofA cardholders to not make their payments for 10 days, and BofA would fold because it would not be liquid.

This bank, moreso than any others, has been adding and increasing fees, doing shady shit like changing it so all payment-due dates are on a Sunday, and crap like that solely to be able to rip people off with outrageous, unwarranted fees.

People can say that you should read your cardholder agreement before you get your card... but the one I signed, 15 years ago, bears no resemblance to the agreement I have now. The changes are tiny, incremental, and the bank does everything possible to ensure you avoid reading about them.

Additionally, I've discovered that BofA has a \"catch-all\" phrase buried into all of its agreements. I found this out after I had exhausted all of the arguments offered by the so-called \"Customer Solutions\" person as to why the bank was wrong and I was right on an issue. After I showed her why the bank was not doing what it had agreed in all of its terms of service, she pulled out a paragraph in the TOS that said, in essence, \"Bank of America may change any policy at any time, with or without notice to a customer, and may alter the way it interprets or enforces any policy at any given time if Bank of America believes that it is in its best interest to do so.\"

When she pulled that out, I knew that both she, and the bank, had absolutely no sense of ethics or desire for fair dealing whatsoever.

Unfortunately, when you are \"too big to fail\", the government will look the other way and allow you to do everything but put a gun to people's heads to get enough money to keep yourself in business.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

daveinva

November 27, 2009 5:14 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

\"According to BOA she doesn't have enough income to be put on the program, but she can however keep paying the high interest rate on the account, and fees, because at the end of the day it is her account, she did rack up the debt, and she was late, so she did deserve that 29.99 percent interest rate that she had, and it wasn't up to Bank of America to help her figure out how to get this debt paid off. It was up to her.\"

And that's precisely as it should be.

You want personal service? Shop at your corner store. You want cold, capitalist efficiency? You deal with soulless companies.

And I don't use soulless as an insult-- I *want* my credit card company (and my insurance company, and my governments) to be soulless. And blind. And deaf. I want them to tell me, \"Here are the rules, follow them and you get X, break them and you get Y. No exceptions other than the ones here in the fine print.\"

You start arbitrarily breaking that system down, and who suffers? The honest, diligent people who had no trouble paying their bills on time, reading the fine print, or understanding their contractual responsibilities.

Do I have sympathy for the cancer survivor, the unemployed man, the vision-impaired elderly? Yes, tremendous sympathy, enough to both give a large percentage of my income to charities and volunteer (admittedly, not as often as I'd like, but I still do). But that's *my* sympathy, and no one else has to share it.

If BoA wants to change its policies to be more \"charitable,\" by all means, go ahead. Business decision, marketing campaign, just pure decency, have at it. I'd certainly think more of BoA if they did that.

But the OP's proper response was to complain-- first to her boss, than to her boss's boss, up the chain until she got a response that satisfied her, or she determined that she needed to move on. What she did instead-- knowingly violate her employer's policies, whatever the reason-- was an eminently fireable offense. In fact, I'd say it went as far as theft, as she intentionally reduced the income BoA was rightfully owed. She's fortunate she was only fired, and not sued or even charged.

She sounds like a bright woman; I wish her well in finding an employer she appreciates.

But again-- whether it's Fannie Mae encouraging the handing out of mortgages like candy or BoA employees \"fighting the power,\" the end result is the same: one person is helped, but many others the OP will never meet will be hurt, through no fault of their own, even though *they* followed all the rules.

3 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

Verdant Pine Trees

November 28, 2009 10:49 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

I'd have to disagree with you about the OP reducing the income BOA \"rightfully earned\". As has been explained earlier in this discussion (and better than I can), these usurious terms BOA is pushing offer a short term benefit to the company at the expense of the long term profits.

BOA is not in the wedding and funeral business, where you expect to have a short-term, finite relationship with the client. Plenty of these people who are having trouble with their bills were good, solid customers and will be good, solid customers once again when the economy clears up, they become solvent and current again, and their troubles go away. I have a close, close friend who, for the fifteen years I've known her, has always been the soul of discretion when it comes to managing her finances, for example, paying off her student loans in record time. She had some financial trouble recently, through no fault of her own - she helped out a family member who turned out to have lied to her, BIG TIME, about the mortgage they shared together. In the future, she'll be a good customer who could bring in a lot of money to the bank who treats her well now. Sometimes people misstep. Sticking it to them in the short term may earn BOA stockholders a few extra toys in the stocking this year, but becoming one of the most hated companies in the world doesn't usually pan out well.

By the way, I'm a BOA affinity customer right now, but debating whether to move because of their shifty practices. We get treated much better at the local FCU and would never borrow money from BOA because of this sleaziness. They're not just alienating \"bums\".

$\"user-pic\"$

That's Consumer007 to you

November 27, 2009 7:17 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Ummm In case you weren't paying attention, the honest hardworking people who pay on time are now the prime targets of credit card companies. You pay on time? You are a \"deadbeat\" and a \"cheat\". Wake up and shut up.

$\"user-pic\"$

zomg!

November 27, 2009 6:54 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Jesus broke the rules when he flipped over the money-changers' tables. Do you think he should have just complained to God (his Boss) and not done anything?

Do you think Jackie complaining to her Boss would have done any good?

","","","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 6:31 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

I am the person who made the video. Thank you everyone for all your support and kind words. I definitely would like to take a moment to respond to what I have seen written on here.

1. Yes, I was a competent collector. In fact, I was one of the top associates. When it came to Bank of America and their practices, I understand very well about being for profit and taking the proper actions to ensure that you stay for profit and stay profitable. Being a top associate, I did my job well collecting far more than those who were more tenured than me. Not everyone is a sob story. Like many Americans, I feel like if I make a debt then I should pay my debt. There is a difference, however, in collecting debts and being a bully. I collected debts from people who eluded us in the past. From those who spent foolishly and were angry that had to pay. I've collected from those who simply forgot and those who put up a fight but I got them to pay anyway. These aren't the people my video is advocating for. BOA is a rich company. All those who are literally suffering, dying, and homeless are the one's I made the video for. How do you justify telling a dying woman that 30 percent interest with fees is fair. This \"just business\" mentality is disgusting. Right now BOA is about at a 10% delinquency rate. Does this sound bad? Because this means that 90% of their cardholders are still paying. Let's do some math...let's say that BOA is getting 10% interest off all these accts every month (and 10% interest is low. we all know they are charging higher) What does this acct to dollar wise?? A whole lot. Enough so that when a loyal cardholder writes in, the least BOA can do is waive a fee and stop charging over $70 in fees every month until they are caught up. Also, BOA's attitude is if you don't want to pay off the debt, you shouldn't have made it. They say they charge high interest rates because credit cards are the riskiest product they offer. Here is an idea, use all the people in your marketing department to actually come up with a product that works. Yes, credit is important. In this society we need it. So why not make it work? Clearly this system is broken so why don't the folks at BOA, Wachovia, Suntrust, Wamu, etc figure out how to make credit work. This is the equivalent of the real estate market crashing because of greed. Why keep pushing products that turn a profit on the front end but causes a catastrophic financial let down in the long run? That's just greedy.

2. Why did I work there? I am not ashamed to admit that I needed a job and took what was offered. I was told I would be a patient advocate for the customer assistance department. Who knew that translated to collector for a collection's department? I certainly didn't.

3. Did I deserve to be fired? I don't believe people should break rules. They are there for a reason. I believe people should be accountable for their actions and I continue to be accountable for mine. When my boss pulled me aside, I never lied about anything and let him know how I was thinking. I benefited in no way from any of my actions. If I had taken money out of a cardholder's acct then that is something to be fired for. What I did, in my opinion, deserved a right up. I really just wanted to help people.

4. How often did I \"help\" people? I don't want you guys to think that I went around putting everyone on a program. Like I said, I did my job well. The proof was in my numbers. But every so often, I would encounter a cardholder that \"got to me\" and I definitely did my all to help them get approved. In fact, it was only once that I went overboard and approved a program that I wholeheartedly knew a cardholder didn't qualify for. But I knew that she needed the program and that me helping her was her only way of staying up to date. I definitely wasn't a rule breaker or a rebel.

5. There are honest people. There are liars. I encountered them both. I had times when I knew someone was blowing smoke. And I had times when I really couldn't tell. But, I also had times when I had both men and women sobbing on the phone because they had no where else to turn and no one else who would listen. I wasn't gullible. I wasn't helping everyone with a sob story. In fact, I was fired for one isolated case. Like I said, I never tried to be the rebel with a cause. I just wanted to offer help that made sense.

4 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

November 28, 2009 1:07 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Jackie,

as far as I'm concerned, you didn't even deserve a write-up. You followed the companies rules. It's not your fault if the company's rules are hypocritical in nature. On one hand, they tell you to:

* do the right thing for the customer;
* think of yourself as a customer;
* and do the right thing for the company.

.. and on the other hand, \"policy\" is apparently to crush as many souls as possible by allowing them a theoretical glimmer of hope but denying it to people who fail to luck out enough to meet the convoluted requirements necessary.

Your actions in helping those customers who needed help were very much in line with points #1 and #2, and your exemplary track record of collection was very much in line with point #3.

As far as my little pea-brain can understand, you took a horrible situation (a clearly hypocritical set of policies) and somehow made the most of it. The righteousness of your position is undeniable. The only thing you should be fired for is setting the bar too high for those wharf rats and lowlifes festering throughout the company.

As far as I'm concerned, you're a hero for our troubled times, and I mean \"Rosa Parks\" level of hero. I guess I can't speak about whether you'd WANT to be that, but you certainly should be.

I wish the best of luck to you in finding a new job. You are clearly a bright, articulate and decent human being.. so you'll need all the luck you can get, I guess.

Charles.

$\"user-pic\"$

Stephmo

November 28, 2009 9:59 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

Good for you.

And good for you for understanding that collections is not a narrowly-focused job. Yes, there are scammers. But there are many, many others who really need help. Unfortunately, individuals who either have never been on the phone or have allowed themselves to take it personally when one liar got one passed them are the ones making decisions on who gets help. Or worse, individuals whose idea of having things \"rough\" is that mad sacrifice of deciding to cut back to eating out only twice a week are deciding what you do.

You'll do fine. You're articulate, you've done the right thing for a small number of people and you're putting a human face on this problem. Thanks for showing that corporations have no problem taking away jobs from people that can help those who need help. The more actual faces - the real ones that aren't scams, the people that are struggling, the people that did try to do right - that people see, the less that people can pretend that everyone who has ever lost a job or been in debt is an irresponsible lowlife.

$\"user-pic\"$

That's Consumer007 to you

November 27, 2009 7:14 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Jackie, way to go girl! I applaud you as another citizen and consumer with a conscience. I'm just sorry you had to be abused and in turn be made to abuse others for so many months.

I also wish the thousands and thousands of other decent people like you would get busy making videos exposing the other companies so people in this country really start to understand how things really are and why we should never let corporations get so powerful.

Good luck to you getting a decent well paying job helping people you deserve!

$\"user-pic\"$

zomg!

November 27, 2009 6:58 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Jackie, you did the right thing. I worked for Key Bank, and I walked out one day because I couldn't take it any more. They wanted me to pressure people into getting Home Equity Loans and Lines of Credit. When I told my boss that I couldn't possibly sell it to some of my clients because I felt it was too risky for them, I was told to present it regardless and let them make their own bad decisions. I couldn't do it. I literally walked out the door and never looked back. A year later, the housing market crashed. If more employees like me had stood up to the corporations and said \"no, we're not screwing our customers\" maybe the housing market wouldn't have crashed at all!

","","","","","","","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

That's Consumer007 to you

November 27, 2009 7:27 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

I want to know RIGHT NOW why when a bank borrows YOUR money, they only pay you 1% interest, but you borrow theirs and they charge you 30%!!!!! Isn't that WRONG to anybody here? We need a federal law now saying they have to be the same. Why does a corporation deserve more interest money than a consumer?

","

$\"user-pic\"$

dlikhten

November 27, 2009 8:05 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

The only \"wrongness\" i feel for your customers is the fact that the help programs didn't get given to people who need them. The rest is well deserved.

Here is a history of the world of lending for you. Back in the day, banks liked people paying on time. It means they can charge merchants their 1%-5% and the consumer would not know they are giving money to banks out of the pockets of the stores they buy from. Literally, and that all prices are jacked up about 1-5% because of it for everyone. It was good and convenient.

Then one day in the 90s a pair of mathematicians came with undeniable proof that late-payers are good for the banks. People who feel a wrongness for paying late will be ok paying their late fee because they forgot, or don't have the money ATM. The banks were happy. They made more cash. Then it was suggested that banks add high interest rates with mechanisms to ensure people with a balance pay high %. And the way they calculate even paying off my full balance today does not mean next month I won't get an interest, technically if you don't pay off your CC correctly you can be paying a few dollars for a long time. To accomplish profits banks target those who they KNOW won't pay well. And they don't care. Remember they are lenders not charities. Why else would a bank offer to give ME (at the time, unemployed student) a $5000 credit line? How do they expect me to pay that off? with good intentions? They gave my friend an 18yo girl unemployed in highschool over $5000 credit, and her mom had brain damage, and went off buying crap racking up debt. How do they expect an 18yo to make $5000 and pay it off?

In the end the best way to end this is to TEACH PEOPLE FROM AN EARLY AGE (jr high school) to SPEND WISELY! Teach them that they will ALWAYS have the option to get loans, but never take them unless the loan works for you. I have only been in debt for... 2 weeks for $500 because I needed it. Until I have a good reason to get a loan I won't even with credit cards (which I use frequently) because I understand responsibility. Vice versa my friend does not, she racked up over $8000 already not realizing she had to pay it off, and how much it costs. The point is EDUCATION IS KEY.

So quit whining about it and send a letter with this information to the department of education telling them to educate our youth. And I suggest everyone reading this does! And lastly never expect a for-profit company to be a charity, unless they say they are, otherwise turn elsewhere for help.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

UIS4821

November 27, 2009 8:28 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

It is well known in the collection industry that BOA is one of the worst in terms of taking advantage of people. They are one of the few that continue to apply interest to accounts even after charge-off (6 months delinquent). So what she is saying definitely holds water.

However, collections is NOT customer service. Everyone that calls in has an issue they are dealing with trust me.

It takes a different kind of person to be in collections.

","","","","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 27, 2009 11:28 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Anywhere know where this girl is located? If she's on the west coast, I have a job.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 28, 2009 12:14 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

While I commend the tone and inflection of this video, I don't believe the full story is being told here. What this person did was against federal regulations in compliance with the FDIC and the OCC. Bank of America, or any bank for that matter, does not make the guidelines by which they implement hardship and repayment plans and/or settlements or payoffs. Her actions to place customers on programs that they could not afford according to regulatory standards, inflated her collected balances and made her a 'top performer' increasing her monthly bonuses. I question whether her intentions were noble or whether she got caught with her 'hand in the cookie jar.' Employees of all Loss Prevention departments at any financial institution are required to take Federal Regulatory education in order to do this type of job and are constantly updated and informed of the repercussions of not adhering to these guidelines. The programs that she speaks of are monitored by the Office of the Comptroller of Currency and all financial institutions have an obligation to the accuracy of the information. Skewing the numbers is a fraudulent act and she knows that she profited from it.

","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 28, 2009 1:21 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

I think the cherry on top is that they just threw her food on top of her belongings with absolutely no respect. What a slap in the face.

","","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 28, 2009 6:52 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

In most states, getting fired will cause you to speak with a monetary determination claims examiner to see if you get unemployment. They will call the employer and have you on the phone at the same time, so you can hear what the employer says is the reason they fired you.

Then after the employer hangs up you have a chance to defend yourself to the agent, and they make a decision in a couple days and based on their determination, you get the money straight away or have a penalty waiting period of I think it is 6 weeks in NJ. You do not get back pay for that time you are waiting either.

1 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

November 28, 2009 7:02 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

that above post was in reply to someone who was inquiring whether or not the OP was going to be able to collect unemployment insurance. Been there, done that, got the T shirt and went back to meet the band.

","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

thebort

November 28, 2009 9:33 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

having worked in this type of field (call centre), i can relate to what happens, its all about making money at any cost, even if a 5 year old can tell the cost is higher then the savings.

","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 28, 2009 10:18 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

This is a little besides the point of the original post, BUT, I think it should be said that it is important to establish a credit history when you are \"college-age\", because without a decent history, you will be required to have cosignors on your student loans....and, as we all agree, education is key! Not everyone knows a qualified cosignor (i.e. college-age children of the adults calling Jackie to negotiate payment terms of their debt).

If we educate kids during high school about what it means to be financially astute and to make wise decisions to set themselves up for adult-hood (we should also teach high school kids about the student loan process, because if high school teachers do not, student loan company reps in college will), society would obviously benefit.

Until FICO scores are obsolete and we continue to measure a consumer's veracity and fitness using their credit history, the BOA/HSBC/CITI/JPMC cycle will perpetuate itself. If we arm young adults with the right financial knowledge, the cycle may have less participants. Unfortunately, our teachers are teaching bullshi* standardized tests instead of personal finance...but that's a topic for another post.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

ripkrb

November 28, 2009 11:16 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

BofA questions customers about their monthly expenditures to determine if they've cut back on \"frivolous\" expenses. If a debtor is telling a lender they cant repay their debt yet they are paying $150-$300 month for a cell phone, another $60 for satellite TV, high speed internet, etc. then the bank has every right to deny assistance. I'm sick of this sense of entitlement so many Americans have these days. Since when is a night out at the movies more important than repaying your debt obligations?!? Go to Red Box and rent a movie for a dollar, then watch it at home on that Plasma or LCD tv and home theater you probably purchased on your credit cards. You, the consumer, took a risk and lost. Suck it up!

1 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

Stephmo

November 28, 2009 12:07 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

-OR- It's more like this:

- A consumer is paying $30 bucks for a bare-bones phone plan that is their ONLY phone. One that is on so they can get calls from other collectors and, hopefully, job offers that will help them get out of debt. They don't have web access, they don't download videos and they aren't spending $100 a month on text-messaging.

- There's no plasma TV. You can pretend all you like, but you've put a picture on that makes you feel better about denying people.

- Cable is long-gone. It has been.

- RedBox rentals? This family doesn't waste a dollar on a movie rental. They go to the library and they get movies for free. They've figured this one out already. Oh - and this is where they likely access the internet as well. For their hour while other patrons wait. In that hour, they'll search job sites, check e-mail and tat will be about it.

It's really nice to pretend that everyone fits a very narrow mold - much like the whole \"welfare queen\" stereotype that isn't even close to being representative of everyone.

The sad thing is that she was dealing with people willing to work on paying their debt - they just want a little help. And it's not even to pay for luxuries. Yes, or rep said, \"so they can enjoy a night out at the movies with their kids,\" and that makes her a human being. Which is actually a nice thing.

Of course, you probably think it's all cool that you've figured out all of humanity. And that you know everyone in the world sucks.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 28, 2009 11:23 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

How she handled that situation was commendable. This is not the case in all banks. I work for a small community bank and we do not charge exorbitant rates on our credit cards or mess with billing dates and credit limits. It is the big banks that pull this crap. Anyone who banks with B of A, Citi, Wells Fargo, etc., pull all your accounts and move to a small community bank. These big banks are not too big to fail.

","","","","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 28, 2009 1:40 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Did you miss the part of the OP where she mentioned that she had a very high rate of efficiency in recovering the debt? She didn't forgive them of their debts, she simply afforded them more reasonable terms. Bear in mind that BoA's own corporate rhetoric included policy phrases like \"put yourself in the customer's shoes, and do what's good for the customer and what's good for the company\". Of course, that's contradictory to BoA's other policy of \"screw everyone as hard as you can with every ridiculous fee imaginable, wave this 'Fix Pay' program that might actually help them under their nose, and deny it to them because we'd rather crush them and suck their blood dry\".

She helped people that needed it, maintained her high standard of collecting on outstanding debt, and got fired for it.

Hopefully when three funny-looking ghosts visit you in the dead of night a few weeks from now, you'll better understand why so many people are behind her.

","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 28, 2009 9:50 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Someone give this woman a medal.

Awesome story.

","","

$\"user-pic\"$

Difdi

November 28, 2009 10:53 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

* do the right thing for the customer;
* think of yourself as a customer;
* and do the right thing for the company.

Hmm. Given the meanings of those words, it's nearly impossible to do the OP's job and obey all three rules. The only way you could, is with a customer who has no problems, who just called up to thank the bank (which just about never happens, and such a person certainly wouldn't be talking to collections).

If you obey rules #1 and #2, you almost certainly will break rule #3. If you obey #3, you can't avoid breaking #1 and obeying #2 would make you near-suicidal. But if #1 and #2 are unimportant, they wouldn't be repeated so often.

I'd say the OP not only did the right thing morally, but ethically as well. Obeying 2 rules and breaking the third is better than obeying one rule and breaking the other two!

","

$\"user-pic\"$

commonsensemoney

November 28, 2009 11:24 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

I mentioned this article to my husband this morning because I have a BOA that I rarely ever use and when I do pay it off. The saddest thing about this is the conclusion we came to: we live in a culture of credit. If we don't have good credit we are basically nobodies. but to have good credit you need to do business with these type of companies with no morals or regard for their customers.

","","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

80sbaby

November 29, 2009 10:43 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

im not surprised by this. i work for a local credit union in miami as a loan officer and i speak to countless people daily who leave banks and come to us because they are a number at the end of the day. even if one of our members skips a payment the highest his/her interest rate can be is 17.99 now i know it is high but nowhere near 30.%

","","","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

Rectilinear Propagation

November 30, 2009 10:34 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

Too often I would have to give them the spiel about, \"I can't accept you [into the program] because your disposable income is too negative,\" and then they would just sit there on the phone and say, \"Well, if I could afford to pay my bill, why would I need a program?\"

See, that's just bassackwards. You're only let into the program if you have enough income to pay off your card without assistance?

In fact, I was one of the top performers of my department, even outdoing those who were more tenured than I was.
A reasonable company would look at that and say, \"Hey, she's recovering more money for the company. Maybe instead of firing her we should tell our other employees to do what she's doing instead.\" But no, BoA would rather make less money by offering an assistance program that no one who needs assistance can qualify for.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

November 30, 2009 2:34 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Where in the hell is the federal government at to investigate these companies? Too bad she is probably going to get sued by Bank Of America for the video. After all if \"Cash for gold\" can do it, why can't Bank of America?

","","

$\"user-pic\"$

scut

November 30, 2009 8:23 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

No where did the commenter say that consumers shouldn't be responsible for their actions. I have seen several stories on this site alone regarding each of the things listed in his/her comment. Mainly, I read a lot of frustration. Nothing more. Certainly nothing to deserve your brand of nastiness.

Psst. The site is called Consumerist...ya know, kind of like communist with a fancy twist. It's power to the people and buyer beware fare. Since when did being indignant about corporate abuse equate to crazy, militant behavior here? Grinch, please!

","","

$\"user-pic\"$

jim_reed

December 8, 2009 12:00 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Wall Street likes BofA, many people are living off the returns from BofA's stock, who should we take money from? Those who invest in our infrastructure or those who find trouble paying their bills? Every law that we have in place about the use of credit has been placed there by our own representatives, if these rules were so bad why did we allow them to be put in place? We have made our own beds and now we must sleep in them. Everyone should take responsibility for this mess.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

anon

December 9, 2009 9:15 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

you go girl. Bof A sucks. They didn't deserve to have you. But I can tell you, you are not the only employee there who did this. They just haven't caught the others yet. Also, Bof A isn't the only creditor to charge these \"covenience fees\" - NMAC does too. Same as ATM fees - it was supposed to be less expensive as it took the human out of the transaction. Now they charge them for the convenience. and most banks have limits on the amount of checks you can write. Unfortunately the only way to really stick it to these lenders is to go to a cash transactions. Screw them.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

January 24, 2010 4:23 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

When I worked for Washington Mutual as a customer service rep, I was not allowed to reverse ANY overdraft charges or reverse ANY fees. If I did, I would've been fired on the spot. I ended up getting layed off anyway because they transferred my position to India.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

March 5, 2010 8:10 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

I applaud this young lady for her efforts! Shame on B of A! I once worked in credit card collections.....I took an extended lunch break and never returned. Its not just B of A who treats people this way but it is great to see someone call them out on it! I hope she continues to tell her story. Maybe upper management should make some changes!

","

$\"user-pic\"$

March 6, 2010 12:46 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

I'm filing for bankruptcy. Everything I have is junk. They'll probably get my tax refund, everything else is not worth paying an auctioneer to sell.
Chase changed their website address several years ago, they did not put a notice on their old website. I tried to sign in to pay my bill but I couldn't get the page to load after putting in username and password, I thought it was my crappy obsolete computer that wasn't supported by anything but dialup service but I called to ask about why I couldn't access it. They said there was nothing wrong with their website so I wrote a paper check and snail mailed it, i didn't know you could pay over the phone at the time and nobody suggested that. My payment was late that month. The same thing happened the next month, I wasn't having any trouble with any other websites and I called again, they still didn't tell me the address had changed. I finally found out because I googled to see if there were any other complaints about the site and the new site was in the search results, by then my interest rate had been changed from 9.99% to 29.99%. Everything has gone downhill from there, eventually the different banks have raised minimum payments, raised interest rates, which raises the payments further, and lowered credit limits. Lowered credit limits means I have too high a percentage of my credit limit charged which gives them reason to raised the interest rates again, which raises the payments more.
I used up all my savings trying to keep up with the payments and now I give up. It can't be done, see ya in court.

");