To sue or not to sue... a BANK.

[RockDaddy]

Okay, I'm go out on a limb and probably ask a question that hopefully won't get me flamed. I'm still going to ask it anyway, out of pure speculation:

How difficult would it be to sue a bank? A big bank at that.

It's TD Bank here in MA, but based in Toronto, Canada with branches in about 16 states on the Eastern Seaboard.

I'm thinking specifically under MA Consumer Protection law 93A, which governs consumer's rights and remedies.

The details are somewhat long, but I will post, read on if you're curious.

It's about TD Bank intentionally misleading me about a business checking account I opened. They purposely witheld my checks at the branch for over a month, even though I went in every few days and asked about my order, and had to verify my info over and over again. In the end, they finally admitting that they had held them because *they* had entered a wrong telephone number the day I opened the account so when they called me, were told I didn't live at that number, etc.

Thing is, the rep who opened the account asked if I'd ever had a TD Bank account, as a *Rhode Island* phone number had populated on his screen. I said I'd lived in RI over 10 years prior but had *never* had a TD Bank account. (nor have they swallowed up any bank I dealt with at that time) He waived it away, but it got me thinking and wondering.

So - after going into the branch 5 times and calling 3 times in one month, my checks magically appear when I start to make a bit of a fuss. But with the *Rhode Island* phone number on the customer info area on a form I was asked to sign to release the checks to me. (not on the checks) I refused, because they obviously had the wrong number.

I asked for the branch manager, who then admitted that they'd been holding my checks at the branch, that she had personally driven by my address, had searched the web for my website and had done other 'checking' on me to attempt to verify I was who I said I was. I was like - WTF?

So I asked what the difference was now? She just shrugged, saying that since I was upset they were going to release them to me. And I was like, WHAT? Why? It made zero sense to me. I also have a witness to the entire conversation.

Additionally - I saw on the box that my checks had been IN THE BANK for 3 weeks, or the *entire* time I had been going into the bank, asking about how it was going, etc.... so, I was lied to over and over again.

Here's where it gets weird.

Some of you may remember my thread about Convergent Outsourcing, an Out of Statute debt, from 2003. I said I'd write a funny mail to them about 'persecuting and violating me', etc.... they have since stopped.

Turns out, this decade old phone number that *TD Bank* used in my account info, alerted the CA, to my home phone number and other details. It must have. My phone number is new, and had only been given to some friends, family and ONLY TD Bank, on a professional capacity. No one else has it yet. When I asked how the CA had gotten my new, unlisted phone number, the CA said, 'via normal collection channels'.... yeah right. Another lie.

So, I've been lied to and mislead continuously by the bank over my checks, and then to add insult to injury, opening my account alerted a CA who has continuously harrassed me, all because the clerk left in an old telephone number that they shouldn't have had in the first place. So I'm puzzled.

I feel violated. (really) And like my good name has been besmirched. I also feel that TD Bank has violated their fiduciary relationship with me on a number of levels.

Also, I'd opened this account solely because TD Bank does business in Florida, where I plan to buy a house later this year, so wanted a good relationship established with a bank that does business there. So much for that, I feel like 'that a$$hole' when I go into the branch and get dirty looks from everybody. Nice huh?

Thoughts?

Edited April 8, 2012 by RockDaddy

[willingtocope]

See if there is a www.naca.net lawyer in your area that would be interested in taking this on.

You've certainly be wronged...but, you'll need a lawyer to tell you if there's anything here to sue over...

[RockDaddy]

See if there is a www.naca.net lawyer in your area that would be interested in taking this on.

You've certainly be wronged...but, you'll need a lawyer to tell you if there's anything here to sue over...

Thanks a lot.

I have a friend that is in law school. She said that the fact that it went on to a CA because of their unintentional negligence caused me damages.

Whether or not that will fly in court is another thing.

I appreciate you taking the time to write back, it's a long story.

-RD

[1stStep]

Torturous interference of business.

BTW- I sued a big bank...they rolled over pretty quick...but YMMV.

[legaleagle]

I think the most you might be looking at is a violation under the FCRA if they allowed a credit collector access to your info. Otherwise, you are dealing with a pack of idiots and altho they gave you grief, you didn't seem to suffer any monetary loss. I would close this account and go with a local state bank where you intend to live. Some of this may be under the state banking commission, and you have no private right of action. Only they can sue / prosecute. Since you have no damages, I think it would be a waste of time.

[Coltfan1972]

You've been violated (sorry can't resist). Here is the problem, damages. I agree with the torturous interference of business. However, I don't know enough about the damages part.

It appears at most you have been given the run around. Of course that is common from big banks and really big business in general. If the insurance company I worked for had to pay damages every time we gave somebody the run around (usually unintentional) they would have been bankrupt in six weeks.

Here is a huge issue I see with your post. When you say "Turns out, this decade old phone number that *TD Bank* used in my account info, alerted the CA, to my home phone number and other details. It must have."

You're probably right, but "it must have" has to turn into "they did," with proof. However, again, I see you being stuck with damages. By your own admission, unfortuantely the agency has now left you alone after your "I'm being violated" letter.

That was some inconvience to you. Personally, in my non-atty opinion, I think you have a few violations, not sure how serious they are as I've never sued a big bank, but damages are where I see your main issue being. Just my two cents.

[BV80]

If you had to sign an agreement when you opened your checking account, see what's stated in the agreement about their use of your personal information. There may even be something in there about how their customers can expect to be treated.

[legaleagle]

I think the interference with business would be a stretch. They will argue that their concern was legitemate, and after all, if you were an experienced businessman, you would not have relied on StupidBank for your entire transactional well being. What is the underlying tort that interfered with the business? How was the business damaged? Etc. Sounds nice, tough to prove. Mass. is very similar to my state, you have to document actual damages.

You've been violated (sorry can't resist).

Bet that's the first time he said that to anybody with his pants on.

Remember Al Bundy? A God among men who hate fat women. He was in a lingerie store with Peggy and a fat woman waddled over to him and said "What do you think would look good on me?" He responded: "Aluminum siding."

[1stStep]

Aluminum siding...I remember that one!

AZ is a lot different, but yes, you'd have to be able to prove damages...

The only way I can think of to indirectly sort out the phone number issue is to sue Convergent and get that info thru discovery. Make that interrogatory item.

[legaleagle]

How about the time the fat woman asked Al if he had any suggestions as to how to make her feet look smaller? He said "Hold them up next to your a**." Then there was the woman who complained because the shoes he sold her broke. He told her they could nail the soles to her feet so they wouldn't come loose when she was pulling the ice wagon. What a guy. You can just see him being sued by a JDB.

[usagi555]

It depends on the statute you are using, which I do not know anything about, and what you can prove. Here, I might be able to get $300 out of them, and make them spend a couple thousand on their attorneys. It's one instance where I might actually consider small claims.

[RockDaddy]

Torturous interference of business.

BTW- I sued a big bank...they rolled over pretty quick...but YMMV.

1st Step - I'd be happy with mileage that varied. Wondering what you did / said that made them roll over, or what your circumstances were, if similar. I like your idea of sueing Convergent and then sort out the phone number issue through Discovery - that would certainly settle whether or not TD Bank shared my personal information.

You've been violated (sorry can't resist). Here is the problem, damages. I agree with the torturous interference of business. However, I don't know enough about the damages part.

Here is a huge issue I see with your post. When you say "Turns out, this decade old phone number that *TD Bank* used in my account info, alerted the CA, to my home phone number and other details. It must have."

You're probably right, but "it must have" has to turn into "they did," with proof. However, again, I see you being stuck with damages. By your own admission, unfortuantely the agency has now left you alone after your "I'm being violated" letter.

That was some inconvience to you. Personally, in my non-atty opinion, I think you have a few violations, not sure how serious they are as I've never sued a big bank, but damages are where I see your main issue being. Just my two cents.

Coltfan,

Agreed, 'it must have' has to turn into 'they did' and therein lies the rub. So far though, the CA has stopped calling. Then again, I've been house sitting over the last week, so haven't been home to see if they've called or not. So going to give them another little while. If they still call... then what?

If you had to sign an agreement when you opened your checking account, see what's stated in the agreement about their use of your personal information. There may even be something in there about how their customers can expect to be treated.

BV80 - Here's where it gets funny. When I went in to pick up my checks, the last time, I *asked* about the original document that I signed when I opened the account. I was told "oh, we kept that and you don't get a copy of it". I was fairly dumbfounded. How do I get that agreement / statement?

I think the interference with business would be a stretch. They will argue that their concern was legitemate, and after all, if you were an experienced businessman, you would not have relied on StupidBank for your entire transactional well being. What is the underlying tort that interfered with the business? How was the business damaged? Etc. Sounds nice, tough to prove. Mass. is very similar to my state, you have to document actual damages.

LegalEagle, I appreciate your perspective on this, thank you.

You know though, I would love to search for a tort that dealt with this kind of thing. Obviously 93A protects consumers from being subject to deceptive conduct (per the statute), which is pretty much what I experienced.

However, I do agree with your overall take, that it would be hard to prove.

It depends on the statute you are using, which I do not know anything about, and what you can prove. Here, I might be able to get $300 out of them, and make them spend a couple thousand on their attorneys. It's one instance where I might actually consider small claims.

Usagi555,

I like this strategy. I'm at the very least going to send them a 93A demand letter outlining what their branch did, how I was treated, how I was wronged (I'll do my best to find things that would could be damages), and how I want to be remedied. This will at least eat up some legal fees.

On a side note, I'm a public figure here in Boston to some small degree. I am wondering if I can suggest that their unfair business practices could possibly reflect negatively on their business, should I go on radio and talk about my experiences. Maybe I'll eek a settlement out of the lawyers, rather than them risk negative publicity. My biz partner has a public relations firm... heh heh...

Thanks to all for their Easter comments. We are all truly vested in this board.

Also - I know this question was slightly out of the nature and scope of this site, so I appreciate the comments and insight.

With Regards,

-RD

[BV80]

BV80 - Here's where it gets funny. When I went in to pick up my checks, the last time, I *asked* about the original document that I signed when I opened the account. I was told "oh, we kept that and you don't get a copy of it". I was fairly dumbfounded. How do I get that agreement / statement?

What??? I've never heard of such a thing. They want your signature, but you don't get a copy of the document that has your signature? I'd ask again. If denied, I'd ask to speak to that person's superior and go as far up the chain of command as necessary.

There might not be anything usable in that document, but you'll never know if you don't get to see it. Besides, I'd want to know the terms to which I agreed.

Edited April 8, 2012 by BV80

[1stStep]

If denied, I'd ask to speak to that person's superior and go as far up the chain of command as necessary.

Yes even if you have to call a CEO at home...

[RockDaddy]

What??? I've never heard of such a thing. They want your signature, but you don't get a copy of the document that has your signature? I'd ask again. If denied, I'd ask to speak to that person's superior and go as far up the chain of command as necessary.

There might not be anything usable in that document, but you'll never know if you don't get to see it. Besides, I'd want to know the terms to which I agreed.

Yeah, seriously. I was dumbfounded, but was focused on other matters at the time, like getting my checks, finding out why a Rhody phone number was attached to me and why my checks had been held for 3 weeks without being released to me.

But yes, Monday I'm going in and asking for the exact statement that I signed. I was mildly annoyed when I heard that to be honest. I will bring a witness who went to law school with me, to see what happens. I will pursue this until I get an answer or not leave the bank.

Yes even if you have to call a CEO at home...

Yup, sounds good....

Tell me - TD Bank is based in Toronto, Canada. IF I wanted to pursue any of this, (even the MA 93A Consumer Statute complaint), who would I send it to? An American branch of TD Bank? The upper eschelon of the bank?

Under MA rules, they only have 30 days to respond and remedy, otherwise I can sue. Maybe it behooves me to send it to the local branch manager just to eat some time. In any case, it will scare the knickers off of her, and she'll know that she messed with the wrong local guy.

And of course, I'm going to close this TD Bank account. To date, I've not written ANY checks or done anything other than pay some online bills with this account. So - they eat the costs of the fancy checks.

I'd just like for them to have to eat legal costs too. Even if it's to tell me to sue or pound sand...

Edited April 8, 2012 by RockDaddy

[MarvinArizona]

banks have deep pockets , and good lawyers ...

my advice , don't sue ... i don't see anything super horrible that was done to you ...

a judge might just say that if you didn't like the service you should have gone elsewhere ...

[usagi555]

banks have deep pockets , and good lawyers ...

my advice , don't sue ... i don't see anything super horrible that was done to you ...

a judge might just say that if you didn't like the service you should have gone elsewhere ...

You'd think they have good lawyers, but it just ain't so. They have to hire whomever is licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction that they are being sued in.