Connect with us

Business

Wells Fargo, Chase, Bank of America sued over alleged unchecked fraud on Zelle app

Published

on

Wells Fargo, Chase, Bank of America sued over alleged unchecked fraud on Zelle app

Wells Fargo, JP Morgan Chase and Bank of America are being sued by the embattled Consumer Financial Protection Bureau over alleged unchecked fraud on the Zelle payment app — setting up a legal showdown that the incoming Trump administration could quash as soon as next month.

The three financial institutions, which co-own the app along with four other large banks, were accused in a lawsuit filed Friday of rushing to launch the service in 2017 without putting in place proper consumer safeguards in order to compete with popular payment apps such as Venmo. The result, according to the lawsuit, were fraud-related losses of more than $870 million over the last seven years.

“Zelle became a gold mine for fraudsters, while often leaving victims to fend for themselves,” said CFPB Director Rohit Chopra.

The 91-page federal lawsuit claimed that hundreds of thousands of consumers at the three banks made complaints about being defrauded but were “were largely denied relief, and some were even told to try getting their money back by contacting the person who had defrauded them.” The CFPB said the three banks accounted for 73% of Zelle activity last year.

The lawsuit was immediately attacked by Early Warning Services, which operates the app on behalf of the banks, as “legally and factually flawed” and claimed the lawsuit could be counterproductive by “incentivizing” criminals to make bogus fraud claims that institutions would have to pay — raising the app’s costs and driving away credit unions and community and minority-owned banks offering Zelle. Some 2,200 financial institutions use the service.

Advertisement

“Zelle is relied upon by 143 million enrolled American consumers and small businesses, and we are fully prepared to defend this meritless lawsuit to ensure their service does not suffer,” said Jane Khodos, a spokesperson for Early Warning, which was also named as a defendant.

Bank of America, in its own statement, said that “more than 99.95 percent of transactions across the Zelle network go through without incident. When a client has an issue, we work directly with them.”

JP Morgan Chase also denied the allegations and alluded to political overtones raised by Early Warning, saying the CFPB’s action was a “last ditch effort in pursuit of their political agenda.” Wells Fargo did not return messages for comment.

The CFPB, established in 2011 in the aftermath of the financial crisis, has long been criticized by Republicans as a “runaway” agency whose actions are heavy handed and stifle economic growth.

The first Trump administration sought to rein in the bureau and redrafted proposed rules aimed at tightening regulations on payday lenders. Consumer advocates considered the final regulations watered down. The new Trump administration could terminate the Zelle lawsuit when it takes power next month.

Advertisement

Some critics want to abolish the agency altogether. Billionaire Elon Musk, who is leading an effort to streamline the federal government through the so-called Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, criticized the agency in a November post on X that said, “ Delete CFPB. There are too many duplicative regulatory agencies.”

Earlier this year, the Supreme Court turned down an effort by a payday lending trade group to declare the bureau’s structure unconstitutional because it is funded by bank fees instead of congressional appropriations.

The bureau, which boasts it has gotten consumers more than $21 billion in relief, has stepped up its enforcement actions recently ahead of the change in administrations.

On Monday, it filed separate lawsuits against Walmart and Rocket Mortgage over alleged financial wrongdoing. And earlier this month issued landmark rules that could lower the costs of bank overdrafts to as little as $5.

Separately, the Federal Trade Commission, led by outgoing chair Lina Khan, sued Los Angeles cash app Dave Inc. last month, accusing it of misleading its financially vulnerable customers about fees it charges and the amount of money it gives out. The company denies the allegations.

Advertisement

The CFPB in its lawsuit claimed that without adequate safeguards Zelle allows fraudsters to create multiple email addresses and mobile phone numbers in signing up for the service that it can link to the same or different bank accounts, leaving consumers unaware of who they are sending their money to.

It claimed the banks allowed repeat offenders to hop between banks, with the banks not sharing information about fraudsters and acting too slowly to restrict or track criminals. It also claimed that it did not act on the hundreds of thousands of complaints they received to prevent further fraud.

In response, Early Warning claimed it has “highly effective multi-layered fraund and scam prevention measures” that in 2023 resulted in reports of frauds and scams decreasing by nearly 50% despite a 27% increase in transaction volume.

The company said it had made “every effort to engage and cooperate” with the bureau before the lawsuit was filed, which it said is part of the agency’s “pattern and practice of regulatory overreach.”

The bureau’s lawsuit was applauded by the National Consumer Law Center, which said, “The CFPB is standing up for people who weren’t able to get the big banks to take their claims of fraud seriously and return their hard-earned money. The CFPB helps ordinary people who’ve been hurt by big banks.”

Advertisement

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who spearheaded the creation of the agency, came to its defense last week and called on Trump to work with the agency to help American families by temporarily capping credit card interest rates at 10% — a pledge he made on the campaign trail.

“That would be a real boost for millions of families across this country,” the Massachusetts Democrat said. “If he’s true to his word here, and I think we ought to take them at his word, then the CFPB can help him do that.”

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Business

Nike to Cut 1,400 Jobs as Part of Its Turnaround Plan

Published

on

Nike to Cut 1,400 Jobs as Part of Its Turnaround Plan

Nike is cutting about 1,400 jobs in its operations division, mostly from its technology department, the company said Thursday.

In a note to employees, Venkatesh Alagirisamy, the chief operating officer of Nike, said that management was nearly done reorganizing the business for its turnaround plan, and that the goal was to operate with “more speed, simplicity and precision.”

“This is not a new direction,” Mr. Alagirisamy told employees. “It is the next phase of the work already underway.”

Nike, the world’s largest sportswear company, is trying to recover after missteps led to a prolonged sales slump, in which the brand leaned into lifestyle products and away from performance shoes and apparel. Elliott Hill, the chief executive, has worked to realign the company around sports and speed up product development to create more breakthrough innovations.

In March, Nike told investors that it expected sales to fall this year, with growth in North America offset by poor performance in Asia, where the brand is struggling to rejuvenate sales in China. Executives said at the time that more volatility brought on by the war in the Middle East and rising oil prices might continue to affect its business.

Advertisement

The reorganization has involved cuts across many parts of the organization, including at its headquarters in Beaverton, Ore. Nike slashed some corporate staff last year and eliminated nearly 800 jobs at distribution centers in January.

“You never want to have to go through any sort of layoffs, but to re-center the company, we’re doing some of that,” Mr. Hill said in an interview earlier this year.

Mr. Alagirisamy told employees that Nike was reshaping its technology team and centering employees at its headquarters and a tech center in Bengaluru, India. The layoffs will affect workers across North America, Europe and Asia.

The cuts will also affect staffing in Nike’s factories for Air, the company’s proprietary cushioning system. Employees who work on the supply chain for raw materials will also experience changes as staff is integrated into footwear and apparel teams.

Nike’s Converse brand, which has struggled for years to revive sales, will move some of its engineering resources closer to the factories they support, the company said.

Advertisement

Mr. Alagirisamy said the moves were necessary to optimize Nike’s supply chain, deploy technology faster and bolster relationships with suppliers.

Continue Reading

Business

Senate committee kills bill mandating insurance coverage for wildfire safe homes

Published

on

Senate committee kills bill mandating insurance coverage for wildfire safe homes

A bill that would have required insurers to offer coverage to homeowners who take steps to reduce wildfire risk on their property died in the Legislature.

The Senate Insurance Committee on Monday voted down the measure, SB 1076, one of the most ambitious bills spurred by the devastating January 2025 wildfires.

The vote came despite fire victims and others rallying at the state Capitol in support of the measure, authored by state Sen. Sasha Renée Pérez (D-Pasadena), whose district includes the Eaton fire zone.

The Insurance Coverage for Fire-Safe Homes Act originally would have required insurers to offer and renew coverage for any home that meets wildfire-safety standards adopted by the insurance commissioner starting Jan. 1, 2028.

Advertisement

It also threatened insurers with a five-year ban from the sale of home or auto insurance if they did not comply, though it allowed for exceptions.

However, faced with strong opposition from the insurance industry, Pérez had agreed to amend the bill so it would have established community-wide pilot projects across the state to better understand the most effective way to limit property and insurance losses from wildfires.

Insurers would have had to offer four years of coverage to homeowners in successful pilot projects.

Denni Ritter, a vice president of the American Property Casualty Insurance Assn., told the committee that her trade group opposed the bill.

“While we appreciate the intent behind those conversations, those concepts do not remove our opposition, because they retain the same core flaw — substituting underwriting judgment and solvency safeguards with a statutory mandate to accept risk,” she said.

Advertisement

In voting against the bill Sen. Laura Richardson, (D-San Pedro), said: “Last I heard, in the United States, we don’t require any company to do anything. That’s the difference between capitalism and communism, frankly.”

The remarks against the measure prompted committee Chair Sen. Steve Padilla, (D-Chula Vista), to chastise committee members in opposition.

“I’m a little perturbed, and I’m a little disappointed, because you have someone who is trying to work with industry, who is trying to get facts and data,” he said.

Monday’s vote was the fourth time a bill that would have required insurers to offer coverage to so-called “fire hardened” homes failed in the Legislature since 2020, according to an analysis by insurance committee staff.

Fire hardening includes measures such as cutting back brush, installing fire resistant roofs and closing eaves to resist fire embers.

Advertisement

Pérez’s legislation was thought to have a better chance of passage because it followed the most catastrophic wildfires in U.S. history, which damaged or destroyed more than 18,000 structures and killed 31 people.

The bill was co-sponsored by the Los Angeles advocacy group Consumer Watchdog and Every Fire Survivor’s Network, a community group founded in Altadena after the fires formerly called the Eaton Fire Survivors Network.

But it also had broad support from groups such as the California Apartment Association, the California Nurses Association and California Environmental Voters.

Leading up to the fires, many insurers, citing heightened fire risk, had dropped policyholders in fire-prone neighorhoods. That forced them onto the California FAIR Plan, the state’s insurer of last resort, which offers limited but costly policies.

A Times analysis found that that in the Palisades and Eaton fire zones, the FAIR Plan’s rolls from 2020 to 2024 nearly doubled from 14,272 to 28,440. Mandating coverage has been seen as a way of reducing FAIR Plan enrollment.

Advertisement

“I’m disappointed this bill died in committee. Fire survivors deserved better,” Pérez said in a statement .

Also failing Monday in the committee was SB 982, a bill authored by Sen. Scott Wiener, (D-San Francisco). It would have authorized California’s attorney general to sue fossil fuel companies to recover losses from climate-induced disasters. It was opposed by the oil and gas industry.

Passing the committee were two other Pérez bills. SB 877 requires insurers to provide more transparency in the claims process. SB 878 imposes a penalty on insurers who don’t make claims payments on time.

Another bill, SB 1301, authored by insurance commissioner candidate Sen. Ben Allen, (D-Pacific Palisades), also passed. It protects policyholders from unexplained and abrupt policy non-renewals.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

How We Cover the White House Correspondents’ Dinner

Published

on

How We Cover the White House Correspondents’ Dinner

Times Insider explains who we are and what we do, and delivers behind-the-scenes insights into how our journalism comes together.

Politicians in Washington and the reporters who cover them have an often adversarial relationship.

But on the last Saturday in April, they gather for an irreverent celebration of press freedom and the First Amendment at the Washington Hilton Hotel: The White House Correspondents’ Association dinner.

Hosted by the association, an organization that helps ensure access for media outlets covering the presidency, the dinner attracts Hollywood stars; politicians from both parties; and representatives of more than 100 networks, newspapers, magazines and wire services.

While The Times will have two reporters in the ballroom covering the event, the company no longer buys seats at the party, said Richard W. Stevenson, the Washington bureau chief. The decision goes back almost two decades; the last dinner The Times attended as an organization was in 2007.

Advertisement

“We made a judgment back then that the event had become too celebrity-focused and was undercutting our need to demonstrate to readers that we always seek to maintain a proper distance from the people we cover, many of whom attend as guests,” he said.

It’s a decision, he added, that “we have stuck by through both Republican and Democratic administrations, although we support the work of the White House Correspondents’ Association.”

Susan Wessling, The Times’s Standards editor, said the policy is a product of the organization’s desire to maintain editorial independence.

“We don’t want to leave readers with any questions about our independence and credibility by seeming to be overly friendly with people whose words and actions we need to report on,” she said.

The celebrity mentalist Oz Pearlman is headlining the evening, in lieu of the usual comedy set by the likes of Stephen Colbert and Hasan Minhaj, but all eyes will be on President Trump, who will make his first appearance at the dinner as president.

Advertisement

Mr. Trump has boycotted the event since 2011, when he was the butt of punchlines delivered by President Barack Obama and the talk show host Seth Meyers mocking his hair, his reality TV show and his preoccupation with the “birther” movement.

Last month, though, Mr. Trump, who has a contentious relationship with the media, announced his intention to attend this year’s dinner, where he will speak to a room full of the same reporters he often derides as “enemies of the people.”

Times reporters will be there to document the highs, the lows and the reactions in the room. A reporter for the Styles desk has also been assigned to cover the robust roster of after-parties around Washington.

Some off-duty reporters from The Times will also be present at this late-night circuit, though everyone remains cognizant of their roles, said Patrick Healy, The Times’s assistant managing editor for Standards and Trust.

“If they’re reporting, there’s a notebook or recorder out as usual,” he said. “If they’re not, they’re pros who know they’re always identifiable as Times journalists.”

Advertisement

For most of The Times’s reporters and editors, though, the evening will be experienced from home.

“The rest of us will be able to follow the coverage,” Mr. Stevenson said, “without having to don our tuxes or gowns.”

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending