3 ms·

The scale of this ... there has to be more to the story. 5,300 people didn't co-ordinate this for years without anyone knowing, surely.

cag_ii 10y ago
Apparently WF determined that 5,300 fireable people knew about it. LA Times did an article back in 2013 on the high-pressure sales culture there that lead to these practices: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-wells-fargo-sale-pressure-20131222-story.html http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-wells-fargo-sale-press... This is blatant fraud IMO, this settlement is just a slap on the wrist.
- doug1001 10y ago
  isn't it also theft? From a memo sent today to WF employees: "At Wells Fargo, when we make mistakes, we are open about it, we take responsibility, and we take action" the sentiment expressed in that memo is difficult to reconcile with this WF memo to its customers: We regret and take responsibility for any instances where customers may have received a product that they did not request" that sounds like an apology if a clerk accidentally sent to a few customers a leather checkbook cover and charged them for it, even though the customer never ordered it.
  - hga 10y ago
    Wells Fargo's remedies are pretty much limited to firing the guilty, giving them true references, and making the list of them available to the authorities. And they say they're making their customers whole, although I'm sure it's a bit late for a lot of them. The memo, though, yeah, if someone created an account with money taken out of an existing one, and that caused them grief, and I think we're only talking about which degree of grief.... One reason to always keep at least two banking arrangements in place at all times, so you can, if necessary loudly in the bank lobby, close all your accounts and take all your money out on a moment's notice. No doubt without the drama, my father had to do that not many years ago at a bank where the account was set up for him in the '30s, I think, back when he was a pre-teen. Or not much later.
    - ourmandave 10y ago
      > if necessary loudly in the bank lobby, close all your accounts and take all your money out on a moment's notice. Wouldn't you do that on Instagram or Twitter now?
      - hga 10y ago
        Ah, you do have a point. I'm old fashioned enough not to use either, but why not embrace the power of "and" and do both? In the real world, your targets includes the banking staff, who's attachment to their jobs might not be all that sticky, especially bank tellers who have no influence over policy but can relatively easily move to another bank.
  - stevep98 10y ago
    They are talking about new accounts in the customers name. The banker isn't stealing the money for themselves. The bankers are doing it to meet quotas
    - woodandsteel 10y ago
      But isn't the employee still committing a felony, like some sort of fraud? Shouldn't they all go to jail, or at least pay large fines?
    - doug1001 10y ago
      not keeping the money but taking it for the sole reason of financial gain (bonus tied to quotas) is close enough, it seems to me, to "stealing money for themselves"
stevep98 10y ago
Wells Fargo policy sets quotas for bankers to open new accounts for customers.
fallingfrog 10y ago
Yeah it does seem implausible that 5300 people spontaneously committed the same fraud at the same time.. Must be some kind of policy driving this behavior.

cag_ii 10y ago

Apparently WF determined that 5,300 fireable people knew about it. LA Times did an article back in 2013 on the high-pressure sales culture there that lead to these practices: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-wells-fargo-sale-pressure-20131222-story.html http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-wells-fargo-sale-press... This is blatant fraud IMO, this settlement is just a slap on the wrist.

doug1001 10y ago
isn't it also theft? From a memo sent today to WF employees: "At Wells Fargo, when we make mistakes, we are open about it, we take responsibility, and we take action" the sentiment expressed in that memo is difficult to reconcile with this WF memo to its customers: We regret and take responsibility for any instances where customers may have received a product that they did not request" that sounds like an apology if a clerk accidentally sent to a few customers a leather checkbook cover and charged them for it, even though the customer never ordered it.
- hga 10y ago
  Wells Fargo's remedies are pretty much limited to firing the guilty, giving them true references, and making the list of them available to the authorities. And they say they're making their customers whole, although I'm sure it's a bit late for a lot of them. The memo, though, yeah, if someone created an account with money taken out of an existing one, and that caused them grief, and I think we're only talking about which degree of grief.... One reason to always keep at least two banking arrangements in place at all times, so you can, if necessary loudly in the bank lobby, close all your accounts and take all your money out on a moment's notice. No doubt without the drama, my father had to do that not many years ago at a bank where the account was set up for him in the '30s, I think, back when he was a pre-teen. Or not much later.
  - ourmandave 10y ago
    > if necessary loudly in the bank lobby, close all your accounts and take all your money out on a moment's notice. Wouldn't you do that on Instagram or Twitter now?
    - hga 10y ago
      Ah, you do have a point. I'm old fashioned enough not to use either, but why not embrace the power of "and" and do both? In the real world, your targets includes the banking staff, who's attachment to their jobs might not be all that sticky, especially bank tellers who have no influence over policy but can relatively easily move to another bank.
- stevep98 10y ago
  They are talking about new accounts in the customers name. The banker isn't stealing the money for themselves. The bankers are doing it to meet quotas
  - woodandsteel 10y ago
    But isn't the employee still committing a felony, like some sort of fraud? Shouldn't they all go to jail, or at least pay large fines?
  - doug1001 10y ago
    not keeping the money but taking it for the sole reason of financial gain (bonus tied to quotas) is close enough, it seems to me, to "stealing money for themselves"

stevep98 10y ago

Wells Fargo policy sets quotas for bankers to open new accounts for customers.

fallingfrog 10y ago

Yeah it does seem implausible that 5300 people spontaneously committed the same fraud at the same time.. Must be some kind of policy driving this behavior.