• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Consumer agency fines Capital One for card marketing

lpast

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 18, 2011
Messages
13,663
Reaction score
4,633
Location
Fla
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Ive posted several threads in a short period of time about Big Banks and Corporations and Big Pharma criminality. Their ripping off the american people for millions and billions and in turn recieving MINOR slap on the wrist fines...then issuing WE DID NOTHING WRONG but were paying the finet....Your crooks and thieves just like AL Capone and Vito Genovese and Mexican Drug Cartels...
This bank like all the others just laugh at this...they swindled and pocketed alot more than the fine...

Capital One Financial agreed to pay $210 million to resolve charges by banking regulators that its call-center representatives misled consumers into paying for extra credit card products
The enforcement action, announced on Wednesday, is the first by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which said it unearthed the activities through an examination of the bank
The CFPB was created by the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reform law and is nearing its one-year anniversary.
The government said $150 million of the sanctions will go to reimburse affected customers, while the remaining penalty will be split between the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, which fined the bank $35 million, and the CFPB, which will collect $25 million.


Consumer agency fines Capital One for card marketing | Reuters
 
I used to work for Citi in the credit card division.

We had 10 or 15 products available to customers similar to those Capital One is being fined for.

These programs, while expensive, can be beneficial to a certain demographic of card holder.

The payment protection plan, which is usually a varying fee based on your balance (i.e. $0.43 per dollar of balance) is a program that will cover your minimum payment for a designated period of time under certain circumstances. Those circumstances would include lay-offs, serious illness that results in short-term/long term disability, and a few other situations. The down side, other than the fee, is that you cannot use the card when you're in protection mode. Then again, if you don't have normal income you probably shouldn't be using a credit card anyway.

Credit monitoring is a service offered by almost every single bank in existence and several 3rd party companies. It can be invaluable. I know when I had it on my Citi card I got alerted quite a few times when "weird" stuff happened...out of state inquiries, a card swipe outside my normal activity area, etc. The program also offered $10k to cover costs associated with credit theft.

I'm assuming the issue that led to Capital One being charged involves their methodology. And I'll agree that the men at the board room desk/marketing department/supervisors are very, very serious about pushing these credit products onto consumers. And why not? They're a HUGE profit boon for companies. I know how Citi did it: We had to offer, offer again, and if the customer accepted we had to read them 2 pages of legal information (they'd later receive that in the mail, too) before signing them up.

Looks like C1 reps were lying about the system. My guess, having been that poor jerk sitting at the phone bank, is that the pressure to meet sales quotas, especially in this economy, resulted in a lapse in proper procedure. I actually feel bad for the reps in this situation. I remember very well how hard we were pushed to sell, sell, sell...but we were never encouraged to lie about the programs. In fact, we were warned that if we were caught lying in a call audit we'd be immediately terminated.
 
and it's not just capital one. my credit card is somehow charging me the credit protection nonsense again after i had it removed. looks like i'll have to waste time calling them (again) to have it removed (again.) every time i use the damned card, i think about how much i don't want to ever use a credit card. needless to say, i don't use it often, and i do not carry a balance from month to month.
 
I used to work for Citi in the credit card division.

We had 10 or 15 products available to customers similar to those Capital One is being fined for.

These programs, while expensive, can be beneficial to a certain demographic of card holder.

The payment protection plan, which is usually a varying fee based on your balance (i.e. $0.43 per dollar of balance) is a program that will cover your minimum payment for a designated period of time under certain circumstances. Those circumstances would include lay-offs, serious illness that results in short-term/long term disability, and a few other situations. The down side, other than the fee, is that you cannot use the card when you're in protection mode. Then again, if you don't have normal income you probably shouldn't be using a credit card anyway.

Credit monitoring is a service offered by almost every single bank in existence and several 3rd party companies. It can be invaluable. I know when I had it on my Citi card I got alerted quite a few times when "weird" stuff happened...out of state inquiries, a card swipe outside my normal activity area, etc. The program also offered $10k to cover costs associated with credit theft.

I'm assuming the issue that led to Capital One being charged involves their methodology. And I'll agree that the men at the board room desk/marketing department/supervisors are very, very serious about pushing these credit products onto consumers. And why not? They're a HUGE profit boon for companies. I know how Citi did it: We had to offer, offer again, and if the customer accepted we had to read them 2 pages of legal information (they'd later receive that in the mail, too) before signing them up.

Looks like C1 reps were lying about the system. My guess, having been that poor jerk sitting at the phone bank, is that the pressure to meet sales quotas, especially in this economy, resulted in a lapse in proper procedure. I actually feel bad for the reps in this situation. I remember very well how hard we were pushed to sell, sell, sell...but we were never encouraged to lie about the programs. In fact, we were warned that if we were caught lying in a call audit we'd be immediately terminated.


All banks offer their services to customers...I like that they tell me whats available it helps me to make decisions on programs that could benefit me.
I have absolutely NO problem with companies hawking their goods...its when they cross the line and do something criminal to get your business that Im against...and Capitol 1 obviously did that...you dont agree to pay a 215 million dollar fine being innocent.
 
All banks offer their services to customers...I like that they tell me whats available it helps me to make decisions on programs that could benefit me.
I have absolutely NO problem with companies hawking their goods...its when they cross the line and do something criminal to get your business that Im against...and Capitol 1 obviously did that...you dont agree to pay a 215 million dollar fine being innocent.

Oh, I agree with you. I just know how much it sucks to be that phone rep. They're the ones that did something illegal, but from my experience I'm willing to bet that part of the motivation was the extreme pressure from the top to make those sales.

I forgot to mention, though: There are several programs that are just a waste...Pet insurance that didn't really cover anything, an AAA program that didn't cover even half of what AAA covered, etc.

Most people didn't qualify for those programs, though. You had to have a near perfect credit score and a HUGE credit limit to qualify for all of the extras. The most common programs that popped up where the payment protection and credit monitoring programs.
 
and it's not just capital one. my credit card is somehow charging me the credit protection nonsense again after i had it removed. looks like i'll have to waste time calling them (again) to have it removed (again.) every time i use the damned card, i think about how much i don't want to ever use a credit card. needless to say, i don't use it often, and i do not carry a balance from month to month.


I dropped my capitol one card a year or so ago because they kept putting a fee for Payment protection if I lost my job and couldnt pay and I HAD NO BALANCE...they just stuck it on there...I called and said I never asked for th is...Capitol one said we gave you a free trial for a month and you didnt cancel...I said how can I cancel something I never knew I had....but I can cancel your card and thats exactly what im doing right now...Cancel this credit card and credit line now please.
 
I dropped my capitol one card a year or so ago because they kept putting a fee for Payment protection if I lost my job and couldnt pay and I HAD NO BALANCE...they just stuck it on there...I called and said I never asked for th is...Capitol one said we gave you a free trial for a month and you didnt cancel...I said how can I cancel something I never knew I had....but I can cancel your card and thats exactly what im doing right now...Cancel this credit card and credit line now please.

I still have my C1 card. I have to pay a $35/year fee, but my interest rate is half the rate on my other active card, so it seems fair enough to me. My other active card is from Chase.

I closed my Citi card almost 3 years ago. I had about $2500 on it from helping my dad w/finances and taking care of some medical stuff, and I noticed that my minimum due had almost tripled from the previous month, even though the balance had decreased. Looking further into the statement I realized they'd doubled my interest rate, taking it from 12.99% to 23.99%, which is basically the default rate. I called them and asked them what the hell they were doing and got a bunch of stupid excuses. I'd just recently received my credit report, so I knew my score was good. My I-to-D ratio was good, hadn't missed any payments, paid late, or under paid (usually paid 2-3x the minimum or more).

Basically, it came down to a "business decision related to the current economic climate" that motivated them to raise my rate so high. I was told it wouldn't be lowered unless I closed the account. I think they assumed I'd just eat the new rate since the card had a limit over 10k, and had been open since I was 18. I told them to close it. The "supervisor" argued with me for 10 minutes before finally sending me to retention. They then tried to sway me by offering to take my rate down to 19.99%. I told them to **** off and close the card.
 
that default rate really pisses me off. I've been penalized with that rate once, which was my fault. I basically stopped using the card and got a small loan to pay off the balance. I called a couple months ago after years of on time payments and asked them to lower it, which they did. had they fought me on it, I would have cancelled and gone with a competitor.
 
Ive posted several threads in a short period of time about Big Banks and Corporations and Big Pharma criminality. Their ripping off the american people for millions and billions and in turn recieving MINOR slap on the wrist fines...then issuing WE DID NOTHING WRONG but were paying the finet....Your crooks and thieves just like AL Capone and Vito Genovese and Mexican Drug Cartels...
This bank like all the others just laugh at this...they swindled and pocketed alot more than the fine...

Capital One Financial agreed to pay $210 million to resolve charges by banking regulators that its call-center representatives misled consumers into paying for extra credit card products
The enforcement action, announced on Wednesday, is the first by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which said it unearthed the activities through an examination of the bank
The CFPB was created by the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reform law and is nearing its one-year anniversary.
The government said $150 million of the sanctions will go to reimburse affected customers, while the remaining penalty will be split between the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, which fined the bank $35 million, and the CFPB, which will collect $25 million.


Consumer agency fines Capital One for card marketing | Reuters

I wonder how much will go to trial lawyers,among the biggest donors to the Obama campaign.
 
Ive posted several threads in a short period of time about Big Banks and Corporations and Big Pharma criminality. Their ripping off the american people for millions and billions and in turn recieving MINOR slap on the wrist fines...then issuing WE DID NOTHING WRONG but were paying the finet....Your crooks and thieves just like AL Capone and Vito Genovese and Mexican Drug Cartels...
This bank like all the others just laugh at this...they swindled and pocketed alot more than the fine...

Capital One Financial agreed to pay $210 million to resolve charges by banking regulators that its call-center representatives misled consumers into paying for extra credit card products
The enforcement action, announced on Wednesday, is the first by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which said it unearthed the activities through an examination of the bank
The CFPB was created by the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reform law and is nearing its one-year anniversary.
The government said $150 million of the sanctions will go to reimburse affected customers, while the remaining penalty will be split between the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, which fined the bank $35 million, and the CFPB, which will collect $25 million.


Consumer agency fines Capital One for card marketing | Reuters

Fascinating. I used to actually DO this for CapitalOne, through a telemarketing company. I can tell you, from firsthand experience, that this is certainly what I saw going on during my 9 months working as a CapitalOne representative. We were told to distort and twist the truth to make it sound like a benefit to a customer. We were told to target older people and non-English speakers as especially "receptive" to what we were pushing. In reality, we were offering unnecessary and risky options that would inevitably lead customers to spend more and ultimately pay us more.

I'm glad to see they got some form of punishment. It was a particularly dirty trick they were playing.
 
Fascinating. I used to actually DO this for CapitalOne, through a telemarketing company. I can tell you, from firsthand experience, that this is certainly what I saw going on during my 9 months working as a CapitalOne representative. We were told to distort and twist the truth to make it sound like a benefit to a customer. We were told to target older people and non-English speakers as especially "receptive" to what we were pushing. In reality, we were offering unnecessary and risky options that would inevitably lead customers to spend more and ultimately pay us more.

I'm glad to see they got some form of punishment. It was a particularly dirty trick they were playing.

If you knowingly did these things, then I am sure some smart lawyer will find out who you are and sue you. You can't use as an excuse that this is what your company made you do, a moral person would have quit.
 
If you knowingly did these things, then I am sure some smart lawyer will find out who you are and sue you. You can't use as an excuse that this is what your company made you do, a moral person would have quit.

Yeah, even a moral person with rent due, an empty gas tank, and an empty fridge. They'd TOTALLY leave a job in the middle of a recession out of moral indignation because it's the right thing to do. Who cares if they end up homeless or unable to drive to job interviews or unable to feed themselves. It's far more important to be morally righteous when survival is on the line.

And besides, RM said he "used" to do this for C1. That means he left at some point for one reason or another. Perhaps he left because of this issue. Perhaps not.

But to demand or expect people to just walk out because of morally questionable actions on the part of the company without any safety net or other options hammered out is asking an awful lot.
 
Yeah, even a moral person with rent due, an empty gas tank, and an empty fridge. They'd TOTALLY leave a job in the middle of a recession out of moral indignation because it's the right thing to do. Who cares if they end up homeless or unable to drive to job interviews or unable to feed themselves. It's far more important to be morally righteous when survival is on the line.

And besides, RM said he "used" to do this for C1. That means he left at some point for one reason or another. Perhaps he left because of this issue. Perhaps not.

But to demand or expect people to just walk out because of morally questionable actions on the part of the company without any safety net or other options hammered out is asking an awful lot.

Make up all the false excuses you want. I say false because unless you know this person how can you state his financial condition.

All that being said, if the choice is doing poorly yourself or stealing from others, most people think stealing is not the proper box to check. Clearly your moral compass is different. Stealing from the elderly seems to be OK with you under some conditions.
 
If you knowingly did these things, then I am sure some smart lawyer will find out who you are and sue you. You can't use as an excuse that this is what your company made you do, a moral person would have quit.

Which is what I did. I was sick of that job and having to do glaringly immoral work. So thanks for the words of concern, but screw you. Don't make stupid accusation like "someones gonna sue you" and then insinuate I'm immoral because you incorrectly I assume I had no problem with it.
 
Which is what I did. I was sick of that job and having to do glaringly immoral work. So thanks for the words of concern, but screw you. Don't make stupid accusation like "someones gonna sue you" and then insinuate I'm immoral because you incorrectly I assume I had no problem with it.

You can still be sued even if you suddenly found a moral compass. The fact you would do it for a single day says everything. You can be mad with this view. I would like to see the poll that asked people if someone used to be a mugger but stopped because he decided it was not right, could he still be convicted for his/her crimes if the statute of limitations has not passed.
 
Oh, I agree with you. I just know how much it sucks to be that phone rep. They're the ones that did something illegal, but from my experience I'm willing to bet that part of the motivation was the extreme pressure from the top to make those sales.

I forgot to mention, though: There are several programs that are just a waste...Pet insurance that didn't really cover anything, an AAA program that didn't cover even half of what AAA covered, etc.



Most people didn't qualify for those programs, though. You had to have a near perfect credit score and a HUGE credit limit to qualify for all of the extras. The most common programs that popped up where the payment protection and credit monitoring programs.

The bane of having an 800+ credit score is that EVERYONE wants a piece of you and everyone wants to sell you something...My wife and I are utterly inundated with garbage everyday...via mail, email and phone...I have my name on ALL do not call lists...cell phone too...I unsubscribe from everything I can and it just keeps coming...sigh...maybe I should go bankrupt so they leave me alone and let turtledude pay my bills lol
 
You can still be sued even if you suddenly found a moral compass. The fact you would do it for a single day says everything. You can be mad with this view. I would like to see the poll that asked people if someone used to be a mugger but stopped because he decided it was not right, could he still be convicted for his/her crimes if the statute of limitations has not passed.

Yeah, yeah yeah...you're the expert now that ruling has been handed down. Hindsight is 20/20 huh? Now you think you've got the moral high ground to judge me.

Get bent.
 
I am shocked....

You got bank regulation and regulators in the US? Since when!?
 
You can still be sued even if you suddenly found a moral compass. The fact you would do it for a single day says everything. You can be mad with this view. I would like to see the poll that asked people if someone used to be a mugger but stopped because he decided it was not right, could he still be convicted for his/her crimes if the statute of limitations has not passed.

Well, I did it for two days back in college and managed to quit while I could still call it "that awful yet slightly humorous experience back in college" and not "that bad thing I used to do to other people for a living." It was because of that experience that I lost all potential for sympathizing with a telemarketer's need to "just pay the bills." There are countless crappy, low paying jobs that don't involve being evil, so anyone choosing to stay on as a telemarketer tells me that they are in, in essence, extremely well suited to the requirements of that job.

Seriously, if you're a telemarketer, kill yourself. The world is a worse place because you're alive.
 
Make up all the false excuses you want. I say false because unless you know this person how can you state his financial condition.

All that being said, if the choice is doing poorly yourself or stealing from others, most people think stealing is not the proper box to check. Clearly your moral compass is different. Stealing from the elderly seems to be OK with you under some conditions.

Or perhaps I can just ignore the requests to swindle the customers I talk to and do the job correctly until I can find something else.

But thanks for the veiled insult. How magnanimous of you.
 
Fascinating. I used to actually DO this for CapitalOne, through a telemarketing company. I can tell you, from firsthand experience, that this is certainly what I saw going on during my 9 months working as a CapitalOne representative. We were told to distort and twist the truth to make it sound like a benefit to a customer. We were told to target older people and non-English speakers as especially "receptive" to what we were pushing. In reality, we were offering unnecessary and risky options that would inevitably lead customers to spend more and ultimately pay us more.

I'm glad to see they got some form of punishment. It was a particularly dirty trick we were playing.

Corrected. You chose to be a part of that trick for nine months. Own up to it.
 
Corrected. You chose to be a part of that trick for nine months. Own up to it.

Yeah, cause I got the job under full knowledge that we'd be tricking old grandmas and immigrants out of money.

You do realize this was 3+ years ago that I quit that job?

Do you have any idea what my job there actually entailed, the details of it? Do you know what I did on a daily basis? Do you know the details of the parent companies business contract?

No? Then why are you saying anything?
 
Yeah, cause I got the job under full knowledge that we'd be tricking old grandmas and immigrants out of money.

Where in your three year stint did that become required of you?

You do realize this was 3+ years ago that I quit that job?

Relevance of this?

Do you have any idea what my job there actually entailed, the details of it? Do you know what I did on a daily basis? Do you know the details of the parent companies business contract?

I worked long enough as a telemarketer (two days) to know that we were encouraged to hit up old people because they were more trusting and easier to part with their money. I do not, however, pretend to know the details of your parent business contract. Relevance?

No? Then why are you saying anything?

You're on a forum that hundreds of people participate in, and possibly thousands lurk on. What makes you think you're the only one who knows anything about telemarketing?
 
Where in your three year stint did that become required of you?

Lol, great reading skills. I didn't work there for three years, I worked there for ~9 months.

I was hired on through a contract call center company. They are hired by outside companies, like CapitalOne, to take incoming calls and make outbound calls on behalf of the company. The contracts are for overflow handling (as in too many calls), special promotion media blitzes, and handling routine customer service calls. I was hired one month prior to the start of the Credit Card Act of 2009. My job initially was to handle routine customer service calls; take payments, adjust customer controls, review spending histories, etc. The acts that garnered CapitalOne's large fines weren't introduced into my company for the first two months. It was integrated into our customer service scripts after new training rounds. My job at that company was not to make sneaky scam calls to unsuspecting credit card holders; I took inbound calls and had to integrate CapitalOne's sales pitch into each call.

So you're simple little, "you should've quit" line doesn't really work, now does it? That's because you didn't have any of the facts about my very tiny role in this was.

Relevance of this?

You and washnut are riding your high horses all over me because I happened to be one of many underlings who worked for or indirectly for CapitalOne when they were doing these illegal actions. Three years ago. The judgement and the fine just came out this week. So I think you and WN see a way to bash someone with feigned indignity because hindsight is 20/20; I bet you'd be singing a different tune if I had asked for your thoughts then.

Don't take a judegement against an individual whose employer made as big mistake.

I worked long enough as a telemarketer (two days) to know that we were encouraged to hit up old people because they were more trusting and easier to part with their money. I do not, however, pretend to know the details of your parent business contract. Relevance?

Wow, two whole days. And I'm sure you "quit", too. Yawn...

The relevance is the aforementioned fact that you have zero notion of my role at CapitalOne and it's illegal actions. You and Wingnut are both out of line for accusing me of willingly immoral actions without any knowledge of the facts of my employment there.

You're on a forum that hundreds of people participate in, and possibly thousands lurk on. What makes you think you're the only one who knows anything about telemarketing?

I'm not talking about telemarketing in general; I'm talking about MY telemarketing that I did for CapitalOne. Neither of your know what I did, but you're both more than willing to cast the first stone. So I'm telling both of you to sit on it cause you don't anything about what I did there.
 
The acts that garnered CapitalOne's large fines weren't introduced into my company for the first two months. It was integrated into our customer service scripts after new training rounds. My job at that company was not to make sneaky scam calls to unsuspecting credit card holders; I took inbound calls and had to integrate CapitalOne's sales pitch into each call.

So, what you said before...

were told to distort and twist the truth to make it sound like a benefit to a customer. We were told to target older people and non-English speakers as especially "receptive" to what we were pushing. In reality, we were offering unnecessary and risky options that would inevitably lead customers to spend more and ultimately pay us more

You did that for seven months then, if I read that correctly? That was your verbatim description of some of your duties there.

So you're simple little, "you should've quit" line doesn't really work, now does it? That's because you didn't have any of the facts about my very tiny role in this was.

While you've said a lot about other duties you held at your company and the fact that all this happened three years ago, I fail to see why I was wrong in saying you should have quit. Unless your description of the timeline or my understanding of it is inaccurate, seven months seems like a really long time to be paid, at least in part of your duties, to con old people and non-English speakers.
 
Back
Top Bottom