JPMorgan Begins Suing Customers In 'Infinite Money Glitch' (cnbc.com)
- Reference: 0175340185
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/24/10/28/2224234/jpmorgan-begins-suing-customers-in-infinite-money-glitch
- Source link: https://www.cnbc.com/2024/10/28/jpmorgan-suing-customers-over-infinite-money-glitch.html
> The bank on Monday filed lawsuits in at least three federal courts, taking aim at some of the people who withdrew the highest amounts in the so-called infinite money glitch that [2]went viral on TikTok and other social media [3]platforms in late August. [...] JPMorgan, the biggest U.S. bank by assets, is investigating thousands of possible cases related to the "infinite money glitch," though it hasn't disclosed the scope of associated losses. Despite the waning use of paper checks as digital forms of payment gain popularity, they're still a major avenue for fraud, resulting in $26.6 billion in losses globally last year, according to Nasdaq's Global Financial Crime Report.
>
> The infinite money glitch episode highlights the risk that social media can amplify vulnerabilities discovered at a financial institution. Videos [4]began circulating in late August showing people celebrating the withdrawal of wads of cash from Chase ATMs shortly after bad checks were deposited. Normally, banks only make available a fraction of the value of a check until it clears, which takes several days. JPMorgan says it closed the loophole a few days after it was discovered.
>
> The lawsuits are likely to be just the start of a wave of litigation meant to force customers to repay their debts and signal broadly that the bank won't tolerate fraud, according to the people familiar. JPMorgan prioritized cases with large dollar amounts and indications of possible ties to criminal groups, they said. The civil cases are separate from potential criminal investigations; JPMorgan says it has also referred cases to law enforcement officials across the country.
"Fraud is a crime that impacts everyone and undermines trust in the banking system," JPMorgan spokesman Drew Pusateri said in a statement to CNBC. "We're pursuing these cases and actively cooperating with law enforcement to make sure if someone is committing fraud against Chase and its customers, they're held accountable."
[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2024/10/28/jpmorgan-suing-customers-over-infinite-money-glitch.html
[2] https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/chase-bank-glitch-check-fraud-customers-reported-to-authorities-rcna169986
[3] https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/events/august-2024-chase-bank-atm-glitch#fn1
[4] https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/03/business/chase-tiktok-trend/index.html
Americans say what? (Score:2, Interesting)
If you ever wonder if the rest of the world thinks Americans are idiot, now you know.
"Fraud is a crime" (Score:2)
"Fraud is a crime", unless it is perpetrated by the banks, then it is just business as usual.
P.S. that it still takes days to clear a check is borderline criminally negligent with modern day technologies. How hard is it to scan a check and send it to the issuing bank to clear? 24 hours is more than adequate for the whole process.
Re: (Score:2)
It took an hour of phone calls at my bank for them to clear my California income tax refund check.
They didn't have anything like it in their huge database of checks.
I must be one of the only people to ever manage to get a refund from California. :-)
Not a glitch. Outright fraud. (Score:4, Informative)
It was not a glitch. The bank allowed you to deposit a check, and then to immediately draw on that check as a sign of good faith on the validity of said check. If the check was bad, though, you're on the hook for that money. No different than if you went to a teller and did the same thing, except that there was no human contact.
To think this was a glitch is to reveal one's own gullibility.
I would fully expect the account to have been debited once the bad check was discovered, and a penalty applied on top of that, according to the rules of the account. I would also expect the largest abusers to have been malicious, rather than merely opportunistic, for whom legal remedy is justified. Everyone else got to pay a fee to learn a lesson about writing checks.
Re: (Score:2)
I assume these cases are about getting a judgement on accounts that are now negative.
I know if my bank account was 5 or 6 figures negative I'm not about to put money into it.
I'd be more surprised if they didn't try to recover the money.
Arbitration (Score:1)
Shouldn't they have to go through arbitration as defined in their customer agreement instead of going directly through the courts? Or is it yet another case of "rules for thee but not for me".
Re: (Score:3)
Strong likelihood that their first step was to request repayment/restitution from the withdrawer (as agreed to in their customer agreement). Even if the withdrawal was malicious, assuming the customer had not spent the money, restitution could have been satisfied by returning the monies so obtained. Now whether you would call that "arbitration", I do not know, but certainly from a banking perspective, hiring lawyers is not a cost free exercise and typically not pursued by a bank without first attempting mor
Re: (Score:2)
They're being pretty nice about it. The alternative is to file criminal charges and ask the court to extract the money from them (after they get out of prison in about 5 years).
Maybe they shouldn't defraud a huge bank and post videos of it online?
What exactly do you think should be arbitrated? There is no issue to be negotiated other than a repayment schedule and the avoidance of criminal charges if they stick to the schedule. That's exactly what happened to a college buddy of mine who stole from his emp
Re: (Score:2)
> What exactly do you think should be arbitrated?
The dispute.
If customer agreement says that both parties must use binding arbitration to settle any disputes, then that's how it needs to be settled.
Re: (Score:2)
What is the nature of the dispute?
They over drew their account. Is that disputed?
They need to bring their account back to zero. Is that disputed?
What is in dispute? If there is no dispute (there is not) the only thing the arbitrator can and will do is tell the customer to repay.
Arbitration is not some magical place where they ignore the law and common sense. Most arbitrators are retired judges and lawyers. They ren't random people off the street who will declare some bizarre outcome like no repayment i
Re: (Score:2)
> Shouldn't they have to go through arbitration
No. Arbitration makes no sense. It is clear these people need to pay back the money, so there is nothing to arbitrate.
Only a court order is enforceable to seize assets, garnish wages, or whatever.
Re: (Score:2)
Why is the bank entitled to obtain a court order, but customers aren't?
Re: (Score:2)
> Why is the bank entitled to obtain a court order, but customers aren't?
Because if the arbitrator says the bank has to pay, the bank will pay, so no court order is needed.
If the bank refuses to honor the arbitrator's ruling, the customer can go to court.
Re: (Score:2)
The article said the bank tried to contact the customers, then sued them if they didn't respond. They did not indicate that they tried arbitration.
Again, why does the bank get to skip binding arbitration?
Checks? (Score:1)
1970 called. Wants his checks back. We are not using signatures as a security solution in shops when using a bank card anymore for some years. But that pinnacle of business evolution country and Fortune 500 company still has checks? And then they wonder, why someone mistreats them. It is still fraud, scalable by opportunists, but who is the stupid one there?
Re: (Score:2)
We use signatures as a security solution for vote by mail in more than a few states, 31 according to this PolitiFact article: [1]https://www.politifact.com/fac... [politifact.com]
[1] https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jul/30/facebook-posts/most-states-require-signature-verification-mail-ba/
TikTok clowns (Score:4, Funny)
"Hi everyone, watch me commit fraud, theft, and god only knows many other felonies in my public video!"
Anything for likes.
In related news ... (Score:4)
... zoomers rediscover [1]check kiting [wikipedia.org].
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Check_kiting
Fixed that for them (Score:2)
"The lawsuits are likely to be just the start of a wave of litigation meant to force customers to repay their debts and signal broadly that the bank won't tolerate fraud..." unless the crime is being committed by the bank , in which case it's not "fraud" or "theft". It's just good business and having enough legislators in your pocket to buy the necessary laws.
[1]https://archive.nytimes.com/dealbook.nytimes.com/2008/03/18/jpmorgans-12-billion-bailout/ [nytimes.com]
[1] https://archive.nytimes.com/dealbook.nytimes.com/2008/03/18/jpmorgans-12-billion-bailout/
Third world doing better? (Score:2)
In India our cheques clear in less than 6 hours irrespective of the bank, branch or location.. are you guys still usingbhorse buggies to send cheques for clearing?
how much (Score:2)
I'd like to know the maximum amount anyone got.