Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is under attack by the rich banks CEOs; You must act to protect consumers everywhere

  CORPORATE ACCOUNTABILITY AND WORKPLACE

AlterNet / By Dave Johnson

6 Unbelievable Ways the Big Banks Are Scamming You

Five years since the crash, the big banks continue to screw over their customers.
June 19, 2013  |

It is going on five years since the financial crash and three years since President Obama signed the meager Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, and the big banks are still scamming and conning and ripping off their customers. What a huge surprise.

After the financial crash, we heard about a laundry list of abuses and frauds that ranged from small things, like hidden fees, to pushing minorities into subprime loans and then switching them into more expensive mortgages at signing time, to huge things like selling trillions of dollars in complicated CDO schemes and making bets on derivatives of derivatives without having the reserves to pay off what they owed when the bets went bad.

Of course, no one at the top was prosecuted and the banks were allowed to settle a host of charges (which meant that their shareholders, not the executives who made the decisions, paid the fines). The bad behavior gave these giants a competitive advantage, driving out what good companies there were. So the costly and destructive bad behavior, schemes, cons and scams continue.

1. Falsifying Paperwork, Blitzing, Lying About Payments to Force Homeowners Into Foreclosure

This week, ProPublica released a report detailing the shocking ways that Bank of America has been pushing homeowners into foreclosure. Employees lied about documentation and falsified paperwork to force families out of their homes when these customers thought they were getting a loan modification under the government’s Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP). To make matters worse, the bank gave bonuses to employees who were able to reach monthly quotas of people they forced into foreclosure.

According to a lawsuit against Bank of America, the bank used “blitzing” twice a month to deny HAMP applications even when the homeowner had fully complied with the program’s requirements; it gave employees $500 bonuses each month they forced 10 or more homeowners into foreclosure; it intentionally ignored applications for 30 days, then declared them late and forced homeowners to reapply; it closed applications even when they knew the homeowner had met all criteria; and it canceled loan modifications because of “late payments” when the bank’s records shows that payments had been made on time.

Of course, as long as the government refuses to prosecute banks and bankers for violating laws, and instead negotiating “settlements”  that require bank shareholders to pay fines, bankers will see no reason to stop this kind of activity.

2. Bank Protection “Service” Puts Consumers at “Greater Risk Of Harm”

Last week  a report from the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) found that the big banks are still scamming their customers with ridiculous fees that are hugely profitable for the big banks.

Three years ago the government required banks to ask their customers if it is okay (this is called “opt-in”) before they charge them for “overdraft protection” service. CFRB has been studying how this is working out, and its report shows that customers who do not opt-in to this heavily marketed “protection” service pay much, much less in fees than those who do. In other words, agreeing to use the “protection” actually puts you at a much greater risk of incurring expenses than those who are not “protected.”

According to  a McClatchy News report on a call with CFPB director Richard Cordray to discuss the report, Cordray said, “What is marketed as overdraft protection can, in some instances, put consumers at greater risk of harm.”

How much risk? People who are “heavy overdrafters” but still opt out of this service save on average more than $900 a year. But it isn’t just heavy overdrafters who are saving. According to the CFPB report “… the reduction in fees for those who did not opt in was $347 greater, on average, than for those who did opt in.” People who opt in are also more likely to lose their bank accounts, with the bank “involuntarily” closing it.

Banks have made $32 billion from these fees. So maybe this isn’t about providing a “protection” to consumers at all. As  NPR puts it, “Overdraft and non-sufficient funds fees accounted for 61 percent of total consumer deposit account service charges in 2011 among the banks in the CFPB report.”

3. Transaction Ordering

Not only do customers who opt-in pay more for this “protection service,” but the banks are still scamming them by causing the overdrafts that generate these fees. The CFPB report says that some banks still use “transaction ordering” to cheat customers out of additional fees. These banks post checks or debit transactions from large to small to trigger these fees. In other words if you write several small checks (or make debit card transactions) and then a big one that overdraws your account, they credit the large one first so each of the smaller transactions causes its own fee to be charged, even though those transactions occurred before the account ran out of money.

From the report, “The earlier in a sequence that an account becomes negative, the more overdraft or NSF transactions may occur.”

4. Forced Arbitration

Another big-bank scam on consumers is “forced arbitration” clauses in bank account, credit card, mortgage and other financial-service agreements. Forced arbitration clauses – also called mandatory arbitration or binding arbitration – require you to give up your legal right to take a big bank to court if it cheats or harms you. And if you don’t agree (which requires reading the entire agreement) you can’t get the account.

They way this works is that instead of being able to pursue your legal rights, you have to take your complaint to an arbitrator, and then must accept the arbitrator’s decision. The catch is that the bank gets to pick the arbitrator, and the arbitrators naturally know they’ll never work in this town again if they ever rule against the banks. So there is an inherent conflict of interest working in favor of these companies.

How is that conflict of interest working out for us? A 2007 Public Citizen report revealed that arbitrators working for the National Arbitration Forum (NAF) had ruled against consumers 94 percent of the time.

In another blow to the big banks, the CFPB is beginning to take steps to reign in forced arbitration clauses in consumer financial contracts.

The five-year-old Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act authorizes the CFPB and the Securities and Exchange Commission to regulate mandatory arbitration. The SEC is resisting implementing their part of this law, but the CFPB is conducting a survey to determine consumer awareness of forced arbitration clauses in credit card agreements.  On its blog, the CFPB said the study will “explore consumer awareness of dispute resolution terms in credit card agreements. The survey will gather information about consumers’ perceptions, preferences, and assumptions related to arbitration proceedings.”

5. Marketing Refinancing That Costs People

Thom Hartmann has exposed yet another banker scheme. This time banks are marketing a mortgage refinancing that promises annual savings of more than $4,000. But the scheme really just adds more than $37,000 to the cost of a loan.

Basically, the mailer focuses on lowering monthly mortgage payments, while neglecting to mention that the borrower would end up paying a higher overall interest rate, and would be adding 10 more years to the overall length of their loan. Hartmann  writes,

Back in November of 2012, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau sent warning letters to around a dozen of America’s largest mortgage lenders and brokers, advising them to “clean up” potentially misleading advertisements, especially those targeting veterans and older Americans.

At the time of the CFPB’s announcement, CFPB director Richard Cordray said that, “Misrepresentations in mortgage products can deprive consumers of important information while making one of the biggest financial decisions of their lives.”

And, as we also know, deceptive mortgage advertisements like this can cause consumers to bite off more than they can chew, ultimately leading to a nationwide financial meltdown.

6. Banks Trying To Kill the CFPB

Over the years, scam after scam is exposed, and nothing has been done about it. But there is a new cop on the beat, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The CFPB’s job is to police the big banks, and protect financial consumers. Of course the big banks are trying to head this agency off at the pass.

The Republican Party and its conservative infrastructure have basically been contracted by Wall Street’s big banks to obstruct and even kill this agency. Senate Republicans have been blocking the confirmation and are still trying to obstruct the nominee to head up the agency. Republicans have been filibustering the nomination of Richard Cordray to be its director and even vowing to filibuster to keep any nominee from being confirmed to head the agency. President Obama finally  made a recess appointment of Cordray in January 2012. But this recess appointment runs out at the end of the year with no end to Republican obstruction in sight.

Republicans are also  trying to defund the agency. Republicans and the (billionaire, Wall Street, oil and tobacco-financed) conservative movement have also launched a propaganda campaign against the agency. Recently, at the Senate Republican Policy Committee website, “CFPB: Unaccountable and Unrestrained,” claims, “A recent action by the CFPB to monitor consumer credit cards and the spending habits of millions of Americans is raising new concerns in a government suffering from a trust deficit.” In an example of how the right’s echo machine works, the Heritage Foundation echoes this attack, alleging that CFPB gathering data for reports like this one is an example of government “surveillance” on consumers, “amassing an Orwell-worthy database on all manner of spending, including … overdrafts …”

Sen. Elizabeth Warren – the person most credited with the creation of the CFPB – spoke at a Senate hearing on the CFPB last March on the role of the CFPB and Republican obstruction of the agency:

“I see nothing here but a filibuster threat against Director Cordray as an attempt to weaken the consumer agency,” Warren said. “I think the delay in getting him confirmed is bad for consumers, it’s bad for small banks, bad for credit unions, for anyone trying to offer an honest product in an honest market.”

“The American people deserve a Congress that worries less about helping big banks,” she added, “and more about helping regular people who have been cheated on mortgages, on credit cards, on student loans and on credit reports.”

Don’t expect much to change until we have a government that is willing to take on these financial giants. As long as we keep seeing “settlements” with these giants instead of prosecutions, and as long as we allow big money to buy influence over our government, nothing will change.

______________________________________________

But the banks’ CEOs have huge incomes and the power that comes with being super rich. The rich banks and corporations run  the USA and form all of the policies. Citizens must speak up and vote appropriately.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

 Any advertisements  that may appear on this page were selected by wordpress.com and do not reflect any choice made by MRND5

PrePaid Bank Cards are not the answer; PrePaid Bank Cards are part of the problem

PrePaid Bank Cards are more confusing and complicated than if you paid using cash and bought locally.

Global Payments Breach Fueled Prepaid Card Fraud

 

Debit card accounts stolen in a recent hacker break-in at card processor Global Payments have been showing up in fraud incidents at retailers in Las Vegas and elsewhere, according to officials from one bank impacted by the fraud.

At the beginning of March 2012, Danbury, Conn. based Union Savings Bank began seeing an unusual pattern of fraud on a dozen or so debit cards it had issued, noting that most of the cards had recently been used in the same cafe at a nearby private school. When the bank determined that the school was a customer of Global Payments, it contacted Visa to alert the card association of a possible breach at the Atlanta-based processor, according to Doug Fuller, Union Savings Bank’s chief risk officer.

That’s when USB heard from Tony Higgins, then a fraud investigator at Vons, a grocery chain in Southern California and Nevada owned by Safeway Inc.

According to Fuller, Higgins said the fraudsters were coming to the stores to buy low-denomination Safeway branded prepaid cards, and then encoding debit card accounts issued by USB onto the magnetic stripe on the backs of the prepaid cards. The thieves then used those cards to purchase additional prepaid cards with much higher values, which were then used to buy electronics and other high-priced goods from other retailers.

“Higgins said, ‘You have a problem,’” Fuller recalled, of a phone conversation the bank had with Higgins in early March. “He said he had a slew of these people going through their Vons and Safeway stores exchanging cards. He had them on surveillance tape, knew where they were from and everything.”

Higgins told USB that the fraud he was seeing was mostly in Las Vegas, but that there also was some fraudulent card activity in neighboring states in the southwest.

“He had a theory that these guys came from Los Angeles and San Diego to Vegas just to make these transactions, and then went back,” Fuller said.

The fraud described by Higgins matched the unauthorized activity that they had seen stemming from accounts used at the private school cafeteria. Fuller said Visa has alerted Union Savings Bank that about 1,000 debit accounts it issued were compromised in the Global Payments breach — including the dozen or so card accounts that initially prompted USB to investigate.

USB officials say the bank has suffered approximately $75,000 in fraudulent charges, and that it has so far spent close to $10,000 reissuing customer cards.

Other banks notified by Higgins had much higher losses, Fuller said. “Mr. Higgins told us that the thieves also hit Bank of Oklahoma and Fulton Bank of New Jersey. He said Fulton was hit very hard by these guys, to the tune of about one thousand [stolen card accounts] each week.”

Higgins could not be reached for comment. Safeway officials confirmed that he retired from the company last month, but declined to discuss Higgins’ work or the incidents that prompted him to alert USB and other financial institutions affected by the Global Payments breach. Neither the Bank of Oklahoma nor Fulton Bank responded to repeated requests for comment.

The experience of Union Savings Bank illustrates how fraudsters can extract value from debit cards even if they only have some of the data associated with the accounts. {And this is why PREPAID BANK CARDS are a bad idea}Initial alerts about the breach from Visa and MasterCard stated that the breach at Global Payments compromised both Track 1 and Track 2 data from affected card accounts, meaning thieves could produce counterfeit versions of the cards and possibly commit other acts of identity theft against cardholders. Global Payments claims that only Track 2 data was taken, and that cardholder names, addresses and other data were not obtained by the criminals.

Yet, as USB’s story shows, the data on Track 2 alone was enough for the crooks to encode the card number and expiration date onto any cards equipped with a magnetic stripe.

The cards could then be used at any merchant that accepts signature debit — transactions that do not require the cardholder to enter his or her PIN.

Visa and MasterCard each have revoked their certification of Global Payments as a compliant card processor. Global Payments said it is still investigating the cause and extent of the incident.

The company maintains that fewer than 1.5 million card accounts were stolen, but some in the industry now believe more than 7 million card accounts may have been compromised. Meanwhile, the card associations keep broadening the window of time in which hackers likely had access to the processor’s network. Initially, Visa and MasterCard said the breach window at Global Payments was between January and February 2012, but in the latest round of alerts sent to banks affected by the breach, the card brands warned that the breach dates back to at least early June 2011.

USB’s experience also raises fresh questions about the timing of the breach discovery. Global Payments says it self-discovered and self-reported the breach on March 8, but Fuller said his bank figured out Global Payments was having an issue and reported the fraud before that.

“Global is saying this was self-discovered, but already knew it was them at the beginning of March, because within 48 hours of a customer telling us they were having problems, we figured out it was Global and alerted Visa,” Fuller said. “We are going to put Global on notice that we hold them accountable, because we’re bleeding here.

Granted, a seventy-five thousand dollar loss isn’t the end of the world, but when you have a large institution like Global that doesn’t want to accept responsibility about what’s happened, that’s sort of annoying.”

[Keep it simple…. Don’t use PREPAID BANK CARDS…. Pay using cash. Buy Locally!!!!!]

Meta Bank regrouping, seeking new ways to scam their customers

2011 Banking & Securities Outlook

An unusually uncertain prospect

To borrow from two Federal Reserve Bank chiefs, we have moved from a period of “irrational exuberance” to one of “unusual uncertainty.”

– In July 2010 Congress passed sweeping regulatory reform in the shape of the Dodd-Frank Act, ending months of speculation.

– And later in the year, the Basel Committee issued the new capital and liquidity guidelines known as “Basel III.”

These two major events will profoundly shape the banking and securities industry in 2011.

Amid the uncertainty some things are clear.

Banks are actively responding to the new pressures they face from regulators and evaluating considerations that will position them for the revised capital regime.

Some of these responses may well dominate the industry in 2011.    They concern everything from

        • strategic questions about business models,
        • to capital allocation,
        • to management of regulatory relations,
        • to the technology platforms required for data management, and, finally,
        • to the quest for that most elusive of goals – revenue growth.
This report was made by Deloitte

And what does this mean for the consumer?

The banks like Meta Bank are re-grouping.

Dollar General’s Pre-Paid Card is a Meta Bank Card: November 2011 update: www.everywherepay.com is scamming customer

never had 70.00 loaded on card and can not get company they say has to load it!
Company information:
dollar general
3465 Blue Star Hwy /Store #05826
Sagatuck/ DouglasMichigan
United States
Phone: 615-855-5734
dollargeneral.com

Well first i payed for gift card 20.00 then you apply for reloadable card and you put money on it for me it was 70.00 for internet purchases smart right! dollar general took money but later took no responcablity for the so called visa card that they have put there name on as well as visa for the theft i have tryed for 2 months now and over 500 min. of phone time and there store could not even after repeated trying to get this Meta bank or money network you can even try it http://www.everywherepay.com or 1-866-387-5146 my card # xxxxxxxxxxxx  reload code xxxxxx my name on card is xxxxx valid thru 11/12 on back of card last 4 digits 4039 and code # xxx  last 4 digits of my soc. xxxx  Store no# 05826 phone i puchased card from and have receipt for purchase from 1-269-857-5186 i told them hey you can have your card back i just want my money back after they could not get it to work they told me no not there problem do i have to get police report and sue them in court my email address xxxxxxx

Please report this to your state’s Attorney General’s office.

Yes, make a police report.

Contact the the US Office of Thrift Supervision to make a complaint.

Write to your US Senator and US Representative explaining that consumer’s need to be protected

Regarding Going to Court: META BANK’s CEO, J. Tyler Haahr or J. Tyler Haahr, Jr. is an attorney and their focus has been on been on defense and acting under the radar. Politically well connected and experienced in posturing and leverages. This is nothing more than a game for J. Tyler Haahr.

Some very sad cases pertaining to the interior management highlight META BANK’s anticipation of litigation and regulation.

Example # One

Customers Sue Bank to Get Back CD Money Stolen by the Bank’s Employee

Comments (30)

Jul 14, 2009 – 8:08 AM by Ken – Bank Deals Guy

As reported by the CU Times, “Nearly 50 credit unions, municipalities and pension funds have filed suit against Iowa-based MetaBank to recover $4 million in allegedly stolen certificate of deposit funds.” A former MetaBank employee pleaded guilty to the theft. Employee theft at a bank is troubling, but what is much more troubling is that the bank’s customers are having to sue to get back their deposits and interest. Here’s an excerpt from The Des Moines Register:

MetaBank said “it does not appear at this time that she stole any bank money as part of this fraud,” but the bank says there are still “unresolved questions as whether, under what theory and to what degree the bank might be liable for the former employee’s actions.”

Another thing that makes this case troubling is that the customers victimized were financial institutions. One would think they had professionals making and verifying the deposits at MetaBank.

I find it hard to believe that MetaBank didn’t quickly pay the affected customers of all of their deposits and interest. With this publicity, who would trust MetaBank with their money? I’m also surprised that MetaBank’s regulators didn’t require them to immediately make their depositors whole. An attorney for one of the affected credit union’s made a good point in The Des Moines Register article:

“Frankly, it would undermine the entire banking system if a bank is allowed to refuse to pay back deposits on the basis that someone thereafter stole them, especially when the thief was one of their own branch supervisors,”

You might think that the FDIC would protect depositors in his case, but FDIC insurance does not cover losses due to theft or fraud. One important thing you can do to protect yourself is to check your balances online and check your statements monthly. As described by the OCC’s website:

Your deposit account agreement states that it’s your responsibility to review your periodic statement and advise the bank of any errors. Generally, you have 30 days from the statement date to find the error and notify the bank.

This might not help if the criminal employee is able to falsify the statements and the online balances. Another thing that may help is avoid dependence on any one bank representative. Dealing with multiple employees can make it harder for one rogue employee to get away with fraud. Please leave a comment if you have any other advice on how to prevent being a victim of this type of fraud?
_______________________________________________________________________________
Sample Comments:

Mike –  Tuesday, July 14, 2009 – 12:12 PM

I used to laugh when I heard about the “old days”, when people put their money in a mattress because they did not trust banks. The more I read, the less I laugh.

ChrisCD -Tuesday, July 14, 2009 – 2:09 PM

It is quite interesting to also read the comments from the IA newspaper articled linked above.

We are sadly, familiar with this case. You have an interesting quote that Metabank said “no bank money was stolen”. Metabank never cared about the 50 or so client’s that expected them to hire trustworthy employees. The 50 clients who purchased the CDs were Metabank’s customers as well. Does Metabank care about any of their clients? Further more, according to the FDIC, when you make a deposit at a bank, you are immediately covered and protected… Unless your money is stolen.

We had actually contacted the FDIC multiple times. After all, they released a Bill of Rights this year that basically said your deposit is safe and insured as long as it is under the FDIC insurance limits. Banking Guy points out, the FDIC does not cover loss due to fraud or theft (I’ve also heard a rumor that they don’t cover deposits if the building is destroyed by fire). The fact is the FDIC only covers deposits if the bank fails. The FDIC basically always said, it wasn’t their problem.

More amazing about this case, is monthly checks were sent out to each depositor, each month. The checks always cleared. The clients received safekeeping receipts and many rolled over their CD, year-after-year. There was never any reason to believe fraud was going on. It is so hard to believe that this went on so long, undetected.

The newspaper article also has an interesting quote from Metabank about justice being served now that she has pleaded guilty. Justice has not been served.. There are still about 42 clients that have not had their $99,000 returned.

You do make a great point about the dangers of only working with one bank employee. Far too often, you think you have a good contact at a bank so you always call them about issues. Occasionally, calling someone else would be a good idea. However, once the funds have been stolen, it is too late.

I do wonder if other banks would have behaved any differently. After all, if the FDIC isn’t going to pressure them, who will.

Hopefully, now that the case is getting press, Metabank will do the right thing and return the funds (and of course cover the attorney fees that clients have had to incur up until this point). I would also hope that some serious changes can be made so that cases like this are not allowed to drag on for so long.

Mary – Tuesday, July 14, 2009 – 4:09 PM

This article should really make us all stop and consider its implications. FDIC does not cover employee theft. Any suggestions, other than generic check your account, which is an after the fact discovery? Do we now need to ask a bank if we are covered, as customers, by their “blanket bond?” Could a CSR even answer that question? Does this issue mean we might have to return to distinguishing national banks for state banks? Is the issue different for credit unions? Any insight into this issue is appreciated.

ChrisCD –  Tuesday, July 14, 2009 – 4:49 PM

Mary,

I won’t be much help here. First, I don’t believe an employee would know the answer. And even though, banks and credit unions carry a bond on their employees and insurance policies against losses such as fire, that doesn’t mean the policies will pay. In this case, the claim was made, but the bonding company refused. Personally, I don’t really blame the bonding company, after all for about 18-months, no charges were even filed. Were they supposed to take the bank’s word for it?

Secondly, I believe the NCUA operates the same way as the FDIC. They are only insuring your funds against closure of the institution.

Finally, I don’t think it would matter whether it was state chartered or nationally chartered.

To be honest, in all of my years in this business, I had never run up against a situation like this. But, that doesn’t help the 42 customers who are now affected.

The only insight would be a letter writing campaign to the FDIC and your elected officials. The FDIC should have gotten involved. The depositor shouldn’t be put on hold until the case is solved. The depositors were able to prove in a matter of days that they had all wired in funds and had safekeeping documents. They are the innocent victims. Some sort of law should be added that funds have to be returned within a reasonable time frame, like 90-days.

The fact is that controls that are in place at banks should be sufficient. Most banks have a two or three-tiered system for handling wires and changes to accounts. I really don’t believe most people need to worry about their deposits. But some changes to the law could secure and protect them more.

JCE –  Tuesday, July 14, 2009 – 6:43 PM

Everyone who has an account with this bank should close their accounts as soon as possible and tell customer service it’s because of how they did not make restitution to the accounts that had monies stolen, this will send a clear message to the bank to do the right thing or they will be forced out of business.

Tuphat –  Wednesday, July 15, 2009 – 6:48 AM

@ 5:42 — A more appropriate example would be a customer depositing cash through a teller, then the teller taking the cash. Any distinction between “the bank’s money” and “the customer’s money” is irrelevant after the duly authorized agent of the bank (the teller) accepted the deposit. Metabank seems to be getting terrible legal advice, probably from a law firm with a vested interest in protracted litigation.

Here it is “a law firm with a vested interest in protracted litigation.”

[The CEO of METABANK is the attorney and litigation is expensive and nasty to go through. J. Tyler Haahr will only add more and more money to his own pocket through a protracted litigation.]

_________________________________________________________________________________

For J. Tyler Haahr, I found this information

META FINANCIAL GROUP INC
(CASH:NASDAQ GM)

LAST $14.71 USD
CHANGE TODAY -0.54 -3.54%
VOLUME 400.0

EXECUTIVE PROFILE*

J. Tyler Haahr
Chairman, Chief Executive Officer, President, Chief Executive Officer of Metabank, President of Metabank and Member of Executive Committee, Meta Financial Group, Inc.

7
7
Age Total Calculated Compensation This person is connected to 7 board members in 2 different organizations across 3 different industries.See Board Relationships
48 $702,318
As of Fiscal Year 2010

BACKGROUND*

Mr. J. Tyler Haahr has been the Chief Executive Officer of Meta Financial Group, Inc. since June 2005 and serves as its President and Chairman. Mr. Haahr has been Chief Executive Officer of MetaBank, Inc., a subsidiary of Meta Financial Group, Inc. since June 27, 2005 and serves as its President.[ He was raised in this bank; his father was also a banker.]

Mr. Haahr serves as Chief Executive Officer of Security State Bank. [Avoid this bank too.]

He serves as President of First Services Trust Company; and Vice President and Secretary of First Services Financial Limited and Brookings Service Corporation. [ Here are some of the other banks to avoid.]

Mr. Haahr served as Chief Operating Officer, Senior Vice President and Secretary of Meta Financial Group, Inc. and served as Chief Operating Officer and Secretary of MetaBank, Inc. He has been employed by Meta Financial and its affiliates since March 1997. He was a Partner with the law firm of Lewis and Roca LLP, Poenix, Arizona, and had been with the firm since 1989. [ His family had a small local bank which he has expanded through how he does business.]

Mr. Haahr is active in many local charities. He serves as Chairman of the Sioux Falls YMCA.[This is political posturing.]

He has been the Chairman of the Board of Meta Financial Group, Inc. and MetaBank, Inc. since October 1, 2011. He has been a Director of Meta Financial Group, Inc., since 1992. He served as a Director of MetaBank, Inc., since 1992. He served as a Director of Security State Bank.

Mr. Haahr received his B.S. degree with honors in 1986 at the University of South Dakota in Vermillion, South Dakota.

[There is no doubt that Haahr is talented, but does he have moral scruples?]

He graduated with honors from the Georgetown University Law Center, Washington, D.C., in May 1989.

CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS*

121 East Fifth Street
Storm Lake, Iowa 50588

United States

Phone: 712-732-4117
Fax: 712-749-7501

BOARD MEMBERS MEMBERSHIPS*

1992-Present
Chairman, Chief Executive Officer, President, Chief Executive Officer of Metabank, President of Metabank and Member of Executive Committee
2011-Present
Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer, President, Chairman of Meta Financial Group Inc, Chief Executive Officer of Meta Financial Group Inc and President of Meta Financial Group Inc

EDUCATION*

BS 1986
South Dakota State University
Other Education 1989
Georgetown University Law School
[Here is the kind of money Haahr has at his disposal to work with:]

ANNUAL COMPENSATION*

Salary $365,015
Total Annual Compensation $365,015

STOCK OPTIONS*

Restricted Stock Awards $10,355
All Other Compensation $62,441
Exercisable Options 90,255
Exercisable Options Value $922,095
Total Value of Options $922,095
Total Number of Options 90,255

TOTAL COMPENSATION*

Total Annual Cash Compensation $618,956
Total Short Term Compensation $365,015
Other Long Term Compensation $72,796
Total Calculated Compensation $702,318
[$702,318.00  or more  in annual compensation reported for J. Tyler Haahr who is a graduate of Georgetown University Law School. You can assume that J. Tyler Haahr enjoys law as others enjoy games of strategy.  Making money, and even more money is his primary goal.]

BOARD MEMBERS AFFILIATED WITH J. TYLER HAAHR *

J. Tyler Haahr   
Chairman, Chief Executive Officer, President, Chief Executive Officer of Metabank, President of Metabank and Member of Executive Committee

7
7
Age Total Annual Compensation
47 $365,015 USD
Rodney G. Muilenburg
Meta Financial Group, Inc.
Board Affiliations
Meta Financial Group, Inc.
MetaBank, Inc.
E. Thurman Gaskill
MetaBank, Inc.
Board Affiliations
Meta Financial Group, Inc.
MetaBank, Inc.
Frederick V. Moore
Buena Vista University
Board Affiliations
Meta Financial Group, Inc.
MetaBank, Inc.
Jeanne Partlow
Meta Financial Group, Inc.
Board Affiliations
Meta Financial Group, Inc.
MetaBank, Inc.
Troy Moore
Meta Financial Group, Inc.
Board Affiliations
MetaBank, Inc.
Bradley C. Hanson
Meta Financial Group, Inc.
Board Affiliations
Meta Financial Group, Inc.
Brad Hanson
Meta Payment Systems Inc.
Board Affiliations
MetaBank, Inc.
DIVERSIFIED FINANCIAL SERVICES
______________________________________________________________________________________

Meta Payment Systems Inc.

COMPANY OVERVIEW

Meta Payment Systems Inc. develops, implements, and supports payment systems for banks, processors, and third party marketers.

[ Consumer, customer and client simply don’t factor into this mix. True, re-read the sentence at the beginning of this section. What is METABANK’s focus per their own information?]]

The company provides prepaid and credit card programs, and ATM sponsorships.

It also provides ACH origination, card activation, merchant acquiring, ATM sponsorship, and money transfer services. The company was founded in 2004 and is based in Sioux Falls, South Dakota with an additional office in Doral Center, Florida. Meta Payment Systems Inc. operates as a subsidiary of Meta Financial Group, Inc.

5501 South Broadband Lane

Sioux Falls, SD 57108

United States

Founded in 2004     Phone: 605-275-9555    Fax: 605-782-1701

KEY EXECUTIVES

Mr. Brad Hanson [ Watch the actions of this person. He doesn’t have the consumer’s best interests in mind. Profit motivates him and his peer J. Tyler Haahr. They are the same age, and most likely grew up together.]
President     Age: 47
Mr. John de Lavis
Senior Vice President of Operations
Mr. Ira Frericks
Chief Accounting Officer and Vice President
Mr. Trinity Surat
Director of EFT
Mr. Ian Stromberg
Vice President of Sales
Compensation as of Fiscal Year 2011.

KEY DEVELOPMENTS FOR META PAYMENT SYSTEMS INC.

Meta Payment Systems Inc. Presents at 19th Annual ATM, Debit & Prepaid Forum 2011, Nov-03-2011 03:20 PM   09/7/2011

Meta Payment Systems Inc. Presents at 19th Annual ATM, Debit & Prepaid Forum 2011, Nov-03-2011 03:20 PM. Venue: Bellagio Hotel & Casino, 3600 Las Vegas Blvd South, Las Vegas, NV 89109, United States. Speakers: Mick Conlin, SVP.

Meta Payment Systems Inc. Reports Earnings Results for the Second Quarter Ended March 31, 2011
05/10/2011

Meta Payment Systems Inc. reported earnings results for the second quarter ended March 31, 2011.

For the second quarter, the company recorded net income of $2.2 million, or 70 cents per diluted share, as compared to $6.5 million, or $2.17 per diluted share for the same period last year.

Revenue decreased by 48.7%, from $41.6 million in fiscal 2010 to $21.3 million in 2011.[So does METABANK Push this loss off onto their customer base? But it was their own actions that put them into this situation in the first place. Investors are you paying attention here?]

The revenue and income declines in this quarter were mostly due to the discontinuance of the iAdvance and certain income tax-related programs. [However, please note all of the income that J. Tyler Haahr makes a year. Are investors also making this kind of  income?]

[Stockholders of METABANK should take note of the term “diluted shares”]

Meta Payment Systems Inc. Presents at 6th Annual Underbanked Financial Services Forum, Jun-08-2011 01:00 PM. Venue: Hilton New Orleans Hotel Riversid, Two Poydras Street, New Orleans, LA 7013, United States. Speakers: Mick Conlin, SVP.

[Meta Bank is promoting their Pre-Paid Bank Card at a very intense and rapid rate as being a solution. It is a problem, and not a solution. PrePaid Bank Cards create or have the far too easy potential to create great misery for consumers. – And they do. How many people must complain before we can get these bank practices stopped???]

SIMILAR PRIVATE COMPANIES BY INDUSTRY

Company Name Region
Family Security Credit Union, Inc. United States
South Texas Regional Federal Credit Union United States
Fleet Global Markets United States
Fuji America Holdings Inc. United States
Inverlat International Ltd United States

RECENT PRIVATE COMPANIES TRANSACTIONS

Type
Date
Target
No transactions available in the past 12 months.
 Don’t opt into the options at this link: http://www.bankfreedomvisa.com/
_______________________________________________________________________
Further comments about how METABANK handled the embezzlement
ChrisCD – Wednesday, July 15, 2009
“I’m not saying the FDIC should pay, I’m saying they should have intervened or legislation should be in place that allows them to intervene.I am saying, the bank is responsible for the actions of their employees. They hired them. Their controls or lack there of allowed the theft to occur and carry on for a number of years. And although, they carry insurance and bonds to cover such, when that process has broken down, they should step-up to the plate. If I were a stockholder, I would seriously question the quality of the people representing my investment. One bad apple can certainly hurt the investment. As a stockholder, I would be seriously concerned about why controls weren’t in place or how they broke down if they were. I would rather my bank step-up and gain in reputation, vs. hide behind procedures and law suits.I would say there is a big difference between a Thug and an employee turned Thief. The bank didn’t (I hope) hire the Thug. The bank did hire the employee and the bank’s controls and processes failed.”

Anonymous – Wednesday, July 15, 2009 – 12:54 PM

What is scary is that a bad employee can transfer almost all of the money out of the bank and nobody will be responsible for it.
Fraud, theft, embezzlement and number of other creative mischiefs can render the bank insolvent and FDIC will just wipe their hands off of it.

Nice banking system we have!!!!!!!

“We all place a lot of trust and faith in our banks. My profession and livelihood depend on banks being trustworthy and honest. But if the banks and companies of the world are going to take the route of pointing the finger elsewhere until we all turn to dust, it is just a little scary.

For the record, I have deposits at multiple banks and I’m not going to panic and rush out and withdraw all of my money. I just believe some changes can be made to make us feel better about our bank deposits.”

Anonymous – Thursday, July 16, 2009 – 10:21 AM

What will stop the CEO or the president to transfer all of the customers money out of the country in a secret bank accounts and close the doors.
They disappear and enjoy the stolen money. FDIC shrugs off the shoulders and says: tough luck, it is not our responsibility.
End of the story……

[MetaBank has a Swiss Branch so they could actually do this. It is called foresight. Right!!!]

________________________________________________________________________________

Back to Example #1: Embezzlement of CD Money within METABANK:

i. Why wasn’t this embezzlement  found during an internal audit?

ii. What were the supervisors for this one employee [Pickhinkle] doing while they say she was embezzling?

iii. I find it odd that METABANK didn’t want to keep this out of the media since it highlights their own poor internal practices.

[So all the embezzlement blame was pushed off onto one employee within METABANK who was sent to jail. By the way, I am not connected to that person in anyway, but I feel that she may well have been set up by METABANK to take all of the blame.   METABANK came out smelling like a rose or did they?  In my mind, METABANK is not good for the future of the USA nor for our economy.]

[J. Tyler Haahr is a litigator. Was that bank employee set up? It looks like it to me. Or, METABANK has such poor internal practices that this could happen? Either way, better and more effective bank regulations are needed.]

http://www.ongo.com/v/914174/-1/053C45E71E19AB3F/value-of-boesen-partnerships-could-spur-lawsuit

______________________________________________________________________________

Example # 2 BOESEN

Boesen’s business ventures, which were extensive, were failing. He was behind in his tax payments also.

META BANK indicated that BOESEN had presented them with falsified information to get a loan.

META BANK never did any research to check out the paper work they were given? Many times, METABANK advertises that bad credit, no problem, they will be able to give you a loan. This is basically a set up for failure for any potential customer. METABANK is basically telling you that they will treat you like dirt, as a customer.

The actions and normal operating practices of METABANK didn’t provide BOESEN with a real solution nor did METABANK act as a friend or a good neighbor to BOESEN. In none of the documents presented to the public, METABANK never mentioned that they had counseled BOESEN to seek financial counseling or psychological counseling so that he could find ways to liquidate, as in go into legal bankruptcy before they would give him a loan. METABANK’s ordinary operating practices let them make monetary advances to a very poor credit risk, BOESEN. They took advantage of BOESEN’s situation and it was all legal. METABANK pushed the blame off onto the customer and the judge believed them.

[ I remembered that METABANK had lied to me and tried to push  blame off  on me as their former customer, pulled in through a company I had used locally for years. They said that I hadn’t given them my contact information, but they had sent me a cash out check to my addressed and the canceled check would have been in their files.  I have now also severed my relationship with that company since I would never be able to trust them again. So METABANK isn’t good for the partner company either.]

After BOESEN committed suicide, METABANK went after all of his assets; this was their plan all the time. BOESEN’s wife was unaware of the loan; she hadn’t signed for it. This is very unusual for getting such a large advance, but METABANK gave the loan. Usually banks require the signature of both spouses to even get a credit card; METABANK knew what they were doing, BOESEN was destined to fail and they wanted to get everything when he had to liquidate which was inevitable.

After his death by suicide, METABANK pushed the blame off onto BOESEN saying that he had provided them with falsified  documents. Note the word “FALSIFIED” because it will come up again, and again and become a pattern for METABANK.

Boesen’s widow was left with only something like $50,000.00 which was considered by the court to be one year’s living expense. [I find this amount to be ridiculous. Have you considered what one year of expenses would be for tuition at a private college would be? BOSEN’s WIDOW was being pushed into a state of penury.] J. Tyler Haahr, an attorney, may have delighted in being able to exercise his talents as a litigator. It appears as if he was prepared for this situation because METABANK clearly got as much as they could get out of BOESEN’s estate. METABANK specializes in collections and they have collection agents in place ready to serve. This is in their publicity to get partner companies, but the relationship starts out by being nothing but a scam; the intention is to set in place a situation where collection agencies are put into action sooner rather than later. In the past Collection Agencies may have been used as a last resort; for METABANK it is part of their original intent.

BOESEN must have been pushed to beyond the limit at the most vulnerable time in his life. I blame METABANK for his death; their practices do not serve to help humanity, simply to make more and more money for themselves.

________________________________________________________________________________

 Example #3: Network Branded Prepaid Card Association
The Network Branded Prepaid Card Association (NBPCA) is a non-profit, inter-industry trade association that supports the growth and success of network branded prepaid debit cards and represents the common interests of the many players in this new and rapidly growing payments category. For additional information, visit www.NBPCA.org or our Twitter page.[METABANK is spreading disaster]

[METABANK’s Brad Hansen was instrumental in getting the D.C. Lobbyist, Rupli and Associates to advocate and push through influence in the US Senate and in the US House of Representatives so that these cards could proliferate. Huge sums of money were donated to this endeavor by the NBPCA and METABANK, one of the founders of this “NON-PROFIT”; the money either went to Rupli or to our elected officials.

Now these PREPAID CARDS are everywhere. They are so common that they seem normal, and as if they are that common then they must be okay for consumers. Nothing could be further from the truth, these PREPAID BANK CARDS weren’t designed to help the average person, the regular consumer, to make it or to succeed. Customers are encouraged to use these cards often and to attach their paychecks to a direct deposit system that is very good for the bank, but this puts the consumer into a form of economic slavery.

Non-Profits are usually associated with charities and serving the underprivileged so that they can improve their situation in some significant way. METABANK brags that they were one of the first to serve the “underserved” in the banking system. This may sound altruistic, but they set it up that they would charge higher interest rates for their loans.

How in the world did the Network Branded Prepaid Card Association legally qualify as a non-profit?

They treat their PREPAID BANK CARD HOLDERS as if they were also a poor credit risk; they are more than willing to lie to the customer just to keep ahold of your hard earned money. Schemes, far fetched schemes, are created within METABANK to make it so they can and will hold onto your money. Never mind that the reasons given make no sense to you as their customer; they don’t care. It is simply a set up so METABANK can hold onto their customer’s money, keeping it out of the reach of the customer to whom the money actually belongs. METABANK gets free interest and use of the customer’s money, but they lend it out at exaggerated rates. Is that fair? or is this USURY? USURY….this is USURY!!!

Once again, J. Tyler Haahr is a litigator. He is prepared for a protracted time period of litigating hoping to exhaust the former customer’s funds and exasperate them with ridiculous schemes. Why do the judges appear to go along with METABANK’s dark scheme?

GUESSES:

Money helps. People who have money tend to have power. People like people who have money.

Monied and well educated, J. Tyler Haahr would have been working on forming connections. He serves on committees and boards, such as at the YMCA. This only is to build up his appearance in the community.

METABANK’s collectors appear to be far more like those “BOOKIES” that used to  appear in old B-rated movies. How safe would any judge be if they decided against METABANK’s actions and the ways that METABANK hurts the lives of so many people?

J. Tyler Haahr may know the law well and he is anticipating going into court. Consumers aren’t. ]

___________________________________________________________________________________

Example #4 PAYONEER ASSASINS:

PAYONEER is a branch of METABANK. On their website, they advertise that they have the best technology in the world to ascertain whether documents are legitimate or not. About 26 people bought PREPAID BANK CARDS from PAYONEER using false ID’s and then flew to Dubai where they committed a murder.

They all turned out to be part of the Israeli Moussad and their victim was a Palestinian whom they didn’t like. The issue isn’t whether that Palestinian had done anything wrong in society’s mind; the issue is that one man in te world was denied the right to a fair and impartial trial in a court of law.

International news networks traced the PREPAID BANK CARDS back to their connection to METABANK. Iowa residents couldn’t believe that Storm Lake Iowa would be involved in any kind of international assassination with as great of implications as this assassination had. That man was left in his hotel room to look like he had died of natural causes; local Dubai police did their work and found out that he had been suffocated.

That man, denied a fair and impartial trial no doubt has family and some friends whom he left behind after his death. Those people will not be happy most likely about his death.What METABANK did was sell PREPAID BANK CARDS to people they said had presented false ID’s so it wasn’t their fault.  When the media came knocking at their door with questions, METABANK sent out a medium ranking bank official to talk to the media. She was a very recently hired employee who was obviously given a script. She had no other insider’s information that she could share with the media, and her face would have had a genuine expression on it. She really didn’t have any more information; she was not a high ranking officer  of the bank and she was too new. This was a very well orchestrated response for the world. METABANK said that they had been given falsified documents by those people who were trying to get their PREPAID BANK CARD at PAYONEER.

So once again, the term “FALSIFIED DOCUMENTS” were presented to METABANK, but the blame belongs to the person who presented the documents.

[Had METABANK not lied to me, I may have viewed these situations in a different light, but it is impossible for me to think of METABANK as an innocent.]

[Their actions over and over again highlight that no one should do business with METABANK or a bank like them. Partner companies should be warned that in the long run your customer base will be driven away.]

——————————————————————————————————————————-

Ok, so we have a repeated pattern that METABANK:

  • push blame off onto the consumer,
  • protracted litigation is in their favor,
  • keep the consumer’s own money from them,
  • make up lies to give as an excuse for their actions
  • take advantage of consumer’s for METABANK’s gain
  • METABANK has operated using many different names, but it is always the same gimmicks and intention to get their collectors into action

___________________________________________________________________________

Your situation indicates that METABANK or an entity operating like METABANK took your money but that METABANK won’t let you access your own money. This is a pattern that is unfortunately common to METABANK practices. They do this to many people, but it would take great effort and expense to take METABANK to court. Once in court for some reason, METABANK tends to prevail. Why? Something is seriously wrong. I see their pattern. Certainly others do as well. This will stop when enough people demand the changes that are needed:

Please write emails or letters to the Office of Thrift Supevision in DC

Write to your elected US Senator and US Representative asking for better consumer protections to be put into place.

Write to your  State Attorney General and the US Attorney General

Ok, so we have a repeated pattern that METABANK pushes blame off onto to anyone and everyone else. They also have full control of your money that you tried to put on the PREPAID BANK CARD; this would have already given them free use of your money.

Why does METABANK want even more use of your money? Greed? Personal self-interest? Lack of empathy? Te need to compete and to win at all costs?

The American public and the world needs to be protected from unscrupulous banks like METABANK. They seem to be spreading their “word” faster than any gospel message is moving at this time. Nothing seems to be in place to protect the consumer. We live in an age that is over run and dominated by unscrupulous banks and corporations; it is all about making more and more money for them. Each move is well studied; they have the money to hire consultants that the general public simply doesn’t have. It is for us to speak up so that no one else must suffer from the actions and attitude of banking practices of METABANK and those banks they are training.

Quite frankly, I am tired of being pulled into wars trying to protect the interests of big corporations and banks like METABANK. Person to person, we learn that we have no conflicts with Others. We are being set up to send our youth to fight in faraway places, people who may be just like us, and then return to live in poverty and indebtedness. Change is needed.

Please write to as many people you can explaining your experience and help to get the changes we so desperately need put in place to protect consumers.