| 05/08/2023 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Checking account
|
- Managing an account
- Funds not handled or disbursed as instructed
|
|
Web |
|
|
Reference crd # # XXXX # # investment advisorDollar bank rejected/denied a claim in the Requested by law see attachment 15 usc 1635 the recipe of deposit from a Merchant is proof of credit to be returned upon demand.
CITE 15 USC Sec. 1 01/05/2009 EXPCITE TITLE 15 - COMMERCE AND TRADE CHAPTER 1 - MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE HEAD Sec . 1. Trusts, etc., in restraint of trade illegal ; penalty STATUTE Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal. Every person who shall make any contract or engage in any combination or conspiracy hereby declared to be illegal shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding {>= $1,000,000} if a corporation, or, if any other person, {>= $1,000,000}, or by imprisonment not exceeding 10 years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.
SOURCE ( July 2, 1890, ch. 647, Sec. 1, 26 Stat. 209 ; Aug. 17, 1937, ch.
690, title VIII, 50 Stat. 693 ; July 7, 1955, ch. 281, 69 Stat. 282 ; Pub. L. 93-528, Sec. 3, Dec. 21, 1974, 88 Stat. 1708 ; Pub. L. 94- 145, Sec . 2, Dec. 12, 1975, 89 Stat. 801 ; Pub. L. 101-588, Sec.
4 ( a ), Nov. 16, 1990, 104 Stat. 2880 ; Pub. L. 108-237, title II, Sec. 215 ( a ), June 22, 2004, 118 Stat. 668. ) AMENDMENTS 2004 - Pub. L. 108-237 substituted " {>= $1,000,000} '' for " {>= $1,000,000} '', " {>= $1,000,000} '' for " {$350000.00} '', and " 10 '' for " three ''.
1990 - Pub. L. 101-588 substituted " {>= $1,000,000} '' for " one million dollars '' and " {$350000.00} '' for " one hundred thousand dollars ''.
1975 - Pub. L. 94-145 struck out from first sentence two provisos granting anti-trust exemption to State fair trade laws.
1974 - Pub. L. 93-528 substituted " a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding one million dollars if a corporation, or, if any other person, one hundred thousand dollars, or by imprisonment not exceeding three years '' for " a misdemeanor, and on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding fifty thousand dollars, or by imprisonment not exceeding one year ''.
1955 - Act July 7, 1955, substituted " fifty thousand dollars '' for " five thousand dollars ''.
1937 - Act Aug. 17, 1937, inserted two provisos.
EFFECTIVE DATE OF 2001 AMENDMENT Pub. L. 107-72, Sec. 4, Nov. 20, 2001, 115 Stat. 650, provided that : " This Act [ enacting and amending provisions set out as notes under this section ] and the amendments made by this Act shall take effect on September 30, 2001. '' EFFECTIVE DATE OF 1975 AMENDMENT Section 4 of Pub. L. 94-145 provided that : " The amendments made by sections 2 and 3 of this Act [ amending this section and section 45 of this title ] shall take effect upon the expiration of the ninety-day period which begins on the date of enactment of this Act [ Dec. 12, 1975 ]. '' SHORT TITLE OF 2008 AMENDMENT Pub. L. 110-327, Sec. 1, Sept. 30, 2008, 122 Stat. 3566, provided that : " This Act [ amending provisions set out as a note under this section ] may be cited as the 'Need-Based Educational Aid Act of 2008 '. '' SHORT TITLE OF 2007 AMENDMENT Pub. L. 110-6, Sec. 1, Feb. 26, 2007, 121 Stat. 61, provided that : " This Act [ amending provisions set out as a note under this section ] may be cited as the 'Antitrust Modernization Commission Extension Act of 2007 '. '' SHORT TITLE OF 2004 AMENDMENT Pub. L. 108-237, title II, Sec. 201, June 22, 2004, 118 Stat.
665, provided that : " This title [ amending this section and sections 2, 3, and 16 of this title and enacting provisions set out as notes under this section and section 16 of this title ] may be cited as the 'Antitrust Criminal Penalty Enhancement and Reform Act of 2004 '. '' SHORT TITLE OF 2002 AMENDMENT Pub. L. 107-273, div. C, title IV, Sec. 14101, Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1921, provided that : " This title [ amending sections 3, 12, 27, and 44 of this title, section 225 of Title 7, Agriculture, section 1413 of Title 30, Mineral Lands and Mining, and section 2135 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare, repealing sections 30 and 31 of this title, enacting provisions set out as a note under section 3 of this title, amending provisions set out as notes under this section and section 8 of this title, and repealing provisions set out as notes under section 15 of this title and section 41309 of Title 49, Transportation ] may be cited as the 'Antitrust Technical Corrections Act of 2002 '. '' SHORT TITLE OF 2001 AMENDMENT Pub. L. 107-72, Sec. 1, Nov. 20, 2001, 115 Stat. 648, provided that : " This Act [ enacting and amending provisions set out as notes under this section ] may be cited as the 'Need-Based Educational Aid Act of 2001 '. '' SHORT TITLE OF 1998 AMENDMENT Pub. L. 105-297, Sec. 1, Oct. 27, 1998, 112 Stat. 2824, provided that : " This Act [ enacting section 26b of this title and provisions set out as a note under section 26b of this title ] may be cited as the 'Curt Flood Act of 1998 '. '' SHORT TITLE OF 1997 AMENDMENTS Pub. L. 105-43, Sec. 1, Sept. 17, 1997, 111 Stat. 1140, provided that : " This Act [ enacting and amending provisions set out as notes below ] may be cited as the 'Need-Based Educational Aid Antitrust Protection Act of 1997 '. '' Pub. L. 105-26, Sec. 1, July 3, 1997, 111 Stat. 241, provided that : " This Act [ amending sections 37 and 37a of this title and enacting provisions set out as notes under section 37 of this title ] may be cited as the 'Charitable Donation Antitrust Immunity Act of 1997 '. '' SHORT TITLE OF 1995 AMENDMENT Pub. L. 104-63, Sec. 1, Dec. 8, 1995, 109 Stat. 687, provided that : " This Act [ enacting sections 37 and 37a of this title and provisions set out as a note under section 37 of this title ] may be cited as the 'Charitable Gift Annuity Antitrust Relief Act of 1995 '. '' SHORT TITLE OF 1990 AMENDMENT Section 1 of Pub. L. 101-588 provided : " That this Act [ amending this section and sections 2, 3, 15a, and 19 of this title and repealing section 20 of this title ] may be cited as the 'Antitrust Amendments Act of 1990 '. '' SHORT TITLE OF 1984 AMENDMENT Pub. L. 98-544, Sec. 1, Oct. 24, 1984, 98 Stat. 2750, provided : " That this Act [ enacting sections 34 to 36 of this title and provisions set out as a note under section 34 of this title ] may be cited as the 'Local Government Antitrust Act of 1984 '. '' SHORT TITLE OF 1982 AMENDMENT Pub. L. 97-290, title IV, Sec. 401, Oct. 8, 1982, 96 Stat. 1246, provided that : " This title [ enacting section 6a of this title and amending section 45 of this title ] may be cited as the 'Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act of 1982 '. '' SHORT TITLE OF 1980 AMENDMENT Pub. L. 96-493, Sec. 1, Dec. 2, 1980, 94 Stat. 2568, provided : " That this Act [ enacting section 26a of this title ] may be cited as the 'Gasohol Competition Act of 1980 '. '' SHORT TITLE OF 1976 AMENDMENT Section 1 of Pub. L. 94-435, Sept. 30, 1976, 90 Stat. 1383, provided : " That this Act [ enacting sections 15c to 15h, 18a, and 66 of this title, amending sections 12, 15b, 16, 26, and 1311 to 1314 of this title, section 1505 of Title 18, Crimes and Criminal Procedure, and section 1407 of Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure, and enacting provisions set out as notes under sections 8, 15c, 18a, and 1311 of this title ] may be cited as the 'Hart- Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976 '. '' SHORT TITLE OF 1975 AMENDMENT Section 1 of Pub. L. 94-145 provided : " That this Act [ amending this section and section 45 of this title and enacting provisions set out as a note under this section ] may be cited as the 'Consumer Goods Pricing Act of 1975 '. '' SHORT TITLE OF 1974 AMENDMENT Section 1 of Pub. L. 93-528 provided : " That this Act [ amending this section and section 2, 3, 16, 28, and 29 of this title, section 401 of Title 47, Telegraphs, Telephones, and Radiotelegraphs, and sections 43, 44, and 45 of former Title 49, Transportation, and enacting provisions set out as notes under this section and section 29 of this title ] may be cited as the 'Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act '. '' SHORT TITLE Pub. L. 94-435, title III, Sec. 305 ( a ), Sept. 30, 1976, 90 Stat.
1397, added immediately following the enacting clause of act July 2, 1890, the following : " That this Act [ this section and sections 2 to 7 of this title ] may be cited as the 'Sherman Act '. '' ANTITRUST ENFORCEMENT ENHANCEMENTS AND COOPERATION INCENTIVES Pub. L. 108-237, title II, Secs. 211-214, June 22, 2004, 118 Stat. 666, 667, provided that : " SEC. 211. SUNSET.
" ( a ) In General. - Except as provided in subsection ( b ), the provisions of sections 211 through 214 shall cease to have effect 5 years after the date of enactment of this Act [ June 22, 2004 ].
" ( b ) Exception. - With respect to an applicant who has entered into an antitrust leniency agreement on or before the date on which the provisions of sections 211 through 214 of this subtitle [ this note ] shall cease to have effect, the provisions of sections 211 through 214 of this subtitle shall continue in effect.
" SEC. 212. DEFINITIONS.
" In this subtitle [ subtitle A ( Secs. 211-215 ) of title II of Pub.
L. 108-237, amending this section and sections 2 and 3 of this title and enacting this note ] : " ( 1 ) Antitrust division. - The term 'Antitrust Division ' means the United States Department of Justice Antitrust Division .
" ( 2 ) Antitrust leniency agreement. - The term 'antitrust leniency agreement, ' or 'agreement, ' means a leniency letter agreement, whether conditional or final, between a person and the Antitrust Divis
ion pursuant to the Corporate Leniency Policy of the Antitrust Division in effect on the date of execution of the agreement. " ( 3 ) Antitrust leniency applicant. - The term 'antitrust leniency applicant, ' or 'applicant, ' means, with respect to an antitrust leniency agreement, the person that has entered into the agreement. " ( 4 ) Claimant. - The term 'claimant ' means a person or class, that has brought, or on whose behalf has been brought, a civil action alleging a violation of section 1 or 3 of the Sherman Act [ 15 U.S.C . 1, 3 ] or any similar State law, except that the term does not include a State or a subdivision of a State with respect to a civil action brought to recover damages sustained by the State or subdivision. " ( 5 ) Cooperating individual. - The term 'cooperating individual ' means, with respect to an antitrust leniency agreement, a current or former director, officer, or employee of the antitrust leniency applicant who is covered by the agreement. " ( 6 ) Person. - The term 'person ' has the meaning given it in subsection ( a ) of the first section of the Clayton Act [ 15 U.S.C . 12 ( a ) ]. " SEC. 213. LIMITATION ON RECOVERY. " ( a ) In General. - Subject to subsection ( d ), in any civil action alleging a violation of section 1 or 3 of the Sherman Act [ 15 U.S.C. 1, 3 ], or alleging a violation of any similar State law, based on conduct covered by a currently effective antitrust leniency agreement, the amount of damages recovered by or on behalf of a claimant from an antitrust leniency applicant who satisfies the requirements of subsection ( b ), together with the amounts so recovered from cooperating individuals who satisfy such requirements, shall not exceed that portion of the actual damages sustained by such claimant which is attributable to the commerce done by the applicant in the goods or services affected by the violation.
" ( b ) Requirements. - Subject to subsection ( c ), an antitrust leniency applicant or cooperating individual satisfies the requirements of this subsection with respect to a civil action described in subsection ( a ) if the court in which the civil action is brought determines, after considering any appropriate pleadings from the claimant, that the applicant or cooperating individual, as the case may be, has provided satisfactory cooperation to the claimant with respect to the civil action, which cooperation shall include - " ( 1 ) providing a full account to the claimant of all facts known to the applicant or cooperating individual, as the case may be, that are potentially relevant to the civil action ; " ( 2 ) furnishing all documents or other items potentially relevant to the civil action that are in the possession, custody, or control of the applicant or cooperating individual, as the case may be, wherever they are located ; and " ( 3 ) ( A ) in the case of a cooperating individual - " ( i ) making himself or herself available for such interviews, depositions, or testimony in connection with the civil action as the claimant may reasonably require ; and " ( ii ) responding completely and truthfully, without making any attempt either falsely to protect or falsely to implicate any person or entity, and without intentionally withholding any potentially relevant information, to all questions asked by the claimant in interviews, depositions, trials, or any other court proceedings in connection with the civil action ; or " ( B ) in the case of an antitrust leniency applicant, using its best efforts to secure and facilitate from cooperating individuals covered by the agreement the cooperation described in clauses ( i ) and ( ii ) and subparagraph ( A ).
" ( c ) Timeliness. - If the initial contact by the antitrust leniency applicant with the Antitrust Division regarding conduct covered by the antitrust leniency agreement occurs after a State, or subdivision of a State, has issued compulsory process in connection with an investigation of allegations of a violation of section 1 or 3 of the Sherman Act [ 15 U.S.C. 1, 3 ] or any similar State law based on conduct covered by the antitrust leniency agreement or after a civil action described in subsection ( a ) has been filed, then the court shall consider, in making the determination concerning satisfactory cooperation described in subsection ( b ), the timeliness of the applicant 's initial cooperation with the claimant.
" ( d ) Continuation. - Nothing in this section shall be construed to modify, impair, or supersede the provisions of sections 4, 4A, and 4C of the Clayton Act [ 15 U.S.C. 15, 15a, 15c ] relating to the recovery of costs of suit, including a reasonable attorney 's fee, and interest on damages, to the extent that such recovery is authorized by such sections.
" SEC. 214. RIGHTS, AUTHORITIES, AND LIABILITIES NOT AFFECTED.
" Nothing in this subtitle [ subtitle A ( Secs. 211-215 ) of title II of Pub. L. 108-237, amending this section and sections 2 and 3 of this title and enacting this note ] shall be construed to - " ( 1 ) affect the rights of the Antitrust Division to seek a stay or protective order in a civil action based on conduct covered by an antitrust leniency agreement to prevent the cooperation described in section 213 ( b ) from impairing or impeding the investigation or prosecution by the Antitrust Division of conduct covered by the agreement ; " ( 2 ) create any right to challenge any decision by the Antitrust Division with respect to an antitrust leniency agreement ; or " ( 3 ) affect, in any way, the joint and several liability of any party to a civil action described in section 213 ( a ), other than that of the antitrust leniency applicant and cooperating individuals as provided in section 213 ( a ) of this title. '' ANTITRUST MODERNIZATION COMMISSION Pub. L. 107-273, div. C, title I, subtitle D, Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1856, as amended by Pub. L. 110-6, Sec. 2, Feb. 26, 2007, 121 Stat. 61, provided that : " SEC. 11051. SHORT TITLE.
" This subtitle may be cited as the 'Antitrust Modernization Commission Act of 2002 '.
" SEC. 11052. ESTABLISHMENT.
" There is established the Antitrust Modernization Commission ( in this subtitle referred to as the 'Commission ' ).
" SEC. 11053. DUTIES OF THE COMMISSION.
" The duties of the Commission are - " ( 1 ) to examine whether the need exists to modernize the antitrust laws and to identify and study related issues ; " ( 2 ) to solicit views of all parties concerned with the operation of the antitrust laws ; " ( 3 ) to evaluate the advisability of proposals and current arrangements with respect to any issues so identified ; and " ( 4 ) to prepare and to submit to Congress and the President a report in accordance with section 11058.
" SEC. 11054. MEMBERSHIP.
" ( a ) Number and Appointment. - The Commission shall be composed of 12 members appointed as follows : " ( 1 ) Four members, no more than 2 of whom shall be of the same political party, shall be appointed by the President. The President shall appoint members of the opposing party only on the recommendation of the leaders of Congress from that party.
" ( 2 ) Two members shall be appointed by the majority leader of the Senate.
" ( 3 ) Two members shall be appointed by the minority leader of the Senate.
" ( 4 ) Two members shall be appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives.
" ( 5 ) Two members shall be appointed by the minority leader of the House of Representatives.
" ( b ) Ineligibility for Appointment. - Members of Congress shall be ineligible for appointment to the Commission.
" ( c ) Term of Appointment. - " ( 1 ) In general. - Subject to paragraph ( 2 ), members of the Commission shall be appointed for the life of the Commission.
" ( 2 ) Early termination of appointment. - If a member of the Commission who is appointed to the Commission as - " ( A ) an officer or employee of a government ceases to be an officer or employee of such government ; or " ( B ) an individual who is not an officer or employee of a government becomes an officer or employee of a government ; then such member shall cease to be a member of the Commission on the expiration of the 90-day period beginning on the date such member ceases to be such officer or employee of such government, or becomes an officer or employee of a government, as the case may be.
" ( d ) Quorum. - Seven members of the Commission shall constitute a quorum, but a lesser number may conduct meetings.
" ( e ) Appointment Deadline. - Initial appointments under subsection ( a ) shall be made not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act [ Nov. 2, 2002 ].
" ( f ) Meetings. - The Commission shall meet at the call of the chairperson. The first meeting of the Commission shall be held not later than 30 days after the date on which all members of the Commission are first appointed under subsection ( a ) or funds are appropriated to carry out this subtitle, whichever occurs later.
" ( g ) Vacancy. - A vacancy on the Commission shall be filled in the same manner as the initial appointment is made.
" ( h ) Consultation Before Appointment. - Before appointing members of the Commission, the President, the majority and minority leaders of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and the minority leader of the House of Representatives shall consult with each other to ensure fair and equitable representation of various points of view in the Commission.
" ( i ) Chairperson ; Vice Chairperson. - The President shall select the chairperson of the Commission from among its appointed members.
The leaders of Congress from the opposing party of the President shall select the vice chairperson of the Commission from among its remaining members.
" SEC. 11055. COMPENSATION OF THE COMMISSION.
" ( a ) Pay. - " ( 1 ) Nongovernment employees. - Each member of the Commission who is not otherwise employed by a government shall be entitled to receive the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay payable for level IV of the Executive Schedule under section 5315 of title 5 United States Code, as in effect from time to time, for each day ( including travel time ) during which such member is engaged in the actual performance of duties of the Commission.
" ( 2 ) Government employees. - A member of the Commission who is an officer or employee of a government shall serve without additional pay ( or benefits in the nature of compensation ) for service as a member of the Commission.
" ( b ) Travel Expenses. - Members of the Commission shall receive travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, in accordance with subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code.
" SEC. 11056. STAFF OF COMMISSION ; EXPERTS AND CONSULTANTS.
" ( a ) Staff. - " ( 1 ) Appointment. - The chairperson of the Commission may, without regard to the provisions of chapter 51 of title 5 of the United States Code ( relating to appointments in the competitive service ), appoint and terminate an executive director and such other staff as are necessary to enable the Commission to perform its duties. The appointment of an executive director shall be subject to approval by the Commission.
" ( 2 ) Compensation. - The chairperson of the Commission may fix the compensation of the executive director and other staff without regard to the provisions of chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter 53 of title 5 of the United States Code ( relating to classification of positions and General Schedule pay rates ), except that the rate of pay for the executive director and other staff may not exceed the rate of basic pay payable for level V of the Executive Schedule under section 5315 of title 5 United States Code, as in effect from time to time.
" ( b ) Experts and Consultants. - The Commission may procure temporary and intermittent services of experts and consultants in accordance with section 3109 ( b ) of title 5, United States Code.
" SEC. 11057. POWERS OF THE COMMISSION.
" ( a ) Hearings and Meetings. - The Commission, or a member of the Commission if authorized by the Commission, may hold such hearings, sit and act at such time and places, take such testimony, and receive such evidence, as the Commission considers to be appropriate. The Commission or a member of the Commission may administer oaths or affirmations to witnesses appearing before the Commission or such member.
" ( b ) Official Data. - The Commission may obtain directly from any executive agency ( as defined in section 105 of title 5 of the United States Code ) or court information necessary to enable it to carry out its duties under this subtitle. On the request of the chairperson of the Commission, and consistent with any other law, the head of an executive agency or of a Federal court shall provide such information to the Commission.
" ( c ) Facilities and Support Services. - The Administrator of General Services shall provide to the Commission on a reimbursable basis such facilities and support services as the Commission may request. On request of the Commission, the head of an executive agency may make any of the facilities or services of such agency available to the Commission, on a reimbursable or nonreimbursable basis, to assist the Commission in carrying out its duties under this subtitle.
" ( d ) Expenditures and Contracts. - The Commission or, on authorization of the Commission, a member of the Commission may make expenditures and enter into contracts for the procurement of such supplies, services, and property as the Commission or such member considers to be appropriate for the purpose of carrying out the duties of the Commission. Such expenditures and contracts may be made only to such extent or in such amounts as are provided in advance in appropriation Acts.
" ( e ) Mails. - The Commission may use the United States mails in the same manner and under the same conditions as other departments and agencies of the United States.
" ( f ) Gifts, Bequests, and Devises. - The Commission may accept, use, and dispose of gifts, bequests, or devises of services or property, both real and personal, for the purpose of aiding or facilitating the work of the Commission. Gifts, bequests, or devises of money and proceeds from sales of other property received as gifts, bequests, or devises shall be deposited in the Treasury and shall be available for disbursement upon order of the Commission.
" SEC. 11058. REPORT.
" Not later than 3 years after the first meeting of the Commission, the Commission shall submit to Congress and the President a report containing a detailed statement of the findings and conclusions of the Commission, together with recommendations for legislative or administrative action the Commission considers to be appropriate.
" SEC. 11059. TERMINATION OF COMMISSION.
" The Commission shall cease to exist 60 days after the date on which the report required by section 11058 is submitted.
" SEC. 11060. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
" There is authorized to be appropriated {>= $1,000,000} to carry out this subtitle. '' YEAR 2000 INFORMATION AND READINESS DISCLOSURE Pub. L. 105-271, XXXX XXXX, XXXX, 112 Stat. 2386, as amended by Pub. L. 107-273, div. C, title IV, Sec. 14102 ( e ), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1922, known as the Year 2000 Information and Readiness Disclosure Act, provided for the free disclosure and exchange of information about computer processing problems, solutions, test practices and test results, and related matters in connection with the transition to the year XXXX.
APPLICATION OF ANTITRUST LAWS TO AWARD OF NEED-BASED EDUCATIONAL AID Pub. L. 107-72, Sec. 3, XXXX XXXX, XXXX, 115 Stat. 648, provided that : " ( a ) Study. - " ( 1 ) In general. - The Comptroller General shall conduct a study of the effect of the antitrust exemption on institutional student aid under section 568 of the Improving America 's Schools Act of 1994 ( 15 U.S.C. 1 note ) [ Pub. L. 103-382, see below ].
" ( 2 ) Consultation. - The Comptroller General shall have final authority to determine the content of the study under paragraph ( 1 ), but in determining the content of the study, the Comptroller General shall consult with - " ( A ) the institutions of higher education participating under the antitrust exemption under section 568 of the Improving America 's Schools Act of 1994 ( 15 U.S.C. 1 note ) ( referred to in this Act [ see Short Title of 2001 Amendment note above ] as the 'participating institutions ' ) ; " ( B ) the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice ; and " ( C ) other persons that the Comptroller General determines are appropriate.
" ( 3 ) Matters studied. - " ( A ) In general. - The study under paragraph ( 1 ) shall - " ( i ) examine the needs analysis methodologies used by participating institutions ; " ( ii ) identify trends in undergraduate costs of attendance and institutional undergraduate grant aid among participating institutions, including - " ( I ) the percentage of first-year students receiving institutional grant aid ; " ( II ) the mean and median grant eligibility and institutional grant aid to first-year students ; and " ( III ) the mean and median parental and student contributions to undergraduate costs of attendance for first year students receiving institutional grant aid ; " ( iii ) to the extent useful in determining the effect of the antitrust exemption under section 568 of the Improving America 's Schools Act of 1994 ( 15 U.S.C. 1 note ), examine - " ( I ) comparison data, identified in clauses ( i ) and ( ii ), from institutions of higher education that do not participate under the antitrust exemption under section 568 of the Improving America 's Schools Act of 1994 ( 15 U.S.C. 1 note ) ; and " ( II ) other baseline trend data from national benchmarks ; and " ( iv ) examine any other issues that the Comptroller General determines are appropriate, including other types of aid affected by section 568 of the Improving America 's Schools Act of 1994 ( 15 U.S.C. 1 note ).
" ( B ) Assessment. - " ( i ) In general. - The study under paragraph ( 1 ) shall assess what effect the antitrust exemption on institutional student aid has had on institutional undergraduate grant aid and parental contribution to undergraduate costs of attendance.
" ( ii ) Changes over time. - The assessment under clause ( i ) shall consider any changes in institutional undergraduate grant aid and parental contribution to undergraduate costs of attendance over time for institutions of higher education, including consideration of - " ( I ) the time period prior to adoption of the consensus methodologies at participating institutions ; and " ( II ) the data examined pursuant to subparagraph ( A ) ( iii ).
" ( b ) Report. - " ( 1 ) In general. - Not later than September 30, 2006, the Comptroller General shall submit a report to the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate and the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives that contains the findings and conclusions of the Comptroller General regarding the matters studied under subsection ( a ).
" ( 2 ) Identifying individual institutions. - The Comptroller General shall not identify an i
|
| 08/24/2023 |
Yes |
- Mortgage
- Conventional home mortgage
|
- Trouble during payment process
|
|
Web |
|
|
Sometime in late XXXX, I began noticing an extra {$30.00} being requested for my mortgage payment for a property I own in XXXX, PA. The mortgage on the property is held by Dollar Bank, XXXX. The mortgage was originated in XXXX of XXXX and has a 15 year term. I have paid every payment on time as agreed in the loan agreement documents.
Seeing this {$30.00} charge, I contacted Dollar Bank to inquire about it. The representative ( who I can not recall as it was so long ago ) reassured me that this wasn't an actual amount owed, but would be the amount I would pay should I make my payment late.
I took this answer at face value, and continued to make my payments on time each month.
For some time I thought this was a normal thing to see on my statements, so I did not pay it much mind.
During a review of my old statements, I noticed that prior to the statement dated XX/XX/XXXX, I did not have this {$30.00} charge on my statements. Upon further investigation, I discovered that there was a {$30.00} charge to my account on XX/XX/XXXX for " FAX STATEMENT FEE ''. As I did not recall ordering a fax statement, I began by contacting Dollar Bank 's customer service.
I then called XXXX, the number for Dollar Bank customer service. The first person I spoke with on Monday, XX/XX/XXXX, was a representative named " XXXX XXXX XXXX ( extension XXXX ). I explained that I did not order a fax statement, that the charge must be in error, and kindly asked her to remove it from my account. She then told me that a third party requested records of my account, and since they charge {$30.00} for such a service, I must pay for it. I explained to her that I have never agreed in any of our signed loan documents to be responsible financially for records requests made by a third party. She refused to remove the charge, and said that my authorization by XXXX XXXX XXXX to request records allowed them to assess me this charge. I requested the document she was referring to, and she sent me through secure email the authorization document I signed with XXXX to request the records. That document is attached to this complaint. I asked her to show me where in this document was I agreeing to be financially liable for requests from third parties, and she could not do so. She then made speculative statements that ( and this is paraphrasing ) " it's probably in the documents you signed with XXXX ''. I stated that I had agreed to no such thing with XXXX, and also that such an agreement is irrelevant because the {$30.00} charge is being imposed by Dollar bank and not XXXX, but she kept denying any merit to my assertion that I haven't agreed to be financially liable for a XXXX party 's request. I stated that the document simply grants permission to XXXX to *make a request*, not that such a request can be charged to me. I stated that they could have certainly asked XXXX to pay a {$30.00} fee to receive the records, but they instead charged it to me without my consent or consultation. We went back and forth, me explaining that I never agreed to be pay for XXXX party requests, and she ignored that and continued to repeat the same thing over and over, that they will not remove the charge and that my authorization for a records requests is explicit authorization to be financially responsible for third party requests.
Seeing that this wasn't going anywhere, I asked for a supervisor. " XXXX XXXX '' discouraged me from talking to her supervisor by saying that her supervisor would just tell me the same thing and that I am wasting my time. I insisted and she transferred me to her supervising associate, " XXXX XXXX '' ( extension XXXX ). XXXX, in similar fashion, did not attempt to provide any evidence that I had agreed to be financially responsible for XXXX party record requests. She parroted the same thing her subordinate associate said to me, which is that they would not even consider resolving their mistake of charging me a fee they are not legally allowed to collect. Similar to my discussion with " XXXX XXXX XXXX, this conversation went in circles where XXXX refused to acknowledge that the documents we went over have no wording or implication of financial responsibility for myself to cover record requests made by a third party. She said that my original loan documents would contain the wording that I supposedly agreed to cover these fees, so I asked her to obtain those documents and point out the location where this requirement is described. She said she would need a day to get my file and would send it to me.
I then waited a day, and received no response from " XXXX H '' on Tuesday XX/XX/XXXX. The next day, Wednesday XX/XX/XXXX, I called the XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) to attempt to continue resolving this issue. The representative ( I did not get their name ) read the notes on my account, said the issue is still being worked on, and said they would have " XXXX XXXX '' contact me.
I waited some more time, and received a call from " XXXX XXXX '' She said she pulled up the loan documents and found the portion that makes me financially responsible for third party requests. She read off a portion of this document that did not at all address anything to do with financial responsibility for third party requests. I asked her to please send me the document she is reading from. I also asked her to please initiate a complaint with her supervisor, who she stated was named " XXXX XXXX '' Similar to " XXXX XXXX '' 's subordinate, she told me that speaking with her supervisor would not help and that I would hear the same response. I continued with my request to file a complaint anyway, which she agreed to. Shortly thereafter we ended the call, as the document she sent me was long and would take some time for me to read.
The document in question was sent through secure email, which has on its title page " XXXX TITLE COMPANY '', and is a mortgage loan document with legal wording. I read through the entire document and could not find any sentence, section, or clause that relates to third party record requests or anything related. Shortly after reading this, I was going to call back to discuss this with " XXXX XXXX '', but soon after received a call from " XXXX XXXX ''. " XXXX XXXX XXXX stated that she was a subordinate of " XXXX XXXX '' and repeated the same story her associates before her repeated. I explained that this {$30.00} charge for a XXXX party request can not be charged to me as I have not agreed to such in any loan documents. She then falsely claimed that my authorization to request records by XXXX gives them permission to charge me for any and all fees incurred, even in situations that include negligence such as ordering dozens of identical record requests. She falsely claimed that the authorization letter was allowing XXXX to " act on my behalf '' on all matters, which it does not. The authorization letter permits them to make requests of my records, but does not allow them to pass fees associated with those record requests to me. Nor does it authorize Dollar Bank to bill me for those third party record requests.
At this point I realized that none of the customer service representatives were listening to my explanation in good faith, and I asked " XXXX XXXX '' to provide me with the address to Dollar Bank, XXXX. 's legal department. She refused to provide this information, and said I can only deal with her department on this issue. I explained that everyone I spoke to has been hostile and treated my issue in bad faith, and that I want to handle this through the legal department if possible, and she continued to refuse. In actuality, the legal departments mailing address is a public record, which I found to be Dollar Bank, XXXX, XXXX Department, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX Floor, XXXX, PA XXXX. Despite this being public record, she discouraged me from reaching out to them and refused to provide me a means to have my grievance heard by them.
Since I was originally told I would receive a message from " XXXX XXXX '' ( " XXXX XXXX '' 's supervisor ), I asked why she did not call me instead. I was told the reason was that " XXXX XXXX '' was unavailable. I asked if " XXXX XXXX '' could generate a formal complaint in writing to be submitted to myself and her supervisor, but was told that would not happen. When I asked why, she told me that these matters are only handled internally through voice communication. I again asked to have this in writing so that I could have a record of the communication, even if through email, and again she refused. She stated that she will notify " XXXX XXXX '' that I would like a call, and again I was told that attempting to speak with a supervisor will result in the same denial. When I asked if anything at all could be sent to me by physical mail to document this entire ordeal, I was told that the only thing they could send me is a letter stating that they will not remove the fee, despite not having any legal basis to collect it.
My next step may be to contact the legal department, but for a charge that should never have been assessed to me, this is excessive. The customer service representatives have acted in bad faith, sending me documents claiming they prove financial burden, when in fact they don't. What should normally be a 10 minute phone call to fix an error with any other bank ( as I have dealt with in the past ) turned into a multi hour nightmare of misdirection, shirking of responsibility, and bad faith argument in Dollar Bank 's attempt to avoid fixing a legitimate mistake that they have either accidentally or intentionally done to me ( and perhaps many, many others ).
|
| 04/08/2023 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Checking account
|
- Managing an account
- Problem making or receiving payments
|
|
Web |
|
|
XXXX XXXX has a Free Checking Account ending XXXX. This account was opened on XX/XX/2022. On XX/XX/2022, he deposited a check into the account, in the amount of {$4500.00}. He also made a withdrawal in the amount of {$120.00}. Prior to the check being deposited ; his account balance was {$1.00}. After the deposit of the check his account balance had been {$4400.00}. The following day he made a debit card transaction in the amount of {$2500.00}. The transaction was with XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX on XX/XX/2022. XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX approved the withdraw and the plaintiff has never withdrawn any money from gambling account bankroll with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. After this transaction had been processed the remaining balance left from the deposited check was {$11000.00}. Afterwards he attempted took withdraw more money and learned that restrictions had been applied to his account preventing his from processing any more withdraws. Additionally, he learned that the check had been returned to sender rather than allowing the remaining balance from the check in the amount of {$1100.00} be received and made payable to him therefore the sender XXXX XXXX discrepancies with the accountholder would be with merit therefore resulting into liability of the accountholder. However, the account holder should not bear any responsibility nor liability of the funds of the check wherein the only monetary value in which he actually received had been a withdraw in the amount of {$120.00}. The plaintiff needed the entire amount of the check, or it was useless to be used in the way it had been as the {$2500.00} deposit into XXXX had stayed with XXXX. Finally, Dollar Bank has valued the account holders free checking account at a negative balance of {$2600.00} with additions too late fees. Since this issue hasn't been resolved thus caused closure of the account. Either the remaining balance of the check should be made payable to the account holder XXXX XXXX or the entire check amount of {$4500.00} minus the {$120.00} withdraw equaling {$1400.00} should be made payable to XXXX XXXX. As the check had been expired when accepted by Dollar Bank and negligently deposited into the account holder 's free checking account the account holder should either receive the whole check or no check at all. No regulations allow a portion of a check made payable to an account holder to be seized when the issues of the check had been brought to the attention of the bank before depositing.
|
| 01/24/2023 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Checking account
|
- Closing an account
- Can't close your account
|
|
Web |
|
|
This is not the first time Ive had trouble with Dollar Bank. Between mid XXXX and early XXXX of XXXX, my debit card was compromised twice in a 15 day period. The replacement cards took a very long time to arrive and I found the service I received over the phone to be less than great. After the XXXX time my card number was compromised, I opened a new checking account at a different bank with the intention of closing this one.
On XX/XX/XXXX I received a letter for overdrafted transactions to XXXX. Knowing I hadnt used this account in some time, I called and filed a fraud claim. The next day I reinstalled XXXX and discovered I had been wrong, the transaction was made on my XXXX using this account in error. I immediately called Dollar Bank back and asked to cancel the fraud claim, to please waive the fees, I would settle the account and close it then. The rep I spoke to ( XXXX XXXX advised I would need to go to a branch to close the fraud claim and they would handle waiving all of the fees and settling/closing the account. I confirmed the branch would waive ALL fees more than once.
So I took time off of work today to go to the branch, withdraw the fraud claim and settle it. I had to write a statement and sign it to withdraw the fraud claim. Then they refused to waive the three {$36.00} overdraft fees that they applied to the account, would only waive two. I told them I would happily wait while they contacted the call center and pulled the call and that I would like what I was told on the phone to be honored and they refused multiple times to waive the fee, refused to close my account and threatened me with a charge off. Over two transactions totaling less than {$25.00} that I was willing to pay! I was a loyal customer for more than eight years and always had direct deposit. I recommended them to so many people and I feel lied to, I feel bullied by both the personal banker XXXX XXXX XXXX and his boss, branch XXXX XXXX XXXX. So now Im out not only the wages I lost not being at work to go all the way out to the branch, I was deceived by multiple people. I feel this is a XXXX violation.
|
| 07/26/2023 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Checking account
|
- Managing an account
- Deposits and withdrawals
|
|
Web |
|
|
On XX/XX/XXXX, I visited the XXXX ATM located at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, OH XXXX, USA, to deposit a refund check received from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. The details of the check are as follows : Check # : XXXX Check date : XX/XX/XXXX Check amount : {$2200.00} The screen suddenly went black after inserting my card and the check into the machine. Since the branch was closed then, I promptly contacted Dollar Bank to report the incident. They assured me a new card would be issued and provided a provisional credit for the deposited amount.
There was a witness to this incident in the car with me. We are willing to make affidavits regarding the incident.
The following day, I contacted the branch and was informed they still needed to retrieve the checks from their ATM. Unfortunately, they did not disclose whether this issue was specific to the ATM, stating that the back office/third party handles ATM matters.
However, this weekend, around XX/XX/XXXX, I discovered that my account balance had plummeted to approximately - {$840.00}. Concerned, I contacted the bank on Monday, XX/XX/XXXX, seeking clarification. XXXX from the bank advised me to place a stop payment on the check and informed me that I am now responsible for any account-related matters since the check was not retrieved from the ATM.
Throughout my association with this bank, I have never encountered any issues with my deposits. In light of this situation, it would have been appropriate for the bank to notify me promptly if there were any problems with the ATM, such as the check being damaged or stuck inside the machine.
Regrettably, the resolution process may take XXXX to XXXX days for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX to issue another check. Meanwhile, I incur bounced check fees, and my debits and withdrawals face difficulties.
I request your assistance in investigating this matter to ascertain the cause of the incident and to ensure a fair resolution. Your prompt attention to this issue would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you.
|
| 12/01/2023 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Checking account
|
- Closing an account
- Company closed your account
|
|
Web |
|
|
On XX/XX/2023 i open a checking and savings account at Dollar Bank in person with my ID at the XXXXXXXX XXXX location. Opened with {$50.00} cash. On XX/XX/2023 my account is closed by a XXXX at the XXXX, XXXX operations facility in the XXXX XXXX because my residence isn't close to a branch. I swear these banks, just get goofier and goofier by the minute with stupid closure reasons that amount to nothing but XXXX. I really planned on using this account because of all the features this bank had to offer. Good thing i didnt set up my direct deposit. You're online website application does not restrict or prohibit account opening with my zip code. I was told long as i resided in XXXX XXXX, and or XXXX i could open an account. Therefore, someone's full of XXXX and i'm demanding the accounts be re-opened before i have an internal investigation opened up with your regulators that govern you to determine if your organization is behind any corrupt, discriminating and derogatory illegal activities. When applying online if you type in a zip code outside of the XXXX states you operate A copy of this is also being fowarded to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
XX/XX/2023 : called Dollar Bank and was lied to about reason for account closure. XXXX specified now that it was because of to many inquiries. Them are legit valid inquiries, no fraud or ill intent never took place and part of the reason for the inquiries were banks invited me to open an account and even though my charge off from XXXX XXXX was paid they wouldn't open it. Most banks will accept the paid closures such as you guys did. But the inquiries were due to trying to open an account and being declined because XXXX XXXX wasnt fully removed but did show paid.
|
| 09/23/2022 |
Yes |
- Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports
- Credit reporting
|
- Improper use of your report
- Credit inquiries on your report that you don't recognize
|
|
Web |
|
|
I recently reviewed my credit report and found unauthorized inquiries.
I contacted the below creditors and they have NO proof I initiated such inquiries, nor written authorization and have failed to provide any permissible purpose. Since, they do not have my authorization, written nor verbal I ask that you DELETE these authorized inquiries from my credit report immediately as there is no evidence of any authorization, nor any permissible purpose.
According to Section 604 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act Permissible Purposes of Consumer Reports 15 U.S. Code $ 1681b In general. Subject to subsection ( e ), any consumer reporting agency may furnish a consumer report under the following circumstances and no other : F ) otherwise has a legitimate business need for the information ( i ) in connection with a business transaction that is initiated by the consumer.
Under 15 U.S. Code $ 1681i, Paragraph ( 5 ) Treatment of Inaccurate or Unverifiable Information ( A ) In general. If, after any reinvestigation under paragraph ( 1 ) of any information disputed by a consumer, an item of the information is found to be inaccurate or incomplete or can not be verified, the consumer reporting agency shall- ( i ) promptly delete The following inquiries are unauthorized : XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX
|
| 02/22/2023 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Checking account
|
- Managing an account
- Deposits and withdrawals
|
|
Web |
|
|
On XX/XX/2023 i deposited {$2100.00} to my checking account. I originally attempted to make this deposit in the drive through ATM window. The machine was counting the new bills, I say this because they were crisp and sticking together which was the issue here., incorrectly. A car pulled up behind me so since I still had over {$1000.00} to deposit I pulled around to the front of the building to deposit the remaining {$1300.00}. The drive through ATM has taken {$760.00}. I didnt realize until AFTER I hit accept at the second ATM that I was short {$200.00}. I called the bank once they opened on the XXXX only to be told by the bank manager that the ATM counts were correct with no more help. I filed a claim and was returned my {$200.00}. Today however {$200.00} was pulled from my account saying the claim was denied. I have two witnesses that watched me count the money for my daughters XXXX account that state that there was {$2100.00}. I had them count it before I left. And now the bank is taking this money back? The money was crisp and sticking together. Unless it was physically recounted by the employees then a machine is of course going to keep sticking those bills back togetherI have this problem at my place of employment. I would not be pursuing this issue this far if I was not 100 % sure that I am being stolen from.
|
| 09/20/2022 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Checking account
|
- Managing an account
- Fee problem
|
|
Web |
|
|
My bank charged a XXXX nsf fee on XX/XX/22 and returned a payment when it clearly showed there was enough money to cover the XXXX payment and when I opened the account approximately 5 years ago I was told that deposits to the account go through before debits and there was a deposit and a credit so there still wasnt a reason to charge me the fee I have screen shots showing that I was not negative to being with it wasnt until they charged their fee that it went negative. I havent talked to customer service because they tell me to go to the branch manager and he treats me and talks to me like Im garbage very poor customer service we had an account with them over 20 years ago and due to job loss we had to file bankruptcy and that account at the time was negative like XXXX due to fees and was included in the bankruptcy we had to fight to get the account we have now we were told we could not have an account unless we paid the money but we new that they could not collect on something that was XXXX through bankruptcy I feel like our account is flagged so they can collect their money
|
| 08/05/2023 |
Yes |
- Mortgage
- Conventional home mortgage
|
- Trouble during payment process
|
|
Web |
|
|
I've called before and no one follows through. Our mortgage is with Dollar Bank servicing center in XXXX, OH. We are in year 5 of a XXXX XXXX Bankruptcy. We made a partial payment of {$900.00}. XXXX XX/XX/2023 and on XX/XX/2023 paid {$440.00}. This was supposed to be added together to make XXXX XXXX payment. I spoke with someone at XXXX XXXX branch and someone at customer service over a month ago. Still no one has applied the payment. I made another payment on XX/XX/2023 for {$1300.00}. That was for XXXX 's payment. on XX/XX/XXXX, another payment was made for {$1300.00}. for XXXX 's payment. These last 4 payments are sitting in 'unapplied funds ' and not credited to my account. They are saying, 'It 's a sensitive issue and we need to proceed slowly '!! I am stressed out over this. It seems when I did the partial payments in XXXX, it threw off the whole account. They have my money, but not distributing funds. I have receipts.
|
| 05/26/2022 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Checking account
|
- Managing an account
- Deposits and withdrawals
|
|
Web |
|
|
So XX/XX/ 2022, someone walked into a dollar bank and it was not me, someone in another state and withdraw XXXX $ and the bank teller let this happen without proper identification. How does this happen? Banks have cameras right? I want the teller and the person who did this held responsible, this is not okay I want all my money back, Im a XXXX mother of XXXX I have no help now my money is gone I have bills and no one whats to hear my problems with a bank issue that I thought my money was safe at. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Ohio is the dollar bank today is XX/XX/2022 no one has gave me an explanation to what took place and how. Please help me.
|
| 04/19/2023 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Savings account
|
- Closing an account
- Funds not received from closed account
|
|
Web |
|
|
He worked with Changing the XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX since their inception in XXXX before their bankruptcy going on two years ago. We ranked in customers who spent {$5.00}, on our products weekly. Dollar Bank never reimbursed him the {$28.00}, that was earned since XXXX of XXXX
They instead overdrafted his account {$45.00} and insisted that he pay that overdraft or else they would close terminate their agreement in one year. Must be nice that he is crazy and everyone knows it for something they insist never happened.
|
| 11/14/2022 |
Yes |
|
- Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage
|
|
Web |
|
|
In XX/XX/2016 I purchased a home through Dollar Bank using the FHA program. During my home search I expressed wanting to purchase a multi-family property that would be owner-occupied. I was told by the banker that FHA changed it's rules and I could not purchase a multi-family home. I have come to learn that I, in fact, could have purchased a multi-family home using the FHA program, and I have been feeling cheated ( and redlined ) out of the home I truly wanted and would have been happy living in.
|
| 12/29/2022 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Checking account
|
- Closing an account
- Company closed your account
|
|
Web |
|
|
XXXX XXXX I went to Dollar Bank XXXX XXXX, PA branch to do a deposit. I was notified that Dollar Bank decided to close my account. I sent the attached letter to XXXX. The statements are facts backed by Us codes. I feel discriminated and violated. Also embarrassed because the manager at this particular site was loud an rude. It's apparent that Dollar Bank doesn't value its customers. Yet rather violates them when they " question '' and of their procedures that they deem. See attachment
|
| 04/11/2023 |
Yes |
- Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports
- Credit reporting
|
- Incorrect information on your report
- Account information incorrect
|
|
Web |
|
|
In accordance with the Fair Credit Reporting act XXXX has violated my rights.
15 U.S.C. 1681 section 602 A. States i have the right to privacy.
15 U.S.C. 1681 section 604 A Section 2 ; It also states a consumer reporting agency can not furnish an account without my written instructions.
15 U.S.C. 1666B ; A creditor may not treat a payment on a credit card account under an open end consumer credit plan as late for any purpose.
|
| 07/08/2023 |
Yes |
- Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports
- Credit reporting
|
- Improper use of your report
- Credit inquiries on your report that you don't recognize
|
|
Web |
|
|
These inquiries on my report are unauthorized. In accordance with the fair credit Reporting Act XXXX Account, has violated my rights.
15 USC 1681 Section 602 States I have the right to privacy.
15 USC 1681 Section 604 A Section 2 : It also states a consumer reporting agency can not furnish a account without my written instructions.
|
| 06/23/2023 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Checking account
|
- Managing an account
- Fee problem
|
|
Web |
|
|
Hello, I'm reaching out because of Dollar Bank and charging me overdraft fee too many times multiple times a month. I dont understand how I got overdraft when I get my paycheck for example today XX/XX/2023 and they charge me {$72.00} for XXXX different transactions.
|
| 07/17/2023 |
Yes |
- Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports
- Credit reporting
|
- Improper use of your report
- Credit inquiries on your report that you don't recognize
|
|
Web |
|
|
My XXXX XXXX report indicates that Dollar Bank ran an inquiry on my report, on XX/XX/2022.
Dollar Bank didn't have my permission to request a report.
|
| 01/30/2024 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Other banking product or service
|
- Problem with a lender or other company charging your account
- Transaction was not authorized
|
|
Referral |
|
|
|
| 01/25/2024 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Savings account
|
- Managing an account
- Deposits and withdrawals
|
|
Web |
Older American |
|
|
| 01/24/2024 |
Yes |
- Debt collection
- Credit card debt
|
- Attempts to collect debt not owed
- Debt was paid
|
|
Web |
|
|
|
| 01/08/2024 |
Yes |
- Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports
- Credit reporting
|
- Improper use of your report
- Credit inquiries on your report that you don't recognize
|
|
Web |
|
|
|
| 12/18/2023 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Checking account
|
- Problem caused by your funds being low
- Late or other fees
|
|
Referral |
|
|
|
| 12/04/2023 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Checking account
|
- Managing an account
- Deposits and withdrawals
|
|
Referral |
|
|
|
| 11/28/2023 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Checking account
|
- Managing an account
- Problem using a debit or ATM card
|
|
Web |
Older American |
|
|
| 10/31/2023 |
Yes |
- Mortgage
- Home equity loan or line of credit (HELOC)
|
- Struggling to pay mortgage
- Foreclosure
|
|
Referral |
|
|
|
| 10/19/2023 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- CD (Certificate of Deposit)
|
- Managing an account
- Problem with fees or penalties
|
|
Referral |
|
|
|
| 10/12/2023 |
Yes |
- Credit card
- General-purpose credit card or charge card
|
- Problem when making payments
- Problem during payment process
|
|
Phone |
|
|
|
| 10/04/2023 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Checking account
|
- Managing an account
- Deposits and withdrawals
|
|
Referral |
|
|
|
| 08/23/2023 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Savings account
|
- Managing an account
- Funds not handled or disbursed as instructed
|
|
Web |
|
|
|
| 07/20/2023 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Checking account
|
- Closing an account
- Can't close your account
|
|
Phone |
|
|
|
| 07/15/2023 |
Yes |
- Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports
- Credit repair services
|
- Confusing or misleading advertising or marketing
|
|
Web |
|
|
|
| 07/11/2023 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Checking account
|
- Managing an account
- Deposits and withdrawals
|
|
Phone |
|
|
|
| 07/10/2023 |
Yes |
- Debt collection
- Credit card debt
|
- Attempts to collect debt not owed
- Debt was paid
|
|
Web |
|
|
|
| 05/24/2023 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Savings account
|
- Managing an account
- Banking errors
|
|
Web |
|
|
|
| 05/23/2023 |
Yes |
- Credit card or prepaid card
- General-purpose credit card or charge card
|
- Incorrect information on your report
- Account status incorrect
|
|
Web |
|
|
|
| 05/03/2023 |
Yes |
- Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports
- Credit reporting
|
- Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem
- Difficulty submitting a dispute or getting information about a dispute over the phone
|
|
Web |
|
|
|
| 04/11/2023 |
Yes |
|
- Trouble during payment process
|
|
Phone |
|
|
|
| 04/05/2023 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Checking account
|
- Managing an account
- Fee problem
|
|
Web Referral |
|
|
|
| 03/30/2023 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Checking account
|
- Opening an account
- Unable to open an account
|
|
Web |
Servicemember |
|
|
| 03/20/2023 |
Yes |
- Credit card or prepaid card
- General-purpose credit card or charge card
|
- Fees or interest
- Problem with fees
|
|
Referral |
|
|
|
| 03/07/2023 |
Yes |
- Mortgage
- Other type of mortgage
|
- Incorrect information on your report
- Information belongs to someone else
|
|
Web |
|
|
|
| 02/27/2023 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Checking account
|
- Managing an account
- Problem accessing account
|
|
Phone |
|
|
|
| 02/08/2023 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Checking account
|
- Managing an account
- Deposits and withdrawals
|
|
Phone |
|
|
|
| 02/06/2023 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Checking account
|
- Managing an account
- Problem making or receiving payments
|
|
Web Referral |
|
|
|
| 01/30/2023 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Checking account
|
- Managing an account
- Deposits and withdrawals
|
|
Web Referral |
|
|
|
| 01/30/2023 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Checking account
|
- Managing an account
- Problem using a debit or ATM card
|
|
Phone |
Older American |
|
|
| 01/25/2023 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Checking account
|
- Closing an account
- Company closed your account
|
|
Web |
|
|
|
| 01/24/2023 |
Yes |
- Checking or savings account
- Checking account
|
- Managing an account
- Cashing a check
|
|
Phone |
Older American |
|
|
| 07/21/2022 |
Yes |
- Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports
- Credit reporting
|
- Incorrect information on your report
- Account status incorrect
|
|
Web |
|
|
|