 |
| # | First Name | Last Name | State | Country | Comments |
|---|
| 401 | Leah | Potter | AL | US | I made the mistake of getting a Providian and transfering balances, only to discover the intro 0% APR only applies to purchases, not balance transfers. I feel hoodwinked and will transfer my balances away from the card as soon as possible. |
| 402 | Robert | Porter | CA | US | Providian caused me a negative credit report |
| 403 | Tasha | Cantin | | | |
| 404 | jessica | beardsley | CT | US | i was just looking back on my account in 2001 and found many mistakes now haunting me on my credit report. on my husband i see we overpaid them almost 2000.00 and on his credit report it says legally paid off for lower amount. |
| 405 | Heather | Gurack | NC | US | I had a credit card with a $300 limit that was maxed out right before I went out if work on maternity leave. I was unable to pay on it for two months. That made it possible for them to charge me over the limit fees and my payments would not post until the day after it was due no matter how early I mailed them so I also got charged with late fees. Within a year my balance went from $300 to $1400. I'm now having the payments drafted so they can't say my payments are late.
Over the last 5 years I have probably paid 5 times what my original balance was but they will not let me settle my account. That $300 is costing my thousands now. It just doesn't seem fair. Am I just crazy to feel that way? |
| 406 | Paul | Greiner | NY | US | Providian is running a Credit Protection scam. |
| 407 | MIKE | RYAN | KY | US | THE CREDIT CARD COMPANYS YOU MENTIONED ARE SUEING ME. EVEN IN A DEBT COUNCILING SERVICE. I DONT KNOW HOW MUCH MORE I CAN TAKE. IT IS DRIVING ME NUTS. |
| 408 | Bryan | Butts | MI | US | It's pretty bad when you cancel a card and the amount owed still goes up and gets "over the Limit". I make payments ontime and pay the extra phone fee and still get charged more... |
| 409 | George | Logue | CA | US | I have a rare complaint. I ran my card up into the thousands every month but paid the balance off completely, never incurring a finance charge for years. Providian kept raising my credit limit but no matter how much I ran up I made sure to pay it off in the period. As a result I had a few hundred dollars owed to me by Providian from their "cash rebates" incentive. Then they charged me an annual fee, one which they have reversed three prior times to keep me a happy customer. THIS TIME, they would not reverse it, even though they acknowledged the previous reversales. I had to close the account to avoid the fee and of course, you can guess what happened to the money they owed me....POOF..gone. Since I never paid an annual fee, never paid interest, never paid them anything...they weren't making money on me, so they would rather drive me out by refusing to reverse the annnual fee (again) then pay me the money they owe me. |
| 410 | Teresia | Sanders | KY | US | Thank you for making this petition. |
| 411 | shellie | LOGAN | AR | US | i have ccard with providian and as of last week they now raised it to 29 percent and i pay 180 a month and im being ripped off by this company what do i need to do? |
| 412 | Randy | Dunbar | CA | US | |
| 413 | Robbin | Hopkins | MI | US | Providian increased my interest rate to 29% and I have never been late. I have a 4000.00 balance! |
| 414 | shellie | logan | AR | US | providian sucks they raised my intrest to 29.99 and there ripping everyone off that they have done this to |
| 415 | willie | crisel | TN | US | amen |
| 416 | Heather | Hemmingson | WA | US | that was a good letter.My bill right now is over a 1,000.00 over my credit limit from late fees and overlimit fees it's bullshit something needs to be done |
| 417 | kevin | mullaney | CT | US | |
| 418 | Barbara | McElligott | MA | US | I was lied to by a "Providiot" concerning a balance transfer and my attempts to reconcile the situation drew me into the Providian downward spiraling snakepit.
At least I know I have lots of good company down here. |
| 419 | Adam | Morrison | CA | US | Burn in HELL providian ....
|
| 420 | GREGORY | ONEILL | LA | US | ACCOUNT SOLD TO BANK IN GEORGIA AND MANAGED BY SST? |
| 421 | Peggy | Deward | MD | US | I called Providian in October to see why my statement said that I had available credit of $0.00 when I had been making payments of $100.00 monthly (at least $50.00 if not more than the minimum payment). I was told that my account had been closed in June. When I inquired as to why it had been closed, I was told I would get a letter stating so in 7-10 days. I have yet to receive this letter. |
| 422 | Christopher | Bartosik | MD | US | They almost got me. They started with an intro rate then when I as almost up to my limit I paid it off. Was never late, always paid more than min. Anyway the day after I paid they lowered my credit line almost $1000. Had I not made the payments I would have been over my limite and subject to more charges. I closed my account |
| 423 | Bart | Spence | CA | US | Always pay my bill on time and much more than the min. My rate was increased to %30.5 !! |
| 424 | Tamara | Luan | NV | US | |
| 425 | Jimmy | Samuels | CA | US | turned a $982 debt into $4000 we are on the verge of losing everything because of providian |
| 426 | teresa | ogle | AL | US | I paid my bill always on time, never late. i was @ 18.9 percent and without notice (they said the mail me something in the mail, but i never got it) they raised it up to almost 35% and i can't hardly afford to put any extra money on this account as it is and now i can't even afford to pay the high payment. i tried to communicated with them but they don't care about any ones problems. |
| 427 | Gwendolyn | Moore | MD | US | they are constanting calling me at work about payments that are not even due yet |
| 428 | Donald | Kinderman | PA | US | Ripoff Basterds. Charging Monthly Finance fees and Cash Fees when 0, ZERO Cash has been issued. |
| 429 | Edward | Kuhlman | LA | US | I live in New Orleans and after Hurricane Katrina I had to use my Providian card to live for a few months, I had a zero balance before the storm and used it for food and fuel. Just received my first bill and they raised the interest rate to 29.99%. Of course I called and was told about the agrement I signed back in 2001 and that because I was late a few days back in the early part of the year that I had the increase and that they had sent this to me in the mail and I should have received this on Aug. 29, 2005. I said the mail was not delivered that day because of a hurricane, and they said sorry but we can not help you as we have no offers available for you. So I found this site and wanted to blow off some steam about how Providian has treated me. At least I'm not in it alone! |
| 430 | Dave | Williams | | | |
| 431 | Abdoulaye | Ndiaye | KY | US | I have card with you then i losted, because I was in accidence now, I want a get it back waht can i do, This is my account number before #4465-6123-0040-1865, I want a reopen it and bring back. thank you |
| 432 | Sherif | Azeez | PA | US | I had a fruad on my proviadian account in 2001 and I filled a dispute, providian financial did notting about my account and are helding me responsible for the charge. I stopped paying them and and closed the account, providian add penalty and other charges to my account.my balance went from about 2300 to 4078. I am currently been sued at the supreme court of NJ.I need help and I don't know what to do. |
| 433 | susan | everett | NC | US | March on!!! |
| 434 | Teasha | Pigram | OH | US | I was with Providian ..now they sold my account to SST Card Services,With a Higher APR and a Total Nightmare! |
| 435 | Ellen | Griffith | GA | US | MY rates were raised for NO REASON when Providian was sold to washington Mutual from 14% to 30%!!! Not only that, but I never got notice of the lawsuit against them AND Washington mutal can't tell me EVER when they "reviewed" my creidt for an interest rate decrease or WHY I was "turned down" for an interest decrease. Yet, Mr. Bush claims that he is doing a 4% minimum payment hike for the consumers' own good. WHY then is he allowing this company to drive their interest rates sky high so that these bills take forever to pay off? Why, Mr. President does one have to take it in the a%* with high interest rates and the only way to lower the intereste rates for a person who pays EVERY bill on time EVERY time is to file for a debt consolidation, which will hurt our credit scores and keep us gettting crappy intterest rates even longer? Oh, you went to debt consolidation? BUM!! We'll give you an interest rate of 30%. Well, Washington Mutual, Providian and congress - screw you! I am a taxpaying American citzen who worked too hard on my credit score to have it wrecked by you jerks. I will be paying these stupid things down just long enough to transfer them to a REPUTABLE, ETHICAL company who doesn't dabble in illegal practices and isn't run by creidt card lobbyists, but their own conscience. And to think I VOTED for you Bush - TWICE!!! |
| 436 | Anonymous | Anonymous | NY | US | A 30 % rate incurred for missing a payment?? This can't be legal. |
| 437 | Anonymous | Anonymous | NJ | US | My monthly payment went from 220 to 270 I have never been late but boy am I being abused and mistreated, I will be closing the account and paying it off sometime this year, if I have to stop eating to do it |
| 438 | nancy | mccoy | CA | US | Providain has to be the worst credit card company in business today. I thought usury was illegal. |
| 439 | Anonymous | Anonymous | CA | US | I have never read a more accurate account of the "evil" that credit card companies are allow to do and protected under the umbrella of the law of the land. |
| 440 | terry | calhoon | MO | US | |
| 441 | Michael | Griffiths | TX | US | Interest rates are outrageous |
| 442 | Anonymous | Anonymous | FL | US | I feel the regulators have let me down. I had account with Providian National Bank which was involved in a National class action suit. I did not respond to the arbitration clause because I did not understand what it meant at the time. I felt that what ever Providian National Bank had done wrong they would correct it. You would think they would correct the error it was only fair. They could not legally collect the debt, and did not apply my payments corrected. This credit card agreement was with Providian National Bank, and has been closed, and sold to a junk debt buyer. The agreement has nothing to do with WaMU Providian , because it was closed before they merged. What I do not understand is why the original contract or credit card agreement was with Providian National bank, which I have confirmed with Department of Finance in Florida, and State Attorney General of Florida this bank would have regulated by the Office of the Comptroller, not the OTS. When this account was originated it was solicited to me Providian Financial Corporation , and issued by Providian National Bank. There were class action suits filed against Providian Financial Corporation, Providian Bancorp Services, Providian National Bank and Providian Bank on behalf of customers for their unfair practices. I sent a letter to the OCC who forwarded the letter to the OTS, and stated that all my complaints should be filed to the OTS since Washington Mutual purchased the account in 2005. My agreement does not fall within that time frame. In my dispute I requested Providian to delete the file from my credit report, because it was a violation of the Truth in Lending laws, Usury laws, Fair Debt collection laws, federal and Banking laws, and Fair Credit and Billing act, and the Fair credit and Billing act. I stated that I should be compensated for the harassment and violations, and this should be deleted from credit file. I recently received a response from WaMu Providian stating they would not delete the file and the issue which is was the amount charged off was correct, and was unpaid. They admitted to the account being sold to a junk debt buyer. The OTS stated they agreed. Help me to understand how would they agree, when they are not the appropriate regulator. I do not honestly think they even looked at it. The agreement shows this was with a National Bank, not WaMU Providian, and the account was closed. It shows Providian National bank charged me interest, and finance charges, and over the limit fees, upgrade fees, credit protection , added to principle. There was no security deposit , and this was for unsecured credit. Again, this was Providian National Bank. The OCC ORDERED Providian to issue restitution and credit the accounts. Providian National Bank did not. I believe they only focused on the accounts who did respond to the arbitration agreement, and who were represented by an attorney. If a case has already been investigated it should not be so hard. The bottom line is Providian is taking advantage of consumers by stating they should be allowed to report this charged off limit on a credit report as bad debt. They did not go back and issue in credits to deducted all of the illegal fees. Since, the law says they could not lend credit or their own funds, they should have gone back to offset the payments to the charges. Providian did not. They violated the Truth in lending laws because did not tell the consumer they were prohibited from do this.
There were no credits ever made to my account in connection with this. These corporations are affiliated and did indulge in unlawful lending and unfair practices. From 2002-2006, I have been disputing this. I had no way to explain it before. Initially, I disputed the charged off balance with based on the Federal and Banking laws, and the credit bureau ignored me. They stated they reported that checked with Providian and it was reported correctly. Federal laws do not permit banks to lend credit. They cannot lend their own money, or the deposits of the affiliates or subsidaries. Providian National Bank did not disclose this information in the credit card agreement.
Providian National bank offered an unsecured visa card with a $49.00 application fee, and $59.00 membership fee offered by Providian Financial , and issued by Providian National Bank. The initial credit limit was $500.00, then it was increased 2 times. They also had a 23.9 % interest rate. Providian National Bank added an excessive amount of late fees, finance charges, cash advance fees, and over the limit fees. Providian National Bank advised that no deposit was required by me. This is a violation in Truth in Lending Act.
Providian National Bank did not tell me that they were accepting my application, and using the promissory note as negotiable instrument to trade. Providian National Bank endorsed the note without my consent, because I had no knowledge of that the note would be traded note or exchanging it cash. They monetized my signature. In order for Providian National Bank to count it as an asset, they would have to receive cash for the note . This mean they created credit. This would have been a violation of the Federal Trade Commissions Act. This is what they meant when they said unlawful predatory lending. At the same time Providian National Bank did not advise this would occur in the transaction of creating and account, and they did not have the authority to lend you credit, or their own money. Providian National Bank guaranteed you something they could not provide as under the United States Code Title 12 Section 83: No national bank shall make any loan or discount on the securitization of the shares of its own capital stock
Providian National Bank charged interest and finance charges on a loan which never existed. The annual percentage rate was 23.9% which higher than the usury rate in California where the bank is located. I live in Florida and this rate is higher than the usury rate here also. Providian also applied finance charges to the balances. The monthly statements sent to customers on the back indicated how they calculate the finance charges. They add up all the debits. There were no debits for cash deposits where Providian National Bank deposited any funds. In accounting Debits are on the left, and credits are on the right. Providian National bank sent monthly statements which reflected no cash being deposited by them, only charges made by the consumer. They made a seperate column for payments which were applied incorrectly. The correct way to apply the checks or payments made by customers was not applied directly to the charges. Simply, because Providian National guaranteed to lend customers credit and give credit line increases without telling the customers that they could not do lend you any money. In my case , I did not transfer a balance, and I did not make a deposit to Providian National Bank.
Since there was no deposit required Providian National bank opened the account in 04/00 and on the ledger transferred 0.50 to a savings account which they created in my name. There was no deposit ever equivalent to line of credit which Providian National Bank claimed to provide. This is a violation of Truth In Lending laws. My visa account was backed by future payments. They were attempting to treat like a loan, but they were not authorized to lend any of their own money. So how is it legal for them to charge interest on something they did not honestly give.
I am outraged because I had no knowledge about credit before. I have taken an accounting class and work with accounting, and I can validate just how Providian National Bank did not lend me anything through accounting. Not only did Providian National Bank reported the account to all 3 credit bureaus, with the principle amount including all the finance charges, late fees, credit protection, over the limit fees, and cash advance fees, it was sent to Collections in 2003 to collect this amount, and sold to an outside collection in 12/01/03. This is a violation of the Fair Debt Collections law.
My outrage is that Washington Mutal has acquired Providian National Bank in 2005. Providian merged with them, which my account is not open, and does not fall under the regulations of the Thrift and Savings charter, which Providian National Bank has changed their practices from 2004 to the present. Therefore, the OTS should not have investigated my complaint. My complaint would have fell under the regulation of the OCC. The OCC states they had to send it to OTS. The OTS states they do not get involved with the arbitration, or contract dispute. As a result of the investigation by the OTS, Washington Mutual forwarded to me a copy of the credit card agreement issued by Providian Financial for the card issued by Providian National Bank. It shows that the credit card agreement did disclosed that deposit is not required. It also shows that when the account was opened there was no deposit of initial $500.00 for the initial line of credit. They indicate that I deposited 0.50., which I did not do. My guess is they deducted $0.50 from the application fee and deposited the 0.50, however that was not was the credit agreement said. The agreement said $500.00 guaranteed. Therefore, where there is a line of credit, and they calculated the account as an asset, there should have been a debited and credited for that amount of cash being deposited in to the account. This way when on the monthly statements since this is a bank, the consumer could see the follow the formula for calculating the finance charges in late fees. WaMu Providian even told me they could not delete the account from credit report, and the OTS said they could not order them to because there was an unpaid balance.
I may not receive a cash settlement, but since Providian National Bank guaranteed me a revolving lines of credit, and was not honest that could not lend me any of their money, and that I would be depositor. I should be entitled to receive credits by them deducting the all late fees, finance charges, and over the limit fees , because they did not lend me any money. They did not have the authority and were prohibited to lend me this money through their affiliates. They violated the Federal Trade Commissions Act, and falsified the profits of their stockholders by doing this. The profits sored thru the roof. The initial $500.00 turned into $3,586.00 being charged off. Providian received payments from me which if they were credited correctly as they were doing for other members involved in the class action suits. They would have applied my payments to the charges which would zeroed out a few, and only leaving a balance on the charges which there was not enough money to cover.
I understand that banks make money on lending money, but they cannot lend their own. Based on this being a national class action suit on account during that time. Crediting the accounts issued by Providian National Banks and their affiliates should have been the least the Providian National Bank could have done. Instead of selling or transferring the debt, they created unlawfully. I was disappointed to see that OTS made a decision about the account not be withdrawn, and that it was not reviewed correctly. After all the scandal of the Providian National Bank and Providian Financial they were forced to enter into a consent with the Occ and sell the accounts to other companies and to junk debt buyers. They should have been allowed to do, because Providian created these accounts unlawfully. Providian National Bank was told to cease and desist their credit card practices as a National Bank by the OCC they merged with Washington Mutual after my account was closed. Providian financial did not fufill their part of the agreement. They failed to loan me money that belonged to Providian National Bank. This is violation on their part of the agreement. There was no check drawn by Providian National Bank ever credited to the account to fund the extended credit. The laws are proved that it was unlawful for Providian National Bank to extend credit. National Banks were told to cease and desist their activities for unsecured debts. Providian National bank is the business for loaning money not credit. Providian National Bank and Providian Financial are subsidiaries. There is no lawful debt which exists. What good faith did Providian National Bank and Providian Financial have by selling an account or transferring an unlawful account?. We are not speaking about Providian National Bank in their current day and time. My agreement deals with Providian National Bank when they were doing business as a National bank with their subsidiaries issuing credit cards to consumers. Promising them lines of credit at higher interest rates, finance charges etc. All these charges on my account occurred when they performing their unfair practices. Even though you did not respond to the agreement, they still had to write off charges, because they were not valid, and not lawful. All of the unlawful charges was money that you could not collect but this was because of their unlawful lending. I did not transfer a balance. The disclosure even stated they did not pull my credit. When a customer balances a check book or their savings account if they deposit $500.00, they will deduct their charges from that. The consumer is able to trace every deposit of money made, and every deduction and every credit. Providian National Bank should have gone back to credit the accounts. For tax purposes they would have to. However, to get out of crediting all the accounts, Providian sold and transferred the accounts. Still not fulfilling their obligation to the customer, by throwing an arbitration agreement which states the customer waives their right by not going to court. Now none of the authorities will help you, because everyone chooses to ignore the issue. Providian National Bank pinned debt on consumers and sold the debt and transferred the debt. They charged off your account as bad debt, then wanted to say that it was your fault. You did not pay the charges back in full with interest. When they lied to you about giving you anything. Fair is Fair. My account has been dispute with Providian National Bank since 2002. I have been questioning the balance. I did not send certified letters before, until 2005. I took this up with the credit bureau’s in writing. Finally, I called Trans Union one day and was told they simply asked the Providian is the amount they reported correct, and they look at the accounting database, which is merely a copy of the application , and the last bill which has the balance. This is inaccurate credit reporting, when they have not gone back to adjust their accounting because the account is closed. So, I asked Providian based on accounting where is the actually loan, because of the laws you could not use your money, and I did not have to deposit any money. Then you lied by saying that the consumer should pay the minimum payment. Based on the account history there was never a deposit for the amount by Providian equivalent to the line of credit. National Banks did not have a charter to lend credit using their own funds. Therefore they cannot charge you interest and finance charges when no loan ever existed. Providian increased their profits that way which caused the securities fraud. Because they were exchanging the promissory notes to fund deposits which is was not in good faith. Providian National Bank violated customers.
If the OCC says that among other requirements, national banks must:
• Tell customers of the prohibition on tying.
•Explain that a debt suspension agreement, if activated, does not cancel the debt, but only suspends requirements to make payments.
•Disclose the amount of the fees charged.
•Make customers aware of the option to pay in a lump sum or periodic installments.
•Disclose their refund policy if the fee is paid in a single payment and added to the amount borrowed.
•Tell customers whether they would be barred from using the credit line if the DCC or DSA was activated.
•Explain eligibility requirements, conditions and exclusions that might affect a customer’s ability to purchase or obtain benefits under a DCC or DSA.
And the following states below:
TITLE 12 > CHAPTER 22 > § 1972
Prev | Next
§ 1972. Certain tying arrangements prohibited; correspondent accounts
(1) A bank shall not in any manner extend credit, lease or sell property of any kind, or furnish any service, or fix or vary the consideration for any of the foregoing, on the condition or requirement—
(A) that the customer shall obtain some additional credit, property, or service from such bank other than a loan, discount, deposit, or trust service;
(B) that the customer shall obtain some additional credit, property, or service from a bank holding company of such bank, or from any other subsidiary of such bank holding company;
(C) that the customer provide some additional credit, property, or service to such bank, other than those related to and usually provided in connection with a loan, discount, deposit, or trust service;
(D) that the customer provide some additional credit, property, or service to a bank holding company of such bank, or to any other subsidiary of such bank holding company; or
(E) that the customer shall not obtain some other credit, property, or service from a competitor of such bank, a bank holding company of such bank, or any subsidiary of such bank holding company, other than a condition or requirement that such bank shall reasonably impose in a credit transaction to assure the soundness of the credit.
The Board may by regulation or order permit such exceptions to the foregoing prohibition and the prohibitions of section 1843 (f)(9) and 1843 (h)(2) of this title as it considers will not be contrary to the purposes of this chapter.
(2)
(A) No bank which maintains a correspondent account in the name of another bank shall make an extension of credit to an executive officer or director of, or to any person who directly or indirectly or acting through or in concert with one or more persons owns, controls, or has the power to vote more than 10 per centum of any class of voting securities of, such other bank or to any related interest of such person unless such extension of credit is made on substantially the same terms, including interest rates and collateral as those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions with other persons and does not involve more than the normal risk of repayment or present other unfavorable features.
(B) No bank shall open a correspondent account at another bank while such bank has outstanding an extension of credit to an executive officer or director of, or other person who directly or indirectly or acting through or in concert with one or more persons owns, controls, or has the power to vote more than 10 per centum of any class of voting securities of, the bank desiring to open the account or to any related interest of such person, unless such extension of credit was made on substantially the same terms, including interest rates and collateral as those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions with other persons and does not involve more than the normal risk of repayment or present other unfavorable features.
(C) No bank which maintains a correspondent account at another bank shall make an extension of credit to an executive officer or director of, or to any person who directly or indirectly acting through or in concert with one or more persons owns, controls, or has the power to vote more than 10 per centum of any class of voting securities of, such other bank or to any related interest of such person, unless such extension of credit is made on substantially the same terms, including interest rates and collateral as those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions with other persons and does not involve more than the normal risk of repayment or present other unfavorable features.
(D) No bank which has outstanding an extension of credit to an executive officer or director of, or to any person who directly or indirectly or acting through or in concert with one or more persons owns, controls, or has the power to vote more than 10 per centum of any class of voting securities of, another bank or to any related interest of such person shall open a correspondent account at such other bank, unless such extension of credit was made on substantially the same terms, including interest rates and collateral as those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions with other persons and does not involve more than the normal risk of repayment or present other unfavorable features.
(E) For purposes of this paragraph, the term “extension of credit” shall have the meaning prescribed by the Board pursuant to section 375b of this title, and the term “executive officer” shall have the same meaning given it under section 375a of this title.
(F) Civil money penalty.—
(i) First tier.— Any bank which, and any institution-affiliated party (within the meaning of section 1813 (u) of this title) with respect to such bank who, violates any provision of this paragraph shall forfeit and pay a civil penalty of not more than $5,000 for each day during which such violation continues.
(ii) Second tier.— Notwithstanding clause (i), any bank which, and any institution-affiliated party (within the meaning of section 1813 (u) of this title) with respect to such bank who—
(I)
(aa) commits any violation described in clause (i);
(bb) recklessly engages in an unsafe or unsound practice in conducting the affairs of such bank; or
(cc) breaches any fiduciary duty;
(II) which violation, practice, or breach—
(aa) is part of a pattern of misconduct;
(bb) causes or is likely to cause more than a minimal loss to such bank; or
(cc) results in pecuniary gain or other benefit to such party,
shall forfeit and pay a civil penalty of not more than $25,000 for each day during which such violation, practice, or breach continues.
(iii) Third tier.— Notwithstanding clauses (i) and (ii), any bank which, and any institution-affiliated party (within the meaning of section 1813 (u) of this title) with respect to such bank who—
(I) knowingly—
(aa) commits any violation described in clause (i);
(bb) engages in any unsafe or unsound practice in conducting the affairs of such bank; or
(cc) breaches any fiduciary duty; and
(II) knowingly or recklessly causes a substantial loss to such bank or a substantial pecuniary gain or other benefit to such party by reason of such violation, practice, or breach,
shall forfeit and pay a civil penalty in an amount not to exceed the applicable maximum amount determined under clause (iv) for each day during which such violation, practice, or breach continues.
(iv) Maximum amounts of penalties for any violation described in clause (iii).—The maximum daily amount of any civil penalty which may be assessed pursuant to clause (iii) for any violation, practice, or breach described in such clause is—
(I) in the case of any person other than a bank, an amount to not exceed $1,000,000; and
(II) in the case of a bank, an amount not to exceed the lesser of—
(aa) $1,000,000; or
(bb) 1 percent of the total assets of such bank.
(v) Assessment; etc.— Any penalty imposed under clause (i), (ii), or (iii) may be assessed and collected—
(I) in the case of a national bank, by the Comptroller of the Currency;
(II) in the case of a State member bank, by the Board; and
(III) in the case of an insured nonmember State bank, by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation,
in the manner provided in subparagraphs (E), (F), (G), and (I) of section 1818 (i)(2) of this title for penalties imposed (under such section) and any such assessment shall be subject to the provisions of such section.
(vi) Hearing.— The bank or other person against whom any penalty is assessed under this subparagraph shall be afforded an agency hearing if such bank or person submits a request for such hearing within 20 days after the issuance of the notice of assessment. Section 1818 (h) of this title shall apply to any proceeding under this subparagraph.
(vii) Disbursement.— All penalties collected under authority of this subsection shall be deposited into the Treasury.
(viii) “Violate” defined.— For purposes of this paragraph, the term “violate” includes any action (alone or with another or others) for or toward causing, bringing about, participating in, counseling, or aiding or abetting a violation.
(ix) Regulations.— The Comptroller of the Currency, the Board, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation shall prescribe regulations establishing such procedures as may be necessary to carry out this subparagraph.
(G)
(i) Each executive officer and each stockholder of record who directly or indirectly owns, controls, or has the power to vote more than 10 per centum of any class of voting securities of an insured bank shall make a written report to the board of directors of such bank for any year during which such executive officer or shareholder has outstanding an extension of credit from a bank which maintains a corresponding account in the name of such bank. Such report shall include the following information:
(1) the maximum amount of indebtedness to the bank maintaining the correspondent account during such year of (a) such executive officer or stockholder of record, (b) each company controlled by such executive officer or stockholder, or (c) each political or campaign committee the funds or services of which will benefit such executive officer or stockholder, or which is controlled by such executive officer or stockholder;
(2) the amount of indebtedness to the bank maintaining the correspondent account outstanding as of a date not more than ten days prior to the date of filing of such report of (a) such executive officer or stockholder of record, (b) each company controlled by such executive officer or stockholder, or (c) each political or campaign committee the funds or services of which will benefit such executive officer or stockholder;
(3) the range of interest rates charged on such indebtedness of such executive officer or stockholder of record; and
(4) the terms and conditions of such indebtedness of such executive officer or stockholder of record.
(ii) The appropriate Federal banking agencies are authorized to issue rules and regulations, including definitions of terms, to require the reporting and public disclosure of information by any bank or executive officer or principal shareholder thereof concerning any extension of credit by a correspondent bank to the reporting bank’s executive officers or principal shareholders, or the related interests of such persons.
(H) For the purpose of this paragraph—
(i) the term “bank” includes a mutual savings bank, a savings bank, and a savings association (as those terms are defined in section 1813 of this title);
(ii) the term “related interests of such persons” includes any company controlled by such executive officer, director, or person, or any political or campaign committee the funds or services of which will benefit such executive officer, director, or person or which is controlled by such executive officer, director, or person; and
(iii) the terms “control of a company” and “company” have the same meaning as under section 375b of this title.
(I) Notice Under This Section After Separation From Service.— The resignation, termination of employment or participation, or separation of an institution-affiliated party (within the meaning of section 1813 (u) of this title) with respect to such a bank (including a separation caused by the closing of such a bank) shall not affect the jurisdiction and authority of the appropriate Federal banking agency to issue any notice and proceed under this section against any such party, if such notice is served before the end of the 6-year period beginning on the date such party ceased to be such a party with respect to such bank (whether such date occurs before, on, or after August 9, 1989). None of PROVIDIAN'S ACCOUNTS OPENED WHILE THEY WERE PROVIDIAN PRIOR TO THEIR MERGER WITH wASHINGTON MUTUAL SHOULD BE COLLECTED OR SOLD OR TRANSFERRED, IF IT WAS UNSECURED. |
| 443 | lewis | walden | CA | US | |
| 444 | JULIE | HALE | | | I AM WITH YOU! PROVIDIAN HAS A BAD BUSINESS PRACTICE. |
| 445 | David | Powell | NC | US | Stop the credit card co's interest insanity. |
| 446 | laura | miller | FL | US | |
| 447 | Joel | Santangelo | NH | US | I am currently being sued by Chase/First USA
If there is any information you have on them please forward it to me.It may just help my case against them. |
| 448 | Natasha | Miller | IL | US | Providian is nothing but a company of crooks and liars! |
| 449 | Angela | thomas | MA | US | Providian is the devil! Avoid them! |
| 450 | Albert | Dorfler | FL | US | Nail the MF's |
|
|
