In response to protests, Chase backs off of MTR

In response to protests and shareholder resolutions, and mounting opposition from government agencies to support the practice, Chase has passed a public policy to limits their financial relationship with coal operators that practice mountaintop removal coal mining (MTR).

Is Chase inept or malicious?

With many of the stories we get about the way Chase bank treats its customers, it is a toss-up as to whether Chase does the things it does because they don’t have a clue or whether they really have a master plan that is all about sucking the most money out of their customers in whatever way possible, ethical or not.  If they really do have a master plan, disguising it in a veil of ineptitude is a stroke of genius.

This recent story about the deal Chase struck with Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac in early 2009 related to their purchase of WaMu mortgages has me leaning towards the master plan theory.  Here is an excerpt from the story:

Yet J.P. Morgan seems better-positioned than rivals for repurchases. That could have a lot to do with a deal it forged with government-backed mortgage buyers last year. In September 2008, J.P. Morgan bought certain assets and liabilities of failed Washington Mutual Bank. Then, in the first quarter of 2009, J.P. Morgan cut a deal with the government agencies that “resolved certain current and future” repurchase claims stemming from WaMu mortgages. It isn’t clear how many loans were involved and what the settlement cost. In 2010, a J.P. Morgan filing merely said a $714 million hit in the 2009 first quarter was “primarily related” to the deal.

But it looks like money well spent. The WaMu repurchase exposure could have been particularly nasty. The bank wrote about $490 billion of mortgages from 2005 through the middle of 2008, and appeared to sell well over half of them. What is more, WaMu specialized in option-adjustable-rate mortgages, which showed high losses and appear to be more vulnerable to repurchase demands.

In this case they clearly showed that they are thinking things through ahead of time, which would seem to indicate that the way they treat their customers, from delayed loan modifications to lowered credit lines and increased minimum payments is more of a plan than anything else.

But that is just my theory.

Dimon cuts house price further

Jamie Dimon first tried to sell his Chicago house a couple of years ago for $13.5 million.  It has yet to sell and the price has since dropped substantially, down to $9.5 million earlier this year.  Well now it has been reduced further, to $6.95 million.

Ouch.

But at least if it is a short sale, he’ll probably get Chase to approve it quickly. 🙂

7+ months for a short sale … yikes!

Here’s an oldie but a goodie:  Chase’s delay delay delay tactics with anything that will help with loan troubles, including this example of a long short-sale delay:

Have been asking Chase Bank for short sale since Jan 14. If not 4closure is imminent, should we pay prop tax?

Husband lost his job in Dec. Just had a baby in Dec. Prop is investment property in FL with tenants who if approved want the short sale. Property tax …. to pay or not to pay in light of short sale or foreclosure? Also .. Any advice on how to get Chase to lean toward short sale?

And just for the record, as far as I know, any type of tax lien will survive foreclosure, short sale, or bankruptcy.  The government gets its money in the end.

Can calling Chase executive customer service help you?

This story on Consumerist sure sounds great:

Contacting Chase Executive Customer Service Saves Reader $240/Year In Fees

And indeed, when the customer had a problem, Chase Executive Customer Service was able to solve it.  I recommend everyone try this if they aren’t getting their problem with Chase solved.  Here are some numbers to try:

1-888-622-7547 – extension 4350
847-488-6833, or 888-622-7547 x 6833 – Jessica Pozehl

But if you actually read the story, you find that what caused the problem in the first place is the same old Chase cluelessness.

1. WaMu customer’s account converted to Chase, but there is no exact type of account that matches is WaMu account
2. Chase doesn’t bother contacting the customer to ask them what type of account they want, and just chooses what they think is the closest tone.  Of course, it has fees that his original account didn’t.
3. Customer sees the fees and complains.  Chase agrees to waive the fee for one month (minimum balance fee) but then customer is surprised to find that they’ve actually converted his account into a different type.  Of course they didn’t mention this when talking to him.
4. Customer calls Chase to ask for help, they say they’ll look into it and call him back.
5. No one calls him back.
6. Customer calls Chase to ask for help, they say they’ll look into it and call him back.
7. No one calls him back.

It was at that point he called Chase Executive Customer Service.  Is that really going to be the solution for all of Chase’s mistakes?