Written by Biloxi
Legal Morass, a website that examines the troubled debt collection industry, is now a target to JP Morgan Chase as Chase is still facing a court battle with a former Chase employee and whistleblower. I had written an article last year on former Chase employee's lawsuit against Chase. Linda Almonte was a "mid-level executive" who "supervised employees across the litigation and post-judgment functions" of the credit card litigation department at JP Morgan Chase. Ms. Almonte no longer works for JP Morgan Chase because she was terminated from her position. In March of this year, Ms. Almonte sued the bank for wrongful termination. She has claimed that she was fired because she had refused to participate in the sale of 23,000 credit card accounts Chase had packaged for sale. Ms. Almonte claimed that 5,000 of the credit card accounts were listed the wrong amount owed and that thousands more had other problems. Read more on Ms. Almonte and her lawsuit. Click here.
Legal Morass has been following Ms. Almonte case against Chase very closely and has posted court filings in the website. Unfortunately, Chase is not too happy that Ms. Almonte's SEC whistleblower complaint[which was filed on November 30, 2010] and sworn affidavit [which was dated in January 24, 2011]. In her affidavit, Ms. Almonte attested to some of the allegations made in her SEC whistle-blower complaint. Legal Morass was notified by a third party to take down Ms. Almonte's SEC whistleblower complaint and sworn affidavit down from the website. More from Legal Morass:
The evidence that supports Linda Almonte's 30 November 2010 SEC Whistleblower Complaint against JP Morgan Chase was delivered to the Enforcement and Compliance Division of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency by us on 11 February 2011.
On Sunday, 03 April 2011, contact was made to Legal Morass by a third-party that JP Morgan Chase, their legal counsel and others were demanding that we remove the above SEC Whistleblower Complaint and the Almonte Affidavit from our Web site. As a matter of public record, our response was and will remain emphatically, “No”.
Also, as a matter of public record, Legal Morass has filed formal complaints with several state Attorneys General relative to the allegations of fraud made within the previously mentioned documents. Legal Morass will continue in its endeavors and within our rights to petition the government and regulatory agencies in areas and about matters in which we believe redress is necessary inclusive of criminal indictments.
Ms. Almonte's sworn affidavit is very damaging to Chase. Here is an excerpt of Ms. Almonte's sworn affidavit:
4. The accounts were supposed to be researched, then the processor/notary would place the
affidavits in a drawer to be retrieved by one of the attorney liaisons for signature. The attorney
liaisons would then take multiple stacks of these affidavits to their desks for signing. These
stacks were usually a couple of feet high. The typical place that I saw them actually signing the
affidavits was during weekly audit and compliance meetings on Wednesday due to the fact they
were anywhere from one to three hours long and provided them the time to sign them in bulk.
They would sign the affidavits in these meetings without looking at any accounts at all. There
was never a Notary present. Processor/Notarys and non-exempt employees were not invited
and did not attend these meetings. There were also no computers or files in the conference
room for the signer to look up and verify any account information whatsoever. There was
constant complaining by the Attorney Liaisons about having to manually sign these affidavits
due to the time it took and, they always questioned why they could not have them digitally
signed in bulk. In other words, the people who signed the affidavits complained because they
had to be bothered to physically sign so many affidavits. Needless to say, it would have taken
an inordinate amount of time if they had to actually review account information as they were
supposed to, before singing. In attendance at these meeting were myself, Tony Forrest (VP
Audit and Compliance), all attorney liaisons, all Team Leaders, including those responsible for
compliance procedures. In addition, at times Jason Lazinbat (Operations Manager) and Edmond
Helaire (Operations Director) were also in attendance. On many occasions, I witnessed Ruben
Alcaraz as well as the other "signers" staying late to sign the affidavits to "catch up." Not once
did I ever see one of the notaries present or an account looked up in the systems by the Ruben
Alcaraz, or anyone, prior to signing. The Attorney Liaisons did frequently travel to various
internal and external firms. Upon their return to the site they would frequently brag that they
were able to "bang out'' a lot of the affidavits during long flights. I specifically recall Ruben
Alcaraz brag that he was able to "bang out'' over 500 affidavits on a single flight.
It was a sense of pride for him. The notaries did not travel and the signers did not have
access to Chase systems while in flight or traveling. I literally never witnessed a notary
public notarize any affidavit in front of the person who actually signed the affidavit This
was definitely the case with Ruben Alcaraz.
5. When the Attorney Liaisons completed a batch of affidavits, they would place them in the
"completed drawer. n The processor/notary would check the drawer on a regular basis to
gather the signed affidavits. The processor/notary would then count the number of
pages and confirm with their tracking sheet that the name on the first affidavit and last
affidavit and number in between matched. They would document in the notary book only
that first and last account name and the number of accounts in between, rather than
notating each account in the notary log, to save time. The processor would then Fed Ex
them back to the attorney or law firm to be utilized to obtain judgment against the
consumer in a lawsuit.
6. In the event that the processor did find a discrepancy with the balances or information in
the system versus the affidavit, they would send the account back to the law firm for
them to change the "language" in the lawsuit. There was very little, if any,
communication between the processor/notaries and the affidavit signers.
7. During my time at Chase both Ruben Alcaraz and Christina Paz, the main notary, were
both on written warnings and had been for a great deal of time due to poor performance
and quality. It was well known throughout my department and by Mr. Alcaraz's
supervisor(s) that Mr. Alcaraz would frequently, if not exclusively, sign affidavits without
having any personal knowledge whatsoever of the account the affidavit referred to.
Despite Chase's knowledge of this, Chase never terminated Mr. Alcaraz. I believe that
Ruben Alcaraz was actually rewarded for producing so many affidavits so quickly.
8. During my time at Chase bank Ruben Alcaraz was not an Assistant Vice President at
the bank, and to my knowledge he never had that title.
9. During my tenure at Chase Bank, I witnessed bank executives and employees routinely
destroy. via shredding and other means, information and communications taken from
consumers' rather than incorporate that information into the consumer's credit card file.
The type of documents I witnessed destroyed included, but were not necessarily limited
to. bankruptcy notices and other bankruptcy documents and communications, proof of
payment by the consumer, and letters from debt settlement companies.
Here is the recent court filing and docket sheet dated April 8, 2011 of Linda Almonte's case. Click here and here. I hope that Legal Morass stick their guns and not allow Chase to bully them. This is a very serious matter. I look forward to reading the outcome of Ms. Almonte's case and the findings of Ms. Almonte's case by the Office of Comptroller of Currency.
No comments:
Post a Comment