5,300 Wells Fargo employees fired for creating over 2 million phony accounts without customers knowing it
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
IPK
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 19 Feb 2008
Posts: 6027

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2016 11:10 pm    Post subject:

Gained a new perspective on Credit Unions from this thread. Thanks ya'll.
_________________
Our song to Phil, the man behind LG: "Miss u"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
governator
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 5405

PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2016 5:10 am    Post subject:

Is there no oversights on banks?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerLanny
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 24 Oct 2001
Posts: 37321

PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2016 8:57 am    Post subject:

angrypuppy wrote:
LakerLanny wrote:
This is a really strange story. 5300 fired for this? Was it really on that level, if so that is nuts.



Unlike most other big bank frauds, this wasn't committed by Wall Street trading operations, but rather rank and file bank branch employees. It's more of a worker revolt, in that Wells Fargo management set extremely unrealistic sales quotas for cross sales. The branch employees couldn't hit those numbers given the limited branch visits and face-to-face interactions with customers (something that a "Key Performance Indicator" aka KPI should have noted to the turds in upper management setting the goals). So in order to not get fired, or be forced to work longer, uncompensated hours, the low-wage bank branch employees crafted fake customer accounts which counted as cross sales. The customers affected mostly got hit with penny ante (bleep), like a couple of dollars here and there, the kind of thing many of us miss on our bank statements or credit card bills.


Wow, I have a checking and savings account with Wells...better go back and look closely. I watch my accounts closely but not everyone does and I wouldn't be surprised if they preyed on elderly or non-English speaking clients and such.

This is really bad. It is the fault of the management for the culture of course, but as someone who has worked his entire life in the financial services field, that is a gross violation of ethics by the employees who created the fake accounts. A real violation of trust.
_________________
Love, Laker Lanny
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 16684

PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2016 9:05 am    Post subject:

angrypuppy wrote:
LakerLanny wrote:
This is a really strange story. 5300 fired for this? Was it really on that level, if so that is nuts.



Unlike most other big bank frauds, this wasn't committed by Wall Street trading operations, but rather rank and file bank branch employees. It's more of a worker revolt, in that Wells Fargo management set extremely unrealistic sales quotas for cross sales. The branch employees couldn't hit those numbers given the limited branch visits and face-to-face interactions with customers (something that a "Key Performance Indicator" aka KPI should have noted to the turds in upper management setting the goals). So in order to not get fired, or be forced to work longer, uncompensated hours, the low-wage bank branch employees crafted fake customer accounts which counted as cross sales. The customers affected mostly got hit with penny ante (bleep), like a couple of dollars here and there, the kind of thing many of us miss on our bank statements or credit card bills.


I think both management and the lower level employees are to blame for this. Having difficult quotas isn't a valid reason to do what they did.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
JerryMagicKobe
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 28 Jul 2005
Posts: 13572

PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2016 11:12 am    Post subject:

Figuring the 5300 is made up of roughly 300 managers and 500 customer facing employees, 2,000,000 fake accounts is about 400 accounts per employee over 5 years that's 80 per year or 6-7 per month.


The fine and restitution for the customers makes sense, but what about the new account reps that were not creating fake accounts and were fired for underperforming?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Raijin
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 08 Feb 2009
Posts: 6262

PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2016 11:29 am    Post subject:

Had a friend who worked as a banker in a Socal branch when this was going on, he didn't feel comfortable doing it, so he never did, but he said it was pretty rampant. Management rode him like no tomorrow so he ended up going back to school to get a Master's
_________________
"It was tough," Kobe Bryant said. "But when it got really tough for me, I just checked myself in."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 16684

PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2016 7:17 am    Post subject:

Warren tells Wells Fargo CEO he should resign and be put in prison.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/09/20/494738797/you-should-resign-watch-sen-elizabeth-warren-grill-wells-fargo-ceo-john-stumpf

Agree with her on the resignation. Not sure yet on the imprisonment part. Only way I'd be down with that is if he either orchestrated, or can be proven to have known, of the fraudulent activities going on.

If he knew about it, or led the effort, that would make him a criminal. If he didn't, then that just makes him a horrific leader.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakerjoshua
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 Nov 2007
Posts: 10619
Location: Bay Area

PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2016 7:39 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
Warren tells Wells Fargo CEO he should resign and be put in prison.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/09/20/494738797/you-should-resign-watch-sen-elizabeth-warren-grill-wells-fargo-ceo-john-stumpf

Agree with her on the resignation. Not sure yet on the imprisonment part. Only way I'd be down with that is if he either orchestrated, or can be proven to have known, of the fraudulent activities going on.

If he knew about it, or led the effort, that would make him a criminal. If he didn't, then that just makes him a horrific leader.


They created an incentive program that promoted this type of abuse. Then 5000 people lost their jobs and the department head received millions in bonuses. Not sure if they broke the law but they surely did nothing to stop it then rewarded themselves with the spoils of I'll gotten gains.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 16684

PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2016 7:44 am    Post subject:

lakerjoshua wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Warren tells Wells Fargo CEO he should resign and be put in prison.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/09/20/494738797/you-should-resign-watch-sen-elizabeth-warren-grill-wells-fargo-ceo-john-stumpf

Agree with her on the resignation. Not sure yet on the imprisonment part. Only way I'd be down with that is if he either orchestrated, or can be proven to have known, of the fraudulent activities going on.

If he knew about it, or led the effort, that would make him a criminal. If he didn't, then that just makes him a horrific leader.


They created an incentive program that promoted this type of abuse. Then 5000 people lost their jobs and the department head received millions in bonuses. Not sure if they broke the law but they surely did nothing to stop it then rewarded themselves with the spoils of I'll gotten gains.


Any commission laden program incentive is going to promote abuse. If they knew it was happening, then surely that is criminal. But if they didn't? Doesn't that just make them a terrible employee?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
angrypuppy
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 30223

PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2016 7:57 am    Post subject:

I like Elizabeth Warren, but this is grandstanding. I doubt the Wells Fargo CEO knew about the fraud, though the shareholders should claw back his compensation for the period affected. The few large company CEOs I've encountered tend to isolate themselves from trouble, and they have frighteningly short attention spans. I'm sure the CEO just demonstrated his management brio by telling his SVP underlings that he had certain growth and profitability targets to meet, and that their compensation was tied to those targets. He probably had no idea what it would take to get there, and if you explained it to him the difficulty or complexity involved in achieving those targets, he probably would have dozed off.

I think the malfeasance was on a lower level, perhaps because some Director-level analyst came up with some targets with rather superficial analysis. My contention is that if you performed some simple proforma KPI (key performance indicators) analysis, you would realize that not enough new or existing customers visit the branches in the numbers necessary to achieve those ridiculously aggressive cross-sales revenue and new account goals. It's simple really, at a superficial level you look at the number of new customers, and the number of current (unique) customers who visit a branch on a given period (say, annual) and then determine: 1) Penetration (percentage of how many agree to open any type of new account) and 2) Number of New Accounts per Customer. I think that alone would have revealed that it simply wasn't possible for the branch minions to generate those new account and revenue goals. Further, the Operations group should have raised a red flag internally as those new accounts must have not had the performance metrics (transactions, balances) of the other "like kind" accounts from the previous operating periods.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakerjoshua
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 Nov 2007
Posts: 10619
Location: Bay Area

PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2016 8:18 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
lakerjoshua wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Warren tells Wells Fargo CEO he should resign and be put in prison.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/09/20/494738797/you-should-resign-watch-sen-elizabeth-warren-grill-wells-fargo-ceo-john-stumpf

Agree with her on the resignation. Not sure yet on the imprisonment part. Only way I'd be down with that is if he either orchestrated, or can be proven to have known, of the fraudulent activities going on.

If he knew about it, or led the effort, that would make him a criminal. If he didn't, then that just makes him a horrific leader.


They created an incentive program that promoted this type of abuse. Then 5000 people lost their jobs and the department head received millions in bonuses. Not sure if they broke the law but they surely did nothing to stop it then rewarded themselves with the spoils of I'll gotten gains.


Any commission laden program incentive is going to promote abuse. If they knew it was happening, then surely that is criminal. But if they didn't? Doesn't that just make them a terrible employee?


I agree however, I also think it's very unlikely management did not know what was going on. It's too large and wide spread to be just a few bad employee's that were gaming the system.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 16684

PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2016 8:43 am    Post subject:

lakerjoshua wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
lakerjoshua wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Warren tells Wells Fargo CEO he should resign and be put in prison.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/09/20/494738797/you-should-resign-watch-sen-elizabeth-warren-grill-wells-fargo-ceo-john-stumpf

Agree with her on the resignation. Not sure yet on the imprisonment part. Only way I'd be down with that is if he either orchestrated, or can be proven to have known, of the fraudulent activities going on.

If he knew about it, or led the effort, that would make him a criminal. If he didn't, then that just makes him a horrific leader.


They created an incentive program that promoted this type of abuse. Then 5000 people lost their jobs and the department head received millions in bonuses. Not sure if they broke the law but they surely did nothing to stop it then rewarded themselves with the spoils of I'll gotten gains.


Any commission laden program incentive is going to promote abuse. If they knew it was happening, then surely that is criminal. But if they didn't? Doesn't that just make them a terrible employee?


I agree however, I also think it's very unlikely management did not know what was going on. It's too large and wide spread to be just a few bad employee's that were gaming the system.


Right. Which is why I'm totally on board with him being fired and not given any bonuses, etc.

But he is to be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a criminal court. So there has to be some evidence there for a criminal charge. A number of employees testifying he knew. An email. Paper trail.

On a separate note, shouldn't the 5,300 employees who knowingly conducted these acts, plus every manager above them in the organization also be jailed for the same reason as the CEO then?

If not, it sounds like a witch hunt more than an interest in ensuring justice.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
angrypuppy
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 30223

PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2016 8:46 am    Post subject:

governator wrote:
Is there no oversights on banks?



There's quite a bit of oversight on banks, on both federal and state levels. While I think the sophistication is somewhat lacking (at times) by the examiners, the opening of fraudulent bank accounts isn't something you ever monitor. You limit your monitoring to things like reserve levels, credit quality, and suspicious account activity (money laundering, tax evasion and the like, not this penny ante (bleep)). In other words, you're trying to find out if the bank might expose the bank (and federal reserve system) to failure, or if other nefarious acts are being carried out.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Reflexx
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 25 Jun 2005
Posts: 11163

PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2016 9:03 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
lakerjoshua wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
lakerjoshua wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Warren tells Wells Fargo CEO he should resign and be put in prison.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/09/20/494738797/you-should-resign-watch-sen-elizabeth-warren-grill-wells-fargo-ceo-john-stumpf

Agree with her on the resignation. Not sure yet on the imprisonment part. Only way I'd be down with that is if he either orchestrated, or can be proven to have known, of the fraudulent activities going on.

If he knew about it, or led the effort, that would make him a criminal. If he didn't, then that just makes him a horrific leader.


They created an incentive program that promoted this type of abuse. Then 5000 people lost their jobs and the department head received millions in bonuses. Not sure if they broke the law but they surely did nothing to stop it then rewarded themselves with the spoils of I'll gotten gains.


Any commission laden program incentive is going to promote abuse. If they knew it was happening, then surely that is criminal. But if they didn't? Doesn't that just make them a terrible employee?


I agree however, I also think it's very unlikely management did not know what was going on. It's too large and wide spread to be just a few bad employee's that were gaming the system.


Right. Which is why I'm totally on board with him being fired and not given any bonuses, etc.

But he is to be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a criminal court. So there has to be some evidence there for a criminal charge. A number of employees testifying he knew. An email. Paper trail.

On a separate note, shouldn't the 5,300 employees who knowingly conducted these acts, plus every manager above them in the organization also be jailed for the same reason as the CEO then?

If not, it sounds like a witch hunt more than an interest in ensuring justice.


Somewhat agree. Every single one of the employees that did this should be charged criminally.

As for the direct managers... they should be charged if there is proof they knew.

If warning signs were ignored or safety procedures ignored, then management should be fired and possible criminal charges.

If there were no existing safeguards, then higher level management needs to go.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
the association
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 03 Feb 2015
Posts: 1982

PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2016 9:07 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
lakerjoshua wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
lakerjoshua wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Warren tells Wells Fargo CEO he should resign and be put in prison.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/09/20/494738797/you-should-resign-watch-sen-elizabeth-warren-grill-wells-fargo-ceo-john-stumpf

Agree with her on the resignation. Not sure yet on the imprisonment part. Only way I'd be down with that is if he either orchestrated, or can be proven to have known, of the fraudulent activities going on.

If he knew about it, or led the effort, that would make him a criminal. If he didn't, then that just makes him a horrific leader.


They created an incentive program that promoted this type of abuse. Then 5000 people lost their jobs and the department head received millions in bonuses. Not sure if they broke the law but they surely did nothing to stop it then rewarded themselves with the spoils of I'll gotten gains.


Any commission laden program incentive is going to promote abuse. If they knew it was happening, then surely that is criminal. But if they didn't? Doesn't that just make them a terrible employee?


I agree however, I also think it's very unlikely management did not know what was going on. It's too large and wide spread to be just a few bad employee's that were gaming the system.


Right. Which is why I'm totally on board with him being fired and not given any bonuses, etc.

But he is to be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a criminal court. So there has to be some evidence there for a criminal charge. A number of employees testifying he knew. An email. Paper trail.

On a separate note, shouldn't the 5,300 employees who knowingly conducted these acts, plus every manager above them in the organization also be jailed for the same reason as the CEO then?

If not, it sounds like a witch hunt more than an interest in ensuring justice.


What about circumstantial evidence? Are we only using that as a prosecutorial tool against the folks in steerage? FFS, isn't it reasonable to assume that someone deserving of that type of compensation package (at the helm of an organization that massive) should be expected to KNOW, to take responsibility for the actions of his organization? You know, the people under his leadership. I mean, what's the alternative? Some kind of "all of the upside opportunity, none of the downside risk" universe where nobody is actually held accountable ... ?

In essence, you're arguing that nobody should ever be charged with receiving (or possession of) stolen property as long as it cannot be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that they explicitly authorized the specific theft(s) themselves. Ignorance of the law isn't a defense in criminal courts. How many (bleep) times have we heard that precept when the defendant isn't a Fortune 100 executive ... ?

No, (bleep) that noise ... at minimum, some flavor of fraudulent conveyance ... remand that sack of protoplasm somewhere for a while (not the Maldives or St. Bart's).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 16684

PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2016 12:43 pm    Post subject:

the association wrote:
What about circumstantial evidence? Are we only using that as a prosecutorial tool against the folks in steerage? FFS, isn't it reasonable to assume that someone deserving of that type of compensation package (at the helm of an organization that massive) should be expected to KNOW, to take responsibility for the actions of his organization? You know, the people under his leadership. I mean, what's the alternative? Some kind of "all of the upside opportunity, none of the downside risk" universe where nobody is actually held accountable ... ?

In essence, you're arguing that nobody should ever be charged with receiving (or possession of) stolen property as long as it cannot be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that they explicitly authorized the specific theft(s) themselves. Ignorance of the law isn't a defense in criminal courts. How many (bleep) times have we heard that precept when the defendant isn't a Fortune 100 executive ... ?

No, (bleep) that noise ... at minimum, some flavor of fraudulent conveyance ... remand that sack of protoplasm somewhere for a while (not the Maldives or St. Bart's).


Ehhh, you're just more interested in putting the guy with the money in jail than actually achieving true justice. Look at the way you post for instance.

Would you be in favor of putting the 5,300 employees who actually did the illegal behavior in jail?

How about the hundreds if not thousands of their DIRECT day-to-day managers?

How about dozens of middle to senior level management above them too while we're at it?

Or just that one guy who may not even have known what was going on?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 16684

PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2016 12:47 pm    Post subject:

Reflexx wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
lakerjoshua wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
lakerjoshua wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Warren tells Wells Fargo CEO he should resign and be put in prison.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/09/20/494738797/you-should-resign-watch-sen-elizabeth-warren-grill-wells-fargo-ceo-john-stumpf

Agree with her on the resignation. Not sure yet on the imprisonment part. Only way I'd be down with that is if he either orchestrated, or can be proven to have known, of the fraudulent activities going on.

If he knew about it, or led the effort, that would make him a criminal. If he didn't, then that just makes him a horrific leader.


They created an incentive program that promoted this type of abuse. Then 5000 people lost their jobs and the department head received millions in bonuses. Not sure if they broke the law but they surely did nothing to stop it then rewarded themselves with the spoils of I'll gotten gains.


Any commission laden program incentive is going to promote abuse. If they knew it was happening, then surely that is criminal. But if they didn't? Doesn't that just make them a terrible employee?


I agree however, I also think it's very unlikely management did not know what was going on. It's too large and wide spread to be just a few bad employee's that were gaming the system.


Right. Which is why I'm totally on board with him being fired and not given any bonuses, etc.

But he is to be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a criminal court. So there has to be some evidence there for a criminal charge. A number of employees testifying he knew. An email. Paper trail.

On a separate note, shouldn't the 5,300 employees who knowingly conducted these acts, plus every manager above them in the organization also be jailed for the same reason as the CEO then?

If not, it sounds like a witch hunt more than an interest in ensuring justice.


Somewhat agree. Every single one of the employees that did this should be charged criminally.

As for the direct managers... they should be charged if there is proof they knew.

If warning signs were ignored or safety procedures ignored, then management should be fired and possible criminal charges.

If there were no existing safeguards, then higher level management needs to go.


That sounds way too reasonable for 2016 internet justice man.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChefLinda
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 12906
Location: Boston

PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2016 12:54 pm    Post subject:

5,000 employees don't coincidentally act on the same scheme unless it was coordinated from the top. This is another example of the 1% screwing everyone else, including their own employees who were doing their bidding for $15/hour while they pocketed the spoils.

Elizabeth Warren had it right. The CEO should give consumers back the money then resign or go to jail.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Reflexx
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 25 Jun 2005
Posts: 11163

PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2016 12:59 pm    Post subject:

ChefLinda wrote:
5,000 employees don't coincidentally act on the same scheme unless it was coordinated from the top. This is another example of the 1% screwing everyone else, including their own employees who were doing their bidding for $15/hour while they pocketed the spoils.

Elizabeth Warren had it right. The CEO should give consumers back the money then resign or go to jail.


5000 people sure could come up with the same scheme.

It wasn't exactly a complex or creative scheme. It's pretty much what you'd expect any dishonest person with a sales quota to try to do.

I'd be surprised if there weren't procedures in place to safeguard against this. But those procedures may have been overlooked or ignored.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakerjoshua
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 Nov 2007
Posts: 10619
Location: Bay Area

PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2016 1:22 pm    Post subject:

Reflexx wrote:
ChefLinda wrote:
5,000 employees don't coincidentally act on the same scheme unless it was coordinated from the top. This is another example of the 1% screwing everyone else, including their own employees who were doing their bidding for $15/hour while they pocketed the spoils.

Elizabeth Warren had it right. The CEO should give consumers back the money then resign or go to jail.


5000 people sure could come up with the same scheme.

It wasn't exactly a complex or creative scheme. It's pretty much what you'd expect any dishonest person with a sales quota to try to do.

I'd be surprised if there weren't procedures in place to safeguard against this. But those procedures may have been overlooked or ignored.


I wasn't going to share this but my wife was a PB1 at Wells for 5 years (no she never needed to open fake accounts as we are pretty well set financially). There was more than one instance where she didn't hit her quota and was threatened by management that she'd be fired. There were also conversations between her and her manager where she was told "do whatever it takes" in regards to improving her sales performance. It was also pretty well know in the branch that this was the practice and when she didn't do it they would assign her to crappy on-site branches and given Saturday open/close shifts as retaliation.

So yes. It came from the top.

Fyi they would also open accounts for underage minors using a fake passport number instead of a social security number, makes me wonder how many thousands of those dummy accounts there are floating around out there.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakersken80
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 27048

PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2016 1:57 pm    Post subject:

I was watching the local news about how one business owner opened a Wells Fargo checking account and then suddenly they got notices of 15 other opened Well Fargo accounts in their name with various fees that popped out of nowhere.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
angrypuppy
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 30223

PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2016 2:16 pm    Post subject:

The unrealistic sales quotas came from the top, but let's not get carried away with the charges of fraud. The bank was fishing for new accounts so that they could grow revenue and profitability over time.

Before we get out the pitchforks, try a quick reasonableness test:

Many accounts probably didn't generate any revenue, but for sake of argument, let's just pretend that all 1.5 million accounts made money. That amount is probably small on a per account basis, the nickel and dime stuff that shows up on your statement that you figure isn't worth your trouble to investigate. Let's say it's $9 per month, as double digit numbers attract more attention.

1.5 million times $9/month times 12 months/year = $162 million

While that sounds astounding, it really isn't. Wells Fargo revenues topped $86 billion last year. On a percentage basis, the fraud is less than 0.2% of revenue, and in fact I expect the real number to be less per annum. This is penny ante (bleep).


Commercial banking is a very mature industry; that's a fancy way to describe that growth prospects were low. Senior management decided to pull a General Patton and threaten the lowly bank branch employees with termination, unless they hit unrealistic numbers. My guess is that the goals were assembled by some middle manager in a rather sloppy manner, and weren't vetted. I'd like to see an investigation, but this smells more like incompetence than some nefarious scheme. Unfortunately I see the branch employees holding the bag, as well as some of the lower corporate folks (note: many lower employees in a commercial bank have a VP title).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakersken80
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 27048

PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2016 2:20 pm    Post subject:

angrypuppy wrote:
The unrealistic sales quotas came from the top, but let's not get carried away with the charges of fraud. The bank was fishing for new accounts so that they could grow revenue and profitability over time.

Before we get out the pitchforks, try a quick reasonableness test:

Many accounts probably didn't generate any revenue, but for sake of argument, let's just pretend that all 1.5 million accounts made money. That amount is probably small on a per account basis, the nickel and dime stuff that shows up on your statement that you figure isn't worth your trouble to investigate. Let's say it's $9 per month, as double digit numbers attract more attention.

1.5 million times $9/month times 12 months/year = $162 million

While that sounds astounding, it really isn't. Wells Fargo revenues topped $86 billion last year. On a percentage basis, the fraud is less than 0.2%, and in fact I expect the real number to be less per annum. This is penny ante (bleep).


Commercial banking is a very mature industry; that's a fancy way to describe that growth prospects were low. Senior management decided to pull a General Patton and threaten the lowly bank branch employees with termination, unless they hit unrealistic numbers. My guess is that the goals were assembled by some middle manager in a rather sloppy manner, and weren't vetted. I'd like to see an investigation, but this smells more like incompetence than some nefarious scheme. Unfortunately I see the branch employees holding the bag, as well as some of the lower corporate folks (note: many lower employees in a commercial bank have a VP title).


Doubtful of those numbers. Most people in general aren't that financially aware. If you look at the various fees they try to sink you with they are in the double digit numbers....I believe a single overdraft fee is around $35.....now if somebody is getting hit with a couple of those and you have a couple million or so accounts that a huge amount of money
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
the association
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 03 Feb 2015
Posts: 1982

PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2016 2:28 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
the association wrote:
What about circumstantial evidence? Are we only using that as a prosecutorial tool against the folks in steerage? FFS, isn't it reasonable to assume that someone deserving of that type of compensation package (at the helm of an organization that massive) should be expected to KNOW, to take responsibility for the actions of his organization? You know, the people under his leadership. I mean, what's the alternative? Some kind of "all of the upside opportunity, none of the downside risk" universe where nobody is actually held accountable ... ?

In essence, you're arguing that nobody should ever be charged with receiving (or possession of) stolen property as long as it cannot be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that they explicitly authorized the specific theft(s) themselves. Ignorance of the law isn't a defense in criminal courts. How many (bleep) times have we heard that precept when the defendant isn't a Fortune 100 executive ... ?

No, (bleep) that noise ... at minimum, some flavor of fraudulent conveyance ... remand that sack of protoplasm somewhere for a while (not the Maldives or St. Bart's).


Ehhh, you're just more interested in putting the guy with the money in jail than actually achieving true justice. Look at the way you post for instance.

Would you be in favor of putting the 5,300 employees who actually did the illegal behavior in jail?

How about the hundreds if not thousands of their DIRECT day-to-day managers?

How about dozens of middle to senior level management above them too while we're at it?

Or just that one guy who may not even have known what was going on?


Your entire (bleep) defense of this mouthbreather is based on the flimsy bolded statement above ...

He may not have known. He may not have known. Really ... ?

So if he knew of the scheme, he's clearly violated codified criminal statutes. I'm assuming we can agree on that position. And if he didn't know of the scheme, his incompetence as leader of a multi-national Fortune 100 company demands that he resign his office immediately, fully remunerate WFB shareholders and customers for his failure to uphold his fiduciary responsibilities, and hit the (bleep) bricks already. And I'm assuming we can agree on that position, as well.

As to your questions, yes ... anybody who knowingly participated or benefitted from this scheme (because that's exactly what the (bleep) this artifice was ... a (bleep) scheme to enrich themselves at the expense of others) should be held to the same criminal justice standard that anyone else outside this 1% bubble would face if caught violating the law ... if that's 5,000+ WFB employees brought to the woodshed, oh (bleep) well ... and if the Courts decide to mete out incarceration as part of their judicial penance, oh (bleep) well ...

I'm mindful of the distinction between vengeance and justice. I'm also content with the knowledge that rational minds like Elizabeth Warren (and ChefLinda FTW) are with me on the right side of history ... on the other hand, feebly defending bankers who wouldn't give you the time of (bleep) day seems like a really sad journey ... but at least you and Reflexx can provide one another company.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
angrypuppy
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 30223

PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2016 2:34 pm    Post subject:

lakersken80 wrote:
angrypuppy wrote:
The unrealistic sales quotas came from the top, but let's not get carried away with the charges of fraud. The bank was fishing for new accounts so that they could grow revenue and profitability over time.

Before we get out the pitchforks, try a quick reasonableness test:

Many accounts probably didn't generate any revenue, but for sake of argument, let's just pretend that all 1.5 million accounts made money. That amount is probably small on a per account basis, the nickel and dime stuff that shows up on your statement that you figure isn't worth your trouble to investigate. Let's say it's $9 per month, as double digit numbers attract more attention.

1.5 million times $9/month times 12 months/year = $162 million

While that sounds astounding, it really isn't. Wells Fargo revenues topped $86 billion last year. On a percentage basis, the fraud is less than 0.2%, and in fact I expect the real number to be less per annum. This is penny ante (bleep).


Commercial banking is a very mature industry; that's a fancy way to describe that growth prospects were low. Senior management decided to pull a General Patton and threaten the lowly bank branch employees with termination, unless they hit unrealistic numbers. My guess is that the goals were assembled by some middle manager in a rather sloppy manner, and weren't vetted. I'd like to see an investigation, but this smells more like incompetence than some nefarious scheme. Unfortunately I see the branch employees holding the bag, as well as some of the lower corporate folks (note: many lower employees in a commercial bank have a VP title).


Doubtful of those numbers. Most people in general aren't that financially aware. If you look at the various fees they try to sink you with they are in the double digit numbers....I believe a single overdraft fee is around $39.....now if somebody is getting hit with a couple of those and you have a couple million or so accounts that a huge amount of money



People notice the overdrafts, they stick out like a sore thumb. One of the things the Internet brought to the masses was the abuse of subscription billing. All too many firms signed up folks for trial subscriptions, and never bothered cancelling the service, even after being given notification. When you have big recurring charges, but small service charges in the realm of $10 or less per month? No. I know that first hand, having been billed for months (even years) for services that escaped my attention. Further, many financial services companies will ask you to sign up for a "free" account that has no service charges, and no starting balance. All you have to do is look at the pile of junk mail you receive.

Reasonableness test: Do you really think 1.5 million accounts are going to generate enough revenue to impact 1% of Wells Fargo revenue growth?

$8.6 billion divided by 1.5 million accounts divided by 12 months = $480 (rounded) per month

No, this looks like shoddy management. Having consulted within this sector, I'm not terribly surprised.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 2 of 4
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2010 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB