Dodd-frank To Likely Bite The Dust - Housewire

[J Grant]

And btw, do you even understand about those accounts, why there were so many? Much as I dislike what happened, it was lots of individual people who worked at WF who took it upon themselves to open accounts to make quotas for high pressure gols of jobs.. wells fargo itself did not order them to open fake accounts.

Enjoy having a powerless, defunded agency that is will exist as a shell of itself with no power to help you should a problem arises for you in future.

 

[Peter LeQuire]

??So you'd rather not have it been caughty at all....okay, you got what you wanted, with no CFPB it would not have been caught.! Enjoy your new status of no protection

You might have been able to miss my point further, but I can't imagine how. My point is that if the people who were doing wrong had been regularly punished to the extent of law and regulation in place before DF, there would have been a lot less of that fraudulent behavior, both over time and an any particular point in time. So the unctuous John Stumpf can simply "take full responsibility" (whatever the whiz that is supposed to mean) and resign with deferred comp and stock worth something in the 9-figure range (as in $100,000,000 or more. Again, wauyo go CFPB - somehow I don't feel particularly well protected.

 

[Peter LeQuire]

??So you'd rather not have it been caughty at all....okay, you got what you wanted, with no CFPB it would not have been caught.! Enjoy your new status of no protection

You might have been able to miss my point further, but I can't imagine how. My point is that if the people who were doing wrong had been regularly punished to the extent of law and regulation in place before DF, there would have been a lot less of that fraudulent behavior, both over time and an any particular point in time. So the unctuous John Stumpf can simply "take full responsibility" (whatever the whiz that is supposed to mean) and resign with deferred comp and stock worth something in the 9-figure range (as in $100,000,000 or more. Again, wauyo go CFPB - somehow I don't feel p

And btw, do you even understand about those accounts, why there were so many? Much as I dislike what happened, it was lots of individual people who worked at WF who took it upon themselves to open accounts to make quotas for high pressure gols of jobs.. wells fargo itself did not order them to open fake accounts.

Enjoy having a powerless, defunded agency that is will exist as a shell of itself with no power to help you should a problem arises for you in future.

articularly well protected.

 

[J Grant]

I agree with you about prosecution...we won't have that either now of course, you do realize that. And the incidence of Wall St bad practices and bank fraud have been way down since Dodd Frank, much as some of us dont' like parts of the bill.

Like any regulation,the parts that worked could be kept and the parts not working so well revamped or replaced, instead we will get a replacement which strips protection for for consumers and allows the same bad practices that tanked the markets back in the day...history repeats itself. ..

 

[djd09]

"(Reuters) - Wells Fargo & Co may have opened as many as 3.5 million unauthorised customer accounts, far more than previously estimated, according to lawyers seeking approval of a $142 million settlement over the practice."

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/well...0aG5zBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzYw--

Nice. There are 3.5 million people who would probably disagree with JG.

 

[Peter LeQuire]

You could more incorrectly interpret what I wrote, but I don't know how. If they'd put John Stumpf and other senior Wells Fargo staff in jail in 2012, there would have been significantly fewer fake accounts. Stumpf and management at every level was culpable - he got something in the 9-figure $ range for "taking responsibility" and resigning. That is not much of a disincentive to future fraud.

"New status of no protection." Surely you jest - nothing has changed in my banking relation except that the bank has been given the ability to charge more and higher fees and to make the management of my simple deposit accounts more convoluted.

 

[djd09]

 

[djd09]

Could you imagine if the average tax payer tried to open 3 fraudulent accounts. 2-10 minimum.

I'm trying to wrap my tiny little brain around the idea of bailing out big banks, only in turn to create a protection bureau to watch them, knowing the fact they are most likely going to steal again. No conspiracy here just plain out right stupidity.

 

[Eli]

Could you imagine if the average tax payer tried to open 3 fraudulent accounts. 2-10 minimum.

I'm trying to wrap my tiny little brain around the idea of bailing out big banks, only in turn to create a protection bureau to watch them, knowing the fact they are most likely going to steal again. No conspiracy here just plain out right stupidity.

It wouldn't be 2-10 minimum. They would personally be under the jail and on CNN, MSNBC. And the local 5:00 news! Lol

 

[J Grant]

You could more incorrectly interpret what I wrote, but I don't know how. If they'd put John Stumpf and other senior Wells Fargo staff in jail in 2012, there would have been significantly fewer fake accounts. Stumpf and management at every level was culpable - he got something in the 9-figure $ range for "taking responsibility" and resigning. That is not much of a disincentive to future fraud.

"New status of no protection." Surely you jest - nothing has changed in my banking relation except that the bank has been given the ability to charge more and higher fees and to make the management of my simple deposit accounts more convoluted.

Wait till there is no DF and your account fees are 4 times as high, report back then!