If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Consumerist)   At Wells Fargo the contract is more what you'd call "guidelines" than an actual binding contract   (consumerist.com) divider line 15
    More: Scary, Wells Fargo, South Norwalk, home equity line of credit, amortizations, lump sums  
•       •       •

3784 clicks; posted to Business » on 14 Sep 2012 at 2:18 PM   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



15 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-09-14 02:15:58 PM
piggybankblog.com
 
2012-09-14 02:23:13 PM
Unconscionable. I can't see a judge deciding otherwise were this to go to court.
However, according to WF's response to the Consumerist this is moot.

But let's green it anyway!
 
2012-09-14 02:31:46 PM
WtF, great company. We tried to do a refi. After five months, we were "approved" by the underwriters, except they had two pages of additional requirements. Didn't happen.
 
2012-09-14 03:22:27 PM
My mortgage was bought by Wells Fargo and I'm trying to sell my place. I'll be lucky to break even on the sale (and I'm taking an actual substantial loss due to all the remodeling I've done on it). So I may be mailing WF my keys in a couple months.

Yeah, CSB.
 
2012-09-14 03:29:58 PM
I'm sure there's more to this story. Why couldn't they just sign up for a new one and use it to pay off the old one? They obviously like to use their home equity as an ATM so they should be savvy to financial games. That said, it seems like WF should have just done some sort of rollover to an equivalent currently-offered HELOC offering.
 
2012-09-14 03:41:53 PM
imageshack.us

What Wells Fargo bankers may look like.
 
2012-09-14 05:25:37 PM
From the update to the article:
Impacted customers with this kind of account have been offered other options to replace this product. We offered [the homeowner] additional options that would have allowed her to replace the discontinued product and move toward paying off her balance.
 
2012-09-14 05:27:42 PM
That is why when dealing with larger sums in bank transactions that any line of credit be to and through a shell corporation that can be collapsed if the bank tries any funny business. What money? I don't owe you any money.. that collapsed corporation owes you the money.

They do it.
 
2012-09-14 05:53:03 PM
I like how finance types describe their usary as a "product." As if they actually produced something. Its a farking service they are exceedingly well compensated to provide. And they do a shiatty job at it.
 
2012-09-14 05:56:15 PM
jlawn001: But let's green it anyway!

Just because WF was shamed into agreeing to their terms doesn't mean it should be swept under the rug.
 
2012-09-14 07:36:41 PM
If the homeowner in question was playing the refinance game, couldn't they have signed a NEW refinance agreement after 1989 (when the act in the article was signed)? The new refinance contract wouldn't have the retroactive adjustment clause that Wells Fargo was using.

Not saying the bank isn't being douchey, but the homeowners DID agree to those terms.
 
2012-09-14 10:08:15 PM
Wells Fargo is really pushing to over take BofA in the douchebag sweepstakes.
 
2012-09-14 11:59:06 PM
Gig103: jlawn001: But let's green it anyway!

Just because WF was shamed into agreeing to their terms doesn't mean it should be swept under the rug.


True. I guess it depends upon when they offered comparable terms. Initially, or as a response to the press.
 
2012-09-15 06:29:22 AM
www.motifake.com
 
2012-09-15 07:35:48 AM
But, I learned here on Fark that it is okay not to pay back a mortgage because the bankers are greedy. A mortgage is a contract. Mixed messages, Fark.
 
Displayed 15 of 15 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »





Report