If you have ever actually been lied to by a bank, it's likely that there's some law that penalizes that lie. You can probably have the situation corrected. Personally, no bank has ever lied to me. Expected me to read documents carefully? Yes. Lied? No.
edit: banks are regularly fined for lying, cheating, stealing or laundering. Some of it is "legitimately" the cost of doing business. Some is quite obviously nefarious. JP Morgan was fined 13B for lying about mortgage risk and bundling knowingly dangerous securities[1] I removed the first link as it was proven to be, well, a lie. However, I think there is enough evidence of banks lying not spend ages posting links.
[1]http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/10/21/e...
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/07/abortion-servic...
https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/3dtx6y/did_a...?
Jeffery stated that after a few days it was resolved and posted his bank account. Given the article you linked was from 2012 and he had a 3 year sentence, it is quite possible he is the same person posting as /u/jamesjuk. I have removed the link above.
However, it does seem that the bank froze his assets and lied to him. It remains unclear whether he has restitution leading to his assets being frozen.
The first link clearly indicates an accidental accounting error, the second talks about banks being negligent in conducting due diligence. The difference between "you knew this was false" and "you should have known this was false" is more than a merely pedantic distinction.
> banks are regularly fined for lying, cheating, stealing or laundering.
Untrue. Banks are regularly fined for a variety of things, but there is a material distinction between failing to properly vet clients, some of whom (as it turned out) were laundering drug money, and knowingly laundering drug money. You link to stories about the former, yet describe it as the latter. If your case is strong, it can be made without inaccuracy.
I guess you could try and focus on the LIBOR scandal, but that's a pretty weak tea. It also didn't involve banks lying to customers (which was what was originally asked). Besides, by many estimates, benefited customers (who got lower interests rates on balance than they should have done) at the expense of wealthy investors. Terrible, no doubt, but not really the same thing as knowingly aiding criminals.
The parent almost certainly meant you broadly as a third person pronoun akin to something like, If [one has] ever actually been lied to by a bank
>Untrue.
I disagree. Banks often lie and it is well public.
In the other case, I assume you know the difference between errors and deceit, so I'll withhold any comment on that.
I didn't mean to say I thought your account was a throwaway. Just the comment -- in other words, I found it thoughtless, seeking of thoughtless upvotes, and still do.
Banks practicing willful fraud as the subjects of this press release did remains a fairly rare phenomenon.
Were you born after 2008? Or what?
I longer bank with them.
