Have you exercised your ADA rights with your bank?
Because they sure as hell aren't giving you "effective communication"
Some of this may be over some heads, but I’m going to write this the way I need to write it, and you can go do your own research.
One of my major adult traumas, and the one that has shaped my life for the last 20 years, is bank fraud. I fought Bank of America on my foreclosure, and their Trustee, Brock and Scott, PLLC, did not have the note at the foreclosure.
Now, I know that the right of presentment is waived on the note, and yet Brock and Scott did not assert this at the foreclosure hearing, and I demanded the note, and Jim Bonner, Esq. asserted that the copy WAS the note.
Imagine trying to cash a COPY of a check… Yeah, that.
Anyway, we lost our home and 85%+ equity, and while I haven’t “recovered”, this bullshit by BOA and the Forsyth County Clerk of Court, who didn’t have a proper oath (a crime under NCGS 14-229), created the monster you see today as me.
So, when my bank reacted to a former disgruntled client asserting fraud on a transaction that was two and a half months old, I learned a few things.
“Fraud” is an ambiguous and arbitrary word with no specific, static, full meaning.
When banks claim that they are investigating “fraudulent activity”, they go no-contact, which means “silent treatment”. Silent treatment is a tool of abuse. It is at this point of the conversation that you should be able to observe that “effective communication” is out the door, UNLESS you invoke the ADA. (which I have)
When a fraud investigation goes on, you are presumed guilty.
When a fraud investigation goes on, you are unable to defend yourself.
“Fraud” is not defined in the Deposit Agreement or Cardholder Agreement.
I also observed the following:
So when a bank tells you that they are investigating an activity for “fraud”, they are issuing “Accusation Trauma” «« (This is a linked article in which I introduced Accusation Trauma.) Accusation Trauma is when someone attempts to assert control over you by inferring or accusing some negative label. “fraud”, or “anti-[fill in the blank]” or any myriad of accusing terms that are meant to shut down communication in lieu of control.
So how would I balance the scales? Well, I want to say before I go here, that the control of one’s own ability to survive is a very fear-anchored thing, and banks have much power, and even the imposed threat of shutting down an account is a nightmare for someone to think about. I have experienced this for the last week, thanks to a soon-to-be-exposed malicious actor, and I can tell you that it’s not fun. So, even though I have taken steps to invoke the ADA with my bank, and even though I have taken steps to ask for effective communication and reasonable accommodation, I caution you to (a) NOT do this if you are just a cut-and-paste armchair warrior, (b) NOT do this if you do not understand the implications of this and assume all risks of doing this, and (c) NOT do this at all if you are unclear on what a communication disability is, and how disability rights are available for communication disabilities.
With that being said, I am presenting this for your viewing pleasure.
I am not telling anyone to do this, and yet, I don’t bullshit. Banks are avoiding accountability by using “fraud” as a way to separate their arbitrary whims from your ability to examine an have equal access.
It’s time to shake shit up.
© Copyright P.D., JAY V SHORE