what is Lawsuits Against Bank of America
Bank of America, HUD, FHA and Other Housing Borrowers in Discrimination Cases
According to Scotus Blog and Reuters, the U.S. Supreme Court has granted an initial writ of certiorari for the banks to consider the city’s claims against Bank of America, Wells Fargo and two other banks. If the bank appeals the order, the case may be set aside or dismissed, with no appeal allowed after that point.
The lawsuits involve a city ordinance aimed at discouraging predatory lending. The ordinance requires banks to only lend money to those people with a steady income and a viable repayment plan. If the person is unable to repay, he or she is not considered a candidate for a loan. The banks argue that since the rules of the ordinance have changed, they cannot discriminate against certain types of borrowers.
According to the lawsuit targets both the original ordinances as well as the new requirements placed on the loans by Wells Fargo and Bank of America. Banks argue that they are not required to treat every borrower the same, even if the loan was originally obtained from them. In other words, if the borrower cannot make the payments on the old loan, they have every right to get another loan to repay the first. However, if he or she has no income or job, they do not have to consider the borrower eligible for the loan.
The cities attempts at this type of discrimination is not against the law; it is a violation of the Fair Housing Act. Cities can also charge borrowers more to compensate for the increased risk posed by being rejected on account of their race, gender, religion, or national origin.
When this lawsuit gets to the courts, there will likely be a lengthy legal process. As a matter of fact, most cities are taking advantage of the current situation, since there will almost certainly be no resolution to the case in court. This means that the city has time to work with the banks to reach some type of settlement.
Other major issues are being raised by the lawsuit, including the banks’ practices of charging excessive fees and interest on accounts they do not have or that they are not able to get back. Some cities have also alleged that the banks have charged credit cardholder’s interest rates that are above what credit cardholders would see in the market. in order to maintain high accounts. While these fees can be problematic and unfair, the cities only have jurisdiction over interest rates on accounts that they have, not accounts that the banks have in the name of third-party companies like credit cards.
Of course, one major problem with this lawsuit relates to the potential impact on the country’s economy. Banks account for more than $2 trillion in deposits every day, and they hold the largest share of that amount. If they lose their ability to get a sizable portion of that money back due to lawsuits, it could lead to a collapse in the economy.
The case is currently on appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. If it were to go to trial, it could take a few months before a decision was reached.
Many city attorneys feel that the city attorneys have a legitimate reason to seek to have this lawsuit dismissed. They argue that it is an effort to force people to give up rights to their money and assets, which are not in the public interest.
Even though it is not illegal to discriminate based on gender, race, religion, or national origin, these lawsuits are a violation of federal laws. that are designed to protect people from discrimination because of their financial status.
If a bank or other company does decide to deny loans or mortgages to account holders because of the race, gender, religion, or national origin, they should make sure they provide a reasonable explanation to the borrowers. for doing so. Otherwise, the courts may find these actions unlawful.