Indianapolis, In. — Attorney General Curtis Hill has reached a $575 million settlement with Wells Fargo Bank to resolve claims that the bank violated state consumer protection laws. As part of a settlement involving all 50 states and the District of Columbia, Indiana will receive $5.2 million.Specifically, the settlement resolves claims that Wells Fargo:opened millions of unauthorized accounts and enrolled customers into online banking services without their knowledge or consent;improperly referred customers for enrollment in third-party renters and life insurance policies;improperly charged auto loan customers for force-placed and unnecessary collateral protection insurance;failed to ensure that customers received refunds of unearned premiums on certain optional auto finance products; andincorrectly charged customers for mortgage rate lock extension fees.“Such grossly unfair and deceptive trade practices as those demonstrated by Wells Fargo must never be allowed to stand,” Attorney General Hill said. “We must continue working tirelessly to hold companies accountable for engaging in blatant misconduct that harms consumers.”As part of the settlement, Wells Fargo will also create a consumer redress review program through which consumers who have not been made whole through other restitution programs already in place can seek review of their inquiry or complaint by a bank escalation team for possible relief.To date, this settlement represents the most significant engagement involving a national bank by state attorneys general acting without a federal law enforcement partner.Wells Fargo has identified more than 3.5 million accounts in which customer accounts were opened, funds were transferred, credit card applications were filed, and debit cards were issued without the customers’ knowledge or consent. The bank has also identified 528,000 online bill-pay enrollments nationwide that may have resulted from improper sales practices at the bank. In addition, Wells Fargo improperly submitted more than 6,500 renters insurance and/or simplified term life insurance policy applications and payments from customer accounts without the customers’ knowledge or consent.The states alleged that Wells Fargo imposed aggressive and unrealistic sales goals on bank employees and implemented an incentive compensation program in which employees could qualify for credit by selling certain products to customers. The states further alleged that the bank’s sales goals and the incentive compensation program created an impetus for employees to engage in improper sales practices in order to satisfy such sales goals and earn financial rewards. Those sales goals became increasingly harder to achieve over time, the states alleged, and employees who failed to meet them faced potential termination and career-hindering criticism from their supervisors.The states also alleged that Wells Fargo improperly purchased automobile insurance policies for more than 2 million auto financing customers and charged them the premiums, interest and fees for it, despite evidence that the customers’ regular insurance policy was in effect, and despite numerous customer complaints about such unnecessary placements. Wells Fargo has agreed to provide remediation of more than $385 million to approximately 850,000 auto finance customers. The remediation will include payments to over 51,000 customers whose cars were repossessed.Additionally, the states alleged that Wells Fargo failed to ensure that customers received proper refunds of unearned portions of optional Guaranteed Asset/Auto Protection (GAP) products sold as part of motor vehicle financing agreements. As a result, the bank has agreed to provide refunds totaling more than $37 million to certain auto finance customers.Finally, the states alleged that Wells Fargo improperly charged residential mortgage loan consumers for rate lock extension fees even when the delay was caused by Wells Fargo, a practice contrary to the bank’s policy. Wells Fargo has identified and contacted affected consumers and has refunded or agreed to refund more than $100 million of such fees.Wells Fargo has previously entered consent orders with federal authorities – including the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) – related to its alleged conduct. Wells Fargo has committed to or already provided restitution to consumers in excess of $600 million through its agreements with the OCC and CFPB – as well as through settlement of a related consumer class-action lawsuit – and will pay more than $1 billion in civil penalties to the federal government. Additionally, under an order from the Federal Reserve, the bank is required to strengthen its corporate governance and controls, and is currently restricted from exceeding its total asset size.As part of its settlement with the states, Wells Fargo has agreed to implement within 60 days a program through which consumers who believe they were affected by the bank’s conduct, but fell outside the prior restitution programs, can contact Wells Fargo to be reviewed for potential redress. Wells Fargo will create and maintain a website for consumers to use to access the program and will provide periodic reports to the states about ongoing restitution efforts.More information on the redress review program, including Wells Fargo escalation phone numbers and the Wells Fargo dedicated website address for the program, will be available on or before February 26, 2019.The states’ agreement with Wells Fargo is attached.
“We told the Crown about our concerns with Site C over and over again,” says Chief Yahey. “We asked them not to make a decision until we had been meaningfully consulted and our concerns had been addressed, but they ignored us and approved the dam anyway.”The two First Nations say they’ll continue meeting with provincial and federal leaders to review their options as they continue their opposition to the proposed Site C Dam. The two First Nations were formed out of the division of the Fort St. John Beaver Band in 1977, sharing a common history and many kinship ties. Today, that common history is a driving force in their shared opposition to the flooding of the Peace River Valley.“Our ancestors were the first signatories to Treaty 8 in this province, signing the Treaty with Canada in 1900 on the banks of the Peace River at Old Fort,” Doig River Chief Norman Davis explained in a written statement. “That river is a central part of our history and we strongly oppose its destruction. The river valley contains many culturally important sites, including the burial site of one of our former chiefs, Chief Attachie.”Blueberry River Chief Marvin Yahey is said to have been raising concerns about the cumulative impacts of resource development in northeast B.C. since his election in December 2013.- Advertisement -“The provincial government has taken enough out of our Treaty territory – the prosperity of this province comes at our expense,” Chief Yahey said in the same written statement. “Our members have been cut off from their culture and natural food source and our communities suffer as a consequence. We are not going to let the Peace River become the next casualty in the province’s economic agenda.”Kelvin Davis, Doig River Councillor and former Chief, says he’s seen significant changes on the land since his childhood.“I told the panel members at the Site C hearings that I wanted to teach my grandson how to hunt, but that many of the animals were contaminated,’ Councillor Davis writes. “It is getting harder and harder to hunt and fish up here with all of the development that now surrounds us.”Advertisement