Derek Monroe vertelt over zijn wedervaren met het CPFB, de overheidsadministratie die de consument moet beschermen. Hij dient een klacht in bij het CFPB naar aanleiding van een dispuut met een lokale bank (Capital One) over een rekening op zijn kredietkaart maar die verwerpen die klacht. Daarbij wordt een verklaring voorgelegd die volgens Monroe leugenachtig is. Hij belt het CFPB maar die hangen op.
Monroe; “Er zijn consequenties verbonden als je leugenachtige verklaring aflegt maar het omgekeerde geldt blijkbaar niet.”
Het voorval is volgens hem exemplarisch voor het falen van de overheidsregulatoren in de VSA.
Derek Monroe: “The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, (CFPB) was created in 2010 as result of failure of the American regulatory framework to supervise financial industry that caused the financial crisis of 2008. The existing bodies supervising banks such as Comptroller of the Currency (COC) or the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) were effectively captured by the industry as result of corrupt politics and revolving doors between the regulated and the regulators.”
“Nine years later and under the President Trump, the CFPB has followed the suit by being a de facto defender of banks and financial manipulators instead of citizens and consumers. Nothing illustrates this better than the case of perfect hypocrisy and political maneuvering as presented in case of Capital One Bank. “
“My wife has filed a dispute with her credit card against the merchant in Canada (the details are not available now due to pending litigation) alleging non delivery of service which was paid for. Although the bank’s credit card credited my account on account of provided evidence, it soon reversed itself presenting the evidence in the case that was utterly fraudulent. The CFPB promptly closed the case and would not discuss it with me. The multiple efforts to reach out to CFPB legal dept ended with repeated phone disconnections.”
“I reached out to my local Congressman Brad Schneider’s office for help and it came in the shape of the letter that was obtained from the CFPB in the case. In it the agency admits that it does not apply the same legal standard to financial industry while examining complaints as it does to consumers and citizens. In other words the banks are allowed to be “generally” truthful while submitting the evidence and there is no legal sanction or penalty if they aren’t. In the same time the consumers are kept to the completely different and higher standard. This case shows the banks have completed the regulatory capture that met the CFPB’s predecessors before 2010 and the agency joined the ranks of infamy as characterized by failure of the federal government to regulate and prosecute PHARMA companies in the ongoing OPIOID crisis (over 300,000 dead and counting in the past 10 years) or the Boeing killer planes scandal of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) self regulatory and congratulatory approach..”