digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at consumerist.com

JPMorgan Chase Breaks into Home, Steals Everything

consumerist.com — Bobo and Joy Dickson bought a house had been headed for foreclosure, but JPMorgan Chase apparently didn't get the message that the former owners had moved out and the new owners were in residence. So, naturally, they hired a firm to drill the Dickson's locks and take everything they owned, including their food.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • benman587, on 07/01/2008, -1/+236I hope someone got fired.
    • uncoveror, on 07/02/2008, -6/+28Fired upon by a firing squad is more like it!
    • chaoswings, on 07/02/2008, -0/+46I hope a whole lot of people got fired. Who knows how many objects had sentimental value to them and now it's all gone. Not to mention they ruined a few of the locks to get in the house and probably more damage to the inside.

      Also how exactly did they get to the point where they thought it was ok to start drilling the locks? It just seems excessive I'm sure there were better ways to get at what they were after. Nevermind that there was a mixup...they went at it in a very asinine manner from start to finish.
      • aliengoods, on 07/02/2008, -0/+9It's breaking and entering and the value of the theft was probably more than 10K, so technically speaking someone should be facing felony charges.
      • Beylan, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1Were one of us to do this, then yes, it would result in felony charges and a long prison sentence. The only problem is that JPMorgan Chase is a large company and are immune from most criminal charges. The worst that they will do to them is give them a small fine.
    • ArielMT, on 07/02/2008, -0/+18I hope the someone who got fired gave the order for this. More than that, I hope he's facing criminal charges as well as civil suits.
    • phybere, on 07/02/2008, -0/+48Fired? I see a massive lawsuit and criminal proceedings on the way...
      • Ajajadude, on 07/02/2008, -0/+12Get a couple of free houses plus cars to fill the garages. To start off.
      • Qeveren, on 07/02/2008, -0/+8There won't be any criminal proceedings. Apparently the state prosecutor thinks 'no criminal intent' = 'no possibility of a crime having been committed', and won't press charges.
      • rabidbob, on 07/02/2008, -0/+10 QeverenQeveren I fixed your post:

        There won't be any criminal proceedings. Apparently the state prosecutor thinks a suitcase full of money from JP Morgan = 'no possibility of a crime having been committed', and won't press charges.
      • HoratioHellpop, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1//plus cars to fill the garages.// ... and gas to fill the cars!
    • allout360, on 07/02/2008, -0/+7For one million dollars! Maw ha ha ha.
      • saigumi, on 07/02/2008, -2/+1I'd be going for a lot more than that.

        Wow, you just hired a team to steal my stuff that has personal records that an identity theif would love to get their mitts on. I believe the word "several billion" would come up if I was suing.
    • ferrariman60, on 07/02/2008, -0/+28No, see, with how companies are run these days, you should be hoping that the RIGHT person got fired. Chances are better than management just found someone relatively low on the totem pole, put the blame on them, and the person who's actually responsible is still on the payroll. Ugh, makes me sick.

      Usually things at the consumerist are just whiny, stupid things, but once in a while, something that's actually attention worthy comes around. This is definitely one of those things. They sink our economy with their foolish policies, get a bailout from the gov't(quiet! don't tell anyone please), and then they do this? ***** all these people. I can't believe the whole situation.
    • NikoKun, on 07/02/2008, -0/+15I hope the family either sues, or strikes a deal with JP, for enough money to set themselves for life.
      I can't imagine having all my possessions tossed away like that... I have so many irreplaceable things... they define my life.

      Man I'd be so pissed... ***** JPMorgan!
      • PopcornDave, on 07/02/2008, -1/+2The family should completely own every single asset of J.P. Morgan. Teach all these greedy ***** weasels a lesson - with my apologies to the weasels of nature.
      • HoratioHellpop, on 07/02/2008, -0/+0Erm ... if the things you own define your life ... you should take a hard look at what you value.
    • MadOgre, on 07/02/2008, -1/+6I hope someone got Arrested.

      Fixed it for you.
    • OwdenBowden, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2Remember this is the very same Financial Institution the Government hand picked to give Bear Sterns and their 1.9 billion dollar real estate portfolio + other assets. So what do YOU expect.
    • RonBurgundy76, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1If the family can't have their day in court due to that corrupt state prosecutor, then I would think a little Fight Club-style justice would be in order for J.P. Morgans' assets...
  • Billybobgeorge, on 07/01/2008, -1/+261I hope they win their lawsuit. This is just pure, gross negligence.
    • richmomz, on 07/02/2008, -6/+4Yet when they did this to Bear Stearns nobody complained.
    • splorpdotorg, on 07/02/2008, -0/+17JP Morgan publicly admitted the error. Pretty much the family gets to name their price. I'd say, minimum: pay off the house + $5 million (to replace "lost" items and for damages). What would you give if you were on the jury?
      • bmystry, on 07/02/2008, -0/+12Knowing its JP Morgan that ***** it up I say they get $20 million
      • siszam, on 07/02/2008, -0/+19Just consider that ALL the baby pictures of their children are gone forever. That by itself is worth 5 million. Even then, it doesn't make up for it.
      • Sinnic, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3I don't know how much I'd try to wrangle out of the sum total of the property lost in the theft...but I'd sure as hell press for punitive damages that would open people's eyes up. There's no excuse and the company needs to be publicly and gratuitously shamed.
    • thisguy457, on 07/02/2008, -3/+0yeah right, it's all the families fault.

      don't you guys bring everything in your house to work with you? or did i buy this pack mule for nothing..... that sales guy was so persuasive.... i hope this rolex watch is still good....
    • pedepy, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1sucks yea, but in a way, they just hit the jack-pot: the bank will probably settle for big time money off-court to keep this story burried as deep as they can

      (plus theyll probably get their stuff back, unlike real theives)
    • redux2redux, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1Something tells me that they are going to be able to buy a much bigger house now.
  • yellowcakewalk, on 07/01/2008, -15/+134JP Morgan Chase is heavily invested in PetroChina. The implication is that they are financing genocide in Darfur. Check them out at
    http://divestfordarfur.org
    Our company does their 401(k) thru JPMC and they lied about PetroChina. I turned down the 401(k) bennie for this reason. The trail of ownership goes through Hong Kong, check the website above.
    • HUKI365, on 07/02/2008, -25/+2You realise its definately a breach of Federal statutes by disclosing that information if you are in a privlidged position...
      • TheGuruStud, on 07/02/2008, -0/+20Sounds like it should be public to me. When they stop being corrupt is when they can get some privacy. We don't have any (partially due to them), so why should they have any?
      • m0neybags, on 07/02/2008, -1/+20That's public information, guy.
      • ch33sehead, on 07/02/2008, -7/+12He's not your guy, buddy.
      • mtanis, on 07/02/2008, -6/+12He's not your buddy, friend.
      • s2ao, on 07/02/2008, -3/+8He's not your friend, pal.
    • dickybrown, on 07/02/2008, -0/+31turning down your 401k benefit is just leaving money on the table - if you're trying to stand on some moral high ground, convince your company to switch 401k admins or find a different job
    • brad3378, on 07/02/2008, -4/+9The plot thickens......

      I found it interesting that Warren Buffet invested $Billions in Petro China before donating money to the same Democrats pushing their windfall profits tax on the American Owned oil companies...... not to mention the threat of government ownership of the oil industry.

      As I suspected, now it looks like even more Petro China investors are supporting the Democrats:
      http://politicallydrunk.blogspot.com/2008/05/obama ...

      • Pixelpaws, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3What does that have to do with this article? Important if it's true, yes, but completely irrelevant here.
      • HoratioHellpop, on 07/02/2008, -0/+0but .. but ... but ... it's Bush's fault! Everything is!
    • sublimemind, on 07/02/2008, -2/+8Darfur genocide?

      Who gives a crap about that?

      They had a BRAND NEW COFFEE TABLE

      so much irony on so many levels i dont think any human should attempt to decipher it
    • banieldowen, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3Look at you, up there on your high horse! So valliant, so poor, so stupid, not accepting free money.
    • BuddhaPhi, on 07/02/2008, -2/+4Interesting... And this relates to the story how?

      BTW, we already know all corporations are evil. Except Google and Apple, of course.
      • Rizin, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1Forgot Nintendo!

        Although Mother 3 still isn't in the US :/
      • HoratioHellpop, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1//Except Google and Apple, of course// I love the smell of sarcasm in the morning.
    • FatherDEath, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2it dosent and its not corect yeah they do busniess with some companys linked to dafurs gov but they are not directly sponsring....if you look the projects they finance have nothing to do with chine ped-o get off the hippy grass and look in to ***** first
    • digdug135, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1Divesting is ridiculous. Why would depressing the price of a company based on some of its assets help? It would mean that those who don't care are getting a bargain (the company presumably is earning the money and distributing the same profits). Why don't you just give me your money directly?
  • therealkdog, on 07/01/2008, -2/+140I think plundering the homes of the owners of JPmorgan would be fair.
    • Y0tsuya, on 07/01/2008, -2/+14That would be the shareholders. Ironically, the Dicksons may be invested in JPM through their 401K. So it comes back full circle.
    • joshblufs, on 07/02/2008, -1/+30Okay. The old man told me to take any rug in the house.
      • Bravesguy18, on 07/02/2008, -0/+6That rug really tied the room together, man.
    • mysticalone, on 07/02/2008, -0/+8Arrr.Raise anchor and set sail for JP Morgan . There be plundering to be done. Arrr.
    • BuddhaPhi, on 07/02/2008, -1/+2Remember: Pillage first, THEN burn... I always get the order mixed up.
  • imakeholesinu, on 07/01/2008, -1/+68Something tells me this house will come gratus now in a settlement and they'll get all new stuff as all of their old stuff is probably pawned, landfilled, goodwilled and liquidated. Though they should also get the amount of money from the liquidation of their home assets as well as part of the settlement.
    • PopcornDave, on 07/02/2008, -0/+14No kidding.

      I do hope they get all seven of their 150" plasmas and the three Austin Healeys that were in the garage. Not to mention the collection of Fabergé eggs and the priceless Picasso and Monet paintings that adorned the walls...
    • NCg8r, on 07/02/2008, -0/+0Gratus?
  • Y0tsuya, on 07/01/2008, -1/+25Field Asset is doing so much business they've gotten sloppy I think. I'd be most worried about any PCs they took away that has sensitive personal information on them.
  • Ninh, on 07/02/2008, -1/+55Have some suits put in jail over this, just as a warning shot.
  • thatguydr, on 07/02/2008, -2/+123worst... overdraft charge... ever
    • Detry, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3That forced some f'in air from my lungs. lol
    • TWGMichael, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2you made me shoot milk out my nose
  • StingingNettle, on 07/02/2008, -1/+19Its almost laughable. Nobody knows who owns what!
  • 0Xonox0, on 07/02/2008, -3/+137Wtf? Even if another family hadn't moved in this wouldn't be legal! Is robbery a common tactic in the lending industry?
    • surfacewound, on 07/02/2008, -2/+63Yes.
    • zoom1928, on 07/02/2008, -24/+6> this wouldn't be legal

      Of course it is. Why wouldn't it be not only legal, but morally right?

      The original family stole from the bank. They took money with no intention of paying it back. That theft (or fraud, depending on how you look at it) should be a criminal act, but in this country it isn't. As far as the bank retaking possession of their property and the contents, it depends on the state. In many states the police oversee placing of the contents on the curb. The bank can take their property back, but can't take the contents. In others, like in this one, you can hire a qualified company to empty and dispose of the contents without police supervision. JP Morgan did everything morally and legally right except for confirming that the property had not changed hands.
      • dinostabOMG, on 07/02/2008, -0/+26The article states that a court order is also necessary for the removal of the property. And that JP Morgan is "not sure" about whether they had an order. That's a pretty big deal.
      • jrobh, on 07/02/2008, -3/+15how do you know they took money with no intention to pay it back? I'd say it's much more likely they became unable to pay it back. My guess is that you've never been in debt trouble before. Lenders make a living off of trapping people into debt that is next to impossible to get out of. As it appears, sometimes they go so far as to break into your home and take everything they can.
      • domomike, on 07/02/2008, -4/+6Why are you getting dugg down? That makes no sense. The biases on Digg are a little silly. For this PARTICULAR STORY, yes, it was illegal. But the original poster wasn't talking about this particular story. He was explaining why it normally is perfectly legal.

        This is the way economies work, guys. Money isn't just given away. For this particular story, the banks made a huge mistake. But there is nothing technically wrong with what the banks do when they repossess property that they own.

        Lenders don't make a living off "trapping people," they make a living off lending money. If someone borrows money improperly then they have to pay the consequences. It's life. You have to get used to that.
      • SPECOPS, on 07/02/2008, -2/+7domomike - No, economics works like this, If you're a big enough company to line certain folks pockets with cash, you get off free and clear, you get to have the government bail you out of bad situations, you can't lose. If you're the average person who takes a financial fall, you're *****. Even the built-in safety valve for the common man (bankruptcy) is now ***** (for the average man, not a corporation, they can still wipe debt free and clear and still make massive profits---- average man, has to do a repayment plan if they make more than minimum wage). How much money has been given away to the airlines every time they "fail" and start over? I'd say LOTS AND LOTS. And that's ONE example.


    • brbubba, on 07/02/2008, -0/+20In New York it is illegal for landlords to move tenants' items or sell them off for collection of a debt. Of course, this is a multi-billion dollar bank so nothing surprises me anymore.
      • jerrycurley, on 07/02/2008, -0/+7This is not a landlord situation. This doesn't apply AT ALL to the scenario in the article. Foreclosures and evictions are two very different things.
      • sandiegodude, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3Add to the fact that JPMC had zero rights to the home at that point anyway - It had been purchased by the new family, which means JPMC (and the acting company that performed the deed) are (or should be) in very very deep ***** for Robbery, which is a felony offense. I'm sure there are a few people at JPMC who are sweating over this, even more so at the collection company. If this were to happen to me, I would be demanding criminal charges be pressed from the first guy who signed the order at JPMC right down to the guy who drilled the lock.

        I'm sure JPMC will likely throw a very large sum at the family to hush them up, all without publicly admitting any wrongdoing.
    • domomike, on 07/02/2008, -10/+3Of course not. If the normal thing to do was "robbery" than the banks wouldn't be doing it.

      When you borrow money from banks you are literally borrowing money. When you buy something on credit you are buying something with the bank's money that you are promising to pay them back. If you don't ever pay them back then the money value of everything you bought with the bank's money belongs to the banks. The banks are entitled to take back the same money value of the things you bought with their money... Because technically they own those things.

      Kind of confusing... I know...
      • hapax, on 07/02/2008, -0/+4I know what you mean, but ownership doesn't work like that.
        If I buy an elephant with a bank loan, I own the elephant, but I also own a liability to repay the loan. That balances out my asset.
        Ownership also means other things, such as responsibility in case the elephant tramples someone to death when I leave the holding pen unlocked. The bank certainly won't be the "owner" then.
    • Murrabbit, on 07/02/2008, -0/+9"Is robbery a common tactic in the lending industry?"

      Haha apparently you don't have much experience with borrowing money, but yes, in fact that's all they do. Time was they called the sort of practices that are industry standard today "usury" and it was illegal.
      • thegreenspanput, on 07/02/2008, -1/+0usury? people get all their econ knowledge from video-google. Banks put their name on their money, accept assets, and stand ready to buy that money back with those assets. There is no fraud and if there were supernormal profits being earned, new banks would form and eliminate this free lunch.
    • Pittance, on 07/02/2008, -1/+2Technically if the place was foreclosed and the warning period for them to evict and leave expired, everything in that house belongs to the bank. Usually the banks give 1-3mos (i think) after foreclosure for people to leave. So if stuff is left, they assume the people dont want it.
    • JigoroKano, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1If you stop paying your car payments, eventually the repo man will come "steal" your car if you won't willingly hand it over. Should be a last resort after a court order, but yes.
      • wshs, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1And what do you call it when you pay for the car in full and the nice repo man takes it anyway?
  • basye, on 07/02/2008, -0/+31Somebody needs to go to jail for this!
  • TheProWasTaken, on 07/02/2008, -2/+81What would happen if somebody thought they were robbing the place and shot them?

    Technically it is robbing/stealing though.
    • DephexTwin, on 07/02/2008, -1/+49Exactly. My thought was the same. Yes, there should be a civil suit and the family should win out big, but there should also be a criminal case for robbery: those who invaded the home and robbed it, and those at JPMorgan Chase who conspired with these thieves to share in the profits!
      • Pittance, on 07/02/2008, -1/+1Not the company they hired. But the people who hired them. You dont arrest the truck driver who accidentally drove C4 hidden in soap boxes when his manifesto was forged. You arrest the guy who hired him.
    • mecharabbit, on 07/02/2008, -0/+32They could have gotten away with shooting them, too:

      http://www.abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/comments?type=Sto ...
      • jerrycurley, on 07/02/2008, -4/+1Because it was in Texas, yeah. In most other states you do NOT have the right to defend property with deadly force.
      • Sinnic, on 07/02/2008, -0/+6I know there are other States with castle doctrines.
      • Pittance, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2Some states have the castle law. But since when is your neighbors home your castle? Castle laws usually only protect you if someone has broken into your house. They are trying to pass the castle laws in NC. I'm personally for them, but I easily see how they can be horribly abused by anyone who knows that law. Currently in NC, you cant shoot someone who broke into your home unless they attack you. But you CAN shoot someone AS they are breaking into your home. Makes some sense since you could murder an aquaintence you invited over at 4am and say he broke in after you sledgehammer your own door.
    • MelvinSchlubman, on 07/02/2008, -0/+12Joe Horn, Texas
      http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNew ...
      is what might happen.
    • NSResponder, on 07/02/2008, -1/+13"Technically it is robbing/stealing though."

      I doubt that the people who actually entered the house could be convicted for theft, because the element of intent is lacking. If they didn't know the circumstances and thought it was just like any other day clearing out the contents of a foreclosed property, they're probably in the clear legally.

      There's a massive civil liability here, but that would be against the corporation, not its employees.

      -jcr
      • TeatherWind, on 07/02/2008, -5/+5Ignorance of the law is not a good defense! I doubt that if I had the home of the people that lived next raided, and cleaned out.. it would simply be a civil suit!
      • drakke1, on 07/02/2008, -2/+1Hmmm. Technically it would be burglary, actually, as i recall, if all of the elements are present. The intent issue is interesting. I think the crime does require intent. Good test question for a Crim Law class? :))
      • MrWhite7, on 07/02/2008, -0/+6Depends on the state statute, Teather, the knowing part isn't in regard to the law, but whether its a degree of culpability required within the law.
      • jgzman, on 07/02/2008, -1/+7According to the comments, the DA refused to prosecute for exactly the reason stated above. Lack of criminal intent.

        I say put him on the gallows with the rest.
      • charliecharlos, on 07/02/2008, -1/+3Are you pie?

        -concerned digger who wonders why people sign their posts
      • Pittance, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1Yes burglary requires intent. You cant accidentally steal someones stuff. And generally if you accidentally take something that you thought wasn't owned, the most cops will do is say to give it back. But that case is pretty rare unless it looks like garbage. They were a clearing company hired to do a job. They were blameless. It was JP that screwed up and misread their own documents. But a judge wont touch this. Its too damn complicated. The civil judge will probably just let the owners tear them a new one.
  • jordankasteler, on 07/02/2008, -2/+10they a large portion of the federal reserve. they really are above the law.
    • Pittance, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1So we indict them, convict them, and then the government takes control of the company. The gov't would love it if they had basis to reclaim some of that cash.
  • twiztidsinz, on 07/02/2008, -0/+91Hear that?

    That's the sound of lawyers across the country having a collective orgasm.
    • PopcornDave, on 07/02/2008, -0/+12Good lord, I hope the levies hold.
    • b4cheung, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2I sense a disturbance in the force
  • Revolutionista, on 07/02/2008, -2/+71I see JPMorgan/Chase don't need warrants to enter your place of residence, either.
    • RationalXubrnce, on 07/02/2008, -2/+12 They probably claim you no longer legally reside there when they do this type of thing.
      • sirbeta, on 07/02/2008, -0/+15A court order is still required to remove articles.
  • nudeinfl, on 07/02/2008, -0/+9The banks get in it deeper and deeper.
  • jdigg06, on 07/02/2008, -2/+4lawsoooot lawsoooot!
  • warlax27, on 07/02/2008, -14/+1THATS SO AWESOME!
  • tweetsa, on 07/02/2008, -0/+32wish they did that to me. I could use a couple million dollars
    • Elliuotatar, on 07/02/2008, -3/+20While a couple million dollars would be nice, think about all that they lost. They didn't just lose furniture. They lost photos. They lost birth certificates, diplomas, passports, baby's first lock of hair, etc etc etc. They lost their PC with all its emails. They lost thei credit cards.

      Lots of the stuff they lost is surely irreplacable. Lots of the stuff they lost may take them months to get replaced.

      A couple million dollars as compensation for losing all those personal items and the stress and work of getting all your documentation and credit cards back in order? Ha. Try twenty million. A couple million is nothing these days, and wouldn't be nearly punishment enough for the corporation that pulled this crap.
    • NCg8r, on 07/02/2008, -0/+0I'd still make the deal. To quote C.M. Burns: "I'd trade it all for a little more..."
  • AlexanderZero, on 07/02/2008, -1/+22Donation effort? ***** that! Sue JPMorgan for several times the value of your belongings IMO!
    • ferrariman60, on 07/02/2008, -0/+11Yeah, I'm feeling some "emotional suffering" coming on for these people. I'm thinking JPMorgan will be paying up big for this one. Hope it gets some real national exposure.
  • Barbrady, on 07/02/2008, -1/+35It's too bad the homeowners weren't at home armed with a shotgun when the "thieves" broke into the house.
    • jpop, on 07/02/2008, -0/+18Undoubtably, the group staked out the house to ensure the owners were gone when they broke in.
    • twiztidsinz, on 07/02/2008, -15/+1Why? so they could be murders?
      Within your legal right or not, not everyone is so willing to take a life over possession.
      • Barbrady, on 07/02/2008, -1/+25Your home is supposed to be your castle. If you don't want to get shot then don't break into my home. Pretty simple concept.
      • shredluc, on 07/02/2008, -0/+16Well what you possess, both material and non is what makes up your life. So they are in fact stealing a part of your life. Anyone attempting to take away another persons life, well, should have a similar fate.
      • evilesttoast, on 07/02/2008, -0/+15who knows why they were there. they were drilling their locks. that shows malicious intent. i say ***** them.
    • eengineer, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2True. Thats why I have an armed robot at my house. Even after you have cased my home, I leave a little surprise.
      • jpop, on 07/02/2008, -1/+1Heh, T1000... Unfortunately, then you'd get dinged by the law for having a boobytrap on your place.
    • digigeek, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2Ninjas. Hidden in every nook and cranny.
  • nitroburn, on 07/02/2008, -0/+24One of those rare times I hope they sue the pants off them.
  • therealrico, on 07/02/2008, -3/+11I am so proud to be working for JPM!
  • darkane, on 07/02/2008, -5/+6Sorry, but you're just asking for home invasion with a name like Bobo.
  • ObamaWins08, on 07/02/2008, -2/+7...stole my house
  • marx2k, on 07/02/2008, -0/+66Man... they repo'ed the FOOD?! That's coldblooded.
    • greenlight2001, on 07/02/2008, -2/+5The company is paid to clean the house out for resale. So EVERYTHING is cleaned out...
    • PopcornDave, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2It's like having the company cafeteria right at your fingertips. Besides with the food right there, they don't have to stop working.
    • eengineer, on 07/02/2008, -0/+0Now now. Maybe JP was going to leave the food and the repo guys got hungry? Ok probably not.
  • Caleb83, on 07/02/2008, -15/+6Is this the new Nigerian scam? I know, bad joke.
  • bsmeteronhigh2, on 07/02/2008, -0/+17I'm sure the bank is taking this very seriously. Chances are, the banker making that statement removed his glasses at just the right moment to make the seriousness of it all, just that much more serious. Of course the outpouring of help to the family was from local charities in the form of pre-paid credit cards and such. Amazingly, the bank who is in the business to make those very same cards didn't step to the plate, and in a goodwill effort, begin to make things right before things are hashed out in the legal system. Of course, common decency is not so common. Seriously, it is a pity.
  • RawOysters, on 07/02/2008, -0/+48Why in the hell should they have to depend on donations to get by? JP Morgan should be at their door with an up front payment to get them by. It's quite obvious that they are going to get the crap sued out of them, so maybe they should start sucking up now.
    • zoom1928, on 07/02/2008, -0/+28The problem with the upfront payment is that it is an admission of guilt. Thank the lawyers for setting that precedent. Where I used to work we helped an old woman who claimed one of our trucks hit her and knocked her down. Despite the fact that she had no injury and had sued three companies with the exact same word for word police report, we still lost in court because the judge instructed the jury to consider our payment as an admission of guilt.

    • ryanhayn, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3you should have jumped up and said, "no your honor...we're paying her because she made us some delicious cookies the other day and let us swim in her pool."
    • dygel, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2A rational person's reaction to this would be "I'm going to sue these people into the ground", and you'd be right to do so. JPMorgan knows this. As zoom points out, if they rush to say "Here's lots of money," that's interpretable as an admission of guilt and doesn't protect them from a lawsuit. In fact, they'd probably sue anyway after that and STILL win.

      Don't worry, these people will get their due. It's just going to go through the steps of "the process" before they reach their out-of-court settlement.
    • bemidia, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1But they already admitted that it was their fault, so I think an upfront payment would be appropriate. Now the family can just point out during the lawsuit that JPMorgan did nothing to help them when they were struggling.
  • NSResponder, on 07/02/2008, -8/+3Well, the settlement should easily cover the the balance of the mortgage on that house..

    -jcr
    • arcticblue, on 07/02/2008, -2/+9You know, your name shows up to the left of your comment. It's really unnecessary to sign your posts.
  • slyzxx, on 07/02/2008, -6/+6That is the most Dangerous thing to do buy a house before the foreclosure and not file proper paper work. I feel for the family i hope they get their money back.
    • TeatherWind, on 07/02/2008, -0/+8It's not just their money.. but anything that was handed down in the family. Perhaps if they had any PCs laying about with personal data.. who knows who has those now..

      SS Cards, Tax paperwork... all of that.. Field Asset Services doesn't seem to keep track of where any of this stuff went.
    • Ozzeh, on 07/02/2008, -0/+4"In early May, the Dicksons bought a house that had been headed for foreclosure. All the paperwork was completed. "

      From the linked article.
  • STPZ, on 07/02/2008, -0/+8What is Field Asset Services Inc.'s number??
  • remixity, on 07/02/2008, -0/+8This definitely sounds like something JPMorgan Chase would do. Idiots!
  • megadan76, on 07/02/2008, -1/+12Wow, honestly thought that was on Onion headline when I saw it.
    Damn, that is just... ugg.
  • reddog093, on 07/02/2008, -0/+9http://www.fieldassets.com/ - From the site:"More than 21,000 properties serviced on a recurring basis" - I highly recommend that the Dickson's get a few pitbulls when they get new stuff...
    • jpop, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2The clearing company would probably shoot the dogs and then charge the family for endangerment...
  • SilverBlade2k, on 07/02/2008, -1/+10I hope the family sues, and wins, big time....
  • Samurai77, on 07/02/2008, -0/+27How could you get your Family pics and heirlooms back after this? A TV is easy to replace but that stuff, man that sucks.
  • carranzam, on 07/02/2008, -1/+4loot ninja's
  • artfiend77, on 07/02/2008, -3/+24Actually, it turns out to save face JP Morgan Chase contacted the RIAA as a last resort and reported about 5 GB of illegal files on the families computer they seized. Each family member is now facing up to 10 years in prison and heavy fines. JP Morgan Chase was ordered to give back all the families belongings and ordered to pay 1,000,000$ in damages.

    /sarcasm
    • diadem2, on 07/11/2008, -0/+1Ah, but if chase stole the computers, that would means they'd have the mp3 files. That means the RIAA would go after Chase now, no?
  • Corrosionx, on 07/02/2008, -1/+13Don't you just hate International Bankers
  • auricomnet, on 07/02/2008, -1/+1Woo hoo!
  • jo42, on 07/02/2008, -3/+7Welcome The Money Grubbing Corporate Overlords. Resistance Is Futile.
    • RonBurgundy76, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2Resistance is the only solution.
  • StonedOdie, on 07/02/2008, -2/+4I would be sooo happy that it was a big insurance company rather then a small firm..... Yea loosing the items would suck..... But you would get at least... You WILL get , at least 5 times the amount of what u owned as money just because of how big of a ***** that is... it can "Ruin your life and make u go crazy.... so u need mad money and healthcare forever also..." Damn Id be pissed and happy like I won the lotto..
  • cjmal, on 07/02/2008, -1/+7Wow, this family is going to be getting a lot of money soon.
  • arrrapirate, on 07/02/2008, -2/+3you can tell the economy is really in the tank when...
  • babyflesheater, on 07/02/2008, -1/+13Since it's a mega rich corporation with deep pockets and in the beds of government officials these poor people are having live off donations. If a private individual did that they would be charged with burglary and thrown in jail! This is modern day feudalism at its worst.
    • mxmj, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2They have to get donations because there is a pending lawsuit; if JPMorgan Chase gave them anything now it would be seen as an admission of guilt.
  • Khast, on 07/02/2008, -1/+8Lawsuit : 25 Million dollars, or all of our stuff back....Settlement conditions 100% of our personal belongings returned, and locks on doors replaced.

    Some personal items can be replaced, however there is family heirlooms which cannot be replaced.
    • Khast, on 07/02/2008, -0/+9IF people don't agree with what I said. I feel it is like this. They screwed up. It shouldn't be just a slap on the back of the wrist. Big corporations, should be let know that they should be held accountable.

      Though JP Morgan is at fault...The Field Asset Services should be held doubly at fault for their shoddy handling of the possessions. [as read in the 2nd related article] (The latter should feel the brunt of the lawsuit.)

      Either way, this needs to be righted, and I don't think an apology and "we're taking this seriously" should be enough.

      If this happened to you, what would you think? That a slap on the wrist and an apology is enough? You would want your possessions back, if not everything, at least the things which were family heirlooms which couldn't be replaced, and the photo albums, ect.
      • saigumi, on 07/02/2008, -0/+125 million or our stuff back?

        I think you are being dugg down because the retribution is not nearly enough.

        JPM: "Here is all your stuff back" (Dumptruck pours it on to the lawn.)
        Homeowner: "Oh, thanks."
        JPM: "Oh, and remember your next payment is due in 5 days."
        Homeowner: "K, THX"

        Right. More liks 25 million AND 100% stuff back or 2 Billion, whichever you want.
  • RedClaw, on 07/02/2008, -0/+11You're a rotten one, Mr. Grinch, you really are a heel...
  • WTFppl, on 07/02/2008, -0/+28In 1934 executives of JPMorgan were brought in front of Congress and questioned about their involvement in laundering Nazi money in the US. Than using that money for lobbying purposes. JPMorgan was issued serious fines for their involvement with the Nazi's, but were allowed to continue doing business in the US!

    -And now you know!
    • bemidia, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1And knowing is half the battle.

      (Sorry, couldn't help myself.)
    • mxmj, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1It gets a lot more interesting when you learn -who- exactly was involved with this...
  • chc131, on 07/02/2008, -2/+15It's probably all true that Rockefellers, Morgans, Rothschilds own the Federal Reserve.
    • Nymphe, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2Yes, it is and every President, except for Kennedy, had an account there.
    • borez, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3Probably true...mate, it is true. Period.
    • diggrnumber1, on 07/02/2008, -4/+1nobody "owns" the fed. if you have a bank account there (which individuals cannot - only large banks), you could have undue influence on it (like Bear Stearns), but you don't "own" it. it's not up for sale. and even if it was, it wouldn't have any fundamental value because it isn't trying to make a profit.
      • BradMW, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2Watch out, Digg has a reflection shield buff up, you just crit yourself - huge.
      • borez, on 07/02/2008, -1/+1O...M...G! You have no idea, do you.

        Better go do some research on the subject mate.
    • symbolicsorcery, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1Get a copy of "The Creature From Jekyll Island" by G. Edward Griffin.

      It will prove to you that the Fed is a system of LEGALIZED THEFT!

      And, they have the power to create money OUT OF NOTHING, lend it to the US government, and then make YOU pay the interest with your tax dollars.

      This is the source of inflation. Just wait till all those worthless overseas Federal Reserve notes come home to roost! You'll be begging to be saved.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 103 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.