When 28-year-old Ikenna Njoku walked into JP Morgan Chase to get his check cashed, he was probably feeling pretty good. He had bought a house and qualified for the first time home buyer’s rebate, both the sort of things that make a guy feel like he’s getting somewhere, accomplishing something with his life. Njoku had a lawn to mow, and he was happy to do it.
The tax rebate check was supposed to be direct deposited into his Chase account, but there was a problem.
Njoku signed up to have the rebate deposited directly into his Chase Bank account. But when the IRS rebate arrived, there was a problem. Chase had closed Njoku’s account because of overdrawn checks in the past. The bank deducted $600 to cover what he owed them and mailed him a cashier’s check for the difference–$8,463.21.
An annoyance, but then, Njoku brought it on himself by overdrawing his account. It’s not that an overdraft doesn’t happen, or is the worst thing in the world, but it’s no Chase’s fault that he took out more than he had in. That Chase allowed it to happen, well, it’s unclear why.
So Njoku walked into a Chase bank with a cashier’s check in hand. This is where it’s necessary to stop before finishing the story and talk about banks. Banks are special. Banks are at once highly regulated and at the same time fiercely independent when it comes to making absolutely sure they their interests are protected above all else. They use the former as a weapon against the customer, and they use the latter as a weapon against the customer.
Banks have many of the attributes of government, in the sense of an uncaring bureaucracy that puts its self-preservation above all else. On occasion, there may be a person in a bank who will help a customer, but they rarely last long or rise high. The foremost concern of a banker is the assure that the money flow is positive, never negative. They are risk averse. That is their reason for existing. They will cover their own butts at all costs.
I know, banks spend a bloody fortune on television commercials designed to tell people how much they love them, how much they care deeply about them. It’s not true. It’s marketing. People who are stupid enough to buy television commercials about bank love get what they deserve, right?
Over the years, clients have come to me many times to tell me that they went to get their money from the bank, but some bank officer gave them the third degree over why they needed a cashier’s check, or withdrawal, or whatever, as if they were required to meet the bank officer’s approval before gaining access to their own money. I would call the bank, yell at the officer in issue about what possibly gave him the impression that he had a say in what his customers did with their money. It was fun.
But back to Mr. Njoku, who walked into the Chase branch with a Chase cashier’s check in hand and, nicely, asked the teller to cash it.
It looked fake? Perhaps, that being the way official cashier’s checks from Chase, it did. Perhaps a dark skinned guy with a name like Njoku made it look even faker. After waiting a while, and with other things to do, he ended up having to come back the next day.But when Njoku showed up at the Chase branch near his house intending to cash the check, he was in for a nasty surprise.
The check had Njoku’s name and address on it and was issued by JP Morgan Chase. But the Chase Customer Banker who handles large checks at the Auburn branch was immediately suspicious.
“I was embarrassed,” Njoku said. “She asked me what I did for a living. Asked me where I got the check from, looked me up and down—like ‘you just bought a house in Auburn, really?’ She didn’t believe that,” he said.
The Customer Banker said the check looked fake, so she took it, along with Njoku’s driver license and credit card, and called Bank Support.
This is where things went from bad to worse for Njoku. As explained by Radley Balko :But when Njoku arrived, it wasn’t the money that was waiting for him.
“They just threw me in jail; they called the police and said this guy has a fraudulent check,” Njoku said.
Auburn police arrested him for forgery – a felony crime.
This domino theory at work, one “mistake” begat the next, and the next, and despite the fact that the only person to suffer was now unemployed, carless, new homeowner, Ikenna Njoku.Yes, they took him the jail. This was on a Thursday. The bank realized the next day that they had made a mistake, and called the police detective working the case to let her know. Unfortunately, “it was her day off” (!!), so the guy stayed in jail all weekend. He also lost his job for failing to show up for work. While he was in jail, Chase had his car towed from their parking lot. Because Chase had his money (the cashier’s check was his savings from a closed-out account), he couldn’t afford the impound fees. And because the check was seized as evidence, it took weeks to get it back, during which his car was sold then at auction.
After a year and a rather tepid lawyer letter, Chase Bank issued an apology :
How very thoughtful of Chase to admit, via its public relations person, that it was wrong and to express its deep regret. It would certainly be far too much for Chase to “understand all the details” a year later, as it’s a very official bank and, let’s face facts, was only trying to protect itself against a dark-skinned guy named Njoku with a funky looking official cashier’s check.“This is a very unfortunate and unusual situation,” wrote Darcy Donahoe-Wilmot of Chase Public Relations. “We apologize to Mr. Njoku and deeply regret what happened to him. We are working quickly to understand all the details so we can reach a fair resolution.
Despite this heartfelt apology, my guess is that Chase won’t offer Njoku a “fair resolution,” if it bothers to offer any resolution at all. Notice that the apology doesn’t say it’s for what Chase did to him, but for what happened to him. It’s not really Chase’s fault, as Chase was just doing what it’s set up to do, avoid any potential loss at the expense of its customer. What followed was just an series of unfortunate events, which they deeply regret.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Well, my first reflex is “sue the bastards!” But that may be my former life as a Plaintiff’s personal injury attorney peeking through.
I wonder if Mr. Njoku would have been victimized if he had (1) been white, or (2) not had a African name? While I sometimes get a bit miffed when ‘activists’ automatically assert ‘racism’ whenever a person of color is arrested, my first thought here was that if he had looked like me and been named, say, “Joe Smith,” he would not have been thrown in jail.
But, come to think of it, after some reflection, “Sue the bastards” still seems a good course. This simply should not be allowed to pass without some consequence to Chase.
This is one of the many reasons why I switched to a credit union. No institution is perfect, but with a credit union, or a local community bank, if there is a problem, the chances of reaching a person who cares are increased – I hope.
I agree, that the knee-jerk racism rationale happens too easily. But in this case, given that it was a real, honest-to-god Chase cashier’s check that some banker thought was a fraud, the Nigerian prince scam looms too large to be ignored. The name, combined with skin color, just can’t be overlooked.
As to “sue the bastards,” that will certainly help him a dozen years down the road, after job, car, house, sanity are lost, because we certainly have an effective legal system for redress of harm done.
The chase after you bank what more can I say. I had a similiar experience with them years ago. Even though they were sued over he incident.. and lost….I never got a dime in settlement money… and lost several days of work over the incident for court visit.
If you sued Chase and won, how is it possible you never got a dime? They should have plenty of dimes from which to collect.
Rather than the tepid letter from the lawyer, why wasn’t it a letter stating that a seven-figure suit was forthcoming?
Loss of job, loss of car, and the towing fee are all real damages. Humiliation and improper jailing as a consequence of the bank’s actions seem suitable for a hefty chunk of punitive damages.
Is there something more to the story or was the lawyer asleep at the switch?
I’m no PI lawyers, but it certainly seems to me that there is significant liability for calling the cops and alleging forgery of their own bank issued cashier’s check, and the consequential imprisonment. I fail to see any explanation to justify that massive screw up.
Big money, at the very least.
Let me observe, as a recovering personal injury lawyer this guy has a hell of a cause of action. Setting aside the various causes of action from Chase’s tortious conduct, this is Chase we’re talking about–one of the banks with the worst consumer track record over the last decade. Chase’s priors would embarass Whitey Bulger.
BL
In Michigan, poor Mr. Njoku might not have a case. “[I]n Michigan, the prosecutor’s exercise of his independent discretion in initiating and maintaining a prosecution is a complete defense to an action for malicious prosecution.” Matthews v Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Michigan, 456 Mich 365, 377; 572 NW2d 603 (1998).
Pertinent? What thinks SHG ?
What makes no sense to me is this. I spent years and years banking at Chase as did my major clients for which I did their banking also, including short term loans for several million when liquidity became issue. I know for a fact they (Chase) could have verified the authenticity of their own Cashier’s cheque in 5 minutes or 10 at the most. I’ve seen them do this using fax, signature cards or a phone call for God’s sake! This is really absurd! Could they have been that lazy, but yet had enough energy to involve the police and do a report? AND what kind of police were they that they didn’t have enough sense to question authenticity a little further? I am forever shocked at the competency of those they place in white collar crime on a police force. Flat foot to white collar crime over night.
In the case cited, the prosecutor was not the defendant: Blue Cross was. The Michigan Supreme Court’s legal holding was that after the prosecutor makes his “independent decision” to commence charges, the complaining victim is no longer the legal cause of the plaintiff’s damages.
While it seems the party initiating a criminal complaint should be tort liability for its misconduct above mere negligence (and in the Chase situation, it strikes me that it was inexplicable that they couldn’t tell, essentially immediately, a true Chase cashier’s check from a fraud), some states protect complainants except to malicious conduct as a matter of policy to encourage people.
As for me, I would hold the party initiating the complaint liable for conduct beyond mere negligence.