Posts by Joseph Cox

Matthew Young35 said:I feel a bit uneasy about this, but I find myself having to defend the MTA.
Honestly, I have no idea what you all are talking about.
These new streetcars are a massive step up from the old fleet—they’re more comfortable and, for goodness' sake, they break down way less often.
My one major gripe? That ridiculous seat layout.

I'm old enough to remember what transit was like back in the eighties and nineties. Back then, you'd hit a delay at every single corner because of some broken-down car; today, that almost never happens.
As for these claims about cars jumping the tracks, I just don't get it. We used to have derailments constantly. At the intersection of Vodnikov, Sava, and Jukićev, it felt like it happened once a month. Now? It simply doesn't happen anymore.

Then there's the noise. These newer models are significantly quieter than the old ones. The very first series they rolled out were a bit louder, but the current ones aren't.

Either my personal experience is completely off base, or we aren't even talking about the same streetcars.

You can't really defend the MTA, because they aren't the ones responsible for the cars—that's General Electric's doing. Everything you mentioned is spot on: they don't break down, they're quieter, and there are no more derailments (though those German brands definitely held the lead there).
Now, just imagine if the MTA maintained the tracks like they're supposed to in the 21st century, instead of acting like we're stuck in the stone age of transit.

PS: The last time they actually expanded the rail network was way back in the last century (out toward Dubuque). These past 18 years have been the longest stretch in history without a single expansion to the system.

nimblescout50 said:You can really see just how much noise the TMK is making here.

So, what you're actually saying is that basically 90% of the track was laid without any concrete base at all. It’s like building a highway on top of loose sand and just hoping for the best—a total recipe for disaster down the line.

I don't know—it looks a bit better than it used to, I guess—but honestly, what does it matter? It’s all just a wash when you consider how things actually turn out.
Traffic is still a mess—just total gridlock—and those MTA trains feel like they’re hauling nothing but lead.

The concrete slab is gone—no more reinforcement, just raw asphalt now. It’s basically a step backward to when things were lower quality.
The tracks aren't exactly being watched—it’s just the MTA buses and trains tearing through those sharp curves like they've got somewhere better to be.
I honestly can't tell if they ever bother lubricating that specific section where it interfaces with the wheel flange—it feels like it's been neglected for ages. It’s getting to the point where the MTA cars screech much louder whenever they pass by than they used to. Just sounds like metal grinding on metal, you know?

Actually, I’d argue the exact opposite. I remember riding it around Horvaćanski right after they finished the reconstruction—it felt seamless. Even over in Seattle, people were incredibly impressed with it. In fact, they ended up deciding to design their own streetcar from scratch, specifically incorporating several solutions borrowed from TMK.

nimblescout50 said:You can really see just how much noise the TMK is making here.

So, what you're actually saying is that basically 90% of the track was laid without any concrete base at all. It’s like building a highway on top of loose sand and just hoping for the best—a total recipe for disaster down the line.

I don't know—it looks a bit better than it used to, I guess—but honestly, what does it matter? It’s all just a wash when you consider how things actually turn out.
Traffic is still a mess—just total gridlock—and those MTA trains feel like they’re hauling nothing but lead.

The concrete slab is gone—no more reinforcement, just raw asphalt now. It’s basically a step backward to when things were lower quality.
The tracks aren't exactly being watched—it’s just the MTA buses and trains tearing through those sharp curves like they've got somewhere better to be.
I honestly can't tell if they ever bother lubricating that specific section where it interfaces with the wheel flange—it feels like it's been neglected for ages. It’s getting to the point where the MTA cars screech much louder whenever they pass by than they used to. Just sounds like metal grinding on metal, you know?

Yeah, up until '86. After that, it was just one massive overhaul. But you have to factor in how much of the track was still sitting on concrete sleepers—streets like El Paso, Ribnjak-Ksaverska, Mihaljevac-Dolje, Držićeva, Jukićeva-Jagićeva, and Zvonimirova.

nimblescout50 said:You can really see just how much noise the TMK is making here.

So, what you're actually saying is that basically 90% of the track was laid without any concrete base at all. It’s like building a highway on top of loose sand and just hoping for the best—a total recipe for disaster down the line.

I don't know—it looks a bit better than it used to, I guess—but honestly, what does it matter? It’s all just a wash when you consider how things actually turn out.
Traffic is still a mess—just total gridlock—and those MTA trains feel like they’re hauling nothing but lead.

The concrete slab is gone—no more reinforcement, just raw asphalt now. It’s basically a step backward to when things were lower quality.
The tracks aren't exactly being watched—it’s just the MTA buses and trains tearing through those sharp curves like they've got somewhere better to be.
I honestly can't tell if they ever bother lubricating that specific section where it interfaces with the wheel flange—it feels like it's been neglected for ages. It’s getting to the point where the MTA cars screech much louder whenever they pass by than they used to. Just sounds like metal grinding on metal, you know?

Even in other cities, these modern streetcars have roughly the same mass as the old TMK models—give or take 5%—so the weight isn't really the deciding factor here. The real issue is that they look significantly better. Or do they? Just take a look at Jurišićev. Thirty-two years ago, when those slabs were first laid down, everything was perfectly aligned, absolutely flawless. Now? They’re just a mess, staggered every other row like nobody bothered to line them up.

nimblescout50 said:You can really see just how much noise the TMK is making here.

So, what you're actually saying is that basically 90% of the track was laid without any concrete base at all. It’s like building a highway on top of loose sand and just hoping for the best—a total recipe for disaster down the line.

I don't know—it looks a bit better than it used to, I guess—but honestly, what does it matter? It’s all just a wash when you consider how things actually turn out.
Traffic is still a mess—just total gridlock—and those MTA trains feel like they’re hauling nothing but lead.

The concrete slab is gone—no more reinforcement, just raw asphalt now. It’s basically a step backward to when things were lower quality.
The tracks aren't exactly being watched—it’s just the MTA buses and trains tearing through those sharp curves like they've got somewhere better to be.
I honestly can't tell if they ever bother lubricating that specific section where it interfaces with the wheel flange—it feels like it's been neglected for ages. It’s getting to the point where the MTA cars screech much louder whenever they pass by than they used to. Just sounds like metal grinding on metal, you know?

How can you even suggest there aren't any signs left? They probably cleared them all out at the major intersections because the old-school masters and engineers—the ones who actually knew how to build things properly—have all retired. Now? The current crew couldn't even put together a kid's toy train set without making a mess of it.
You don't just grease the flanges. That’s not how it works. There are specific materials for that, plus a specialized groove treatment designed so the wheel "grinds" exactly the way it should. Engineers like Košak and Mandl understood that better than anyone sixty years ago. Even with the limited tech they had back then in the old MTA workshop, they turned out much better work than the sloppy, rushed jobs we see today. Honestly, though, why am I even surprised? Getting a job at an agency like the MTA is probably harder than getting a seat in Congress unless you have the right family connections.

nimblescout50 said:Have you taken a ride on the Cityrunner yet?
When I talk about track construction, I’m talking about how the rails are anchored to the base.
As far as I know, they weren't using concrete bases 30 years ago.
The rail pads have improved, though.
They used to seal the track with concrete slabs.
Now, they're actually moving backward. They're ripping up the slabs and going back to asphalt.
The rails themselves don't even feel like traditional railway steel anymore;
instead, they just buy whatever expensive grooved rails they can find, regardless of whether they actually need them or not.

Yeah, I’m currently in Milwaukee. Let's just say it's performing better than the Amtrak models—and I’m talking strictly about handling and ride quality here, not the passenger amenities. Though, honestly, it’s a bit of an apples-to-oranges comparison when you're testing on track that's three classes superior to what we usually deal with. It definitely beats out the Zurich option by a mile, though. Price-wise, we're looking at somewhere between 1.8 and 2.1 million USD, compared to the 1.3 million the Amtrak units would run you.
Austin is great too, honestly, but you can't even make that comparison—the gauge difference makes the whole thing a non-starter.

nimblescout50 said:Have you taken a ride on the Cityrunner yet?
When I talk about track construction, I’m talking about how the rails are anchored to the base.
As far as I know, they weren't using concrete bases 30 years ago.
The rail pads have improved, though.
They used to seal the track with concrete slabs.
Now, they're actually moving backward. They're ripping up the slabs and going back to asphalt.
The rails themselves don't even feel like traditional railway steel anymore;
instead, they just buy whatever expensive grooved rails they can find, regardless of whether they actually need them or not.

It covers everything—from the actual fill and drainage of the soakaway systems to the whole shock absorption setup.

nimblescout50 said:Have you taken a ride on the Cityrunner yet?
When I talk about track construction, I’m talking about how the rails are anchored to the base.
As far as I know, they weren't using concrete bases 30 years ago.
The rail pads have improved, though.
They used to seal the track with concrete slabs.
Now, they're actually moving backward. They're ripping up the slabs and going back to asphalt.
The rails themselves don't even feel like traditional railway steel anymore;
instead, they just buy whatever expensive grooved rails they can find, regardless of whether they actually need them or not.

It was quite the journey—starting through New Chicago, then dealing with that massive reconstruction back in '86/'87 for the Universiade.

nimblescout50 said:Have you taken a ride on the Cityrunner yet?
When I talk about track construction, I’m talking about how the rails are anchored to the base.
As far as I know, they weren't using concrete bases 30 years ago.
The rail pads have improved, though.
They used to seal the track with concrete slabs.
Now, they're actually moving backward. They're ripping up the slabs and going back to asphalt.
The rails themselves don't even feel like traditional railway steel anymore;
instead, they just buy whatever expensive grooved rails they can find, regardless of whether they actually need them or not.

Honestly, the craftsmanship has gone downhill. The current tracks running through, say, Jurišićev are just worse than what they built thirty years ago. It’s like we’ve actually regressed.

nimblescout50 said:Have you taken a ride on the Cityrunner yet?
When I talk about track construction, I’m talking about how the rails are anchored to the base.
As far as I know, they weren't using concrete bases 30 years ago.
The rail pads have improved, though.
They used to seal the track with concrete slabs.
Now, they're actually moving backward. They're ripping up the slabs and going back to asphalt.
The rails themselves don't even feel like traditional railway steel anymore;
instead, they just buy whatever expensive grooved rails they can find, regardless of whether they actually need them or not.

I’m convinced they’ve taken a massive step backward with these concrete slabs. Instead of using actual modern composites, they’re opting for some bizarre, cheap mixture that’s turned out to be a total disaster. The new slabs are just unnervingly smooth—it’s honestly dangerous how slick they get the second even a little bit of rain hits them.
When it comes to the tracks, it isn't even about whether they have a groove or not; it’s all about the steel quality. It's pretty obvious that the MTA is buying absolute junk—you can see it most clearly on the curves where the outer wheels just chew right through the rail.

Elizabeth Lopez2 said:No, I know for a fact they wrote that a Belgian arrived as far back as 1948. The whole thing blew up in the mid-eighties when one of them tipped over—probably some mechanical failure—and that's when they pulled the rest of the fleet out of service.

Well, now you've gone and forced me to go digging and double-check everything... So, here is what I actually managed to find:
The first 5 Belgians arrived in Mexico City in 1952; those were numbers 112-116 (specifically PCC 7000 models built by STIB in 1951). Then, in the early '60s, they sent 70 units that couldn't be converted for the 1000 mm gauge, and those ended up in Ottawa (turns out my previous info on that was wrong).
Instead of those, they picked up used trams from Belgium. These were also PCC trams, but dating back to 1948/1949. They are the original American PCCs that were "manufactured"—if you can call assembly that—at the Belgian BN plant. There were 24 of these (117-140). One was sold back to Belgium (131) and is currently sitting in a museum.

Clearly, I had some incorrect details in my initial posts, but hey, there's always something new to learn. 😁

@Stutley, I might have tripped up on the name. It’s entirely plausible that everyone just referred to all those PCC units in Mexico City as "the Belgians." Now, the term "Washingtonian" was definitely used back in Ottawa—I'm certain about that.
Though, honestly, that doesn't change the fact that those trams arriving in the early '60s had their trucks swapped out once they hit the USA.

nimblescout50 said:Oh, please. You can start a thread about TMK whenever you want.
I haven't heard anything about when they actually implemented recuperation, and there was never any news suggesting the grid was even
upgraded for it.
The frame is steel, sure, but whether that's actually a meaningful advantage is debatable.
Drivers are still getting blinded by the glare from the shelves and dash displays.
And people are still "surfing" through the first series.
The tram is noisy as hell, period.
It's also pretty stiff—honestly, a supermarket cart probably hits bumps softer.

Having had the chance to ride both the CAF models in Mexico City and the Combino tram on meter-gauge tracks in Ulm, Basel, Augsburg, and Freiburg, I can tell you firsthand—the trams themselves aren't inherently superior to TMK. Some details are better, some are worse (and that price gap of several hundred thousand dollars definitely matters). I know for a fact that in Mexico City, the CAF units couldn't run all the lines because they'd swing too wide on certain turns—the "nose" or "tail" sticks out too much since CAF doesn't use pivoting bogies like TMK does. But what really changes the game—and why the ride feels completely different—is the quality of the track itself. And MTA has really let its technical and technological standards slip compared to where they were 30 years ago. Back then, the "Chicago 2" era represented track construction tech that was on par with developed nations. Today’s "Chicago 3" variations are actually inferior to the originals from three decades ago. They're buying lower-quality rails now. I watched them working on the Savska-Vodnikovakićevak intersection last summer—it was a total disaster. It was laid out like something straight out of the 1970s (and I mean that literally). The track quality is a much bigger issue than the trams themselves.

Elizabeth Lopez2 said:It says it's Belgian in several different places. Though, if I'm being honest, my memory tells me the windows used to be smaller... but hey, it's been over 30 years. You can't hold onto every little detail forever. Anyway, regarding the transit history in cities like Mexico City, this also mentions:

People in Mexico City used to ride horse-drawn trams from all sorts of makers—Belgian BBC and PPC, German Siemens and AEG, Czech Skoda and Tatra, Italian Breda and Divag, plus local stuff like "Đuro Đaković," "Jesenice," and "Goš."

http://www.vreme.com/cms/view.php?id=883057

There’s no mention of any "Washingtonian" here. Now they're even adding some Spanish ones to the mix.

This one is Belgian. And there were only 5 of them (112-116). Number 111 was actually a Czech T4 prototype, and that photo you posted is a "Washingtonian"—there were about 70 of those running in Mexico City. The common thread is that they're all PCC trams. The big distinction between the US and European versions is the design—the American ones have that clerestory window setup, where there's a row of small windows along the top. No European manufacturer ever really did that.

Elizabeth Lopez2 said:I was always most fond of the first 5 Belgians, though they were quite old-school—if I recall correctly, they were from somewhere around the late forties.

The person in this photo isn't a Belgian; it's clearly no Washingtonian.

nimblescout50 said:The tram is pretty much lacking in almost every way.
I mean, its low floor is probably one of the few actual redeeming qualities it has.

Let’s be realistic here—the initial series (2201-2270) had a terrible seating layout, which they fixed in the second batch (2271-23140 + 2301 + 2302).
The reality is that Banditos pushed for mass production almost immediately after the first prototype hit the tracks back in May 2005. Končarev wanted to roll out three different prototypes with varying interiors just to see which worked best for passengers and to iron out any "growing pains" within a year. The biggest headache was the door management software, which was poorly calibrated.
When you consider that deliveries kicked off in September 2005—just four months after the prototype launch (if my memory serves, that's basically a world record for tram manufacturing)—most of those minor issues you're pointing out were patched up incredibly quickly. We are talking about the most numerous tram type in MTA history (over 140 units), and they run reliably every single day.
As far as design goes, the vehicle is modern and has proven itself more than capable in active service. You didn't see the frame falling apart like it did with those Siemens Combino trams, and maintenance isn't a money pit like it is with CAF (just look at how much Mexico City pays CAF annually for spare parts compared to what MTA spends on Končar—it makes perfect sense why the Federal Reserve handed over 11.5 million EUR to Mexico City for those 20 CAF trams).
Sure, the Končarev tram isn't perfect. It could have used smarter handrail placement, better passenger info monitors, and a few other small tweaks, but that’s ultimately on the client—in this case, MTA.
Compared to the old fleet, it's a massive upgrade. Because of the low floor, getting on and off is easier; there are wider doors, it's airier, it has AC, better suspension, and less vibration. Plus, it uses recuperation to feed power back into the grid during braking. One Končarev tram, weighing 40 tons with 390 kW, actually pulls less power than the old Đuro Đaković or Czech models.

Bonboncic, the GT-6 units were basically forced upon us by circumstance, and honestly, they weren't exactly the right fit for Chicago. First off, the controller spun in the opposite direction compared to what you'd see on a General Dynamics model, which caused more than a few accidents. Second, we were dealing with aging trams, mostly from the early '60s, where finding spare parts is a nightmare—you either have to scavenge through a scrapyard or custom-fabricate everything from scratch in your own shop.

You’re reaching, honestly. Just saying this as someone who actually uses the MTA regularly.
It’s pretty obvious you don't know the first thing about tram design. Low-floor models are the industry standard now, regardless of whether the track gauge is 1,000 mm or 1,435 mm. Look at the new trams in Zurich or Helsinki—they’re all low-floor, just like the tracks here in Washington, D.C. Even in Mexico City, those CAF models are low-floor. You won't find anyone in Europe building high-floor trams anymore, even in cities with standard meter gauge. There’s a place called Linz where the tracks are even narrower—900 mm—yet they’ve been running low-floor trams there longer than we have in Washington, D.C.
The issue with Končar isn't the engineering; it's the political maneuvering and how these contracts are actually awarded. Take the Polish tenders for Katovica, for example. They scrapped the bid three times just to ensure a Polish firm, PESA, would "win" on the fourth try. At the time of those bids, when the first 70 low-floor units were already running through Washington, D.C., PESA didn't even have a working prototype. Končar had actually won the first three rounds.
In Mexico City, Končar lost out simply because the World Bank footed 50% of the bill for the new fleet; otherwise, the contract would have been theirs.
You’re confusing the MTA's shoddy maintenance habits with actual vehicle construction.

silentviper19 said:Political Correctness originally popped up to help clean up the public square in America and Europe by pushing back against the blatant racism and sexism that used to be everywhere. The idea was basically to shut down those old-school bigots the second they started spewing their nonsense.

But man, things really spiraled out of control. Now, it feels like people use it as a way to muzzle anyone who dares to voice an opinion that actually has nothing to do with sexism or racism at its core. It’s become this tool to silence anyone who doesn't toe the line.

Look, we all know deep down that context and intention are everything. But the media, your political rivals, and everyone else? They ignore that on purpose. Because, let's face it, there isn't a faster way to shut someone down than just slapping the label of "racist" or "sexist" on them. Boom, conversation over.

Personally, what really grinds my gears—and I say this with all due respect to how sensitive things have gotten—is how religion gets lumped in with nationality, race, or gender. It just doesn't make sense! Everyone knows you aren't born with a religion; it's something you choose and can change whenever you want. It's totally different from the other stuff.
Now, a nation might be a social construct, sure, but it isn't inherently "wrong" or "immoral." Usually, when people criticize a country, they are actually just picking apart the ideologies that came out of it.

Religion itself is an ideology. Period. So, it should be treated just like any other belief system. Anything that promotes a specific set of morals or social rules deserves to be scrutinized and debated.

You can see how ridiculous this whole PC craze has become regarding religion when you look at the whole "Islamophobia" debate. Nowadays, if you offer even a tiny bit of criticism toward Islam, people treat it like you're attacking the people themselves. It's gone so far that some folks act like anyone questioning Islamic doctrine must be mentally unstable or something. It's wild.

And honestly, if we’re going to follow that logic to its absurd conclusion, then we should have terms for everything, right? Christianophobia, paganismophobia, communismophobia, fascismophobia, atheismophobia... you get the idea. Anyone can feel insulted because someone else holds a view that contradicts their own. And if you think your views are the absolute, ultimate truth, then any disagreement feels like a personal attack.

At the end of the day, you can't fix how people view Political Correctness through news anchors or politicians. That kind of understanding has to start at home and in the classroom. Like I said before, it all comes down to understanding context and seeing the good intentions behind what people say. We need to teach kids how to read between the lines, and that starts with family and school.

👍 At this point, Political Correctness is just merging with outright censorship and verbal delinquency. We need a massive overhaul.
George Carlin put it perfectly:

Harold Martin10 said:👍

I've chatted with quite a few Americans lately, and they've been telling me pretty much the same thing. Honestly, for them, the big debate is really just centered on social services versus taxation—that's the core of it. As for the standard of living? Well, it's worlds apart from what we have here. When people talk about a "crisis in the USA," it's a completely different beast than how we perceive a crisis at home. I mean, a single guy renting an apartment could live a decent life on $500 a week—and if my memory serves, flipping a burger at McDonald's pays about $8.50 an hour, so just do the math on that.

Besides, even during the worst economic downturns in the US, things weren't actually that bad for people who lived within their means. A lot of folks ended up in trouble not because they weren't making enough, but because of reckless spending or taking on loans they realistically couldn't afford to pay back.

It seems some people are still looking at the USA through rose-colored glasses. Minimum wage is sitting at $5.15 an hour—which is basically what a cashier at Walmart or Kmart makes—and companies, in a desperate bid to cut costs, avoid paying overtime (which is 30% higher) by simply hiring a second crew to work the same minimum wage. So, go ahead, calculate that monthly total... it doesn't even hit $1,000 gross.

A single person living on $500?!?!? Where in America are you finding that? Seriously, take a look at what renting a room or an apartment costs, factor in health insurance, and then come back to me with this idea that someone can live a "normal" life on that amount.

Harold Wright6 said:What exactly counts as "okay" (or should be okay) during wartime and when intelligence agencies are operating?

Unlike some places, Germany is actually a nation governed by the rule of law. And just because things shifted in the last five minutes doesn't mean Germany is at war.
As for intelligence agencies—aside from the fact that they constantly break the law (including their own domestic laws) and, with a few exceptions, tend to cause more chaos than actual benefit in their paranoia—not to mention all the staged nonsense...

Look, it’s easy to play judge and jury from the sidelines. Everyone conveniently forgets that old adage:
- When they came for the Jews, I stayed silent because I wasn't a Jew,
- When they came for the Romani, I stayed silent because I wasn't Romani,
- When they came for Black people, I stayed silent because I wasn't Black,
- When they came for the leftists, I stayed silent because I wasn't a leftist,
- By the time they came for me, there was nobody left to speak up...

Don't act shocked if, in a decade or so, once the USA runs out of water, Uncle Sam suddenly "realizes" how countries like Switzerland (which actually keeps decent reserves of drinking water) have "become" sponsors of terrorism, enemies of democracy, or are developing weapons of mass destruction and threatening Israel... just more propaganda garbage. We might find ourselves becoming the next Afghanistan or Iraq.

Richard Wilson4 said:Don't try to lecture me on history.
Yeah, the Bush administration gave the green light to Slobodan Maddox.

But the Britons and the French kept doing it even after it became obvious who the real criminals were, all while the USA was actually helping us.

PS
Most of the prisoners in Guntanam are Islamists. Not everyone is a terrorist, but yeah, about 99% of them are extremists.
Even that guy from Finsbury Park didn't kill anyone, but he spreads hate and fuels radicalization.

Oh, please. This whole urban legend about the US helping us... clearly, if you repeat a lie enough times, it starts sounding like truth. Does anyone actually have a concrete example of where the US helped us during the war? (And don't count those mercenary firms providing "advice" and training for cash—those same outfits provide services just as readily to everyone from drug cartels to the Taliban).

PS
What, did you personally visit Guantanamo and meet these people?

Richard Wilson4 said:Americans should probably give those losers a solid slap to keep them from talking so much trash...

So, according to your logic, kidnapping an innocent citizen of another country and torturing them for months on end is just perfectly fine?
Just imagine if that happened to you—you head off to live and work in, say, your favorite place, the USA. Someone makes a mistake (or "makes a mistake," right?), and suddenly you're flagged as being linked to terrorists.
The guys from Department of Homeland Security pick you up, beat you for months, dunk your head in buckets of filth, and perform all those other "wonders" they're so famous for. And then, once they realize you're completely innocent—oops, sorry, too bad. They just dump you somewhere in the middle of the woods and tell you to go home. No harm, no foul!
Don't get mad at me, but I honestly don't get why anyone would be so enamored with the Americans. How old were you when Memphis was under siege? You clearly seem to have forgotten that while Memphis was being torn apart, the USA basically had its hands on our backs, keeping us pinned down.

Personally, I stick to online banking through Hyp and Chase. If you ask me, Chase is the better experience. At work, we deal with RBC; it’s not quite the same interface as what we use personally, but it still beats Hyp, even if it doesn't quite hit the mark set by Chase. And don't even get me started on my experiences with ZABOM for corporate accounts—good grief. Whoever designed their system clearly has never actually heard the term "user-friendly" in their life.

As you can probably tell from my rambling, my vote goes to Chase.

And what exactly is wrong with the token?

Richard Wright said:Are you absolutely certain it'll be worth it? You have to factor in the early closure penalties, the origination fees on the new loan, the legal fees for notarization... all of that.
Keep us posted on the final outcome—tell us which bank you land on and what the actual terms look like.

Best,

Well, since my attorney has some pretty airtight arguments based on the contract itself—basically claiming they breached the actual terms by hiking that interest rate—I’m going after a full contract rescission rather than just doing a standard early payoff.

Peter Gomez4 said:Joseph Cox: Give us something juicy, man. Throw out a detail—you can even encrypt it if you have to. We’re all starving for news on that Bank of America affair. 😁

Look, bank secrecy doesn't really apply to me, but the whole group is currently under international investigation. I’m a potential witness here, and frankly, I don't want to be dropping facts that the Department of Justice might consider "confidential" during an active probe. That said, from what I can gather, we could be looking at violations involving several federal statutes—fraud, embezzlement, maybe even racketeering—though I'm not quite sure how they'd categorize the intentional concealment of bad debt or non-performing loans.

So, here’s my brief take on the whole situation. I have a small mortgage—I was actually working at Wells Fargo when I signed the papers—and it's tied to the LIBOR. Back when I left Wells Fargo, the LIBOR was hovering somewhere between 3.7 and 4, and my monthly payment was sitting right around X (which, mind you, was standard for any regular citizen at the time). Fast forward to now: the LIBOR has dropped below 1, yet somehow my monthly payment has jumped up by 20%. I did some digging and compared rates with other banks, and I'm currently in the early stages of refinancing. It looks like most other institutions (aside from the Federal Reserve) could offer me a rate about 5% to 8% lower, even if their baseline mortgage terms are pretty mediocre.

As for the internal specifics regarding what goes on inside Wells Fargo... I think I'll pass. I have no desire to go off on a tangent and end up having to explain myself to the FBI, the Department of Justice, or Interpol.