Everything the bank asks for in these surveys is information they could easily pull from government databases: my income details from the IRS, my birthplace, date of birth, and home address from local municipal records—not to mention they already have full visibility into my annual turnover and typical transaction patterns—and even my Social Security records would tell them my educational background... It seems rather redundant for them to demand this data when the state already holds it all 🤷 and if banks truly want to lean on anti-money laundering and anti-terrorism laws, then their obligation should be to notify the FBI so they can conduct an actual investigation rather than just making blanket assumptions that anyone holding a bank account is a potential criminal—all without any provocation or a single suspicious transaction to justify it.
Which makes it even more baffling to me—given that I provided all the necessary documentation when I first opened my account, what possible need could they have for additional info when they can just pull it directly from federal databases? (Assuming, of course, that this is actually about anti-terrorism and money laundering efforts, which is the excuse they keep using...)
1. Is there a widespread movement among banks to freeze accounts for clients who decline to complete these surveys—or is this merely a handful of isolated incidents designed to test the waters and see how the public and the media respond?
2. Is this restriction specific to Chicagočka banka, or are other major institutions following suit?
vividranger8 said:Alright, look, we really tried to dig up some actual, solid info here—but honestly? It feels kind of childish, you know? Especially when you consider how incredibly serious and transparent every bank is being about all this stuff. 😁 😵
It is quite telling—when a bank requests data and threatens to freeze an account if those demands aren't met, that is labeled "professional business communication." Yet, when a client simply asks which specific details they are legally required to provide—and why such inquiries are even being made in the first place— suddenly, the client is viewed as unprofessional and rude 🙂
vividranger8 said:Alright, look, we really tried to dig up some actual, solid info here—but honestly? It feels kind of childish, you know? Especially when you consider how incredibly serious and transparent every bank is being about all this stuff. 😁 😵
Exactly. If a bank demands specific data and threatens to freeze an account if it isn't provided, that's just standard professional business communication... but when a client asks which pieces of information are actually required by law and which aren't, suddenly it's treated as unprofessional and rude. 🤮
Everything seems fine on the surface, but the real issue lies in their attitude toward clients—it’s frankly demeaning... they go as far as asking about the number of children you have and your level of education, all while hiding behind anti-terrorism and anti-money laundering laws 🙂 yet they refuse to clarify which questions are mandatory and which are merely optional
wiredlynx28 said:Not necessarily, but if a bank like Chase considers a specific piece of information a "must-have," they simply won't open an account or maintain a relationship with a client who refuses to provide it. They'll just close or freeze accounts—either because the government mandates it or because it's just their own internal policy. The truth is, they ask for these details to get a better profile of the client and to beef up their relationship through tailored product offerings. For example, if someone has children, it’s reasonable to assume they’ll need more liquidity, so banks might offer pre-approved higher credit limits or other services based on those specific life stages and financial capacity. Otherwise, quite frankly, the bank couldn't care less how many kids someone has.
I’m not sure if you realize that even in a job interview, an employer isn't allowed to ask a woman if she's married, in a relationship, has kids, or plans to have them soon... having an existing bank account is a far more benign issue than that. Good grief, it’s as if we’re being interrogated by the FBI... 🙂
wiredlynx28 said:Not necessarily, but if a bank like Chase considers a specific piece of information a "must-have," they simply won't open an account or maintain a relationship with a client who refuses to provide it. They'll just close or freeze accounts—either because the government mandates it or because it's just their own internal policy. The truth is, they ask for these details to get a better profile of the client and to beef up their relationship through tailored product offerings. For example, if someone has children, it’s reasonable to assume they’ll need more liquidity, so banks might offer pre-approved higher credit limits or other services based on those specific life stages and financial capacity. Otherwise, quite frankly, the bank couldn't care less how many kids someone has.
Look, if I actually need a loan, I will be the one researching which bank offers the best rates... I won't sit there and let a bank harass me with credit offers I never asked for.🙂 Do you truly grasp how counterproductive this is for banks? If they block someone's account, that person will just withdraw their funds and close everything... the bank ends up with absolutely nothing from all that harassment.🙂
Steven Rivera76 As stated by: Actually, regarding the ideal client profile, my impression is that banks much prefer the very people being mocked here... Where could you possibly find a better client than one sitting in a massive deficit—someone dutifully paying those outrageous interest rates every single month because of it...
Those are exactly the kind of clients every major bank would be desperate to land... 🙂 It seems the banks realized that once they were caught in that Swiss Franc mess, they could essentially do whatever they pleased without much consequence... It seems they have gone so far as to devise their own survey questionnaire—one that bears almost no actual relation to the anti-terrorism and anti-money laundering laws they so incessantly cite... It seems they truly believe they can continue to torment this misguided nation...
The ideal client is one who generates high transaction volumes through the bank—driving commission revenue and overall utility... ideally, they carry several loans (preferably long-term ones), utilize a full suite of service packages, and maintain their business accounts within the same institution ☕ then there are those who simply deposit a paycheck and expect total privacy—refusing to disclose basic details like education level, marital status, or the number of children in their household such individuals are hardly desirable; frankly, this provides a perfect opportunity to phase them out... though I struggle to understand why, if someone refuses to answer these inquiries, the bank would freeze an account when all they want is access to their own funds why doesn't the bank just settle the balance and close the accounts entirely? 🤷
I’m genuinely curious to see how this would play out—someone whose account was frozen by Bank of America simply because they refused to answer a few survey questions, if they were to actually call the police to the local branch... claiming they are some sort of high-level money launderer or a potential terrorist threat, just to see if the authorities could actually verify whether that claim holds any water.🍿
It seems JPMorgan Chase is actively trying to shake off its clientele—they clearly have more than they can handle... they offer the lowest interest rates in the industry, the longest wait times at any branch, and those "personal bankers" who exist solely to push loans you didn't ask for, not to mention the endless barrage of service packages that nobody actually needs... this recent move to freeze accounts is just the logical next step, only now they won't even let you withdraw your own cash or transfer funds to another bank until you've finished filling out some mandatory survey questionnaire 🙂
wiredlynx28 said:Aside from FATCA requirements, banks have their own internal criteria regarding client data. This isn't even tied to federal law; it’s just a prerequisite if you want to establish or maintain a business relationship with them. This includes specific questions about how you intend to conduct your banking activities. I had a similar experience at one bank. When I tried to open an additional account, they asked for things beyond FATCA—stuff about my education level, family details, and so on. They were very clear: without providing that information, they simply cannot establish a business relationship with me. Maybe the people at Chase didn't explain themselves clearly, but I highly doubt they would go hunting for clients and cite regulations if it wasn't actually mandatory. After all, they have their own management teams and legal departments to answer to. As for individuals who make a scene, psychology shows that this behavior usually comes from lower-level employees who are already frustrated by outside stressors. If there's a conflict, just ask for the manager or the person in charge and resolve the disagreement professionally, provided you believe there is actually 👍 I know a client who went absolutely ballistic on his bank, making huge scenes over this exact issue. He kept closing accounts because he assumed other banks wouldn't require the same data. Once he realized he was wrong, he tried to come back, but they refused to reopen his business relationship. Keep that in mind. Regarding Wells Fargo, an acquaintance of mine recently had an account there, but he switched because he was unhappy. He specifically asked me why they hadn't requested certain data from him. I told him to show me the contract, and sure enough, they had filled out the information themselves without asking him anything. That is absolutely wrong and unacceptable, because the client is the one legally responsible for the accuracy of that data. However, given their ownership structure, I suspect you can't even get a job there without an internal referral 🤣 which isn't the case at Chase.
In that case, you just close the accounts, take your money, and move to a different bank where they don't harass clients with such nonsense
wiredlynx28 said:Aside from FATCA requirements, banks have their own internal criteria regarding client data. This isn't even tied to federal law; it’s just a prerequisite if you want to establish or maintain a business relationship with them. This includes specific questions about how you intend to conduct your banking activities. I had a similar experience at one bank. When I tried to open an additional account, they asked for things beyond FATCA—stuff about my education level, family details, and so on. They were very clear: without providing that information, they simply cannot establish a business relationship with me. Maybe the people at Chase didn't explain themselves clearly, but I highly doubt they would go hunting for clients and cite regulations if it wasn't actually mandatory. After all, they have their own management teams and legal departments to answer to. As for individuals who make a scene, psychology shows that this behavior usually comes from lower-level employees who are already frustrated by outside stressors. If there's a conflict, just ask for the manager or the person in charge and resolve the disagreement professionally, provided you believe there is actually 👍 I know a client who went absolutely ballistic on his bank, making huge scenes over this exact issue. He kept closing accounts because he assumed other banks wouldn't require the same data. Once he realized he was wrong, he tried to come back, but they refused to reopen his business relationship. Keep that in mind. Regarding Wells Fargo, an acquaintance of mine recently had an account there, but he switched because he was unhappy. He specifically asked me why they hadn't requested certain data from him. I told him to show me the contract, and sure enough, they had filled out the information themselves without asking him anything. That is absolutely wrong and unacceptable, because the client is the one legally responsible for the accuracy of that data. However, given their ownership structure, I suspect you can't even get a job there without an internal referral 🤣 which isn't the case at Chase.
It might be beneficial if the management and legal teams actually read Section 16 of the Anti-Money Laundering Act which they seem to be citing ☕
wiredlynx28 said:Aside from FATCA requirements, banks have their own internal criteria regarding client data. This isn't even tied to federal law; it’s just a prerequisite if you want to establish or maintain a business relationship with them. This includes specific questions about how you intend to conduct your banking activities. I had a similar experience at one bank. When I tried to open an additional account, they asked for things beyond FATCA—stuff about my education level, family details, and so on. They were very clear: without providing that information, they simply cannot establish a business relationship with me. Maybe the people at Chase didn't explain themselves clearly, but I highly doubt they would go hunting for clients and cite regulations if it wasn't actually mandatory. After all, they have their own management teams and legal departments to answer to. As for individuals who make a scene, psychology shows that this behavior usually comes from lower-level employees who are already frustrated by outside stressors. If there's a conflict, just ask for the manager or the person in charge and resolve the disagreement professionally, provided you believe there is actually 👍 I know a client who went absolutely ballistic on his bank, making huge scenes over this exact issue. He kept closing accounts because he assumed other banks wouldn't require the same data. Once he realized he was wrong, he tried to come back, but they refused to reopen his business relationship. Keep that in mind. Regarding Wells Fargo, an acquaintance of mine recently had an account there, but he switched because he was unhappy. He specifically asked me why they hadn't requested certain data from him. I told him to show me the contract, and sure enough, they had filled out the information themselves without asking him anything. That is absolutely wrong and unacceptable, because the client is the one legally responsible for the accuracy of that data. However, given their ownership structure, I suspect you can't even get a job there without an internal referral 🤣 which isn't the case at Chase.
Exactly—it isn't the banks harassing clients with trivialities, but rather certain primitives who lack basic social graces🤦
wiredlynx28 said:Aside from FATCA requirements, banks have their own internal criteria regarding client data. This isn't even tied to federal law; it’s just a prerequisite if you want to establish or maintain a business relationship with them. This includes specific questions about how you intend to conduct your banking activities. I had a similar experience at one bank. When I tried to open an additional account, they asked for things beyond FATCA—stuff about my education level, family details, and so on. They were very clear: without providing that information, they simply cannot establish a business relationship with me. Maybe the people at Chase didn't explain themselves clearly, but I highly doubt they would go hunting for clients and cite regulations if it wasn't actually mandatory. After all, they have their own management teams and legal departments to answer to. As for individuals who make a scene, psychology shows that this behavior usually comes from lower-level employees who are already frustrated by outside stressors. If there's a conflict, just ask for the manager or the person in charge and resolve the disagreement professionally, provided you believe there is actually 👍 I know a client who went absolutely ballistic on his bank, making huge scenes over this exact issue. He kept closing accounts because he assumed other banks wouldn't require the same data. Once he realized he was wrong, he tried to come back, but they refused to reopen his business relationship. Keep that in mind. Regarding Wells Fargo, an acquaintance of mine recently had an account there, but he switched because he was unhappy. He specifically asked me why they hadn't requested certain data from him. I told him to show me the contract, and sure enough, they had filled out the information themselves without asking him anything. That is absolutely wrong and unacceptable, because the client is the one legally responsible for the accuracy of that data. However, given their ownership structure, I suspect you can't even get a job there without an internal referral 🤣 which isn't the case at Chase.
We aren't talking about disagreements, but rather the bank issuing an ultimatum to obtain data that has absolutely nothing to do with what they claim to be citing... essentially forcing the client to sign away rights so the bank can do whatever they please. A branch manager is just going to recite the same tired nonsense you’re already hearing—there’s zero interest in actually understanding the situation or finding a solution when they have no intention of helping in the first place.
wiredlynx28 said:Political exposure, place of birth, US citizenship, and whether one is a tax resident in the US or some other foreign country.
Steven Gomez37 said:Who can I turn to for some help here? JPMorgan Chase has blocked all my withdrawals because I refused to play along with this whole FATCA nonsense and their "deep dive" client profiling. Naturally, I dug my heels in, and now I’m definitely not budging. I decided to just close the account, BUT JPMorgan Chase won't let me close it or release MY money until I cave and answer their questions. I am absolutely not giving them anything; I've decided to fight this to the bitter end. I also wonder if they're going to try and skim more money from me for monthly maintenance fees and annual card fees on an account I can't even use right now. Btw, the questions are just impossible—before I cut the interrogation short when the teller caught me off guard at the branch, she managed to ask if I was politically active, if I was married, and then she started digging into details about my kids... I just lost it and ended the conversation. Anyway, I'm looking for addresses or any advice on how to push back and put an end to this farce. Thanks.
My personal banker has suddenly taken an interest in my educational background—as if my degree somehow dictates my checking account balance... 🙂 So, how exactly am I supposed to conduct business with my bank—handling cash transactions, managing investments, building up savings... when I actually bothered to ask them about any of it, they gave me absolutely nothing in response... 🤦
Speaking from my own experience, Chase doesn't ask for anything beyond what’s listed on your ID and a contact number—though you aren't obligated to provide a cell or work line—and they pull your SSN directly through irs.gov... I handled my own account openings there once so quit spreading such nonsense ☕
There is absolutely no point in wasting your breath at the FTC—I was just speaking with someone who handles those matters, and they confirmed it’s a total dead end... the real move is to head straight to your local bank branch, demand to see the manager, and tell them you're closing every single account and withdrawing everything you have immediately. If you have to make a bit of a scene to get things moving, then do it.
Things have taken an interesting turn 🍿 fortunately, I closed all my accounts at JPMorgan Chase just as they started threatening to freeze my funds edit: Try hitting them back with this: Are you married? That’s hardly any business of a bank's... Annual income? You should know that better than I do—just click your mouse and see for yourselves. Phone number? Stop bothering me with these ridiculous questions. Zodiac sign? Give it a rest with the nonsense. Favorite sports team? Enough with the stupid questions. --- Then, sign off with "I'm coming for you all, Laura Chavez93," grab your cash, and slam the door on your way out 👋
Just reply to her via email and tell her you aren't interested in entertaining such nonsense—that you found the implication quite insulting, frankly... specifically the suggestion that you're involved in any kind of money laundering scheme. It’s worth asking how JPMorgan Chase even arrived at such a baseless conclusion in the first place.
rowdypilot19 said:Look, I'm not saying your way of fighting this isn't okay—that's totally your right. It’s just... I don't know, I wonder if there's actually any point to it all.
I don't even mean it in terms of whether you'll change things, more like... why fight against something if you don't actually want to put in the work to win?
To really go after something like this, you're gonna need:
1. Patience 2. Time 3. Money 4. Knowledge
I mean, you *can* take on the system—there are plenty of examples out there—but I just, I don't think you're really built for it.
First off, the patience thing. You just don't have it. If waiting three or four hours is already too much for you while you're supposedly fighting for something, then maybe you don't actually want to fight at all. Maybe you just like venting on forums because things aren't going your way. I mean, man, you stepped onto their turf, and by being so impatient, you're basically forcing yourself to play by their rules.
Then there's time. I don't know if you even have it, but honestly, if you're working a standard 40-hour week in the States, unless you stop sleeping entirely, you just don't have the time. Fighting the system like this takes, what, like 20 hours a day? It's intense.
And money... that's huge. Most people don't have it. I'm not saying you need millions, but if you don't have, say, $2,000 set aside this month for lawyers, lawsuits, and all that, you aren't really doing anything.
As for knowledge, based on what you've written, you're missing the basics. Even with that survey, you filled it out yourself when you shouldn't have, and you didn't even know how to lay out the details needed to make them do what they're supposed to do—which is actually pretty simple once you get it.
For instance, I know people living abroad who don't even have a local ID, yet they have zero issues getting their old savings paid out after they expire. My own family had a situation like this about two years ago. So, it's not that it's impossible, it's just that you didn't know how to present your case. The person I mentioned? They got their cash right in their hands. See? It can be done.
The real issue is that you aren't even ready for a basic debate with someone who knows what they're talking about, let alone taking on the entire system. I mean, if you had a friend who was a lawyer, wouldn't you have thought to bring them along or at least asked them for advice on what to say in the moment?
If anything in my post is confusing, feel free to ask, but I think I've explained, as briefly as I can, why the stuff you're posting doesn't really seem to add up to me.
You've hit the nail on the head... suddenly it's "impossible" to issue a payment because a driver's license number can't be entered—it seems we've found a brand new miracle to deal with... ☕