#1 ·
So, here’s the deal: when you want to close out a CD—like when a client keeps trying to break an auto-renewing term after the initial period ends—JPMorgan Chase basically demands you hand over your own copy of the contract just so the teller can "void" it. Their excuse? They claim it’s so "someone doesn't show up later with that contract." Which pretty much implies—and I'm betting this happens at other banks too—that the bank isn't just shredding the document, but actually pocketing the client's copy for themselves.
If the client refuses to hand over their copy, the teller insists they "have to" charge $17.
Of course, there's zero explanation for how paying those $17 somehow stops "someone from showing up later with the contract." It makes no sense.
But enough about that nonsense. My actual question is: which laws is the bank breaking by doing this? And what’s the move if they refuse to close the account (and return the principal) or if they go ahead and snatch $17 (whether through interest or by dipping into the principal)?
What would be the actual, legitimate way for a bank to terminate a contract? Shouldn't it just be signing an amendment to the original agreement where both parties agree to tear it up?
Because, look, from my experience, you keep legal docs specifically to protect yourself. The whole point of having *my* copy is so that it stays mine. If the bank needs another one, they can go hire a notary to make a duplicate.
On top of all that, this whole "you can't lose this scrap of paper" thing feels like those "unconscionable terms" you see in insurance—like when companies tried to deny claims for stolen cars just because the owner lost the accident report. The Supreme Court stepped in on those kinds of predatory clauses and started tossing them out.
If the client refuses to hand over their copy, the teller insists they "have to" charge $17.
Of course, there's zero explanation for how paying those $17 somehow stops "someone from showing up later with the contract." It makes no sense.
But enough about that nonsense. My actual question is: which laws is the bank breaking by doing this? And what’s the move if they refuse to close the account (and return the principal) or if they go ahead and snatch $17 (whether through interest or by dipping into the principal)?
What would be the actual, legitimate way for a bank to terminate a contract? Shouldn't it just be signing an amendment to the original agreement where both parties agree to tear it up?
Because, look, from my experience, you keep legal docs specifically to protect yourself. The whole point of having *my* copy is so that it stays mine. If the bank needs another one, they can go hire a notary to make a duplicate.
On top of all that, this whole "you can't lose this scrap of paper" thing feels like those "unconscionable terms" you see in insurance—like when companies tried to deny claims for stolen cars just because the owner lost the accident report. The Supreme Court stepped in on those kinds of predatory clauses and started tossing them out.