On June 7, 2012, Bank of America entered into a Conciliation Agreement with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The Conciliation Agreement settles allegations that one of the bank's San Jose, California branches refused to refinance the mortgage of an Irvine woman because she was on maternity leave. Under terms of the Conciliation Agreement, the business agreed to pay $30,000 to the woman, $16,180 to her attorney, and $15,000 to Fair Housing Council of Orange County (FHCOC). Bank of America will also create a $100,000 Compensation Fund to pay damages to loan applicants or borrowers who may have been denied a loan, subjected to adverse loan terms, or had their loan applications delayed because they were pregnant or on maternity leave. In addition, the bank is requiring all of its loan officers nationwide to complete annual fair lending training. The Conciliation Agreement was for settlement purposes only and should not be considered an admission of guilt or finding of violation of the law. For more details, go to http://archives.hud.gov/local/ca/news/pr2012-06-07.cfm
On October 10, 2012, Bank of America entered a Consent Order with the United States of America, United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina. The Consent Order settles allegations that the business engaged in a pattern or practice of violating the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C 3601-3619, by discriminating on the basis of disability, and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), 15, U.S.C. 1691-1691f, by discriminating on the basis of receipt of public assistance. The Consent Order also resolves the claims of the United states brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 3612(s) on behalf of Steven Danczak, Karen Danczak, Renee Mill, and David Van Wagnen. There has been no factual finding or adjudication with respect to any matter alleged by the United States. The parties have entered into the Consent Order to avoid the risks, expenses, and burdens or litigation and to resolve voluntarily the claims and alleged violations of federal fair housing and fair lending laws. The Consent Order was for settlement purposes only and should not be considered as an admission of guilt or finding of violation of the law.For more details,go to:
On January 7, 2013, the business entered into an Agreement in Principle with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) and the Federal Reserve Board. The Agreement in Principle settles allegations that the business engaged in deficient practices in mortgage loan servicing and foreclosure processing. Under terms of the Agreement in Principle, the business agreed to cease the Independent Foreclosure Review, which involved case-by-case reviews, and replace it with a broader framework allowing eligible borrowers to receive compensation significantly more quickly. This Agreement in Principle provides the greatest benefit to consumers subject to unsafe and unsound mortgage servicing and foreclosure practices during the relevant period in a more timely manner than would have occurred under the review process. The Agreement in Principle was for settlement purposes only and should not be considered as an admission of guilt or finding of violation of the law. For more details, go to:
On September 24, 2013, the business entered into a Settlement Agreement with the West Virginia Attorney General's Office. The Settlement Agreement settles allegations that the business's credit card protection programs violated West Virginia law. Under terms of the Settlement Agreement, the attorneys are expected to collect roughly $1.95 million in fees and costs. While final attorney fees must be approved by the court, outside counsel firms have agreed to be compensated under the new outside counsel policy established by the West Virginia Attorney General's Office earlier this year. Under the terms of the settlement and the Office's agreement with the Governor and the Legislature, the Settlement Agreement monies will help ensure the Consumer Protection Division has three years of operating; the remainder will be returned to the Legislature. The settlement agreement was for settlement purposes only and should not be considered as an admission of guilt or finding of violation of the law. For more details, go to http://www.wvago.gov/press.cfm?fx=more&ID=728.
On April 7, 2014, the business entered into a Consent Order with the United States of America Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The Consent Order settles allegations that the business engaged in violations of Sections 1031 and 1036 of the CFPA (collectively, "Section 1036), 12 U.S.C. 5531 in connection with the marketing, sales, delivery, servicing, and/or fulfillment of the Bank's Credit Protection Covered Products and the billing of Identity Protection Covered Products. The Consent Order was for settlement purposes only and should not be considered as an admission of guilt or finding of violation of the law.For details as to the Consent Order and the terms of the Consent Order, go to: http://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/201404 cfpb bankofamerica consent-order.pdf.