I hear there is a WorldBank.org sandal in the midst.

$200B

---

https://wallstreetonparade.com/2024/10/goldman-sachs-has-ripped-off-its-customers-for-a-century-a-puny-64-8-million-fine-for-abusing-thousands-of-apple-credit-card-customers-fails-the-smell-test/


By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: October 24, 2024 ~

David Solomon, Chairman and CEO, Goldman Sachs
David Solomon, Chairman and CEO, Goldman Sachs

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) typically receives high
praise from Wall Street On Parade for leveling the playing field between
the pillagers on Wall Street and the hardworking poor and middle class of
America. But yesterday’s announcement of the CFPB’s settlement with Goldman
Sachs and Apple over some of the most abusive conduct we have observed
against consumers in decades left us with the impression that Goldman
Sachs’ lawyers had browbeat the CFPB into a watered-down deal.

The enforcement action by the CFPB pertained to years of abuses by both
Apple and Goldman Sachs involving the Apple Credit Card. Under the CFPB’s
settlement, Goldman Sachs will pay $19.8 million in redress to victims and
a $45 million civil money penalty, bringing Goldman’s total settlement to
$64.8 million. Apple will pay a $25 million civil money penalty for a
combined $89.8 million by both parties.

Let’s pause right here for a moment. Goldman Sachs had profits of $8.52
billion in 2023. The settlement amount of $64.8 million is less than 1
percent of its profits last year. That makes a mockery of holding a serial
miscreant like Goldman Sachs accountable for putting Apple Credit Card
customers through a living hell and destroying people’s credit rating in
the process.

Credit on the Apple Credit Card was provided by the taxpayer-backstopped,
federally-insured commercial bank that Goldman Sachs is allowed to own –
despite its checkered past. That commercial bank is known as Goldman Sachs
Bank USA. For a snapshot look at how prudently it is managed, consider
this: as of June 30 it held $544 billion in assets and $55 trillion in
derivatives. (See Table 15 at this link. The derivatives report is provided
by a federal banking regulator, the Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency.)

The CFPB announced yesterday that Goldman Sachs had engaged in the
following abuses in connection with the Apple Credit Card:

[When customers complained about erroneous charges,] “the bank failed to
consistently send acknowledgment notices within 30 days, conduct reasonable
investigations, or send resolution letters explaining the determinations of
its investigations within 90 days. These failures led to Goldman Sachs
illegally placing damaging information on consumers’ credit reports and
holding cardholders responsible for potentially fraudulent or unauthorized
purchases.”

The CFPB also wrote this:

“The marketing of the Apple Card Monthly Installments plan led consumers to
believe they would automatically receive interest-free financing when
purchasing iPhones and other Apple devices with their Apple Card. The plan
allowed cardholders to purchase Apple devices through a series of
interest-free payments over a period of six months to two years. However,
many cardholders were unknowingly charged interest because they were not
automatically enrolled as expected. They also faced confusing checkout
options about enrolling in the plan. For online purchases, Apple only
presented the payment plan as an option to consumers using Apple’s own
Safari browser. Due to Apple and Goldman’s actions, instead of making
interest-free payments, thousands of cardholders purchased Apple devices on
interest-bearing revolving balances and incurred interest charges.”

Wall Street On Parade began reporting on the grotesque manner in which the
Apple Credit Card was being handled as early as August 10, 2022. Our first
report came one year after J.D. Power had lavished a customer satisfaction
award on the Apple Credit Card provided through Goldman Sachs.

The J.D. Power Award came in August 2021. We dug through customer
complaints in the CFPB’s database for the same month, August 2021, and
found the following telltale signs of big problems: (The redacted
information has been redacted by the CFPB; typos are in the original.)

A customer in California wrote this:

“This problem has been ongoing since XXXX, I have had to open multiple
disputes through Apple credit card (goldman Sachs) and every time I open
disputes, they ALWAYS favor the merchant ( XXXX ) There were multiple
unauthorized purchases on my card through XXXX, XXXX helped with most of
them besides one order that was {$1400.00}. My credit card issuer Goldman
Sachs is saying that the dispute keeps favoring them no matter what
evidence I give them. I really want to sue or something, I have no idea
what to do now…” (Read the full complaint here.)

A customer in Massachusetts told the CFPB this:

“My 11 year old computer died and I went online to apple.com to buy a
replacement one. Their site advertises that you can get an Apple credit
card with 0 % APR for the first 12 months and pay off the computer. When I
tried to redeem that offer, their Goldman Sachs website came back and
extended a {$2500.00} credit limit, which does not cover the cost of a
computer on their site. I called in to get the limit increased to
{$3200.00} because I make {$320000.00} a year and have a XXXX credit
rating. When I called in, their representative told me the only way to
request a credit limit increase to cover the cost of the computer was to
accept the credit card offer and open an account. So I did. He told me the
next day I had to call back to request a credit increase. There was no
other way to get an increase on the application. I have just done that, and
despite making a high salary, having zero credit debt and having an
excellent credit score, Goldman Sachs / Apple has denied the application
and not giving me a reason…” (Read the full complaint here.)

A resident of Virginia wrote this:

“On XX/XX/21, an unknown charge for {$840.00} was Pending on my Apple Card
(Goldman Sachs), I submitted a dispute the same day and was told that,
because the charge was still ‘pending’, they would monitor the charge and
if the charge posted, the dispute process would start with no further
action from me. If the charge did not post, it would just drop off of my
account. Since then, I have made dozens of calls and chat sessions with
Apple Card Support about this charge that posted to my account on XX/XX/21.
On this date, I received a ‘provisional credit’ and exactly one minute
later, the provisional credit was reversed. After many phone calls, I
finally learned that the dispute that I repeatedly called about had been
ruled in the merchant ‘s favor because, they stated, I ‘withdrew my
dispute’ — this is a complete falsehood…” (Read the full complaint here.)

In 2023, we took another look at the CFPB’s complaint database and found
hundreds of cries for help from people being ripped off with the Apple
Credit Card, including the following from a resident of Nevada:

“Late last year, Apple credit card pulled a hard inquiry on my credit and
issued me an Apple credit card. I did not request this credit card, so I
contacted XXXX about this matter. Apple credit card closed my account and
stated to me that they noted my account was closed because they could not
verify that I requested, authorized, or applied for this credit card. I
believe this credit card was requested by an XXXX store agent, without my
authorization, when I purchased a new iphone. I believe this because the
agent signed me up for several other offers that I did not request. These
matters have been resolved with XXXX. Regarding the hard inquiry, the XXXX
representative told me to contact each credit reporting agency to request
that the hard inquiry be removed from my credit report. XXXX will be
reporting this account as closed due to unable to verify that I applied for
the credit card. Thank you for assisting in the removal of the hard inquiry
with each agency.”

This Nevada report suggests that salespeople in Apple’s retail stores may
have been incentivized to open Apple Credit Card accounts without the
customer’s approval. And yet, the CFPB settlement is silent on this issue.

None of this egregious behavior by Goldman Sachs and Apple has made its way
to the folks at J.D. Power. On August 15 of this year, J.D. Power made the
following gasp-worthy announcement:

“Apple Card (Goldman Sachs) ranks highest in customer satisfaction among
co-brand credit cards with no annual fee, with a score of 654. This is the
fourth consecutive year in which Apple Card and issuer Goldman Sachs have
collectively earned a segment award….”

Goldman Sachs’ history of abusing its customers dates back to the roaring
1920s. During the making of the stock market asset bubble of 1928, Goldman
ran the Goldman Sachs Trading Company, a closed end fund known as a “trust”
in those days. Goldman Sachs spun it off to the public at $104 a share. The
trust was filled with dubious investments while paying Goldman a hefty
management fee. Just a few years after the crash of 1929, the Goldman Sachs
trust was trading at a buck and change. On May 20, 1932, Walter Sachs,
President of the Goldman Sachs Trading Company, was interrogated by the
Senate Committee on Banking and Currency. The Committee concluded that
Goldman Sachs fleeced its customers to line its own pockets.

On April 27, 2010 the U.S. Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on
Investigations held a hearing and interviewed multiple executives of
Goldman Sachs over its role in the subprime crisis and 2008 financial
collapse. That hearing was followed by an in-depth report from the
Subcommittee. Among the findings were the following regarding Goldman Sachs:

“When Goldman Sachs realized the mortgage market was in decline, it took
actions to profit from that decline at the expense of its clients. New
documents detail how, in 2007, Goldman’s Structured Products Group twice
amassed and profited from large net short positions in mortgage related
securities. At the same time the firm was betting against the mortgage
market as a whole, Goldman assembled and aggressively marketed to its
clients poor quality CDOs [Collateralized Debt Obligations] that it
actively bet against by taking large short positions in those transactions.
New documents and information detail how Goldman recommended four CDOs,
Hudson, Anderson, Timberwolf, and Abacus, to its clients without fully
disclosing key information about those products, Goldman’s own market
views, or its adverse economic interests. For example, in Hudson, Goldman
told investors that its interests were ‘aligned’ with theirs when, in fact,
Goldman held 100% of the short side of the CDO and had adverse interests to
the investors, and described Hudson’s assets were ‘sourced from the
Street,’ when in fact, Goldman had selected and priced the assets without
any third party involvement. New documents also reveal that, at one point
in May 2007, Goldman Sachs unsuccessfully tried to execute a ‘short
squeeze’ in the mortgage market so that Goldman could scoop up short
positions at artificially depressed prices and profit as the mortgage
market declined.”

For what Goldman Sachs has been up to more recently, see our reports:
Goldman Sachs Criminally Charged by Justice Department – and Its Stock
Closes Up $2.49 and Goldman Sachs Is Being Sued for 27 Separate Stock
Offerings It Underwrote.

To add further insult to injury, while much of the Apple Credit Card hubris
was occurring, the CEO of Goldman Sachs, David Solomon, was moonlighting as
a D.J. (You can’t make this stuff up.) Solomon still sits at the helm of
the company.

FacebookTwitterWhatsAppLinkedInEmail

Reply via email to