Tweet
Lawsuit Filed Against SunTrust Banks, Inc. Regarding Overdraft Fees
Lawsuit claims that SunTrust engages in unfair and bad faith business practices with respect to its assessment of overdraft fees on consumer checking accounts.
Atlanta, GA (PRWEB) April 10, 2009 -- Atlanta-based law firm Webb, Klase & Lemond, LLC has filed a class action lawsuit against SunTrust Banks, Inc. alleging that SunTrust engages in fraudulent, deceptive, unfair, and bad faith business practices with respect to its assessment of overdraft fees on consumer checking accounts. The suit also claims that SunTrust, which is headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia, has engaged in improper and unfair practices in order to increase the number and amount of overdraft and/or service fees imposed upon consumers' accounts. The case, styled Peterson v. SunTrust Banks, Inc., was filed in the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia on April 8, 2009 and has been assigned Case No. 2009CV167326.
According to the suit, Webb, Klase & Lemond's client had overdraft fees deducted from her consumer checking account even though there were sufficient funds in her account to cover the transactions in question.
In addition, the suit alleges that SunTrust routinely enforces a policy whereby charges incurred are posted to consumer accounts in order of largest to smallest amounts, even when larger charges occur days after smaller charges in an effort to maximize the number and amount of overdraft and/or service fees imposed upon consumer accounts. SunTrust's policy allows it to post items to an account in an order that is not chronologically based and is not based on any other proper rationale.
Plaintiff asserts that SunTrust could easily program its software systems to minimize insufficient funds fees without any increased costs to SunTrust.
Instead, SunTrust has programmed its systems to order charges in such a way as to maximize fee income. The Complaint alleges that at the very least, these practices violate SunTrust's obligation to act in good faith and to deal fairly with customers; at worst, they amount to fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices.
Insufficient/unavailable funds penalty 1
Extended overdraft fee2
$ 35.00
$ 36.00 (effective 5/1/09)
$ 35.00
$ 36.00 (effective 5/1/09)
Might be worth keeping an eye on.
Lawsuit claims that SunTrust engages in unfair and bad faith business practices with respect to its assessment of overdraft fees on consumer checking accounts.
Atlanta, GA (PRWEB) April 10, 2009 -- Atlanta-based law firm Webb, Klase & Lemond, LLC has filed a class action lawsuit against SunTrust Banks, Inc. alleging that SunTrust engages in fraudulent, deceptive, unfair, and bad faith business practices with respect to its assessment of overdraft fees on consumer checking accounts. The suit also claims that SunTrust, which is headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia, has engaged in improper and unfair practices in order to increase the number and amount of overdraft and/or service fees imposed upon consumers' accounts. The case, styled Peterson v. SunTrust Banks, Inc., was filed in the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia on April 8, 2009 and has been assigned Case No. 2009CV167326.
According to the suit, Webb, Klase & Lemond's client had overdraft fees deducted from her consumer checking account even though there were sufficient funds in her account to cover the transactions in question.
In addition, the suit alleges that SunTrust routinely enforces a policy whereby charges incurred are posted to consumer accounts in order of largest to smallest amounts, even when larger charges occur days after smaller charges in an effort to maximize the number and amount of overdraft and/or service fees imposed upon consumer accounts. SunTrust's policy allows it to post items to an account in an order that is not chronologically based and is not based on any other proper rationale.
Plaintiff asserts that SunTrust could easily program its software systems to minimize insufficient funds fees without any increased costs to SunTrust.
Instead, SunTrust has programmed its systems to order charges in such a way as to maximize fee income. The Complaint alleges that at the very least, these practices violate SunTrust's obligation to act in good faith and to deal fairly with customers; at worst, they amount to fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices.
Insufficient/unavailable funds penalty 1
Extended overdraft fee2
$ 35.00
$ 36.00 (effective 5/1/09)
$ 35.00
$ 36.00 (effective 5/1/09)
Might be worth keeping an eye on.
Comment