We Defend You Against

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

We defend against collection lawsuits, wage garnishments, and bank seizures. Whether you're facing credit card debt, medical debt, tuition bills, or other consumer debt, we can help. We focus on the area of judgment-enforcement defense involving wage garnishments, bank seizures, or lawsuits (summons and complaints).

JPMorgan Chase usually brings consumer credit lawsuits in New York under its entity name "JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A." which stands for "National Association." This designation indicates that the bank is a federally chartered institution, overseen by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). It is common for financial institutions to file lawsuits under such designations. However, the specific entity may vary based on the type of debt or credit agreement involved.

JPMorgan Chase's address used for New York litigation is 201 N. Walnut Street, Wilmington, DE 19801. Phone: (302) 282-9000. If you need help, call us at (888) 271-7109, or complete this address used for New York litigation is 201 N. Walnut Street, Wilmington, DE 19801. Phone: (302) 282-9000. If you need help, call us at (888) 271-7109, or complete this form.

Unsuccessful Attempts for Alternative Service Lead to Denied Motion for JPMorgan Chase Bank in Debt Lawsuit

Short Summary: In the case of JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. Bochicchio, the plaintiff, JPMorgan Chase, requested the court's permission to serve the summons and complaint on the defendant by alternative methods after several failed attempts to reach her at her residence. The plaintiff further asked for an extension of time to serve these documents. However, the court denied the motion, citing the plaintiff's lack of diligence in attempting service at the defendant's place of employment and failing to demonstrate that alternative service was necessary.

3 Key Points of Law:

1. According to CPLR § 306-b, a court may extend the time for service of the summons and complaint upon good cause shown or in the interest of justice. The court may consider diligence or lack thereof, expiration of the Statute of Limitations, the nature of the cause of action, the length of delay in service, the promptness of the plaintiff's request for the extension of time, and prejudice to the defendant.
2. The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) prohibits debt collectors from communicating with a consumer in connection with the collection of any debt at the consumer's place of employment. However, process servers are exempt from this definition, meaning that they may attempt service at the consumer's place of employment without violating the FDCPA.
3. Under the new Consumer Credit Fairness Act (CCFA) effective from May 7, 2022, plaintiffs in consumer debt matters must take additional actions and file additional documents and notices when serving a summons and complaint.

Conclusion: The case serves as a reminder to plaintiffs to exercise due diligence when serving defendants and to be mindful of requirements under laws such as the FDCPA and CCFA. JPMorgan Chase's motion was denied due to its failure to adequately attempt service at the defendant's place of employment and provide evidence of the need for alternative service methods. The court also indicated that the plaintiff must comply with new requirements under the CCFA for future service attempts.

The Full, Exact Text of CPLR § 306-b:

Service of the summons and complaint, summons with notice, third-party summons and complaint, or petition with a notice of petition or order to show cause

Service of the summons and complaint, summons with notice, third-party summons and complaint, or petition with a notice of petition or order to show cause shall be made within one hundred twenty days after the commencement of the action or proceeding, provided that in an action or proceeding, except a proceeding commenced under the election law, where the applicable statute of limitations is four months or less, service shall be made not later than fifteen days after the date on which the applicable statute of limitations expires.  If service is not made upon a defendant within the time provided in this section, the court, upon motion, shall dismiss the action without prejudice as to that defendant, or upon good cause shown or in the interest of justice, extend the time for service.

An Easy-to-Understand Interpretation of CPLR § 306-b:

Timeline and Conditions for Legal Document Delivery in Court Cases

Breakdown:

• All key legal documents like the summons and complaint, summons with notice, third-party summons and complaint, or petition with a notice of petition or order to show cause must be delivered within 120 days after starting a legal action or proceeding. This delivery is known as service.

• If the time limit given by the law for starting your case (the statute of limitations) is 4 months or less, these documents must be served no later than 15 days after the expiry date of this time limit.

• Exception: The above doesn't apply to cases started under the election law.

• If you don't serve these documents on a defendant (the person you're taking to court) within the specified time, the court can dismiss the case against that defendant. This dismissal won't prevent you from filing the case again (dismissed "without prejudice").

• The court can, however, choose to extend the time for service if you can show a good reason for the delay or if it's in the interest of justice. This decision is made upon a formal request known as a motion.

Inadmissibility of Documents in Summary Judgment Motion: JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. Clancy

Summary: In this case, JPMorgan Chase Bank (plaintiff) brought a suit against Dermott W. Clancy and others (defendants), seeking summary judgment. The Supreme Court of New York County initially granted the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment. However, the defendants appealed, and the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, reversed the decision. The court ruled that the documents provided by the plaintiff, both attached to the complaint and included in an employee's affidavit, did not meet the requirements for admission under the business records exception to the hearsay rule. Consequently, the court ruled that the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment be denied.

Key Points of Law:

1. A complaint verified only by an attorney, as opposed to a person with firsthand knowledge, is not sufficient to establish that attached documents are admissible as business records under the business records exception to the hearsay rule. (McKinney's CPLR 105(u), 4518(a)).
2. Documents attached to an employee's affidavit are inadmissible under the business records exception to the hearsay rule if the affiant does not state that it was the regular business practice of the plaintiff to create such records.
3. A document relied upon by a plaintiff to establish non-payment must be self-explanatory and contain the date referenced in the affiant's statement.

Conclusion & Main Takeaway: The case emphasizes the importance of proper documentation and verification in a legal proceeding. For a document to be admissible under the business records exception to the hearsay rule, it must be verified by a person with knowledge, not just an attorney, and the affiant should explicitly state that creating such records is part of the regular business practice. Moreover, documents that establish nonpayment need to be self-explanatory and must contain the appropriate date references. Any failure in meeting these requirements can result in the denial of a summary judgment motion.

​

CFPB Penalizes JPMorgan Chase for Violations in Checking Account Screening Information Accuracy

Summary: The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)imposed a $4.6 million penalty on JPMorgan Chase Bank for failing to provide accurate information for checking account screening reports. Chase did not maintain the necessary procedures for accurate reporting and neglected to keep customers informed about the results of their reporting disputes and crucial details of their checking account application denials. The CFPB ordered Chase to pay the penalty and implement changes to its policies to avoid future legal breaches.

Key Points of Law:

1. Banks are legally obligated to have appropriate procedures for providing accurate information for checking account screening reports. They also need to notify consumers about the outcomes of their reporting disputes and the reasons for the denial of their checking account applications.
2. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, banks are required to have effective policies regarding the accuracy of the information they report about consumers' checking account activities.
3. As per the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the CFPB has the authority to take action against institutions or individuals engaging in unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices, or those that violate federal consumer financial laws.

Conclusion & Main Takeaway: The case underscores the importance of financial institutions adhering to the legal requirements for providing accurate checking account screening reports. Banks must ensure the accuracy of the information they provide, keep consumers informed about the outcomes of their reporting disputes, and provide clear reasons for checking account application denials. Failure to do so can result in significant penalties, as evidenced by the $4.6 million penalty imposed on JPMorgan Chase by the CFPB.

Persistent Complaints against Chase Bank - BBB Website Summary

Summary: Multiple customers have filed complaints against Chase Bank on the Better Business Bureau (BBB) website, reporting various issues with the bank's services. Despite responses from Chase, customers express dissatisfaction and state that their concerns remain unresolved, leading to financial difficulties and frustration.

Some Complaints:

• Billing/Collection Issues: Customers request paper statements but claim not receiving them despite never opting for paperless statements.
• Problems with Product/Service (Fraud): Customers report unauthorized withdrawals from their accounts by hackers impersonating Chase Bank, and dispute resolutions are not satisfactory.
• Problems with Product/Service (Unauthorized Debits): Customers complain about unauthorized withdrawals and multiple NSF charges, with the bank's response being inadequate.
• Advertising/Sales Issues (Auto Loan): A customer seeks information on how to make loan payments after the borrower's passing, but Chase delays providing assistance.

​