Consumer complaint received 2022-06-09
Company: BANKMOBILE TECHNOLOGIES, INC
State: DC
Product: Checking or savings account
Sub-product: Other banking product or service
Issue: Managing an account
Sub-issue: Banking errors

Complaint:
XXXX XXXX ought to conclude this particular claim is {>= $1,000,000} from applicable penalty on net interes balance XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX Penalty is applicable from various not adequate notices from XXXX  changing positions, delay to delivered debit card, altered account balance, account interruptions, concealment, not applying applicable formula. Being applicable net yielding formula on calculating monthly interes is simply divide the annual interes rate divided by 12 months. The total number of periods is calculated by multiplying the number of XXXX by 12 months since the interes is earned daily and applied monthly and not as your team have always falsely argued since XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX, we pay interes using the following formula, Average balance x factor x number of days in the cycle, The factor is interes rate converted to a decimal, If you have an average balance over {$3000.00}, the firs {$3000.00} is paid interes at the higher rate and anything over {$3000.00} is paid at the lower rate. This would result in a blended rate, XX/XX/XXXX Calculation, {$320.00} x 3.93 % = {$12.00} XXXX days = XXXX x 30 days = {$1.00}, XX/XX/XXXX calculation, {$1400.00} x 3.93 % = {$58.00} / 366 days = XXXX x 31 days = {$4.00}, XXXX XXXX Calculation {$2400.00} x 3.93 % = {$94.00} / 366 days = XXXX x 31 days = {$8.00}, If you need additional assitance, XXXX XXXX Specialits are here for you XXXX. Please call toll-free by dialing XXXX or XXXX from your device, if you're a XXXX  wireless cutomer XXXX  Calculation is false as on average deposit {$4700.00} on XX/XX/XXXX come up with only {$11.00} yield and I spent {$1500.00} within a month on 2 % cash back yield and got {$31.00} even when 2 % is half 4 % and {$4700.00} is XXXX times more than {$1500.00}, XXXX  XXXX. And another example to show XXXX  calculation are completely wrong I spent {$1400.00} XX/XX/XXXX to XXXX XXXX, XXXX on a peg 1 % and 2 % cash back yield and got reimburse {$13.00}, and {$4700.00} is XXXX times {$1400.00} Thirdly XXXX  is not only in violation to set XXXX XXXX formula XXXX  is also not compliance to FCC truth to advertisement compliance, since account conception XXXX  has change from applying 4 % yield on {$200.00} deposit to {$3000.00} deposit and applies now applies average interes on average monthly balance exceeding {$3000.00} XXXX  has change its position on computing from end of the month balance to average end of the month balance. XXXX  has changed it position from not requiring XXXX POS purchase to earn 4 % to requiring XXXX POS purchases before 4 % is applied on each month. Such contradictions from XXXX  comprise two POS purchase balance from XX/XX/XXXX that is not yet brought to XX/XX/XXXX meaning there were XXXX POS purchases XX/XX/XXXX and XXXX POS were applied to gain 4 % and XXXX POS is not brought forward to make current POS balance to gain 4 %. On the subject yielding on 10 POS purchases supposedly placed before end of the month business day. Though 10 purchase transaction were made XX/XX/XXXX on or before end of month business day XXXX  claim applied disputed 1.01 % APY on XX/XX/XXXX and 1 % on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX  claim computation on yield is based on average monthly balance however its yield amount is computed on end of the month balance XXXX  claim that it had change its 4 % APY requirement to additional XXXX POS purchases per month when such was met XXXX  did not apply 4 % APY, XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX promise guaranteed 4 % on deposits {$2000.00} and up to {$3000.00}, XXXX had not only changed the rate to fluctuate around 4 % or above 4 % it has also changed requiring client to make ten purchase per month and even after these so call ten purchases were met in XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX XXXX  did not adhere to apply 4 % APY on deposit. And after I spoke to XXXX  around XX/XX/XXXX it was specify that XXXX purchases are not require as I have already made every requirement prior to changes and have been client since XXXX and prior to after notice to from $ XXXX deposit and up {$3000.00} deposit would gain 4 % yield. XXXX  Further change to require purchases place before two business days on each month though a business day on each of the month count and XXXX  compute base on the end of the month balance as all other competitors do. 

On review to XXXX  numerous breaches, contradictions, not adequate notices, not yet applying applicable yielding rate, not yet applying yielding amount, advert contradiction ask {>= $1,000,000} to resolve this aspect of XXXX  complaint from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX Pursuant to 28 USC 1746 ( 2 ) declare {>= $1,000,000} is applicable amount to law Net Yield balance XXXX, {$25.00}, XXXX, {$1200.00}, XXXX, {$1400.00}, XXXX, {$15000.00}, $ XXXX {$100.00}, {$17000.00} XXXX {$15000.00} XX/XX/XXXX, .289 % XXXX ( {$4700.00} ) ( XXXX ) {$3500.00} XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX ( {$5900.00} ( XXXX ), {$3700.00} XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX ( {$6000.00} ) ( XXXX ), {$3800.00}, PV {$3900.00} XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX ( {$6800.00} ( XXXX ) {$3600.00}, PV {$3700.00} XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX ( {$1500.00} ) ( XXXX ) {$150.00}, PV {$160.00} XXXX {$1400.00} XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX ( {$1100.00} ) ( XXXX ), {$200.00}, PV {$210.00} XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX ( {$1000.00} ) ( XXXX ) {$27.00}, PV {$28.00} XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX ( {$2400.00} ) ( XXXX ) {$250.00}, PV {$260.00} XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX ( {$1800.00} ) ( XXXX ) {$47.00}, PV {$50.00} XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX ( {$1500.00} ) ( XXXX ) {$400.00}, PV {$420.00} XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX ( {$1000.00} ) ( XXXX ) {$100.00}, PV {$110.00} XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( {$450.00} ) ( XXXX ) {$46.00}, PV {$49.00} XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX ( {$300.00} ) ( XXXX ) {$31.00}, PV {$33.00} XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( {$110.00} ) ( XXXX ) {$12.00}, PV {$13.00} XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX ( {$92.00} ) ( XXXX ) {$95.00} PV {$100.00} XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX ( {$100.00} ) ( XXXX ) {$99.00} PV {$100.00} XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX ( {$260.00} ) ( XXXX ) {$27.00} PV {$30.00} XXXX {$1200.00} XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX ( {$340.00} ( XXXX ) {$9.00}, PV {$10.00} XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX ( {$770.00} ) ( XXXX ), {$77.00} PV {$86.00} XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX ( {$3000.00} ( XXXX ) {$310.00} PV {$340.00} XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX ( {$2800.00} ) ( XXXX ) {$280.00}, PV {$310.00} XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX ( {$2400.00} ) ( XXXX ), {$240.00}, PV {$270.00} XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX ( {$1400.00} ) ( XXXX ), {$150.00}, PV {$170.00} XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( {$320.00} ) ( XXXX ), {$33.00} PV {$37.00} XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX ( {$32.00} ) ( XXXX ), {$34.00} PV {$38.00} XXXX {$25.00} XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX ( {$26.00} ) ( XXXX ), {$3.00} PV {$3.00} XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX ( {$170.00} ) ( XXXX ), {$17.00} PV {$19.00} XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX ( {$26.00} ) ( XXXX ), {$3.00}, PV {$3.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) I, XXXX XXXX XXXX declare {>= $1,000,000} this XX/XX/XXXX is net amount to XXXX  owe Claimant from not due compliance to truth to adverts, not adequate notice, not authorize account interruptions, fluctuation, concealment, tune to current value and net yielding value. The above avowals and calculations from formulae sought are true and accurate

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation