Many have received dunning or other letters notifying them that they are late in their payments. Some jurors may have been sued by banks or other financial institutions, yet be too embarrassed to disclose the fact when being questioned during the jury selection process. These ads are catchy and quite humorous. Their underlying theme is that banks are too big, uncaring and do not give customers the personal attention and service which they would like to receive. The problem is that these advertisements feed upon and foster the subconscious belief held by many people that large financial institutions have been treating them poorly for years.
Many people feel frustrated and powerless when dealing with large financial institutions.
Sitting on a jury temporarily gives them the opportunity to yield some of their own power and vent some of frustration. It is extremely difficult to level the playing field when you are defending a bank accused of fraud before a jury. I spent years and years working on trial techniques in an effort to get the jurors to place the banks on equal footing with the individuals suing them. What I find most interesting about the punitive damage award in the Auerbach case, is that it truly bears no reasonable relationship to the amount of the compensatory financial damages. While GWB employed the use of a PWA in an effort to shield its liability, the Auerbachs's counsel used the PWA as a sword to create new liability to GWB by alleging it did not negotiate in good faith nor disclose all material facts concerning the decision making process for modifying loans.