Consumer complaint received 2020-09-26
Product: Checking or savings account — Other banking product or service
Issue: Closing an account — Company closed your account
Company: PROSPERITY BANCSHARES, INC. (TX)

Pursuant to my other complaints sent to Prosperity Bank with the help of the CFPB I am adding this to my complaint that against my wishes Prosperity Bank decided to close out my bank account and proceeded to put intense pressure on me to do so but failed to inform me of their position in a timely manner...In a letter dated XX/XX/2020 which Prosperity Bank mailed on XX/XX/2020...I was told that Prosperity Bank can no longer service my bank account...I reference an email I sent to XXXX XXXX at Prosperity Bank  at XXXX letting XXXX XXXX know that she has the right to be informed of the response I received from XXXX XXXX with the help of the CFPB that is full of lies and errors...I state this because I can document everything that took place on XX/XX/2020 and I did ask that XXXX who is very decent and kind bring this message to the attention of all upper level management at Prosperity Bank because what XXXX did was make the decent people at Prosperity Bank look Bad...I include the message I sent to XXXX in this email:

Dear XXXX,

Thank you for taking care of me and for your voicemail left on my phone in the afternoon of XX/XX/2020...The records clearly show the series of events that took place on the morning of XX/XX/2020...XXXX I ask that you read the response provided by Prosperity Bank via the CFPB where I filed numerous complaints...The CFPB is a government website called the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau in my complaints that number more than ten I cite many acts of aggression towards me not by you XXXX not by any of the pleasant front desk staff I encountered at your branch...Rather in terms of demands I received in the mail for over draft fees for small overages such as being under by a minimal amount...You yourself reassured me that no overdraft fee would be charged as this was a mistake on the part of Prosperity Bank..XXXX  you have the right to be informed that Prosperity Bank has a history of legal misconduct whereby they have tried to keep legal hostage their own employees via contracts signed which resulted in a a lawsuit which Prosperity Bank Lost...The woman whose name is listed on the response that you have the right to see and read...Is one of the parties who tried to get away with legal misconduct in the past...Though not criminal in nature it was aggressive and resulted in a Federal filing...I ask that you read the response I received in its entirety because the date is wrong in that response the woman who crafted that letter cited the events of XX/XX/2020 as having happened on XX/XX/2020...It is vital that you read this as your name may come up as this proceeds...Further to this you have recourse as well...In her response the woman who saw fit to send it never looked at the screenshots or my documentation which is extensive as to the series of events that took place on XX/XX/2020 in the morning...You have the right to be informed and you have recourse...I ask that you bring this email to the attention of your branch manager and upper level management as XXXX XXXX XXXX has misrepresented the events of XX/XX/2020 by citing the wrong date as being XX/XX/2020 as well as lying through her teeth about what actually occurred that day...The phone records can be subpoena'd so as to track and trace the series of events...It is vital you are informed so as to not to be blindsided as this matter continues to unfold...In light of the continued hostility shown me on the part of XXXX  and Prosperity Bank...XXXX be rest assured I will never set foot in another Prosperity Bank ever again...I trust that Prosperity Bank will close out my bank account as they threatened to do to this to me along with other threats I received by Prosperity Bank not limited to threatening to close out my bank account which is retaliation...In XXXX   response to me there are veiled threats whereby she sees fit not only to provide a very sloppy untoward unprofessional response but also to mention other CFPB complaints that I saw fit to file...Complaints that are being studied by many who track and trace complaints like mine for trends which can trigger investigations...One Bank whose name I do not mention here has more than 23,000 CFPB complaints...You have the right to be informed so that you are not blindsided...I can back up everything I say and XXXX makes Prosperity Bank look very bad which is not good for Prosperity Bank it is not fair right or just to make your bank look bad but that is what XXXX is doing here...I published her response because it is my sacred right and duty to so do to defend my name...I am not a XXXX at all and I am sorry XXXX this was done...I want you and the decent people at Prosperity Bank to know that I am getting the help I need for my XXXX  XXXX  needs...I dare say XXXX would likely also benefit from XXXX XXXX services...I include the body of her letter in the body of this email and also in the form of an attachment...You must inform every member of upper level management as to what is being done here...As your name could come up and as such you could placed in an awkward position...You have the right to be informed and it is my duty to inform you of what is happening here...A copy of her response is attached I ask that you bring this email and the attachment to the attention of the proper people who can deal with this at Prosperity Bank..XXXX  you have the right to read the body of this letter as you yourself are well aware that I called you that morning for help and it was through your kind help that I received the help I needed that day...
Letter by XXXX XXXX full of errors and incorrect date...
"Dear Sir or Madam, Prosperity Bank ("Prosperity") is in receipt of the ten (10) above referenced complaints filed by XXXX XXXX XXXX with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ("CFPB"). After a careful review, Prosperity believes it has addressed Ms. XXXX   grievances against Prosperity which are sprinkled amongst those against unrelated third parties. Because the complaints against Prosperity seem to stem from the same core facts (activity on Ms. XXXX debit card on the weekend of XX/XX/2020), the Bank combines its response to address all complaints collectively as follows:" The crux of Ms. XXXX complaints against Prosperity pertain to fraud alerts triggered by her debit card use on XX/XX/2020. It is standard practice in the credit and debit card industry to employ algorithm-based fraud alerts established by rules and scoring in order to protect consumers from fraudulent activity. The scoring for these algorithms are set by FICO based on usage frequency and cannot be changed by financial institutions. The rules for the algorithm are set by the financial institution based on past fraud history and its appetite for risk. The rules are determined by various metrics, including the scoring assessed by FICO, the known risk of the merchant and location, how the merchant processes a transaction, age of the customer's account, account balance, insufficient funds history, frequency of use of the card, the amount of the purchase, and whether it is a chip-related purchase or online purchase. Online purchases, for example, are riskier and trigger flags more than in-person chip-related purchases. Additionally, online purchases of XXXX  or more are also considered higher risk for fraud. If XXXX  (Prosperity's card processor) told Ms. XXXX that the financial institution sets the parameters surrounding the fraud alerts as she claims, that is only partly true. It is the combination of scoring that is automatically set by FICO, which the financial institution has no ability to change, and the rules previously set by FICO, which the financial institution has no ability to change, and the rules previously set for suspicious fraudulent activity by the financial institution which applies equally for all card holders." On the morning of XX/XX/2020, Ms. XXXX conducted eleven online purchases within three hours. As mentioned above, some merchants are considered more "ripe" for fraud than others, including, for example, XXXX and XXXX. During this three-hour span. Ms XXXX   conducted three transactions with XXXX and two with XXXX, which were accepted, however because of the frequency of her transactions, her fraud risk score doubled. When she attempted her twelfth online debit transaction, she received a fraud alert by text. Ms. XXXX did not respond. Had she responded at that time and verified her transaction, the subsequent denial of the use of her card would not have happened. Once the customer does not respond to the fraud alert, the alerts do not continue for each transaction thereafter. However, she attempted five additional transactions, and because she had not responded to the fraud alert, the transactions were denied and the card went to restricted status. Upon such verification, which was only 20 minutes later than the text alert, XXXX called Ms. XXXX and she verified the transaction. The rules are exempted for 15 minutes and all transactions are allowed." "Ms. XXXX later attempted an online transaction wherein the merchant processed the transaction incorrectly as a pin transaction and the transaction was denied. Ms. XXXX attempted the transaction four more times with different dollar amounts, which red-flagged the card and the transactions were denied. Her fifth transaction put the card in restricted status. She attempted to make eight additional transactions which were denied. The next morning, without her identity being verified from the previous day, her next transaction at XXXX XXXX. ws denied due to the restricted status." "OnXX/XX/2020, Ms. XXXX called XXXX and berated, cursed and threatened the customer service agent. Ms. XXXX told the agent numerous times she was going to buy a XXXX and XXXX her XXXX   XXXX at the bank. She also repeatedly stated she was going to buy a XXXX and XXXX  XXXX  the bank. Not surprisingly, these outrageous statements concerned XXXX and they subsequently informed Prosperity of the threats made by the customer." "Ms. XXXX   particularly complained about an employee she encountered when she visited the XXXX XXXX banking center on XX/XX/2020. [XXXX got the date wrong it was XX/XX/2020 this is well documented] This is not Ms. XXXX usual banking center and the personnel were not familiar with her. She proceeded to the teller line and requested they fax personal documents for her. Typically, Prosperity, does not typically fax documents for customers but instead refers them to the XXXX XXXX across the street. When Ms. XXXX was told this, she became aggressive and began yelling at the tellers that they hated her and were discriminating against her because she was XXXX. To diffuse the situation, an employee offered to fax the documents for her. Ms. XXXX next complains that the employee who helped send the fax used threatening body language by wearing gloves and using anti-bacterial spray. Given the ongoing global pandemic, the use of gloves and anti-bacterial spray should not be viewed as threatening or discriminatory. The Prosperity employee who Ms. XXXX  accused of 'vicious mistreatment' was actually courteous and apologetic. She did not get close to Ms. XXXX or breathe on her "to get COVID" as Ms. XXXX claims when she walked her to the door." "Finally, Ms. XXXX claims Prosperity retaliated against her by closing her account based on her XXXX. Rather, the decision was made after Ms. XXXX made multiple threats to XXXX the bank or bring a XXXX to the Bank addition to the abusive behavior toward Prosperity employees, Card Services employees and XXXX employees." Prosperity takes both customer complaints and card fraud very seriously. The actions taken by Prosperity are meant to prevent fraud and entirely appropriate for protecting our customers from fraudulent and suspicious card activity and protecting the safety of our staff." "Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Should you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me." Sincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX 

I also share with you the case that went to the Federal Court over four bankers who left Prosperity Bank to work elsewhere whom Prosperity bank tried to keep as legal hostages by obstructing their right to work elsewhere...It is a matter of public record called the Cardoni VS. Prosperity Bank Case...

 I quote a section from this for you here:  "Four of the bankers later left Prosperity and went to work for a competitor. Both the bankers and Prosperity raced to the courthouse to file lawsuits that ended up being consolidated in federal court in Houston. Prosperity sought to enforce the restrictive covenants under Texas law, contending that the choice-of-law provision was valid. The district court denied Prosperity's applications for injunctive relief. It found that the choice-of-law provision was not enforceable with respect to the noncompetition and nonsolicitation provisions; instead, it applied Oklahoma law, under which it concluded the covenants were not lawful. In contrast, the district court ruled that Texas law applied to the nondisclosure provisions, but denied injunctive relief to enforce that provision. Following the guidance of Texas courts on the enforcement of choice-of-law provisions, we affirm in part and reverse in part."

Cardoni v. Prosperity Bank, 805 F.3d 573 | Casetext Search + Citator