Consumer complaint received 2021-02-24 00:00:00
Product: Checking or savings account — Other banking product or service
Issue: Managing an account — Deposits and withdrawals
Company: BMO BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
BMO Harris Bank did not inform the two female beneficiaries of their rights to a private family education trust for 30 years. Under Minnesota Trust law and Universal trust law, all beneficiaries must be informed upon maturity of their rights to such accounts. The female beneficiaries were told by the elder male beneficiary that this account was empty and/or falsely, that the education/health restricted trust was his personal retirement account. The trust documents and other supporting statements by the person who established the trust clearly indicate that its primary intention was children 's education or major/irregular health or childcare expenses. The elder male beneficiary lives in the area of XXXX Wisconsin and leveraged his friendly local relationship with male branch employees to improperly influence the administration of the trust for his personal benefit. 
He began making withdrawals when his XXXX XXXX moved in and convinced him to buy more XXXX and use if for non-educational expenses. During this time, the female beneficiary, a XXXX widow with a small child, was struggling as a single mom to repay XXXX XXXX XXXX, the huge medical debts from her late husband 's XXXX and still rebuilding after XXXX FEMA disasters. During this time she had no access to these funds or cooperation from family - who financially exploited her whenever she needed emergency childcare. It was XXXX when XXXX in the XXXX branch informed the woman of these funds left in XXXX to her by her grandfather, a professor who became a famous politician. With XXXX 's encouragement, she submitted a documentation of major PAST education and health and childcare expenses that met the criteria for withdrawals - and for which she still had debts. She asked that a son 's CURRENT emergency tuition request be approved asap. XXXX indicated the purposes were proper and in accordance with the trust terms. The beneficiary also consulted two attorneys to confirm that she had the rights to these funds. After submitting the request, the branch started creating irregular delays and waited over a month to schedule a meeting on election day. The selection of the date was transparently politically motivated. Specifically, it was Wisconsin red state male bankers were making a point to further their authority over a trust ceated by a famously liberal blue state politician. It was furthermore retaliation because the female beneficiary sent scholarly articles about gender discrimination issues in private trusts to BMO management. These branch men held the meeting behind closed doors ( irregular ) and denied all request & all purposes including her ten year old 's emergency tuition request without any explanation. When questioned why they approved withdrawals for the elderly male 's XXXX and girlfriend they moved aggressively to disband the trust. Although they had managed for decades at the same stable, modest balance -- -they suddenly claimed it was " too small '' for them anyway and wanted to dissolve it in favor of the elderly male, despite his misuse of it and lack of need. 3 weeks before, when the woman protested bmos high fees and over-risky investment strategy for a conservative-purpose, modest sized trust -- they were adamant that they had to manage the trust this way according to unspecified fiduciary guidelines. They said it could not be amended or dissolved with her elderly retires beneficiary potentially needing it for healthcare -- despite her arguement that he had adequate personal wealth and excellent lifelong health benefits. This is clearly a case of trust abuse via gender-bias, political-motivation and discriminatory branch practices/lack of neutral oversight. Furthermore, XXXX 's misdirection and lack of discretion, created a huge rift between family members who were not privy to the trust terms or issues of it being misused. The female beneficiary has since been harassed. The other beneficiaries emotionally abandoned the widow 's young son to retaliate for highlighting thes issues. BMO, sought to take further advantage of the woman 's out of state location during covid by moving aggressively with an attorney to dissolve the trust before a complete investigation or inquiry could be initiated.

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