Citibank’s Overdraft and Insufficient Funds Fees
Allegations: Misrepresenting how many overdraft or insufficient funds fees consumers could be charged on a single transaction
Espin et al. v. Citibank, N.A.
22-cv-383, E.D.N.C.
(Sept. 2022)
Credit cards
Marketing that the bank is dedicated to military members, veterans, and their families and provides more benefits than required under the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA) when it systematically deprives eligible servicemembers of SCRA benefits, charges higher interest rates than promised, fails to waive fees as promised, and fails to properly calculate debt forgiveness
Stayed pending Citibank’s appeal of a decision to deny arbitration
Allegations: Misrepresenting how many overdraft or insufficient funds fees consumers could be charged on a single transaction
This is not a sitewide perk.
These players dropped the ball in their recent offseason announcements.
Refunds for consumers duped into signing up for “VIP” memberships.
Rosewater ingredient claims wilt upon a closer look.
What does this marketing term mean?