Bank of America freezes gun manufacturer's account?

[dorminWS]

I know what I'd have done if that had been MY account: The same thing I did YEARS ago - CHANGE TO ANY BANK BUT THEM!

http://cowboybyte.com/17209/bank-of-ame ... er-claims/

[Chasbo00]

I'm no BoA fan; however, I suspect there is more to this story than reported in the article. A bank just can't freeze someone's account for such a reason without dire legal consequences.

[VACoastie]

It's (BoA) partially owned by China. Last known, some banking enterprise out there had 9% stakehold in the company. Can't say as I'm too surprised about that happening.

[dorminWS]

I'm no BoA fan; however, I suspect there is more to this story than reported in the article. A bank just can't freeze someone's account for such a reason without dire legal consequences.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Banks do stuff all the time that would have dire legal consequences if any of the small folks they are running over them had the knowledge, resources, and cohones to call their bluff; but they get away with it enough of the time that it pays for the bank. BoA just paid BILLIONS of dollars because they got caught doing that on foreclosures. I know from first-hand experience that BoA is perfectly capable of allowing a bank manager to run roughshod over a small customer. I didn't let them get away with it, but MOST people just don't buck the bank.

[Shakeydeal]

I dumped BOA years ago when they promoted the fact that they would give home mortgages to illegal aliens. That wasn't the only reason, but it was the "straw"......

Shakey

[j1mmyd]

I'm no BoA fan; however, I suspect there is more to this story than reported in the article. A bank just can't freeze someone's account for such a reason without dire legal consequences.

I work for one of the credit card companies, not a bank, but I promise that they (we) *all* do these things all the time. The thought is that the lost profits aren't worth any negative press. Only way to change that is to make the lost profits greater than their estimates by helping them lose more business.

[Chasbo00]

I'm no BoA fan; however, I suspect there is more to this story than reported in the article. A bank just can't freeze someone's account for such a reason without dire legal consequences.

I work for one of the credit card companies, not a bank, but I promise that they (we) *all* do these things all the time. The thought is that the lost profits aren't worth any negative press. Only way to change that is to make the lost profits greater than their estimates by helping them lose more business.

The laws regarding what can be done with someone's credit vs. an actual bank account are vastly different.

[j1mmyd]

I'm no BoA fan; however, I suspect there is more to this story than reported in the article. A bank just can't freeze someone's account for such a reason without dire legal consequences.

I work for one of the credit card companies, not a bank, but I promise that they (we) *all* do these things all the time. The thought is that the lost profits aren't worth any negative press. Only way to change that is to make the lost profits greater than their estimates by helping them lose more business.

The laws regarding what can be done with someone's credit vs. an actual bank account are vastly different.

Your statement is generally true but irrelevant. You're probably also confusing "credit" with a "credit rating". Banks have the right to change ToS at will and if you have an account, you've already agreed to it. They make changes, then just reign in the new so-called violators as happened here. They didn't confiscate any assets or modify his credit rating; they just stopped all transactions for the account they held in his name.

My points remain: 1) They can do this. 2) Get a different bank.