Bank of America: Hire American!

Bank of America certainly does not live up to its name–and I would be hesitant to recommend their banking, investment and mortgage services to any of my Sacramento real estate homebuyers ever again. 

I don’t know how you feel about all the outsourcing of American jobs to other countries,  but since I live in Sacramento and we have double digit unemployment, it makes my blood boil to see critical employment that affects all our lives outsourced to foreign shores.

Bank of America received $45 Billion from TARP (a loan funded by our tax dollars) and they did pay it off early for their own political reasons–but I digress.  Let me get to the point of this article.

I recently met with one of my clients, whom we’ll call Emily, to discuss what she should do with her Sacramento home. She owed more than it was worth, having refinanced it through Bank of America in 2006. In those days, it had been a nice neighborhood with lots of promise. Today, it’s a high crime area that has had a recent murder.

Emily is fearful of opening her home to traffic; she also has an obligation to disclose neighborhood hazards to potential home buyers. She asked me what she should do. I suggested she attempt a “deed in lieu of foreclosure” and allow Bank of America to re-sell the home, as they would not have the same burden of disclosure to potential home buyers and REO’s sell much faster than short sale homes for sale because fast decisions and home sales can be accomplished–which isn’t always the case with a short sale.

Taking my advise, Emily immediately called Bank of America and explained she had experienced a drastic cut in income and could no longer afford the mortgage for this home. She also was adamant about not doing a short sale. She asked for the the “Deed-on-Lieu” department and assumed that they would jump at the opportunity to save $50,000 in foreclosure costs, when she was perfectly willing to hand over keys to the home–which was still in good repair.

The call was immediately transferred to a worker in India by the name of Juvvala, who asked Emily in broken English how much income she grossed and how much she netted. Looking at her 2009 tax return in front of her, she rattled off the appropriate numbers to this outsourced employee and he immediately argued and told her the figures couldn’t be right. This all occurred on speaker phone, and I could not believe what I was hearing. Emily insisted the numbers came from her filed tax return and were correct–and again explained why she believed Bank of America should do a deed-in-lieu versus short sale or foreclosure. Juvvala, after a lengthy conversation, finally told Emily he couldn’t promise anything, but that  she would receive Bank of America’s decision in the matter within 30 days.

In the meantime, Emily has been receiving calls from Bank o f America letting her know that she has missed a payment and that the call could be monitored and recorded.  Each time Emily explained that she is waiting for a reply on a Deed-of-Lieu.  These collection calls, she says,  have been from the U.S. and she found each caller to be very polite, understandable and cordial in offering help.  These Bank of America callers said they were not able to see where Emily was working on a Deed-in-Lieu because apparently that information is on another database–and as a result, the collections department for Bank of America is working in the dark.

Today, Emily received yet another call from a very nice Bank of America employee telling her she was late paying the house payment and she once again informed the caller that she was waiting to hear if her Deed-in-Lieu proposal had been accepted.  She pressed the issue to see if the U.S.  B of A employee could give her an update.

This is where the story gets interesting! 

The U. S. employee transferred Emily to what she thought was the Deed-in-Lieu department of Bank of America–but it wasn’t.  It was a friendly U. S. department for Short Sales. But, this nice man would transfer her to the Deed-in-Lieu department, for sure.

He did, and guess where Emily’s call ended up?  That’s right, India.  This time, Emily spoke with a woman named Malik who told her that according to the information on her screen, Juvvala had spoken to Emily about a deed-in-lieu on July 20th, but the call was disconnected and no further action was taken.

Since I was present during that call and I can tell you, the phone was never disconnected it appears that Mr. Juvvala, an outsourced employee of B of A, was too lazy to write up the conversation.  Had Emily continued to wait, which a lot of homeowners would do, she would have been foreclosed upon.  How many foreclosures have happened with B of A due to outsourced employees who simply took the easy way out and typed into their screen that the call was disconnected? How many never follow up–resulting in neighborhoods and lives being ruined?

My suggestion? Bring these jobs home and give them to American employees who care about our country, and use ONE database that allows one arm of Bank of America to see what the other is doing. All too often, short sales are ready to close and banks foreclose at an even lower price than what was offered.

It is insanity–and it feels like India is holding America hostage–and Bank of America is hiring them to do it.

Bank of America and its shareholders, as well as the American public , should know that this is not acceptable.  India is holding America hostage and Bank of AMERICA is hiring them do it.
 
(As a side note,  Emily reports that when she speaks with Bank of America workers in India there is no monitoring or recording of the conversation…is anyone in charge, does anyone care?)

Is this Bank of AMERICA or Bank of AmeriCAN’T?