Chase did a bad thing, so we did a good thing

https://www.chaseoptout.com/

by zbruhnke • 7 years ago

610 231 7 years ago

chaseoptout.com

adzm• 7 years ago

Wow, Chase is acting like they are a gym or something by requiring a snail-mail letter to opt-out.

asimjalis• 7 years ago

How secure is this website? What prevents a phishing site from pretending to be an opt-out site?

zbruhnke16• 7 years ago

Hey there,

Maker of the site here! Our servers don't touch any of this data, it goes straight to Very Good Security and lives in a PCI compliant vault ... We ourselves are building a new kind of bank so we take security very seriously and are not phishing.

Happy to talk through in more details but the FAQs do a pretty good job of that too!

snug3• 7 years ago

So how do you send the mail if you never get the data?

codemati• 7 years ago

FYI - there is some duplicated content under the "How does this site work?" heading.

krrose27• 7 years ago

With a better understanding of how VGS works I really just fall back to my weakest link in the chain questions:

Does Lob hold any PCI level certifications? It appears they hold HIPAA but I see no mention of PCI?

Does Lob provide any interface that shows sent mail and the content (it appears they do)? If so and they don't hold any PCI certifications what benefit do we really have with ever getting a VGS token?

What stops you from scraping this data from Lob's API?

---

Original comment below.

I'm confused on how this data lands at Lob with an account number if you never get it.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the letter you send includes the account number and not the VGS token?

All of my following questions assumes an affirmative answer.

How is the account number landed in Lob? It appears something must be calling the Lob API with an unencrypted account number? What is making that call?

Does Lob hold any PCI level certifications? It appears they hold HIPAA but I see no mention of PCI?

Does Lob provide any interface that shows sent mail and the content? If so and they don't hold any PCI certifications what benefit do we really have with ever getting a VGS token?

snug3• 7 years ago

Wait, you want me to put my credit card number and my personal info?

zbruhnke16• 7 years ago

We also give you the ability to just download the form and mail it yourself!

Unfortunately Chase forces customers to mail a letter with this information on it so there's not much we can do

snug3• 7 years ago

Awesome, seems like a great service. I myself don't think it'll be a good idea to give someone my credit card number.

In another comment you talked about starting another kind of bank? details?

jasonmp85• 7 years ago

there's not much we can do

Open-source a script I can run locally to generate PDFs with the information your form uses.

latchkey2• 7 years ago

I wrote to Chase on their 'secure message portal', which feels like it is straight out of 1995. I told them I'm out of the country and cannot send mail.

I told them that I am rejecting the agreement to arbitrate. I also said that since their message portal feels official, this would be what I would use as proof of my opt out in court, if the need arises. I saved some screenshots as well.

They have updated me once already to say that they are still working on a response.

patagonia• 7 years ago

JCrew credit card requires a post card mailed to opt out of arbitration

yhoneycomb• 7 years ago

This seems sketchy as fuck - your website, I mean

Might as well leave a box for the SSN while you're at it

zbruhnke16• 7 years ago

Again, I wish we did not have to do this but this is what Chase is forcing customers to do.

We also give customers a way to just download the form without giving us the info but then of course we can't mail it for them ... we were just trying to make this easier for customers to opt out with the shitty options we were given

smallarmsdealer• 7 years ago

Maybe an option would be a client-side only version of this form that onsubmit simply renders a PDF...then users could choose to mail or upload said PDF? (Double-sided for the address bit in a clear envelope window)

Good on you guys for making the thing and showing some effort, wasn't aware of their opt-out policy.

pvg• 7 years ago

I mean, I believe this is well-intended but Chase is not forcing anyone to to enter their banking info into some random site on the internet. That's something you're asking and, at first glance, it seems completely bonkers.

kelnos• 7 years ago

Can you make the link for the download more obvious and less dark-pattern-y? I found it only after scouring the page (somehow the text under the form didn't catch my eye easily), and then it popped up a modal that unnecessarily asks for my email address. I closed it, annoyed, just barely noticing the small-font link to download without entering my email address.

If you actually care about privacy and claim to not be using or selling our information for anything, why don't you make it easier to avoid giving information entirely?

Having said that, thank you for creating this. I had left Chase's email about the terms change in my inbox, starred, so I'd remember to take care of this, but not having to formulate my own letter makes things so much easier.

mandelbrotwurst• 7 years ago

Chase is not forcing their customers to give you their info.

heavymark2• 7 years ago

They also provide a form for you to mail yourself and looks like they are only asking for info that Chase requests (chase does not require a social so that wouldn't be on this =).

jld• 7 years ago

Does this only apply to Chase credit cards? Or also to other Chase services?

zbruhnke16• 7 years ago

It's mostly cards they changed TOS on but I'd have to advise you to check your emails to see if it applies to you

ziroshima• 7 years ago

I was surprised when I received the letter explaining this from Chase. I made a mental note to write them a letter and opt-out, which I had immediately forgotten about until now. Thanks to the creators of the site.

zbruhnke16• 7 years ago

Thanks! We're hoping it helps a few people spur their memory and get this done! :)

mjkornbl16• 7 years ago

Here from myradvocate.com, which is partnering on this project with Zach / HM Bradley. We're psyched for this to go live.

We track news about arbitration pretty closely, and I've been surprised and impressed by how much this Chase issue has "broken through." I no joke overheard a random convo about it on BART on Sunday.

fooey• 7 years ago

Isn't the likely outcome of opting out that Chase just closes your account?

mjkornbl16• 7 years ago

They have said they will not: https://twitter.com/ChaseSupport/status/1135961244760977409

I've been party to some interesting convos about whether it would be legal for them to do so.

kevin_b_er2• 7 years ago

So few will opt out, Chase will get what it wants: No customers can make a dispute with chase in a court of law. They cannot band together for gross abuse. They will have achieved removing courts of law from the equation and replacing them with secret privatized courts that do not have to have any regard for the rule of law.

crystaln• 7 years ago

Not if there is a critical mass of people opting out.

bunderbunder• 7 years ago

If so, that would be convenient. It would save having to arrange for it yourself.

keehun• 7 years ago

I read somewhere that Chase will close out your account if you opt out. Is this true?

mjkornbl16• 7 years ago

Doesn't seem like it: https://twitter.com/ChaseSupport/status/1135961244760977409

kileywm• 7 years ago

I just want to point out that, as a user, opting out of this portion of Chase's agreement could result in Chase deciding to close your account. Not advocating what course of action to take, but merely pointing out that there is risk associated with this action.

That being said, I have read through the email from Chase, and there is nothing that explicitly states that they will close it as a result of the user opting out of arbitration.

Does anyone have experience with similar situations with Chase or other banks and agreement opt-outs that they could share?

mjkornbl16• 7 years ago

This is a reasonable consideration in my (non-legal) opinion. Chase has apparently come out and said they will not be closing accounts however: https://milestomemories.boardingarea.com/chase-says-they-wil...

supernova87a• 7 years ago

Yes, just to emphasize this post -- I have read elsewhere that your declining these terms could lead to your account(s) being closed immediately. What makes anyone think they wouldn't do that?

lozenge3• 7 years ago

Disagreeing with the terms could close your account, but this section is severable (can be disagreed with separately).

Generally, opt-out is added to reduce the risk that courts will throw out the arbitration clause as unconscionable (unfair). Companies know that most people won't opt out, and any class action brought by somebody who opts out will only apply to other customers who opted out- cutting damages by 99%+.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_arbitration#Unconscio...

fataliss• 7 years ago

I did contact chase on twitter about this and was told they would not close my account

ilaksh• 7 years ago

If people didn't have enough reasons to close their Chase account already, this is a pretty good one.

I would actually like to see that service. A website that closes your bank account for you. They can be very tricky when you try to do that.

raxxorrax• 7 years ago

Maybe you should close your account if you feel threatened by behavior that could lead them to do so. Better cut ties immediately.

This is disgraceful behavior from a bank and they also made clear that they tend to close accounts for arbitrary reasons.

axaxs• 7 years ago

Thanks, I'd been meaning to do this but couldn't be arsed.

This seems to be, at least in part, advertising for your bank. I clicked on it, but could get no real information about it. Would be curious for more info about it, as I'm generally tired of dealing with bad online presence.

dbpatterson• 7 years ago

Link to the "full privacy policy" 404s, which is not a good thing, given you are asking people to enter their full names, addresses, CC numbers.

zbruhnke16• 7 years ago

Hi, site creator here - link is here and is not 404'ing for me

https://www.chaseoptout.com/PrivacyPolicy.pdf - let me know if you mean something else?

cdubzzz2• 7 years ago

Under the "What is the actual language in the agreement sent by Chase?" FAQ item, it says --

"Can I (the customer) reject this agreement to arbitrate?

Yes. You have the right to reject this agreement to arbitrate if you notify us no later than 8/9/2019. You must do so in writing by stating that you reject this agreement to arbitrate and include your name, account number, address and personal signature. Your notice must be mailed to us at P.O. Box 15298, Wilmington, DE 19850-5298. Rejection notices sent to any other address, or sent by electronic mail or communicated orally, will not be accepted or effective." (emphasis mine)

How does this service handle the "personal signature" requirement?

mjkornbl16• 7 years ago

We are relying on legal opinions that the site fully complies with the ESIGN Act. That act makes electronic signatures on par with physical signatures. (Disclosure = I'm not a lawyer) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Signatures_in_Globa...

eganist• 7 years ago

Edit: dumb question from me. I didn't follow the flow because I don't have a chase account, so I wasn't aware it was a multi-part form.

Original comment below:

---

I'm likewise not an attorney, but how hard would it be to do a simple "Type your name here to represent your signature" type of deal? This is the most common lay practice I've seen, with the more common CYA practice for electronic records being e.g. what Docusign or Adobe offer, or the use of cryptographic signatures.

mehrdadn10• 7 years ago

Just a layman here but that seems like a misinterpretation of the statute? The idea of the statute seems to be that the government will not void, nullify, or refuse to enforce the terms of an electronic contract. It does not state that in any given contract, private parties must accept the terms signed in any form whatsoever -- that's still left as something for those people to agree on, and Chase very clearly spelled out that that's not valid for the contract. So the "reason" for the invalidity of a contract wouldn't be that it has an electronic signature, but that one of the parties simply didn't follow the terms it set for validity (whatever they were -- in this case, that they be personally signed, and mailed by the actual account holder). So I'm very curious how legal opinions interpret the statute otherwise, since I don't see any hint that it was intended to be interpreted as allowing one of the parties to change the signing terms to include electronic signatures.

SCHiM• 7 years ago

Can someone knowledgeable explain how a company can pick and chose was does and what doesn't constitute a binding agreement?

AFAIK in the Netherlands oral statements, when overheard by a witness, have the same legal standing as a signed contract.

Gene_Parmesan• 7 years ago

I'm a US attorney but not in contracts. Contracts is a fairly complicated area of law, and the fundamental common law of Ks that you study in law school tends to be very different from how Ks work "on the ground." Most notably, statutes currently exist that change the way this common law operates in sometimes non-obvious ways. Standard disclaimer here that this is in no way to be construed as legal advice, this is not my area of expertise; take this as high-level background.

Essentially, under the common law here, all that a contract needs in order to be valid is three things: a valid offer, a valid acceptance, and valid "consideration," where consideration is a legal term of art referring to 'something of value' gained through the agreement.

The idea is that, there is no servitude. Companies can offer whatever terms they want (subject to a very few number of restrictions, dependent on the industry/regulatory domain). You are under no pressure to accept. You can easily reject the terms by simply not using the product. Courts have generally been reluctant to prevent parties from agreeing to whatever lawful thing they want to agree to. The main exception is that you cannot have contracts which serve 'an illegal end.'

In the US, there's no need for a contract to be written or overheard at all. There need be no written document, no witnesses, no record whatsoever. So long as there is a valid offer (obvious jokes are not held to be valid offers, for instance), valid acceptance (you generally need to affirmatively signal acceptance, but this need not be oral or even explicit), and valid consideration (really nothing more than a formality nowadays, this is why many deeds say "exchanged for consideration of $1"), the contract is valid, even if it only exists in the minds of the two parties.

Obviously, proving such a contract can be difficult, but it can be done, particularly if the parties were acting in accordance with the terms of the claimed contract. If we orally agree that you will start working on building a shed for me, you buy supplies and deliver them to the site, but then stop work, you can't claim the contract never existed, because you've acted in accordance with that oral contract.

In this area specifically, there's been some progress made in getting the courts to understand the enormous power differential at play here. You nearly can't survive in this country without at least one credit card, and if all the major companies' cards have terms like this, then you don't really actually have a choice in the matter. It's been a slow process however.

svachalek• 7 years ago

It's called the "golden rule", they who have the gold make the rules.

OK, seriously, they don't technically get to decide what makes a binding agreement, a judge does that. But US law and US judges are very business-friendly. I mean there's the whole invented crime of "identity theft", whereby a bank who is defrauded by an individual gets to pass off their victimhood to a completely uninvolved third party.

latchkey2• 7 years ago

I wrote to Chase on their 'secure message portal', which feels like it is straight out of 1995. I told them I'm out of the country and cannot send mail.

They have updated me once already to say that they are still working on a response.

neilv7• 7 years ago

Assuming that you're completely legit and utterly competent, there's still a big security problem here: it's encouraging people to put their PII and CC info into arbitrary Web sites.

On top of that, it's further identifying them as both Chase CC holders and receptive to scams, qualifying them as leads for further phishing/scamming.

zbruhnke16• 7 years ago

Unfortunately this is the problem that Chase created ... we give users a way to download a form letter instead, but were just trying to make it as easy as possible for customers to opt out if they would like to do so

lozenge3• 7 years ago

You're teaching users it's OK to give out their account information "sometimes". Which is much less secure than "never".

gricardo995• 7 years ago

we give users a way to download a form letter instead

But you don't just let them download it. You make them give you their email address first.

Edit: Haha! No wait, you have to click through two levels of "Don't want to give us your info? Click here to get the letter". The first one asks for you email, only after the second do you actually get the letter. Why? They already said "dont want to...". Just give it to them!

Edit2: Also the form letter, prepopulated with the Chase customer service P.O. box address, is another scam pitfall. Anyone using this kind of form letter should always check the address with the financial institution before sending any forms, especially that include PII/financial information.

Sephr• 7 years ago

Is the form letter generated on the client-side?

craftyguy2• 7 years ago

Collecting/storing credit card numbers, names, and addresses is creating a whole new problem for users.

briandear4• 7 years ago

Chase didn’t set up a website asking for account numbers. So how did Chase create this problem? What exactly have they done wrong? If someone disagrees with the policy, they can opt-out, so what’s the problem that causes someone to need to give a bank account number to a random website? Why not just disclose in big letters what the site is all about: lead generation for a law firm? This isn’t some kind of “we like to help people,” project any more than ambulance chasers seek “justice.” There is a place for lawsuits certainly, but let’s not pretend this is about “helping,” it’s about lead generation.

saagarjha• 7 years ago

Note that there is a PDF for those who don't want to enter their information: https://www.chaseoptout.com/ChaseOptOut.pdf

neilv7• 7 years ago

I don't see how that's relevant to what I said. The problem I was citing was the encouragement to put this info into a Web form on an arbitrary site. You should always be discouraging that.

monksy• 7 years ago

It's even worse than that. If they try to authenticate you on the phone. They'll suggest calling you back, and they don't know what phone number they'll be calling you from.

They literally ask for their customers to pick up the phone from unknown numbers and give your bank details.

stallmanite• 7 years ago

How does this shit get thought up? Their security team was cool with this? Mind boggling

bmer• 7 years ago

IANAL, so can someone help me understand how bullet proof their privacy policy is (https://www.chaseoptout.com/PrivacyPolicy.pdf)?

It seems to me that it's pretty flimsy? In particular:

To conduct research and to improve and promote our services . We use the information wecollect to conduct research and to improve or enhance and promote our Services.

Both promotion and research are pretty damn broad terms, right?

_bxg12• 7 years ago

Oh dang. So this whole thing is just a big data grab. Even if they aren't going to make fraudulent charges, that's a clear ulterior motive.

choppaface• 7 years ago

Yes but it’s your Chase account number. If it gets leaked through this service, Chase precipitated that leak through their unethical use of arbitration.

Idk but I only have Chase through Amazon. Chase might get effed, but my Amazon account will probably always be fine.

3xblah3• 7 years ago

"And who even has stamps lying around anymore?"

People who order stamps online?

If the problem is writing the letter or stamps, then why not just send the user a postage-paid envelope, pre-addressed to Chase, with a generic letter that she can fill in with her personal information and deposit into the mail?

You should now be wondering how this "service" can be "free". As someone else has figured out, this is a company that wants lists of Chase customers to which they can market their consumer arbitration-related services.

This is interesting since the whole point of opting out here is that consumers want to avoid arbitration and reserve their rights to sue.

Other websites are offering a more sensible solution for those who cannot be bothered to write a letter: templates for a simple letter a customer can just print out, fill in her information, sign and mail.

toomuchtodo5• 7 years ago

If you expect customers to print out a template, obtain postage, and mail it, your expectations are too high.

happytoexplain• 7 years ago

Do you have a link? This is exactly what I want.

kardos• 7 years ago

They offer a template as well

news_to_me• 7 years ago

This is great!

What would be really cool is to see this extended to many types of opt-out-by-email things — I know it's a pretty widely-used dark pattern by e.g. newspapers and spam mail companies.

rajacombinator• 7 years ago

Very suspicious. Why should I opt out? Why did some companies/individuals think this was worth spending time building and promoting this service and spending potentially millions of dollars in print & postage to mail letters?

mjkornbl16• 7 years ago

Fact: If millions of people were to take us up on this, we (Radvocate and our friends at HM Bradley) would get tangible value from the publicity around it.

I'd love for us to have that problem.

mjkornbl16• 7 years ago

As for whether you should opt out, I honestly don't know and that is your decision to make.

GrumpyNl• 7 years ago

Nice initiative, but who pays the bill, like the stamps etc?

zbruhnke16• 7 years ago

We're covering that for now because we thought it was the right thing to do

sagres• 7 years ago

That was easy. Thank you for creating this!

ycombonator• 7 years ago

Are you collecting email addresses of your future customers for marketing purposes ? Whats the guarantee that you don't mine the customer address information you collect for your new bank venture http://pdf.secdatabase.com/92/0001772417-19-000001.pdf

neilv7• 7 years ago

What did your legal counsel say about liability here? For example, what happens if a cardholder who used your opt-out service has a dispute with Chase, and Chase claims they did not receive the opt-out?

What has counsel advised about any risk of federal authorities investigating you as possible CC phishing operation (perhaps initiated by monitoring for bank-phishing-like domain name)? (Obviously you have some defense, but the best case might cost you money and misery.)

Also, do you expect to keep the domain name past an ICANN dispute?

AngeloAnolin• 7 years ago

It mentioned that the opt-out requires a specimen signature (from the FAQ as well What do I need to do to opt-out?). How would you be able to ensure that the opt-out process for the customer will be valid / accepted by Chase if there's no actual human signature?

From Chase's perspective, wouldn't they be asking for more details especially if their business hinges on retaining people into their business as much as they can?

Update: Additional wording

mjkornbl16• 7 years ago

There are laws around what counts as a signature. A company doesn't really get to set that unilaterally: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Signatures_in_Globa...

pbk1• 7 years ago

Very nice! I was actually in the process of building the exact same thing but charging users for the cost of mail and server/API expenses.

Xunxi• 7 years ago

There's often a sinister motivation for such goodwill. Most often than not.

Are you just going to discard all the data afterwards or is it just a ploy to build a mailing list for your bank?

jdhn• 7 years ago

I'm betting the latter. If you click on the HM Bradley logo it takes you to their homepage where it says that they're building a bank for the "next hundred years". I'll hand it to them, this is a pretty good way of collecting lots of email addresses.

burntsushi• 7 years ago

Yup, I just happened to notice this by chance when the email came. I was really surprised to see this. Fortunately, I do have stamps lying around, so I've already mailed out a letter rejecting the agreement to arbitrate.

strangattractor• 7 years ago

Do you really want to give a site run by someone you don't know vital info and a account number. Probably legit but ...

zbruhnke16• 7 years ago

totally fine if you don't! we also allow you to just download the form so you can fill it out and mail it yourself

macspoofing• 7 years ago

You shouldn't even be collecting this info.

llaappqq• 7 years ago

Question: how do we prove in the court in the future that we've sent them the rejection letter?

gruez• 7 years ago

Tracked mail would do, although it also means extra $$$

zbruhnke16• 7 years ago

We're getting tracking on all of the letters and will send that information with the emails as well! Sorry we did not make that more clear

m-ee• 7 years ago

Certified mail with a return receipt

mkay581• 7 years ago

Sending certified mail only can prove that something was sent. Doesn't necessarily mean that the mail you sent contained an opt-out notice.

miguelmota• 7 years ago

Cool service. A concern is that scammers can use variations of the domain (chaseoptout.co optoutchase.com etc) and use adwords to get on top of search results to trick people and steal personal identifying information if this thing gets popular enough.

la_barba2• 7 years ago

Well, its the same concern with any eCommerce website that takes your CC, or really, just about any website that has a form input field. Few people in my office click on pretty much any link random people email them. I've even told friends/co-workers to reset their PW because they've been breached based on HIBP, but people never seem to care unless they personally get affected. I've given up..

kccqzy• 7 years ago

I have a feeling that Chase will send a letter to the operator of this website using some excuse like unauthorized use of the Chase trademark or something.

mjkornbl16• 7 years ago

Interesting point. Here from Radvocate (partner on this product). We currently help consumers take action under their contracts with 20+ wireless / cable / ISP brands. We are up and running fine.

Corporations do have a stake in contractual and legal systems continuing to function, as well as in not calling down negative news coverage on themselves.

rdxm• 7 years ago

ok, so this is being provided by a new/competing bank and a marketing agency. What could possibly go wrong?

A quick read of privacy policy should dissuade anyone form putting information into this system.

A+ for guerilla marketing

F- for anything related to privacy, etc...

kevin_b_er2• 7 years ago

Aside from the issue of trust, the site does a terrible job of explaining how bad arbitration is.

The arbiter is permitted the following: * To make an arbitrary judgement outside the scope of the agreement. * The arbiter is not required to follow any law but the arbitration act. They are permitted a manifest disregard for the law. * The arbiter is not required to be fair or impartial. They aren't a judge. * The arbiter may be blacklisted by companies if they rule against the corporation. The companies know who rules against them. * The arbitrations are secret. You may research how the arbiter acted in the past. The company knows, though. You just don't.

To engage in a corporate controlled mandatory binding arbitration is to leave the rule of law and enter into a dystopia where even the courts of law are privatized. Consumer protection laws? Gone. State consumer laws? Gone.

JumpCrisscross3• 7 years ago

Side note, arbitration is cheaper than litigating in court. The only thing opting out affords consumers is easier access to class action suits. If you think you might bring an individual claim against Chase, arbitration is cheaper and a more level playing field (no countersuit strategy) than state or federal court.

TL; DR arbitration is not the corporate-controller enigma many seem to think it is. You trade off real benefits by opting out of Chase's mutual binding arbitration terms.

Most people should opt out, but not everyone. (Nobody should opt out unthinkingly.)

indigodaddy• 7 years ago

Any advantages or downsides to opting out of Chase’s arbitration if Chase sues you for credit non-payment? I read the sites FAQs (only mentioned class action and if one or more people sue Chase) and appears that situation is likely not relevant for this opt-out?

rkhassen2• 7 years ago

For me the red flag is them willing to send this letter to Chase, via snail mail at no charge to you. Nobody gives something for nothing. So I thought, why would they do this? after reading through the form, at the bottom, it looks like one of the companies, who sponsors this site, "Radvocate" seems like they are in the "class action" lawsuit business. https://myradvocate.com/

This site is about having enough potential clients are able to sue Chase at some point in the future, whenever a class action lawsuit comes up - and heck, they even will have a customer list and a relationship with you from sending this "free" letter for you in the past.

Usually in those kinds of cases, the end recipient gets very little - perhaps some subscription to a ID protection service or a few bucks but the firm who runs the class action makes a lot.

On the one hand, maybe it helps keep them honest (they cite Wells Fargo) so its good to be able to. But clearly there is some vested interest here on the part of Radvocate.

JMTQp8lwXL• 7 years ago

Usually in those kinds of cases, the end recipient gets very little - perhaps some subscription to a ID protection service or a few bucks but the firm who runs the class action makes a lot.

This suggests to me you feel that class action judgments do not adequately compensate claimants. This shouldn't dissuade us from fighting back against businesses who treat their customers unfairly.

The problem isn't the class action lawsuit or Radvocate. It goes much deeper. It's goes to the core of businesses (e.g, banks) who provide critical access to the financial system forcing you, the consumer, to resolve disputes through their shadow justice system in which they pay the arbiters, which have a history of siding more frequently with the corporation.

dsfyu404ed• 7 years ago

From a "consumer who wouldn't individually sue chase" perspective I see nothing wrong here.

I know many here consider this to be ideological heresy but it's possible to have a transaction where both parties come out ahead and this seems like one of those win-wins to me. They do a little work for you in exchange for putting your name on a list of people they can use in a class action, you might even get $5 or something out of it if they win.

Putting your PII into a random website should be what raises red flags here. I hope they're not storing the account numbers, or at least not storing them with the associated personal details.

PunksATawnyFill2• 7 years ago

win/win

wutbrodo• 7 years ago

It's a standard HN (and wider society) complaint that makes very little sense: the best case for corporate behavior is having incentives that are aligned with the consumer or whatever your definition of societal good is.

markovbot• 7 years ago

So the "downside" is that they might ask for your help causing more problems for Chase in the future? I didn't click the link but now I'm going to go sign up!

mjkornbl16• 7 years ago

Radvocate here: We do have a vested interest. Over time, we want to be the place you come when you have a dispute against a big company because we'll fight hard for you.

We're excited to partner on this project partly because it is very "on brand" for us from that perspective — we can help people, get our name out there, and shine light on an issue that matters to us. We're a business, but we're also all in this business (instead of some other business) because we want to make the system fairer for consumers.

ETA: Also, to correct one misapprehension: we are not in the class action business. We actually help consumers pursue individual arbitrations. We think more people should know that even if their contract doesn't let them sue, they actually do have a way to assert their power through arbitration. If anything, we'll have more customers for our current business if no one opts out of their Chase clause.

pkfrank2• 7 years ago

Bravo. In my view, this connection and upside was made appropriately-clear in the "Who are you and why did you build this?" section, and the context from the logo attached to the site.

Very clever marketing, good on you for managing this, and I hope you see a great return for your efforts.

rkhassen2• 7 years ago

Good points and I appreciate what you write here.

And an interesting business concept - to help consumers pursue individual arbitrations. That could be really cool especially against large corporations when they are abusive. What do you charge as people go through their individual arbitration process/ how does the profit model work?

I really have mixed feelings about the legal system - on

Also, Radvocate, wondering if you can address the PII concerns other's have raised, as that is a very big deal.

mmaunder• 7 years ago

Hope your site is secure. And I don't mean TLS. Collecting that data paints a giant bullseye on it for hackers.

bribri• 7 years ago

Great Comment.

sametmax• 7 years ago

Good transparency here, an appreciated and professional online reaction to criticism.

trentmb2• 7 years ago

I hold PoA for my father- what's the best way, using this form, to say they're his accounts, but I'm the one filing the letter on his behalf?

mjkornbl16• 7 years ago

An additional point on the logistics:

I don't have direct access to the fulfillment of this particular initiative, but in general we can take advantage of the efficiency of sending multiple legal notices in the same packet. So the cost per individual letter can be much less than one would assume.

ClassyJacket• 7 years ago

Nonsense, their FAQ says:

"We’re a group of like-minded companies who like building things that help people. "

They're just doing this out of the goodness of their hearts!!!

hnruss• 7 years ago

If they're going to sue Chase someday, more power to them.

ForHackernews• 7 years ago

This site is about having enough potential clients are able to sue Chase at some point in the future

...that sounds good to me! I certainly don't have the resources to take Chase to court myself, and who knows, maybe the existence of this class-action-in-waiting will keep Chase from being as shady.

besieged• 7 years ago

That seems like a fair trade off.

mleonhard• 7 years ago

I think I'll just close my Chase credit card account.

giancarlostoro• 7 years ago

I know everyones talking about how sketchy the online forms are. But my question is what sketchy practices is Chase involved in that they need this to be part of their agreement. Secondly and its been noted here before why are such clauses even legal? I really hope we can take the concept to court and murder it completely.

techsupporter• 7 years ago

Secondly and its been noted here before why are such clauses even legal?

It's legal because of a staggeringly overbroad reading of the Federal Arbitration Act that the Supreme Court has said is fine and Congress has refused to reign in.

I really hope we can take the concept to court and murder it completely.

Many will enter, zero will win. Virtually every attempt at limiting the Federal Arbitration Act's scope in legal proceedings has been turned down by the Supreme Court.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AT%26T_Mobility_LLC_v._Concepc...

* https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/american-express...

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epic_Systems_Corp._v._Lewis

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preston_v._Ferrer

PunksATawnyFill2• 7 years ago

I caught these assholes at Chase doing this and demanded a refund of fees, which of course they provided. They're just testing your resolve, every day:

"JPMorgan agreed to pay $110 million to settle a class-action lawsuit over its procedures for charging customers overdraft fees. It was among more than a dozen big banks sued by their customers for reordering debits from their accounts to maximize the possibility that the accounts would become overdrawn, which would generate more fees."

linuxhansl• 7 years ago

Is Chase's practice itself legal? Forcing mailing a physical letter that must contain a lot of personal identifying information...?

That's a really shady move and I'll take note to avoid any business with Chase in the future.

olalonde• 7 years ago

I have nothing better to say than clever marketing for the two sponsors and nice website design.

gowld3• 7 years ago

HN title is contentless and doesn't even match the linked site.

420basteit• 7 years ago

From one media manipulator to another: when you pay the premium price for a long-standing hacker news account, it's usually more convincing to let people find the comment history for themselves.

Nition2• 7 years ago

Looks suspicious enough anyway if users check their history, considering that user posted for the first time in a year just to make that comment.

mirimir• 7 years ago

True. But they've never posted very frequently. So maybe this is just an important issue for them.

Also, are baseless allegations OK here?

mjkornbl16• 7 years ago

Touché. If I need Hacker News "influencer" services going forward, I will turn to you.

xwdv• 7 years ago

Is it really that much of a premium price? I’ve found a few HN accounts with downvote privileges for sale for reasonable prices compared to what people usually spend on marketing.

mancerayder• 7 years ago

Wait, just how what are points worth in an account resale? It can't possibly be worth it for first world adults to sell.

propogandist• 7 years ago

This sort of activity and behavior is common on sites like reddit. It's used by media companies and brands, especially as the reach is much bigger than HN comments.

Astroturfing is big business and can be very profitable. An account itself isn't worth much, it's the overall execution that matters.

dang• 7 years ago

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20160672 and marked it off-topic.

gortok• 7 years ago

One red flag for me is that for Chase, your Credit Card number is your account number. So we're going to give third parties our credit card number... That's safe.

sneak• 7 years ago

I give third parties my credit card number a half-dozen times per day. It’s not secret.

makeramen• 7 years ago

Want to make the same thing for SoFi? They require the same within 60 days after opening and account: https://www.sofi.com/b/policy/arbitration

the_arun• 7 years ago

Does this use Lob under the hood for print & mailing?

gene91• 7 years ago

Can Chase take adverse actions against customers that opt out? For example, denying future account applications, closing existing accounts, exclusion from future promotions, etc.

basicplus2• 7 years ago

SMAAS

Snail Mail As A Service

j_shi• 7 years ago

ps can’t click last button on iphone se via iOS hn app

vmurthy2• 7 years ago

For those of you who do have stamps, the PDF version of the letter is here : https://www.chaseoptout.com/ChaseOptOut.pdf

Mailing address: Chase Customer Service P.O. Box 15298 Wilmington, DE 19850-5298

P.S. The website gave the info. Don't sue me :-)

boh• 7 years ago

Give a random website my name, address, email and account number?? Yes please!

collinmanderson• 7 years ago

They have a direct link to the letter here:

https://www.chaseoptout.com/ChaseOptOut.pdf

Chase did a bad thing, so we did a good thing

Related Stories