Discover Card funding terrorist letter

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

It's more complicated. I had signatory authority on company accounts, which exposed me to additional IRS scrutiny for accounts over $10,000. They get to comingle your personal assets with company assets when regulating illicit transactions overseas. Apparently, we pay for 'safety' with loss of freedom, which is a weird twist on the 'freedom isn't free' mantra.

my UK bank had me sign a waver as a condition of having an account which states they will provide "any" information to the IRS that they may request about my accounts. Not sure what the proper term for the document was, but it was basically absolving them of liability for passing on personal information to another entity. I don't have anything to hide so i signed it, but based on principle i don't like it.

[Abdullah71601]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

my UK bank had me sign a waver as a condition of having an account which states they will provide "any" information to the IRS that they may request about my accounts. Not sure what the proper term for the document was, but it was basically absolving them of liability for passing on personal information to another entity. I don't have anything to hide so i signed it, but based on principle i don't like it.

I don't have anything to hide that I know of. Some bored bureaucrat looking for bonus opportunities may decide I'm suspicious and make my life miserable for a couple years investigating frivolous claims though. It's always better to limit government intrusion, but apparently 'the people' have decided the government can't keep us safe without monitoring my bank account.

[Constantine]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

my UK bank had me sign a waver as a condition of having an account which states they will provide "any" information to the IRS that they may request about my accounts. Not sure what the proper term for the document was, but it was basically absolving them of liability for passing on personal information to another entity. I don't have anything to hide so i signed it, but based on principle i don't like it.

The correct term is indeed a waiver as you say, and all US persons have to submit this when when opening an account with a bank outside the US. You can thank the US government's FATCA regulation for this. A lot of banks don't even want to bother with this and if they determine you are a US person they don't even let you open an account - this is causing big problems to US expats around the world.

Edit: also your bank will be reporting your assets/income in your account to the IRS on a regular basis, so it is not just a matter that they "may" give your information if the IRS asks them for it.

[Laszlo]

Originally Posted by gmh1013

No......just if you have a strange last name like my wife....she kept her maiden name because of kids etc....like i said she is Mexican...but Sephardic Jew. Mexico city has a High Jewish population from when the Jews were run out Spain hundreds of years ago living in Mexico. Most dont even know they are Jewish blood.

That's nuts.

[gmh1013]

Originally Posted by 77T

I would add this to the content driven part: it is also netflow and behavior-driven. Metadata is derived from email patterns, cellphone use, online patterns as well as financial transactions and accounts opened or closed.

All of this develops a cross reference to the institution's customer database. So if an uncertainty score hits a threshold, and the customer file is perhaps lacking some data, the customer gets selective enforcement of the KYC rules.

KYC controls typically include the following:

- Collection and analysis of basic identity information such as Identity documents (referred to in US regulations and practice as a "Customer Identification Program" or CIP)

- Name matching against lists of known parties (such as "politically exposed person" or PEP)

- Determination of the customer's risk in terms of propensity to commit money laundering, terrorist finance, or identity theft

- Creation of an expectation of a customer's transactional behavior

- Monitoring of a customer's transactions against expected behavior and recorded profile as well as that of the customer's peers


So to the OP's first point, it is possible one spouse will get selected while the other spouse isn't selected - but it's highly unlikely it is racially or religiously profiled.

That makes zero sense.....she is a 70 year old great grandmother.....never charged over 1k on Discover and had a balance before she closed it of 78 bucks. She has no money,all the money is in my name....she would have less than 2k in her own name. The only people I know have got a letter like that are Hispanic or foreign born that replied to my request on another website....

[77T]

Originally Posted by gmh1013

That makes zero sense.....she is a 70 year old great grandmother.....never charged over 1k on Discover and had a balance before she closed it of 78 bucks. She has no money,all the money is in my name....she would have less than 2k in her own name. The only people I know have got a letter like that are Hispanic or foreign born that replied to my request on another website....

I'm not sure about what part makes no sense - could you expand that reply?

The facts I shared are simply from the KYC rules.

My opinion is that KYC is not racial-based or religion-based targeting rules.

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by gmh1013

That makes zero sense.....she is a 70 year old great grandmother.....never charged over 1k on Discover and had a balance before she closed it of 78 bucks. She has no money,all the money is in my name....she would have less than 2k in her own name. The only people I know have got a letter like that are Hispanic or foreign born that replied to my request on another website....

just playing devils advocate here, but what you are describing might warrant them to get clarification. Someone who appears to have no money but lives at an address (with you) she could not on paper appear to afford. No money in her own name and not a whole lot of paper trail because of it. Have you considered that?

Plus she would have had to count your assets in order to get a credit card in the first place as no one will extend credit to anyone with a net worth of 2k. So asking where is the money coming from is a reasonable question.

[gmh1013]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

just playing devils advocate here, but what you are describing might warrant them to get clarification. Someone who appears to have no money but lives at an address (with you) she could not on paper appear to afford. No money in her own name and not a whole lot of paper trail because of it. Have you considered that?

Plus she would have had to count your assets in order to get a credit card in the first place as no one will extend credit to anyone with a net worth of 2k. So asking where is the money coming from is a reasonable question.

We have joint accounts.....I only have IRA account in my name only. She has very very little money in hers. Plus she has had the Disco card over 7 years.....this is not a new card.
I just applied for Chase Sapphire and was approved for a higher limit than Disco gave me......They only asked for S.S. and i told them we were retired. We will use Chase and AMEX gold and blue as the main credit cards now. I had charged over 25k on a Disco card buying a Rolex once.....if they lose enough customers they may stop. I have a FICA score over 800 so that helps get any credit card want.

[cdmorenot]

Blame it on OFAC ! I can't tell you how many banking institutions my clients have gotten kicked out off with only a few days notice.

[Bryant Park]

Originally Posted by gmh1013

That makes zero sense.....she is a 70 year old great grandmother.....never charged over 1k on Discover and had a balance before she closed it of 78 bucks. She has no money,all the money is in my name....she would have less than 2k in her own name. The only people I know have got a letter like that are Hispanic or foreign born that replied to my request on another website....

It would appear that no facts will dissuade you of your conclusion that Discovery is acting in an anti Semitic/Hispanic manner.

You may be able to argue that they are more stringent in their observance of KYC laws than other CC companies, but you have offered nothing but anecdotes and conjecture to support your main claim.

To do so is slander. You can't just call individuals or companies racists without being able to produce facts. Once again prove it please!

Lastly, the federal trade commission enforces the equal credit opportunity act which defines the discriminatory behavior you accuse them of as illegal.

[Star Ferry]

Originally Posted by Constantine

The correct term is indeed a waiver as you say, and all US persons have to submit this when when opening an account with a bank outside the US. You can thank the US government's FATCA regulation for this. A lot of banks don't even want to bother with this and if they determine you are a US person they don't even let you open an account - this is causing big problems to US expats around the world.

x2 Opening an account here was a pain the ass in 2015 and I've heard it's become even harder. The result that many banks won't accept US customers might have been the original intent of the regulation

Originally Posted by Bryant Park

It would appear that no facts will dissuade you of your conclusion that Discovery is acting in an anti Semitic/Hispanic manner.

You may be able to argue that they are more stringent in their observance of KYC laws than other CC companies, but you have offered nothing but anecdotes and conjecture to support your main claim.

To do so is slander. You can't just call individuals or companies racists without being able to produce facts. Once again prove it please!

Lastly, the federal trade commission enforces the equal credit opportunity act which defines the discriminatory behavior you accuse them of as illegal.

You are correct on all points but it's not worth your time to argue this

Had a similar issue yesterday: my korean tutor said that the Rothschilds wanted to foment war in Korea so they could profiteer (her friend convinced her of this). After over 5 minutes of explaining the decline of the Rothschild dynasty, the current business lines (financial advisory, wine, etc.) and their lack of relevance to waging war, I realized I had completely wasted my efforts. Nice girl but some people don't care to engage in logical argument

[jbachert]

I got the same request....my last name is of German origin and I’m about as WASP as they come.....I’m thinking they aren’t targeting a specific group.

[No.15]

My parents got one as well. They are WASC(atholic) :D

So racism theory seems to be debunked

[Bryant Park]

Let's see did all of the recipients have dogs as pets? If so Discover are dog haters. Perhaps they all like bacon, therefore Discover must be run be vegans.... and so it goes.

Wait a second all those mentioned are some how related to a Rolex owners. Those b--terds at Discover must be Apple Watch people.

I hope the OP feels at least a little better about his treatment having been randomly chosen and has a better day.

[austinp]

Everybody knows Discover hates dogs!

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

[Knappo 1307]

Originally Posted by Bryant Park

The decision has nothing to do with the customers name. Entirely based on the "completeness" of the clients file. Please stop, what you are suggesting is ludicrous. It's not random but content driven.

Originally Posted by Bryant Park

One last things to consider. The following are the last names of Discovers Board of Directors: Nelson, Weinbach, Aronin, Bush, Case, Duncan, Eazor, Glassman, Lenny, Maheras, Moscow and Thierry.

I have no idea, nor would I speculate or care about the origins of these names but they certainly appear diverse. Seems extremely unfair for you to have slandered them without doing your homework.

I think a retraction is in order or some facts to support your accusations please.

Originally Posted by Bryant Park

It would appear that no facts will dissuade you of your conclusion that Discovery is acting in an anti Semitic/Hispanic manner.

You may be able to argue that they are more stringent in their observance of KYC laws than other CC companies, but you have offered nothing but anecdotes and conjecture to support your main claim.

To do so is slander. You can't just call individuals or companies racists without being able to produce facts. Once again prove it please!

Lastly, the federal trade commission enforces the equal credit opportunity act which defines the discriminatory behavior you accuse them of as illegal.

Originally Posted by Bryant Park

Let's see did all of the recipients have dogs as pets? If so Discover are dog haters. Perhaps they all like bacon, therefore Discover must be run be vegans.... and so it goes.

Wait a second all those mentioned are some how related to a Rolex owners. Those b--terds at Discover must be Apple Watch people.

I hope the OP feels at least a little better about his treatment having been randomly chosen and has a better day.

Do you work for Discover?

[Bryant Park]

Originally Posted by Knappo 1307

Do you work for Discover?

Shareholder, and trying to give OP a chance to do the right thing.

[Star Ferry]

Originally Posted by Knappo 1307

Do you work for Discover?

besides a few C-level positions, working at a credit card company wouldn't buy his collection

I assume he's a front-office employee at an investment bank or alternative investment firm and was tired of reading BS

[Bryant Park]

Originally Posted by Star Ferry

besides a few C-level positions, working at a credit card company wouldn't buy his collection

I assume he's a front-office employee at an investment bank or alternative investment firm and was tired of reading BS

Nailed it! Racists and people who knowingly falsely accuse others of racism are on par in my book. I don't think that was the OPs intent but wanted the record straight.

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by Star Ferry

besides a few C-level positions, working at a credit card company wouldn't buy his collection

I assume he's a front-office employee at an investment bank or alternative investment firm and was tired of reading BS

[Knappo 1307]

Originally Posted by Star Ferry

besides a few C-level positions, working at a credit card company wouldn't buy his collection

I assume he's a front-office employee at an investment bank or alternative investment firm and was tired of reading BS

Forgot about that collection. One of the best I've ever seen....
For the record, I agree with your take on this.