NEWSDEBT

Hey everyone! It's William from Change.org. I wanted to pass on this message from Stef Gray about the amazing progress her campaign against Sallie Mae's "unemployment penalty" is making. Read on:

Whoa! Sallie Mae just blinked!

Today, only a couple of hours after I delivered 77,000 petition signatures from Change.org users to Sallie Mae’s front door, the company issued a statement saying that it would start applying its $50 per loan forbearance fee to customers’ loan balances instead of simply pocketing the cash. They’re obviously hearing your voices loud and clear!

I want to recognize how big Sallie Mae’s shift is. Previously, the company had called this fee a “good faith deposit”, even though it wasn’t a deposit at all! After so many people doubted Sallie Mae could be moved even a little bit, this policy change certainly comes as welcome news.

But it still isn’t enough, and my campaign isn’t over. Their move today does nothing to help borrowers like me, who graduated into the worst job market for new grads since World War II. The unemployed, the underemployed, and others facing economic hardship have no extra money to pay this onerous penalty.

The fact is, there’s still no reason Sallie Mae should be charging its private loan customers this fee when it’s not charged to their federal loan customers. The United States federal government doesn’t think people need to leave a “good-faith deposit” when requesting a forbearance for financial hardship -- why does Sallie Mae think this is necessary?

In fact, there are lots of questions Sallie Mae needs to publicly answer:

• Instead of this half-measure, why doesn’t Sallie Mae go all the way to remove this onerous burden from its worst-off borrowers?
• Does Sallie Mae still earn interest off the fees until they're released to borrowers?
• More importantly, do they get to continue counting the fees as cash on their financial books until the fee is applied to the loans?
• The Associated Press reports that their new policy will be retroactive to January 1 of this year. Why not make it retroactive to when they began charging this fee? This doesn’t give me back the $300 I’ve already paid!
• Why doesn’t Sallie Mae offer any forms of consolidation or income-based repayment to its student debtors?

It’s obvious to me that Sallie Mae isn’t at all serious about providing relief to distressed borrowers. Thankfully, there’s more you can do to push Sallie Mae to do the right thing:

• You can call Sallie Mae spokeswoman Patricia Christel at (302) 283-4076 and tell her you want them to drop their unemployment penalty. Here’s a sample script you can use:My name is _____, and I’m calling because Sallie Mae needs to go all the way to help distressed borrowers. Drop the unemployment penalty now!
• You can post a message to their Facebook Wall- here’s a sample message you can use:I won’t be fooled by Sallie Mae’s financial tricks and half-measures. If you’re serious about helping distressed borrowers like Stef Gray, you need to offer a real solution. Drop your unemployment penalty NOW! http://t.co/fiFCxMdG
• You can also call them out on Twitter! Just post this message:No more tricks! If @SallieMae is serious about helping distressed borrowers, they’ll drop the unemployment penalty NOW! http://chn.ge/SallieMae

I understand that my student debt is my responsibility. It’s a debt I want to pay back. But when my mom told me that education was the key to my future, neither of us knew the game was so rigged against borrowers like me. No student considering college, or who’s in college now, should be duped into using Sallie Mae’s private financial products.

-- Stef Gray

With today's "Occupy Our Homes" kickoff, the Occupy movement has gone from inhabiting the most public of spaces to the most private. They're not taking over just any home, though -- organizers are defending homeowners around the country facing imminent foreclosure.

It's a natural next step for the young but increasingly influential movement. The effort has already been met with great media coverage, and will likely be critical in once again refocusing public conversation on the plight of the 99%. Besides that, there's little question Occupy Our Homes will be successful in saving some homes from foreclosure by exposing the unfair and deceptive banking practices that have driven many homeowners to that point.

But Occupy Our Homes isn't the only avenue for holding banks accountable to homeowners. Dozens of homeowners, their family, and their friends have started petitions on Change.org calling on their banks to treat them fairly and modify their mortgages to allow them to stay in their homes.

One of those homeowners is Monique White, whose story is told by Change.org member Nick Espinosa:

Monique worked for 11 years as youth counselor at a group home to help troubled teens transition back into their communities. In February 2010, the nonprofit shut down due to state budget cuts. Although Monique still has a part-time job at a liquor store where she has worked for the past 8 years, this has not been enough to afford her mortgage payment.

Monique has gone through the process of trying to get a loan modification writing a hardship letter and sending document after document to US Bank, yet they still refused to work with her and have foreclosed on her home.

'A house across the street from mine just sold for $9,500, and the bank would rather kick me out and let the house sit empty than renogotiate my $130,000 mortage. It makes absolutely no sense,' explained Monique.

Sadly, Monique's story is not unique. Lesliane Bouchard, a disabled California schoolteacher, is facing foreclosure by First Mortgage Corporation. Vicky Aase is trying to stop foreclosure on her Los Angeles-area home after being brought to the brink of foreclosure by Bank of America. Liz Wootan, who provides reasonably-priced rental units for middle-class tenants in New York, could lose her rental property. These homeowners have all stood up for themselves using Change.org, and our hope is that many other homeowners begin to use our platform as one more tool at their disposal in their fights to save their homes.

And it can work! Just ask Seattle-area mom Vera Johnson, who managed to stop Bank of America's efforts to foreclose on her home. Sometimes the victories are smaller, but still important. For instance, many homeowners complain that banks frequently lose documents and shuffle them between multiple representatives who often know nothing of the customer's earlier conversations. Through Change.org, numerous homeowners have won the decent treatment and single point of contact they deserve.

Change is possible, and Change.org's tools can make it a little bit easier to win. If you or someone you know is facing foreclosure, consider starting a campaign on Change.org today.

In less than one month, Bank of America went from announcing a new $5 monthly debit card fee, to reeling under huge pressure from the media, Congress, and Change.org members. Now, Chase and Wells Fargo - two of Bank of America's biggest consumer banking competitors - have promised not to levy debit card fees on customers, and Bank of America is suggesting they will 'soften' their fee.

It all started with one Change.org member, Molly Katchpole, who said enough was enough and started a campaign against Bank of America's $5 fee.

Friday night, ABC World News reported on the banking industry’s reaction to Molly’s campaign. Watch the video to learn how Molly and 300,000 Change.org petition signers made big banks listen up!

• View Molly's petition to Bank of America
• Share this campaign with others
• Start your own petition

Here's how it all happened:

September 29: Bank of America announces a new $5 monthly debit card fee.

September 30: Molly creates her petition on Change.org; more than 150,000 people sign in the next 5 days.

October 5: The petition becomes a major national story. ABC News interviews Molly, then tracks down Bank of America’s CEO Brian Moynihan and forces him to respond to it.

October 6: Molly delivers 153,000 petitions to Bank of America and closes her account. She appears on ABC World News again to discuss the petition. Local media in Charlotte (where Bank of America is based) openly speculate that the growing controversy could lead to the firing of Moynihan.

October 9: Molly is featured in a major article in the New York Times as an example of the public’s frustration with big banks.

October 10: Bank of America executive Andrew Plepler calls Molly Katchpole to discuss her petition.

October 13: Molly meets with Congressman Brad Miller to discuss a bill in Congress to make it easier to switch banks. The two later appear on CNN together.

October 18: Molly’s petition reaches 225,000, as Bank of America reports a $6 billion profit. The outrage continues to grow.

October 26: Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan says he’s ‘incensed’ over recent criticism of the bank fees

October 27: JPMorgan Chase, the largest bank in America, and Wells Fargo announce they will stop testing $3 debit card fees and cancel any plans to charge customers to use their debit cards.

October 28: Bank of America begins a full-on retreat from the $5 debit card fee. An unnamed source at the bank says they will 'soften' the fee and allow more customers - including anyone with a direct deposit - to avoid the $5 fee. Molly appears on ABC World News for the fourth time to talk about her petition.

October 30: Molly's Change.org petition reaches 300,000 signatures, and customers continue to demand that Bank of America cancel the $5 fee for all of its customers.

UPDATE (1/11/2011)

November 1: VICTORY! Bank of America formally announces that it will not move forward with implementing the debit card fee, marking a victory for Molly and over 306,000 other customers who signed her petition.

On November 1st, Bank of America announced that it would not move forward with implementing the debit card fee. BofA co-chief operating officer David Darnell stated in a press release, “We have listened to our customers very closely over the last few weeks and recognize concern with our proposed debit usage fee. Our customers’ voices are most important to us. As a result, we are not currently charging the fee and will not be moving forward with any additional plans to do so.” The decision marks an incredible victory for Molly and over 306,000 other customers who signed her petition. Using Change.org, Molly was able to recruit hundreds of thousands of people across the country to join her in successfully challenging one of America’s most powerful financial institutions – and also influencing the behavior of other major banks.

Inspired? Then start your own petition, and make change happen.

• View Molly's petition to Bank of America
• Share this campaign with others
• Start your own petition

20-year-old soldier Aaron Collette is currently on a tour of duty in Iraq. Next month, he’s scheduled to return to Oregon for two weeks of hard-earned leave. After surviving an IED explosion next to his squad this month, Aaron is looking forward to some quiet time with his family.

There’s a problem, though. Through no fault of their own, Aaron's family will be kicked out of their home on August 9th – just ten days before Aaron returns. JPMorgan Chase is foreclosing on Aaron’s father Tim Collette, and has so far refused to modify Tim’s mortgage.

Tim Collette is on a mission to save his home – at least, temporarily. He’s simply asking for Chase to delay foreclosure proceedings so that Aaron can come home to Oregon this summer.

Like many homeowners in foreclosure, Tim Collette played by the rules. He put a $100,000 downpayment on his home when he purchased it back in 2006. But when the economy crashed in 2008, Tim’s flooring and countertop business dried up. Tim struggled to make his mortgage payments each month, and eventually called Chase for assistance in restructuring his loan.

The bank told Tim that he’d need to miss two payments to qualify. Once he did that (per the bank’s instructions), the bank began foreclosure proceedings. After yanking Tim around for more than a year, Chase decided not to modify Tim’s mortgage and scheduled the final foreclosure date for June 20th.

When news of Tim’s story initially broke, JPMorgan Chase quickly told reporters they’d find a solution for Tim and placed his June 20th foreclosure on hold. But as soon as the media attention waned, the bank called Tim again and told him the foreclosure was back on – now scheduled for August 9th.

U.S. law prohibits banks from foreclosing on the homes of active duty military members, but JPMorgan Chase has mistakenly foreclosed on at least 27 service members. Chase CEO Jamie Dimon said of this mistake, "There is no class of citizen that we hold in higher regard...this is the worst [mistake] we've made. We deeply apologize to our veterans ... and we're sorry."

Tim’s son Aaron isn’t the homeowner in this situation. But this is Aaron’s home. It’s his bedroom. His family. His safe place to return to after serving his country in Iraq. Chase Bank has already shown that, when under scrutiny by the media and with the determined advocacy of groups like Economic Fairness Oregon, they’ll delay foreclosure proceedings. Let’s see what happens when Change.org activists send thousands of messages to Chase Bank in support of Tim and his family.

The parking lot was their playground. Now it's gone, thanks to an apparent deal between the Congressman, Georgia's majority Senate leader and an assumedly hapless mope.

The Oglethorpe Inn, off the exit ramp in the decimated carpet industry town of Calhoun, GA, is like one of thousands of nondescript motels peeking at our nation's Interstate highway system. Gordon County, sitting in northwest Georgia, where 1 in 10 school children are reported to be homeless, has no shelter for those without. So the 2-story motel became "home" for about 80 people who lost the keys to their own places.

Now the kids and their families are forced to involuntarily check out of their 12' x 12' abodes to search for a safe place to sleep, do homework, play, and keep their stuff.

Good luck with that.

If you listen to politicians talk about America’s 14.5 million-person unemployment problem there’s usually a lot said about the seemingly double-jointed powers of tax cuts or government spending.

What you don’t often hear are the words “pre-employment credit screening.”

But, a report released in December by the New York-based nonpartisan research and advocacy organization Demos indicates that credit checks should truly be the topic of many more conversations.

Millions of unemployed Americans may be getting caught in a very serious feedback loop. They can’t find work because of their credit score. But, they can't improve their credit score because they can’t find work.

Tell Congress that its time to help Americans in the deepest financial trouble find the jobs they need.

It seems employers looking to hire everything from shelf stockers to bank tellers, CEOs to child care workers are running credit checks on job applicants.

The theory behind the checks is simple: an employee with a poor credit history – particularly pending debt collection suits -- is under the kind of pressure that makes them prone to participating in fraud, theft, bribery and other ethical lapses on the job.

There is just one problem: there isn’t any evidence to support that idea. In fact, there’s ample evidence that just the opposite is true. It turns out that when employees are deep in debt, they tend to buckle down and work harder according to the Demos report.

We’ve all been waiting.

Some of us might be angrier than others. But, it’s safe to say that most Americans have been waiting for an executive perp walk – a line of businessmen and maybe a few women rounded up and hauled in to face charges for the economic turmoil, tsunami of foreclosures and layoffs they unleashed on the world.

It’s also safe to say that with the economy still in flux many of us have decided to settle for rigorous oversight of high-interest and high-risk financial products. We'll take the regulatory equivalent of a beat cop, if that cop is well armed.

Imagine you have been out of work for six or eight months. You've still got bills to pay but without cash coming in, it is likely you're going to let a balance ride on your credit card longer, or be late for a bill here or there. You've been applying for jobs and the gap in your resume looks bad enough, but now you find out that companies are checking your credit score to boot.

It's a vicious cycle, but it doesn't have to be this way.

For most jobs, your credit score is not an important qualification. That's why states are starting to crack down on companies who use credit checks to screen applicants. Hawaii, Illinois, Oregon and Washington have all banned the practice, and Maryland is looking to follow in their footsteps. Maryland State Delegate Kirill Reznik (D-Germantown) just introduced Maryland House Bill 87, the Job Applicant Fairness Act, which would ban employers from using someone's credit score as a criteria for hiring. The act carves out exemptions for financial institutions like Banks and for law-enforcement agencies which are required to run credit checks.

We need more lawyers!

What? Who said that? Must be a lawyer who said that. Well, actually, it is. The Chief Justice of New York State's highest court, saying there is a "crisis of the unrepresented," is calling on the New York State Legislature and the Governor to significantly increase the funding for attorneys who represent those living in poverty in civil cases.

Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman noted "we cannot succeed in the years ahead if we allow the indigent in our state to fall off the cliff." Rich is also a lawyer, and we echo this sentiment, and ask that you sign the petition.

From watching countless films and television programs over the years, most of us know our Miranda rights, including "you have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed to you." Except that this is only in the case of criminal actions where jail time is a possibility.

November 28th. Tina's due date. I lost track of her, this mother of five young boys with one on the way, teetering on the edge of homelessness again.

Earlier this year I helped get her and her boys out of the dinky camper they slept in, with and without electricity/water and barely space to breathe. Extreme hot and cold temperatures merely represented discomfort. More significant were the fear and frustration that continued to eat at her.

Thanks to the stimulus funds (Homeless Prevention and Rehousing Program - HPRP), they moved into a single-wide trailer, about 1,000 times bigger than their 13' tin can. Tina was temporarily relieved, but  scared, rightfully so, because her HPRP housing reprieve was as limited as her resources. Her entire pregnancy and postpartum was spent in traumatic stress. Not good.

All good things come to an end when it’s government money helping people in need. Despite the hype, HPRP is just a temporary housing subsidy. “Preventing or ending homelessness for over 750,000 Americans is a major milestone for the Recovery Act and for the Obama Administration’s Federal Strategic Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness,” HUD Secretary Donovan recently boasted.

For Tina and her boys, housing ends in January. Theoretically, Tina should have been making arrangements to clear up the $5,250 owed the out-of-state housing authority where the family lived before fleeing her violent husband. But her life has been anything but theoretical. Family help? Her mother is a half-step from homelessness herself. Times are tough. Wonder what Donovan would say to Tina and countless single parents in the same boat? Even the safety net — frayed as it is in most places — won't help because Las Cruces, NM has no real shelter for families.