Finance

JPMorgan begins suing customers over ‘infinite money glitch’

Published

7 months ago

October 28, 2024

Business Finance News

The Chase bank logo above ATMs, taken in Manhattan.

Michael Kappeler | Picture Alliance | Getty Images

JPMorgan Chase has begun suing customers who allegedly stole thousands of dollars from ATMs by taking advantage of a technical glitch that allowed them to withdraw funds before a check bounced.

The bank on Monday filed lawsuits in at least three federal courts, taking aim at some of the people who withdrew the highest amounts in the so-called infinite money glitch that went viral on TikTok and other social media platforms in late August.

A Houston case involves a man who owes JPMorgan $290,939.47 after an unidentified accomplice deposited a counterfeit $335,000 check at an ATM, according to the bank.

“On August 29, 2024, a masked man deposited a check in Defendant’s Chase bank account in the amount of $335,000,” the bank said in the Texas filing. “After the check was deposited, Defendant began withdrawing the vast majority of the ill-gotten funds.”

JPMorgan, the biggest U.S. bank by assets, is investigating thousands of possible cases related to the “infinite money glitch,” though it hasn’t disclosed the scope of associated losses. Despite the waning use of paper checks as digital forms of payment gain popularity, they’re still a major avenue for fraud, resulting in $26.6 billion in losses globally last year, according to Nasdaq’s Global Financial Crime Report.

The infinite money glitch episode highlights the risk that social media can amplify vulnerabilities discovered at a financial institution. Videos began circulating in late August showing people celebrating the withdrawal of wads of cash from Chase ATMs shortly after bad checks were deposited.

Normally, banks only make available a fraction of the value of a check until it clears, which takes several days. JPMorgan says it closed the loophole a few days after it was discovered.

Miami and California

The other lawsuits filed Monday are in courts including Miami and the Central District of California, and involve cases where JPMorgan says customers owe the bank sums ranging from about $80,000 to $141,000.

Most cases being examined by the bank are for far smaller amounts, according to people with knowledge of the situation who declined to be identified speaking about the internal investigation.

In each case, JPMorgan says its security team reached out to the alleged fraudster, but it hasn’t been repaid for the phony checks, in violation of the deposit agreement that customers sign when creating an account with the bank.

JPMorgan is seeking the return of the stolen funds with interest and overdraft fees, as well as lawyers’ fees and, in some cases, punitive damages, according to the complaints.

Criminal cases?

The lawsuits are likely to be just the start of a wave of litigation meant to force customers to repay their debts and signal broadly that the bank won’t tolerate fraud, according to the people familiar. JPMorgan prioritized cases with large dollar amounts and indications of possible ties to organized crime, they said.

The civil cases are separate from potential criminal investigations; JPMorgan says it has also referred cases to law enforcement officials across the country.

“Fraud is a crime that impacts everyone and undermines trust in the banking system,” JPMorgan spokesman Drew Pusateri said in a statement to CNBC. “We’re pursuing these cases and actively cooperating with law enforcement to make sure if someone is committing fraud against Chase and its customers, they’re held accountable.”

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO

Finance

Stocks making the biggest moves midday: WOOF, TSLA, CRCL, LULU

Published

2 days ago

June 6, 2025

Business Finance News

Finance

Swiss government proposes tough new capital rules in major blow to UBS

Published

2 days ago

June 6, 2025

Business Finance News

A sign in German that reads “part of the UBS group” in Basel on May 5, 2025.

Fabrice Coffrini | AFP | Getty Images

The Swiss government on Friday proposed strict new capital rules that would require banking giant UBS to hold an additional $26 billion in core capital, following its 2023 takeover of stricken rival Credit Suisse.

The measures would also mean that UBS will need to fully capitalize its foreign units and carry out fewer share buybacks.

“The rise in the going-concern requirement needs to be met with up to USD 26 billion of CET1 capital, to allow the AT1 bond holdings to be reduced by around USD 8 billion,” the government said in a Friday statement, referring to UBS’ holding of Additional Tier 1 (AT1) bonds.

The Swiss National Bank said it supported the measures from the government as they will “significantly strengthen” UBS’ resilience.

“As well as reducing the likelihood of a large systemically important bank such as UBS getting into financial distress, this measure also increases a bank’s room for manoeuvre to stabilise itself in a crisis through its own efforts. This makes it less likely that UBS has to be bailed out by the government in the event of a crisis,” SNB said in a Friday statement.

‘Too big to fail’

UBS has been battling the specter of tighter capital rules since acquiring the country’s second-largest bank at a cut-price following years of strategic errors, mismanagement and scandals at Credit Suisse.

The shock demise of the banking giant also brought Swiss financial regulator FINMA under fire for its perceived scarce supervision of the bank and the ultimate timing of its intervention.

Swiss regulators argue that UBS must have stronger capital requirements to safeguard the national economy and financial system, given the bank’s balance topped $1.7 trillion in 2023, roughly double the projected Swiss economic output of last year. UBS insists it is not “too big to fail” and that the additional capital requirements — set to drain its cash liquidity — will impact the bank’s competitiveness.

At the heart of the standoff are pressing concerns over UBS’ ability to buffer any prospective losses at its foreign units, where it has, until now, had the duty to back 60% of capital with capital at the parent bank.

Higher capital requirements can whittle down a bank’s balance sheet and credit supply by bolstering a lender’s funding costs and choking off their willingness to lend — as well as waning their appetite for risk. For shareholders, of note will be the potential impact on discretionary funds available for distribution, including dividends, share buybacks and bonus payments.

“While winding down Credit Suisse’s legacy businesses should free up capital and reduce costs for UBS, much of these gains could be absorbed by stricter regulatory demands,” Johann Scholtz, senior equity analyst at Morningstar, said in a note preceding the FINMA announcement.

“Such measures may place UBS’s capital requirements well above those faced by rivals in the United States, putting pressure on returns and reducing prospects for narrowing its long-term valuation gap. Even its long-standing premium rating relative to the European banking sector has recently evaporated.”