NBCI Launches a Multiple Myeloma education program with NovartisNBCI launches “To Stay in the Game, Maintain Your Frame” campaign with Novartis Click here to visit the
“To Stay in the Game, Maintain Your Frame” page

The NBCI E-Prayer list is now online!
Email us with your prayer requests.
Who or what would you like us to pray for?

NBCI Search

Listen to a clip of Rev. Anthony Evans on The Black Agenda Radio on the Progressive Radio Network
Week of February 13, 2012

NBCI Protests BB&T Bank - January 27, 2012

NBCI Protests BB&T Bank - February 9, 2012

Featured BB&T Boycott Articles
and Press Releases
Requires Adobe Acrobat Get Adobe  free download

Civil Society Initiative
Press Releases
Requires Adobe Acrobat Get Adobe  free download

Digital Divide Initiative
BOYCOTT! BOYCOTT! BOYCOTT!
The National Black Church Initiative Starts National Boycott Against BB&T BANK

NBCI Investigating 35,000 Complaints Against BB&T

Date Respondent Compaint Description
Mar-10 Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP The national law firm of Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP is investigating the alleged practice by BB&T of allowing customers to make debit charges to their ATM, debit or check cards even when the customer has insufficient funds in their account. BB&T allegedly debits checks in order of the largest to smallest to increase the likelihood that customers will overdraw, and overdraw multiple times.
Aug-09 Scott & Stringfellow LLC A lawsuit claims that BB&T Corp.’s Richmond-based investment banking subsidiary, Scott & Stringfellow LLC, conspired to take trade secrets when it recruited several employees from a competitor’s Richmond office.

Stephens Inc., a Little Rock, Ark.-based investment banking firm, filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Richmond last week. It names Winston Salem, N.C.-based BB&T Corp. and Scott & Stringfellow as defendants.

Five of Stephens Inc.’s former employees — Thomas S. Albrecht, Kevin Sterling, Bradley D. Shiveley, Edward “Neal” Deaton and Alfred Rhem Wood Jr. — also are named as defendants.

The lawsuit claims that the men, who worked as a team of transportation industry analysts for Stephens Inc., violated their confidentiality agreements with the firm when they were recruited to join BB&T starting in May, after BB&T’s own chief transportation industry analyst left the company.
Aug-09 Closing Connection, LLC U.S. District Judge Claude M. Hilton has denied Branch Banking & Trust’s motion to dismiss a lawsuit by a Warrenton business.

The bank’s attorneys said in the motion that the plaintiff simply doesn’t have a case.

In an order issued July 16, however, Hilton said Closing Connection LLC “states a claim on which recovery may be had.”

The business sued the bank claiming insufficient security measures resulted in the theft of several hundred thousand dollars from the business via fraudulent wire transfers.

No further hearings have been scheduled.
Jun-09 Amy Stroupe, a former BB&T investigator An administrative law judge has rejected a bank’s request to close a federal hearing involving a former BB&T investigator who says she was fired after exposing a North Carolina development scam that cost the banking giant millions of dollars.

BB&T asked Judge Jeffrey Tureck to keep the public and journalists out of the hearing about the failed $100 million Village of Penland development to protect the confidentiality of employees not involved in the case, “competitive information” about the bank and an ongoing criminal investigation.

But attorneys for Amy Stroupe, a former BB&T investigator who called the FBI after the Winston-Salem bank “refused to take action,” said that the bank filed the motion to protect its image.

“Obviously their motivation was they didn’t want the case to be subject to public scrutiny,” said John Yanchunis, one of Stroupe’s attorneys. “They wanted to preclude public access and I’ve never heard of that happening. The law is clear: Trials are to be public. We have a long history of public trials in this country.”

Tureck issued his decision Friday.

This is the latest twist in the case. Stroupe filed a “whistleblower” complaint nearly two years ago with the U.S. Labor Department. Her claim was dismissed by the Occupational Health and Safety Administration, but her attorneys appealed the case to Tureck’s court. Under federal law, it’s illegal to retaliate against a worker for exposing wrongdoing. Her hearing is scheduled for June 15 in Winston-Salem.
Jun-09 FDIC For its Complaint against Defendants the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”)and the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) Plaintiff Branch Banking and TrustCompany (“BB&T”) hereby states and alleges as follows: he plaintiff in the Cleveland County Lawsuit alleges she was an employee of BB&T and claims she was wrongfully terminated from her employment with BB&T. Shealleges in part that she was terminated “in retaliation for refusing to conspire with [BB&T] tosuppress evidence of its wrongdoing from the government…” These claims and allegations arecompletely false
Jul-09 Christine Konar In the body of this letter there will be a summary of the contacts, content of them, subordinate’s in this forum, details discussed, and relative documents to any and all parties subject to control or information regarding Federal/Government TARP monies and conditions. It is my opinion that the summary of fee’s and charges should be disclosed much like a mortgage origination; whereby, a quasi-HUD statement be provided prior to any agreement being approved by “both” parties for their perusal, under the law. BB&T’s behavior in this regard and the pervasive, lack of concern attitude to its consumers and customers is emotionally draining and cumbersome, making positive outcomes near impossible and very time consuming.
Jul-09 Samuel Foster Investigators have charged a former BB&T executive with criminal bank fraud, saying he overpaid a contractor and accepted thousands of dollars in illegal kickbacks in return.

Prosecutors with the U.S. Attorney’s office in Charlotte say Chester Williams, an executive vice president at the bank, paid contractor and longtime acquaintance Samuel Foster more than double his fee – and then accepted more than $100,000 from him to alleviate his own financial hardship. Investigators have also charged Foster with bank fraud and submitting a false tax return.
Jul-09 Bank of Louisville BBandT found liable for fraud against Louisville couple with the bank paying $10.6 million.

Louisville, KY (JusticeNewsFlash.com)–A Jefferson County, Kentucky, Circuit Court jury, in Louisville, returned a $10.6 million fraud verdict against Branch Banking & Trust (BB &T) on Monday. The jury verdict read before the court and judge presiding included $9 million in punitive damages against the bank for malicious conduct.

The business litigation lawyers representing the plaintiffs in the Bank of Louisville fraud case presented a strong case against bank officials and BB&T which acquired the Kentucky bank. The legal action, filed by the Thompson family lawyers, claimed the bank used false information to persuade the plaintiffs to consolidate numerous bank loans for their real-estate business into one mortgage held with the Bank of Louisville.
Aug-09 Rex Richard Saunders Here is a classic story of refusal to accept responsibility. Mr. Saunders bought a new car. His old loan was paid off and a new loan acquired. The only problem was it took BBandT eight full months to even acknophoto-car-keyswledge the loan, even after repeated attempts by Mr. Saunders to inform them of their error, and pay the money he owed.

Eight months later when BB&T decided to follow up on this error, not only did they not acknowledge his futile efforts to pay them and inform them of their error, they informed him he would be receiving late fees and must pay the loan in full in ten days time.

Understandably Mr. Saunders was unwilling to pay any late fees as he felt he had went above and beyond his responsibility. He met with a BB&T lending officer in March of 2004 and informed them that he would be more than happy to pay what he owed them, but he would not be paying any penalties as he not only tried to inform them of their error on numerous occasions but also had no way in which to pay them as there was no account number. In fact this was the first time in eight months that BB&T even acknowledged his loan with them.