Did a Wall Street bank use a U.S. Treasury debit card program to hustle jurors in Washington, D.C., out of pay for their court service?

I thought it odd after serving jury duty in D.C. Superior Court that my $4 travel per diem came on a JP Morgan Chase Bank debit card. It seemed like more trouble than it was worth, especially since after previous duty I was able to simply plug a code into a courthouse kiosk and get crisp cash.

I didn’t want to register the 16-digit debit card number with the bank and then try to find a participating ATM or feel compelled to take the plastic shopping. I threw it in the trash, presuming the money would go to the court as a taxpayer’s tip. That was 2016.

Now I feel like my pocket got picked, with the U.S. Treasury Department being the stall.

The feeling grew out of a recent postcard notifying me of a settlement in a federal class action lawsuit that alleged the bank built inconvenience and fees into the debit card so money intended for jurors would default to the bank.

Indeed, the debit card — which also covered $30 per diems for jurors without employers covering their salaries, and pay for fact witnesses — carried an intricate fee schedule: out of network ATM cash withdrawal, $2.00; over the counter bank or credit union withdrawal, $7.00; ATM balance inquiry, 45 cents; declined point of sale transaction, 25 cents; and an inactivity fee, $1.50.

Two Jurors To Collect Up To $5,000 Each In Settlement

Under the settlement agreement, which faces an approval hearing in U.S. District Court on August 17, the bank is expected to reimburse jurors for fees and surcharges, and pay card balances. The deal also covers jurors in Georgia, Michigan and Texas. The two title plaintiffs, both from the nation’s capital, are to receive up to $5,000 each, and their attorneys up to $335,000 in legal fees.

The lawsuit, filed in 2017 and claiming damages of more than $5 million, also alleges violation of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act, a bar to requiring that an account be established with a particular bank as a condition to receive a government benefit.

U.S. Treasury’s role in these arrangements was easy to miss. It was the agency that developed the U.S. Debit Card program and chose JP Morgan Chase Bank in 2008 to act as financial agent. But Treasury wasn’t named in the lawsuit nor obviously referenced in materials accompanying the debit card.

Lawyers for JP Morgan Chase Bank, however, in maintaining no wrongdoing by the bank, make U.S. Treasury central to their defense. They argued in their motion to dismiss the complaint that the bank was only doing as directed by Treasury, which approved the debit card fee schedule.

The bank lawyers argued that jurors had multiple ways to avoid fees and consume all their allotted money, including by combining a credit card with the debit card to make a purchase. Even if the bank did collect fees, the lawyers argued, there was nothing unjust about it, citing rejection of a court challenge to fees associated with debit cards issued to released prisoners.

DC Courts Assert FOIA Exemption

Pickings are slim when it comes to insight about operation of the debit card program.

Treasury did not acknowledge emails I sent seeking information about the debit card program and agency comment about the complaint. Treasury’s U.S. Debit Card website page says it developed the program as a payment option for agencies to “reduce the workload” for accountants and auditors. The debit card was introduced to DC Courts in 2012, with a terse Treasury “Direction To Agent No. 34” that told JP Morgan Chase Bank to provide debit card “products and services.”

DC Courts — covering the DC Court of Appeals, the Superior Court of DC, and the Court System – notes in a 2018 budget justification document posted on its website that the debit card system “enhances overall convenience” and mitigates opportunities for waste, fraud and abuse. Apparently, it need say no more.

Agency officials told me that DC Courts is exempt from the Freedom of Information Act and that my inquiry about the fate of juror funds and debit card program analysis would not be fulfilled. I was surprised, given the agency motto: “Open to All, Trusted by All, Justice for All”.

The inspiring words summon another important element of the JP Morgan Chase Bank defense. The lawyers asserted that Treasury is immune to such lawsuits, and, because the bank acted as Treasury’s agent, the bank is entitled to “derivative sovereign immunity.” The U.S. District Court judge was not persuaded to sign a dismissal order.

Will settlement of the lawsuit end scrutiny about use of the debit card to pay government benefits? Did the deal with jurors break the law? Why would jurors be made subject to paying any fees at all in connection with collecting prescribed compensation for service?

Jurors in the class may be made financially whole. Far too many pieces are missing from this puzzle to presume these government agencies have operated the debit card program in the public interest.