Capital One controversies
Controversies tied to this brand in public sources. A listing is not a finding of fault.
Back to profile10 entries
2021
Capital One Penalized $290 Million for Anti-Money-Laundering Failures
Fine or penalty
Capital One was subject to a $290 million penalty after it admitted to the U.S. Treasury Department that it willfully violated anti-money-laundering requirements between 2008 and 2014. The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) stated that the bank took steps to cooperate and to remediate the problems. The penalty followed the bank's acknowledgment of the violations to the Treasury Department.
Capital One was hit with a $290 million penalty after admitting to the U.S. Treasury Department that it willfully violated anti-money-laundering requirements between 2008 and 2014. FinCEN said the bank took steps to cooperate and remediate the problems.
Company response
Remediation — Capital One
Fincen said that Capital One took significant steps to cooperate with its investigation and to remediate the problems
Source excerpt
Capital One Financial has been hit with a $290 million penalty after admitting to the U.S. Treasury Department that it willfully violated anti-money laundering requirements between 2008 and 2014.
Fincen said that Capital One took significant steps to cooperate with its investigation and to remediate the problems, which it took into account in determining the size of the fine assessed.
Capital One will pay a $390 million civil penalty after admitting to engaging in both willful and negligent violations of the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) announced Jan. 15.
2020
Communication Interface Technologies files patent suits against multiple companies
Lawsuit filed
Communication Interface Technologies filed multiple patent infringement suits in the Texas Eastern District Court against several companies, including Cinemark Holdings and Yum! Brands. The suits alleged unauthorized use of patented push-notification technology; the plaintiff sought infringement adjudication, damages, costs, fees, and other relief.
Source excerpt
Communication Interface Technologies has sought an adjudication of infringement of the patents-in-suit, an award for damages, an award for costs and fees, and other relief as determined by the court.
Communication Interface Technologies also alleged Yum! Brands infringed the ’010 patent through the KFC All-Stars App, Yum Mobile Forms App, and the KFC Suppertime Stories App.
2020
OCC fines Capital One $80 million over 2019 data breach
Fine or penalty
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency fined Capital One $80 million, citing failures to establish effective risk assessment processes before migrating significant IT operations to the public cloud and to correct deficiencies in a timely manner. The security lapse led to a 2019 breach that exposed personal information.
Source excerpt
The breach took place after a former Amazon Web Services (AWS) employee allegedly accessed AWS cloud servers rented by Capital One and downloaded GBs of information containing the personal and financial details of more than 100 million Americans and 6 million Canadians.
The US top banking regulator fined US bank Capital One with $80 million for failing to secure customer data while hosted in the cloud, a security lapse that led to the bank’s massive 2019 security breach that exposed the personal information of more than 100 million Americans.
As a result, the Treasury Department is fining Capital One $80 million, which the company has agreed to pay.
2020
Federal Reserve issues cease-and-desist order against Capital One
Ban or restriction
In a 2020 event, the Federal Reserve's board of governors issued a cease-and-desist order against Capital One. Alongside the order, the board directed the bank to adopt an enterprise-wide risk management program intended to identify future security risks. The action was reported in coverage of the Capital One data breach. The order and the requirement to implement the risk management program are the central facts of the event; the source does not specify further outcomes or details beyond the issuance of the order and the directive to adopt the program.
The Federal Reserve’s board of governors issued a cease-and-desist order against Capital One and ordered the bank to adopt an enterprise-wide risk management program to identify future security risks.
Source excerpt
In July 2019, Capital One Financial announced that a data breach occurred. An outside individual gained unauthorized access to the bank's customer details.
2020
Court orders Capital One to disclose forensic report
Ruling
In litigation related to Capital One’s 2019 data breach, a judge found that the forensic report was not protected by the work product doctrine and granted plaintiffs’ motion to compel Capital One to produce it. The court stayed the order while Capital One’s objections are resolved.
Source excerpt
Capital One has objected to the Judge’s order to compel production, and the court has stayed the order until Capital One’s objections are resolved.
Last month, in In re: Capital One Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, E.D. Va., No. 1:19-md-02915, U.S. Magistrate Judge John Anderson (the “Judge”) ordered Capital One Financial Corp. (“Capital One”) to disclose a forensic report to the plaintiffs in a lawsuit stemming from Capital One’s 2019 data breach.
In this case, the Judge found that the forensic report was not protected by the work product doctrine and granted plaintiffs’ motion to compel Capital One to produce the report.
2019
Customer-data breach
A former software engineer was accused of accessing personal information connected with roughly 106 million people in the United States and Canada. Capital One faced investigations and related legal consequences.
2019
Menards Big Card fraud and security breach disclosed
Issue disclosure
A report said some Menards Big Card holders were affected by unauthorized purchases after criminals guessed valid card numbers. Menards said the incident was a Menards security breach, and Capital One said the incidents were isolated and the problem had been resolved.
Company response
Remediation — Menards
Menards had canceled her card as a precaution
Remediation — Capital One
Capital One, the company that owns and administers the BIG Card, tells us that these are isolated incidences and that the problem has been resolved.
Source excerpt
Several cardholders that were not aware of the security issue did not find out until they were actually in the store and attempted to use their card.
Menards did say it was a Menards Security Breach and not Capitol One.
It appears that a group of traveling criminals is guessing at credit card numbers at gas pumps and when they hit upon a valid number, they are making unauthorized purchases.
2019
Capital One discloses data breach affecting about 106 million card users
Issue disclosure
Capital One announced that a hacker had obtained the personal information of about 106 million of its credit card users. The article does not establish when the breach itself occurred.
Source excerpt
Capital One Financial, one of the largest issuers of credit cards in the United States and the nation’s seventh-largest commercial bank, announced late Monday that a hacker had obtained the personal information of about 106 million of its credit card users.
2014
Automated collection calls litigation
Capital One and collection agencies agreed to a $75.5 million settlement in litigation alleging the use of automated calls to consumers’ phones.
2012
Misleading marketing of add-on services
Regulators alleged that Capital One representatives misled millions of card customers into paying for payment-protection and credit-monitoring products. The company agreed to refunds and a $210 million settlement.