7 Jan

Bank of America Freezes Gun Manufacturer’s Account, Company Owner Claims

Joe Sirochman:

My name is Joe Sirochman owner of American Spirit Arms and I wanted to share my recent experience with Bank of America .(which we have been doing business with for over 10 years)…. Everyone is familiar with the latest increase in guns sales , dealers selling out of inventory , Manufacturers back logged for months , large revenue all generated in the last two weeks …. American Spirit Arms is no exception to the overwhelming demand . What we have experienced is that our web site orders have jumped 500 % causing our web site E commerce processing larger Deposits to BANK OF AMERICA ..Well, this through up a huge RED Flag with Bank of America . So they decided to hold the deposits for further review , meaning that the orders/payments that were coming in through the web ,( being paid by the customer and that were shipped out by American Spirit Arms ),the BANK was keeping (UNDER REVIEW )..as you could imagine this made me furious…After countless hours on the phone with BANK OF AMERICA I finally got a Manager in the right department that told me the reason that the deposits were on hold for FURTHER REVIEW …HER EXACT WORDS WERE …
..” WE BELIEVE YOU SHOULD NOT BE SELLING GUNS and PARTS ON THE INTERNET “
…I flipped the F**k Out and told them that they have no right to make up their own new rules and regs..that we are a firearms Manufacturer with all the proper licensing FFL (Federal Firearm license ), SOT and that we follow all Federal and All
States’ rules and regulations on shipping Firearms and parts ..and that we are also Audited by ATF and Homeland

Read more

       

About Curt

Curt served in the Marine Corps for four years and has been a law enforcement officer in Los Angeles for the last 20 years.

22 Responses to Bank of America Freezes Gun Manufacturer’s Account, Company Owner Claims

  1. Greg says: 1

    There’s an interesting question for republicans: Is one company within its rights if it decides–on moral grounds–that it doesn’t wish to deal with another company? Some might consider weapons manufacturers and gun dealers to be engaging in an immoral activity. Some might feel the same way about the tobacco industry.

    Suppose a bank decided it would no longer handle accounts for an abortion provider. The services provided are legal. Should the bank have a right to refuse to do so?

    We don’t know the details of the Bank of America story. If internet firearms sales are involved, it’s possible that there might be some legitimate concerns about the legality of certain transactions. There might be another side to this.

    ReplyReply
  2. NotinsomeGodforesakenplace says: 2

    So if BoA can do this, for sure cake bakers can follow their religious convictions to not bake for people with life styles contrary to the baker’s religous beliefs.

    ReplyReply
  3. I REALLY DISLIKE THE FACT THAT THE BANK WITH A CUSTOMER THAT SIZE,
    DECIDE ON IT’S OWN TO STOP THE FLOW OF NEW CUSTOMER WHO DON’T BELONG TO THE BANK BUT PAY DUES TO HIS COMPANY THOUGH THAT BANK,
    of course it’s natural for the business man to jump over the roof or the cliff if you want, his business is on hold not because he had put it there, no that bank decide for him and did not tell him wtf, with that bank.
    they are being advise by anti gun movement and that
    would bother me a lot,
    because they fail the business code to be [what's the word?]
    and they fail their customer who depend on them to receive the money on their name,
    is there a way to loose that bank and take one that might be smaller but would be looking up for him
    his interest as a good customer.
    BANK OF AMERICA YOU ARE NOT LIVING UP TO YOUR NAME, SHAME ON YOU, YOU’RE NOT BIG ENOUGH TO NOT FALL.

    ReplyReply
  4. Diana says: 4

    Well Greg you can say that, and I would agree…but this isn’t just about Bank of America not wanting to do business with a particular company. Bank of America has frozen the account, that means they have denied the owner access to his money. If the owner has broken any laws and has the authority to sell those guns and parts, shame on Bank of America!!! Choosing not to let someone open or maintain an account BOA’s choice… end the relationship correctly…. freezing their money…just wrong!!! What if your bank didn’t like what you were spending your money on, and froze your account!!!
    Nice try Greg but so not even in the same ballpark…. keep trying though :)

    ReplyReply
  5. Nan G says: 5

    Diana is correct.
    But often banks do hold TEMPORARILY a large deposit just to make sure the check clears before allowing withdrawals based on it.
    There used to be a con involved with doing this.

    What the BofA rep said about her beliefs (if true) broke all sorts of laws against discrimination.
    At this point we only have the word of the business owner.

    IF Greg was happy that a photographer was forced to pay (really she went out of business and re-emerged later under a different name) because she refused to cover a lesbian ”wedding,” he should also side with the customer on this.

    ReplyReply
  6. Aqua says: 6

    @Greg:

    Is one company within its rights if it decides–on moral grounds–that it doesn’t wish to deal with another company

    Sure. I think BofA has all the right in the world to not do business with anyone they have a philosophical difference with. They don’t have the right to freeze their assets though. As a matter of fact, I doubt seriously American Spirit Arms will be banking with BofA by the end of the week. But I doubt that will be BofA’s decision.

    ReplyReply
  7. johngalt says: 7

    @Aqua:

    My guess is that there were a few banking firms beating down the doors of this company after hearing about what has happened. No real worries for the gun manufacturer, in the long run. Big worries for BofA, though, as they just threw up a red flag to any and all gun owners and Second Amendment rights advocates on their views. If I was a BofA customer right now, I’d be changing banks within days.

    ReplyReply
  8. Aqua says: 8

    @johngalt:
    I am, and I will be.

    ReplyReply
  9. johngalt says: 9

    @Greg:

    You are conflating two, distinct, separate things, Greg.

    -One, a business should have the right to refuse to do business with any other business, or individual, based on their own viewpoints. You won’t find many conservatives that would disagree with that.

    However, that isn’t what this is about. This is about a prior and current relationship between one business and another, that has changed based on a recent event, with the bank freezing the account of a legal business based on the bank’s viewpoints. In effect, they are illegally withholding the property of the other business. That is flat out wrong. Would you like it if your viewpoints were known publicly, and your bank, who held different viewpoints, used that as a reason to withhold access to your accounts? I’d bet not.

    ReplyReply
  10. Nan G
    that remind me of GADAFI asking for his billions to the GOLD SACH INVESTMENT COMPANY WHO SEND A FEW PEOPLE TO TELL HIM THEY DID A BAD INVESTMENT AND THERE IS JUST A BIT OF MONEY LEFT, NO MATTER HOW HE IS, THAT WAS HIS MONEY.
    HE HAS A REVOLUTION ON HIS HAND TO FIGHT, HE IS POWERLESS THEY FREEZE THE REST OF HIS ASSETS AND SOON AFTER OBAMA TELL HIM TO RESIGN, HE IS PUSHING THE BROTHERHOOD,
    YES THOSE WHO KILL THE AMBASSADOR AND THE SEALS AND ARE GETTING AWAY WITH IT
    AND THAT WAS ON 9/11/12
    HOWS THAT FOR A SCREW UP FIX JUST THE GANGSTER STYLE

    ReplyReply
  11. johngalt
    and he has been doing business with that BANK OF AMERICA FOR 10 YEARS,
    CAN YOU BELIEVE THE DOUBLE CROSS BEHIND HIS BACK
    AND IT TOOK SOME ASKING TO GET HIS EXPLANATION FROM A CLERK,
    BAD

    ReplyReply
  12. johngalt says: 12

    @ilovebeeswarzone:

    There are roughly somewhere around 100-125 MILLION gun owners in this country, 5,400 gun manufacturers(includes both manufacturers and gunsmithing shops), and between 50-100k gun dealers.

    BofA has basically told all of them that they do not approve of what they are doing.

    BofA has the potential to lose fully 1/3 of it’s potential customer base, here in America, for what it has done. They will reap what they have sown.

    ReplyReply
  13. johngalt
    yes sir, you see? again they also did it, they thought they could dictate their policy
    with actions to put a customer in financial confusion questioning what, why when
    without any explanation, that was so rude to do that to a business man honest and dealing loyaly with them for the last 10 years,
    I just a while ago watch MEYGAN AT FOX NEWS SHE WAS TALKING TO THE GENTERMAN
    IN THIS PROBLEM, SHE EXPOSE IT FOR ALL TO KNOW,
    HE MENTIONED IT HAS BEEN STARTED 3 WEEKS BEFORE, LEAVING HIM IN THE LIMBO,
    NOW THE BANK said it’s all fix up.
    yes until the next time

    ReplyReply
  14. johngalt says: 14

    @ilovebeeswarzone:

    NOW THE BANK said it’s all fix up.

    The damage, to their own reputation, by the bank, is already done.

    ReplyReply
  15. Greg says: 15

    A sudden, unexplained 500 percent rise in internet sales by an arms dealer might result in any bank having reasonable concerns regarding the legality of the business being conducted.

    Bank of America recently had difficulties because they’d handled funds that were traced back to Colombian drug cartels. There can be serious consequences for any financial institution that doesn’t bother to ask enough questions about the legality of a customer’s business activities.

    “We believe you should not be selling guns on the internet” could be an expression of reasonable concern about the legality of Sirochman’s activities. Does anyone here know for a fact that all of his internet sales are in compliance with applicable laws? Should it be enough for the bank that he simply claims that they are?

    ReplyReply
  16. johngalt
    yes it will ring a bell and slowly decrease as people are getting their business else where,
    a bit by a bit to not make any waves, specially the business who see they can have the same surprise
    when they least expect it,
    when the credibilty is messed up, it’s done, you cannot take a chance of waiting for more,
    specially on line where there is many dangers, if you don’t trust your bank you are in danger
    to begin with,
    bye

    ReplyReply
  17. GREG
    HE HAS DONE BUSINESS WITH THAT BANK OF AMERICA FOR 10 YEARS,
    THAT SHOULD ANSWER YOUR QUESTION,
    and why did they not call him to tell their concern to make him know they are checking the incoming
    money and it will delay some.
    no they cut and he had to call and ask and on and on without having any clue,
    only after persisting for an answer one clerk said, WE THINK YOU SHOULD NOT SELL ON THE WEB,
    HE JUST BEING TOLD THAT,
    WHO DO THEY THINK THEY ARE? HE HAD TO BEG FOR AN ANSWER.
    DO YOU THINK HE WOULD HAVE GONE PUBLIC IF HE WAS NOT LEGIT.

    ReplyReply
  18. retire05 says: 18

    Don’t ever, EVER, use B o A for anything. If you have a credit card issued by them, cut it up and send it back to them.

    If you finance anything through them, they will sit on your check, not presenting it for clearance, so that it looks like your payments are being received late. How do I know? They did that to me, and I had to get the state Attorney General’s office involved in having them make it right. They are rude crooks.

    ReplyReply
  19. retire05
    thank you, you gave an important clue on this,
    now it make more sense, how they acted,
    because as he said this was a many people buying guns and he was doing his business on the web so the payments where coming from the web.
    it was understandable to have them check , but for that much time as to freeze the flow , it was not normal,
    and they even might have made money on their own out of the many sales.
    and they delayed out of proportion, for sure, in any way he as the bank client notice the abnormal situation,
    and became inquisitive and start asking questions , and was not getting any answers, until he insisted and got that stupid answer from a clerk, he never spoke to the direction, they never contacted him either,
    what kind of policies is that from a bank or any business, who care for those making them successful

    ReplyReply
  20. Aleric says: 20

    Sorry for coming in late to this one but I just saw the story yesterday.

    As of Jan of last year I worked for B of A Merchant Services, we provided credit card processing services to merchants and I am in the Loss Prevention Security Dept that over sees merchant accounts. B of A sold this part to FDR and we are still doing the processing for all the merchants simply under a different name. My dept monitors and reviews accounts that have usual credit card purchases and credits to ensure they are legal and valid. In doing so we have the right per the agreement the merchant signed to place holds on funds and accounts until we complete the review or render a decision on a transaction. We have the legal right to hold funds up to 120 days and longer depending on the situation but most reviews take 48 to 72 hours to complete as long as the merchant complies with requests for information. If they don’t comply then it can take a lot longer.

    I asked a friend to look into this case and we show the account being approved and set up to sell over the internet. We did not see where this account was closed on the processing side, it appears to be closed by the merchant at his request. It also appears he was speaking to his local bank branch when the comment was made about his business. If they made the comments then they are basically your local branch tellers who have no clue about how the merchant processing field works and that is normal for someone outside their knowledge base.

    The merchant states that they had a 500% spike in sales which would throw up flags to have the account reviewed and funds are ALWAYS held in these cases. To me it sounds more like the merchant getting angry over his funds being held and the bank didn’t help matters by injecting their personal opinions which you never do in business.

    Hope that helps to clear up some of the confusion

    ReplyReply
  21. Nan G says: 21

    @Aleric:
    You bring actual 1st hand knowledge to this discussion.
    BofA has been in hot water before for discriminating against individuals and businesses….

    *BofA terminated a 12 year relationship with McMillan Fiberglass Stocks, McMillan Firearms Manufacturing, and McMillan Group International earlier in 2012. According to Kelly McMillan, the Operations Director for the McMillan Group, BoA terminated the relationship because the company was in the firearms manufacturing business.
    http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/20/anti-gun-bank-of-america-tells-gun-company-to-find-another-bank/

    *BofA was fined $7,500 by the federal government just a few days ago for refusing to process a mortgage for a lesbian couple.
    http://www.towleroad.com/2013/01/bank-of-america-settles-with-lesbians-denied-mortgage.html

    *BofA was fined $335 million for discriminatory lending to minorities in late 2011.
    http://www.christianpost.com/news/bank-of-america-fined-335-million-for-discriminatory-lending-to-minorities-65498/

    *BofA was fined $1 billion for their part in the mortgage crisis in early 2012.
    http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2012/02/bank-of-america-fined-1-billion-for-mortgage-fraud.html

    Will BofA be fined by Obama’s gov’t for discriminating against gun owners?
    I doubt it.
    Gun owners are not a ”protected class,” like people of color or homosexuals.

    ReplyReply
  22. Aleric says: 22

    @Nan G:

    By no means am I defending B of A but just so people know the merchant processing accounts that process credit cards for merchant businesses was sold to FDR 3 years ago and for the past two years they have been transitioning these accounts over to the FDR platform. In so doing if there were any concerns or irregularities on the accounts or FDR felt the account was too big of a risk they terminated the accounts and advised the merchants to seek new processing services with a 30 day notice.

    I personally have never seen an account closed because they were a gun store as we processed all legal businesses and only closed accounts that were security risks, meaning they were conducting business that put them in danger of being a charge back risk or violated their contract (doing cashabacks, running their own credit cards at the business, etc).

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

 

Switch to our mobile site