Exhibit 5 — In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation (Dkt. 324-8, S.D. Cal. No. 3:21-md-02992)

Record facts

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California · No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB · Doc. 324-8 · 2024-08-29 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

Exhibit 5 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 324-8     Filed 08/29/24     PageID.6833     Page
1 of 6

Declaration of Kuang Ting Chong in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification;
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 
IN RE BANK OF AMERICA 
CALIFORNIA UNEMPLOYMENT 
BENEFITS LITIGATION 
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB 
DECLARATION OF KUANG TING 
CHONG IN SUPPORT OF 
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS 
CERTIFICATION 
This Document Relates to All Actions 
Judge: 
Hon. Gonzalo P. Curiel 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 324-8     Filed 08/29/24     PageID.6834     Page
2 of 6

Declaration of Kuang Ting Chong in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class 
Certification; Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB 
1 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
I, KUANG TING CHONG, declare as follows: 
1.
I am one of the named Plaintiffs in this case.  I am submitting this
declaration in support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification. I have personal 
knowledge of the facts in this declaration. If called upon to do so, I could and would 
testify to these facts. 
2.
In June 2020, I began receiving EDD unemployment insurance benefits
that were paid through a Bank of America EDD debit card (“EDD debit card”) that was 
directly linked to a Bank of America EDD debit card account (“EDD debit card 
account”) in my name.  
3.
My Bank of America EDD debit card had a magnetic stripe. There was no
EMV chip in the card. 
4.
On July 20, 2020, when I attempted to withdraw cash from my EDD debit
card account at a Bank of America (the “Bank”) branch ATM in Monterey Park, CA, 
the ATM screen stated that I had reached the daily amount I could withdraw for the day. 
At that point, I realized there had been an unauthorized ATM withdrawal because I had 
not withdrawn any cash earlier that day. I immediately went home and checked my 
EDD debit card account and saw one ATM withdrawal for $1,000 from the same day 
that I had not authorized and did not know anything about.  
5.
Within minutes of discovering the unauthorized withdrawal on my EDD
debit card account, I printed out the transaction record and brought the printout with me 
to a Bank branch location to speak with a Bank teller about the fraud on my account. 
The Bank teller informed me the branch could not help me and instructed me to call the 
Bank instead.  
6.
After leaving the branch location, I called the Bank’s customer service to
report the unauthorized ATM withdrawal and to ask the Bank to credit my EDD debit 
card account for the $1,000 that was stolen from me. When I reached the claims 
department, I spoke with a Bank representative and made an unauthorized transaction 
claim concerning the unauthorized $1,000 ATM withdrawal. I informed the Bank that I 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 324-8     Filed 08/29/24     PageID.6835     Page
3 of 6

Declaration of Kuang Ting Chong in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class 
Certification; Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB 
2 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
did not make or authorize the $1,000 withdrawal, that it was made in Alhambra—a 
different city than my usual transactions—and that $1,000 was approximately double 
the size of my typical transactions. 
7.
On or around July 30, 2020, the Bank provisionally credited my account
$1,000. 
8.
On September 2, 2020, the Bank mailed me a letter informing me that the
$1,000 provisional credit was now permanent. The letter stated: “We’ve completed our 
investigation of this disputed transaction. The provisionally issued credit for $1,000.00 
is now permanent.”  
9.
On September 28, 2020, the Bank froze my account and the freeze
remained in effect until October 4, 2020. The Bank did not provide me with any prior 
notice that it was going to freeze my account, nor did it explain why it was freezing my 
account.  
10.
The Bank sent me a letter dated October 2, 2020, stating that my claim (the
one that the Bank had already previously permanently credited on or about September 
2, 2020) had been closed because “we believe the account or the claim have been the 
subject of fraud or suspicious activity. Any temporary credit that was applied to your 
account related to this claim, including any related reimbursement of fees, had been or 
will be debited from your account and reflected in your available balance, if any.” 
11.
On October 4, 2020, despite the Bank having sent me a notice that its
$1,000 credit was permanent, the Bank rescinded the $1,000 credit, creating a negative 
balance in my account. While I continued receiving EDD benefits in my EDD debit 
card account, the Bank denied me access to these funds because the funds were applied 
against the negative account balance created by the Bank.  
12.
I repeatedly called the Bank in an effort to obtain access both to my $1000
in unemployment funds that had been stolen from my account and then rescinded by the 
Bank, and to my additional EDD funds that I was unable to access because it was 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 324-8     Filed 08/29/24     PageID.6836     Page
4 of 6

Declaration of Kuang Ting Chong in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class 
Certification; Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB 
3 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
credited against the negative balance that the Bank itself created in my account when it 
rescinded the $1000.  
13.
Between September 28, 2020, and November 15, 2020, I called the Bank
to request assistance with the rescinded claim credit to my account on at least seven 
separate occasions, sometimes making multiple calls, waiting on hold for hours, and 
being shuffled between multiple agents in one day. During this period, I estimate that I 
spent more than an hour on hold each time I called and nearly three hours on the phone 
with the Bank’s representatives trying to resolve these issues. There were typically long 
wait times every time I called the Bank about my rescinded credit, yet the Bank did not 
offer me any option to receive a call back when the next agent became available. 
Calling the Bank’s toll-free number was the only option the Bank provided me for 
reaching a customer service representative. I am not aware of any communication from 
the Bank advising me, or other EDD debit cardholders, of any other options for 
reaching a customer service representative, such as by email or online. 
14.
After I filed a class action lawsuit against the Bank in the U.S. District
Court for the Central District of California in November 2020, I received a letter from 
the Bank dated December 10, 2020, stating that the Bank had performed an additional 
review of my claim and had credited me with the $1,000 that had been stolen from me 
the previous September. I received this credit 143 days after I submitted my 
unauthorized transaction claim to the Bank and 67 days after the Bank rescinded the 
$1,000 credit.  
15.
In this case, I seek to be appointed as a class representative.
16.
Since becoming involved in this case, I have had many communications with
my attorneys regarding discovery, case updates, case filings, and other matters. I have also 
searched for and produced documents and have responded to written discovery requests 
and verified my responses. I intend to continue working with my attorneys, and if 
appointed by the Court as a class representative, I intend to continue to pursue this case 
by, among other things, reviewing important case filings, participating in the discovery 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 324-8     Filed 08/29/24     PageID.6837     Page
5 of 6

1 and hi.al process, staying informed and participating in discussions with my attorneys 
2 regarding significant developments in the case. I am committed to working with my 
3 attorneys to obtain the best possible result for the class consistent with good faith and 
4 sound judg1ne□t. 
5 
17.
T understand that ifT am appointed as a class representative l will be
6 responsible for overseeing the prosecution of this case by my attorneys. My interests in 
7 this matter are consistent with and not antagonistic to, the interests of the members of 
8 each of the classes that I seek to represent. I understand and will fulfill the duties of a class 
9 representative, including the duties to prosecute this case on behalf of each class as a 
10 whole, and to consider the interests of each class as a whole just as I consider my own 
11 
interests. 
12 
l declare under penalty of perjmy that the foregoing is 1rue and correct. Executed on
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
July 26 , 2024, at ------
2024 
, California. 
Declaration of Kuang Eng Chong in Support of PlaiJltiffs' Motion for Class 
C[tification; 
4 
ase No. 3:2 l-md-02992-GPC-MSB 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 324-8     Filed 08/29/24     PageID.6838     Page
6 of 6

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.casd.709615.324.8.pdf

Size

289,867 bytes

SHA-256

d38aa0592ffb60224ba60eb9d78704c1d2fde0cf2eaee85baa1cb6f0efc958f2

Our copy

gov.uscourts.casd.709615.324.8.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)